By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
BACB certification is a voluntary credential that establishes professional standards but has limited enforcement power at the state level. Without state licensing, there is no legal requirement for individuals providing ABA services to hold any particular credential, meaning that unqualified individuals may provide services they call ABA. State licensing creates legal accountability, defines scope of practice, establishes educational and supervisory requirements, provides consumers with a formal complaint process, and gives the profession legal standing to advocate for client access. Additionally, some regulatory protections (title protection, practice protection, insurance requirements) can only be established through state law.
Meaningful inclusion goes beyond token participation. It involves actively seeking out autistic self-advocates and inviting them to participate in all stages of the process: identifying problems, developing proposals, reviewing draft language, testifying before legislators, and serving on advisory committees. Their participation should be compensated when possible and their perspectives should genuinely influence the final product, not just provide the appearance of inclusivity. Accommodations should be provided to ensure that meetings and processes are accessible. When autistic perspectives conflict with those of other coalition members, those conflicts should be discussed openly rather than overridden.
Effective licensing laws typically include title and practice protection (defining who can call themselves a behavior analyst and perform behavior analytic services), educational requirements (specifying the degree, coursework, and supervised experience needed for licensure), scope-of-practice definitions (clarifying what licensed behavior analysts are authorized to do), supervisory standards (establishing requirements for supervising unlicensed practitioners), a complaint and disciplinary process (providing consumers with a mechanism for reporting problems and holding practitioners accountable), continuing education requirements (ensuring ongoing professional development), and provisions for updating standards as the evidence base evolves.
Engagement should be professional, informed, and relationship-oriented. Start by identifying the legislators with jurisdiction over healthcare licensing in your state. Request meetings (often with legislative staff initially) to introduce yourself, explain what behavior analysts do, and describe why regulation is important. Bring clear, concise materials that explain the issue without jargon. Share personal stories and real-world examples that illustrate the consequences of inadequate regulation. Follow up consistently and build ongoing relationships rather than making one-time contacts. When legislation is proposed, provide testimony, submit written comments, and mobilize coalition members to do the same. Always be honest and avoid overstating claims.
Common barriers include opposition from other professions that perceive ABA licensing as encroaching on their scope of practice, political resistance to new licensing requirements in states with anti-regulatory political climates, internal disagreements within the behavior analysis community about what regulation should look like, limited political experience among behavior analysts, resource constraints for funding advocacy activities, and competing legislative priorities that make it difficult to gain attention for ABA-specific issues. Each of these barriers can be addressed through strategic coalition building, political education, and persistent engagement.
Code 3.12 (Advocating for Appropriate Services) explicitly supports advocacy for service delivery systems that provide appropriate care. Code 1.02 (Conforming with Legal and Professional Requirements) establishes the obligation to work within legal frameworks, which implies supporting the creation of adequate frameworks where they do not exist. Code 2.01 (Providing Effective Treatment) supports advocacy for regulatory structures that promote evidence-based practice. Code 1.07 (Cultural Responsiveness) supports inclusive advocacy that incorporates diverse perspectives. Together, these standards establish that regulatory advocacy is not just permitted but is a form of ethical professional behavior.
Evidence should be the foundation of regulatory advocacy. Proposals for specific regulatory requirements should be supported by evidence about what qualifications produce competent practitioners, what supervisory structures support quality services, and what practices the evidence supports or fails to support. When advocating for the elimination or restriction of specific practices, the evidence base for those practices should be clearly presented. Intellectual honesty is essential: distinguish between what the evidence strongly supports, what it suggests, and what remains uncertain. Advocates who overstate the evidence undermine their credibility and risk producing regulation that is not well-aligned with actual clinical needs.
Engage with critics as partners rather than opponents. Many critics of ABA share the fundamental goal of ensuring that services are helpful and do not cause harm. Their criticisms often identify real problems that the profession benefits from addressing. When building coalitions that include autistic self-advocates who have concerns about ABA practices, listen to their specific concerns, acknowledge problems where they exist, and work collaboratively toward solutions. A regulatory proposal that incorporates consumer protections addressing legitimate criticisms is stronger than one that ignores them. Defensiveness or dismissal of criticism weakens both the coalition and the resulting legislation.
Title protection means that only licensed individuals can use a specific professional title (such as "Board Certified Behavior Analyst" or "Licensed Behavior Analyst"). Practice protection means that only licensed individuals can perform specific professional activities (such as conducting functional behavior assessments or designing behavior intervention plans). Title protection is less restrictive because it prevents non-licensed individuals from using the protected title but does not prevent them from performing similar activities under a different title. Practice protection is more comprehensive because it restricts both the title and the activities, providing stronger consumer protection but also potentially limiting access in underserved areas.
The timeline varies enormously by state, ranging from one to several legislative sessions (each typically one to two years). Factors that affect the timeline include the state's legislative calendar and process, the political climate toward professional regulation, the strength of the advocacy coalition, the presence or absence of opposition, and the complexity of the proposed legislation. Many successful licensing efforts took three or more years from initial advocacy to signed legislation. Behavior analysts should approach regulatory advocacy as a long-term commitment rather than a quick campaign. Building relationships with legislators and stakeholders during this process creates a foundation that supports not only the initial legislation but also future amendments and enforcement.
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ on-demand CEUs including ethics, supervision, and clinical topics like this one. Plus a new live CEU every Wednesday.
Ready to go deeper? This course covers this topic with structured learning objectives and CEU credit.
Be the Change: How to Guide Regulation for Reform — Oswin Latimer · 2 BACB Ethics CEUs · $30
Take This Course →2 BACB Ethics CEUs · $30 · BehaviorLive
Research-backed educational guide with practice recommendations
Side-by-side comparison with clinical decision framework
All behavior-analytic intervention is individualized. The information on this page is for educational purposes and does not constitute clinical advice. Treatment decisions should be informed by the best available published research, individualized assessment, and obtained with the informed consent of the client or their legal guardian. Behavior analysts are responsible for practicing within the boundaries of their competence and adhering to the BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts.