By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
Severe challenging behavior typically includes physical aggression toward others resulting in injury or significant risk of injury, self-injurious behavior such as head banging, biting, or hitting oneself, property destruction that creates safety hazards, elopement into dangerous environments, and pica involving ingestion of hazardous materials. The severity classification is based on the intensity of the behavior, the potential for harm, and the frequency of occurrence. Behavior analysts assess severity through direct observation, injury reports, and medical documentation to determine the appropriate level of intervention and safety planning required.
Physical restraint carries multiple documented risks including positional asphyxia, joint injuries, soft tissue damage, and psychological trauma. Beyond physical risks, restraint can damage the therapeutic relationship, increase future aggression through countercontrol responses, and model coercive interaction patterns. Research in trauma-informed care suggests that restraint experiences can be retraumatizing for individuals with adverse experience histories. From a behavioral perspective, restraint does not teach replacement skills or address the function of challenging behavior, meaning it provides only temporary suppression without lasting behavior change. Code 2.15 requires behavior analysts to minimize these risks.
Functional assessment is the cornerstone of restraint-free practice because it identifies why challenging behavior occurs, enabling practitioners to design interventions that address root causes rather than simply suppressing behavior. Without understanding behavioral function, interventions are essentially trial-and-error, with a high probability of failure. When function-based interventions fail, practitioners face pressure to use restrictive procedures. Thorough functional assessment, including indirect methods, descriptive analysis, and when appropriate, functional analysis, provides the information needed to design effective non-invasive interventions that make restraint unnecessary by making the challenging behavior itself unnecessary.
Functional communication training teaches individuals to use appropriate communication responses to access the same reinforcers that currently maintain their challenging behavior. If a client engages in aggression to escape demands, FCT teaches them to request a break using a communication modality matched to their abilities. If behavior is maintained by attention, FCT teaches an appropriate attention-seeking response. By providing an efficient, effective alternative to challenging behavior, FCT reduces the motivation to engage in dangerous responses. FCT is one of the most well-supported interventions in the behavior analytic literature and is particularly effective when combined with extinction of the challenging behavior and reinforcement of the communication response.
Acceptance and Commitment Training is a behavioral approach to psychological flexibility that helps individuals engage fully with the present moment, accept difficult thoughts and feelings without trying to eliminate them, and commit to actions aligned with their values. For ABA practitioners working with severe challenging behavior, ACT principles address the fear, frustration, and helplessness that can arise during dangerous situations. Rather than eliminating these internal experiences, ACT helps practitioners acknowledge them while maintaining commitment to evidence-based, non-restrictive interventions. This psychological flexibility reduces the likelihood that practitioners will resort to restraint as an emotionally driven reaction to crisis situations.
Organizational transition requires a multi-phase approach. First, establish a clear organizational commitment to restraint reduction with specific, measurable goals. Second, invest in comprehensive staff training that covers functional assessment, evidence-based intervention, crisis prevention, and de-escalation skills. Third, develop and implement organizational policies that define restraint as a last resort and require documentation and debriefing after any restraint event. Fourth, create supervision structures that specifically address restraint reduction and support staff in implementing non-invasive alternatives. Fifth, collect and review data on restraint use, challenging behavior frequency, and staff injury rates to evaluate progress and identify areas needing additional support.
Crisis protocols for restraint-free practice should include a tiered response system. Early intervention involves recognizing escalation signs and implementing de-escalation strategies such as reducing demands, providing choices, and allowing space. If behavior continues escalating, practitioners should ensure environmental safety by removing dangerous objects and clearing the area of other individuals. Staff should maintain safe physical distance while continuing verbal de-escalation. If there is imminent risk of serious injury to the individual or others, environmental management strategies such as clearing the room rather than restraining the person should be prioritized. Any physical intervention used in genuine emergencies should be documented and reviewed.
The timeline varies significantly depending on the complexity of the case, the accuracy of the functional assessment, the individual's learning history, and the consistency of implementation. Some clients show significant improvement within weeks when function-based interventions are accurately designed and consistently implemented. Others, particularly those with long histories of severe behavior and exposure to restrictive procedures, may require months of systematic intervention before meaningful reduction is observed. Practitioners should set realistic expectations with stakeholders, establish clear data-based criteria for evaluating progress, and be prepared to modify interventions based on ongoing data analysis.
Antecedent strategies alone can produce significant reductions in challenging behavior in some cases, particularly when behavior is strongly associated with identifiable environmental triggers. Modifications such as providing choices, adjusting demand levels, establishing predictable schedules, ensuring access to preferred items, and reducing environmental stressors can dramatically alter the conditions that set the occasion for challenging behavior. However, most severe cases require a comprehensive approach that combines antecedent strategies with consequence-based procedures such as differential reinforcement and functional communication training, along with skill-building programs that expand the individual's repertoire for meeting their needs through appropriate behavior.
Staff safety concerns are legitimate and must be addressed proactively. Practitioners should develop comprehensive safety plans that include environmental modifications to minimize injury risk, training in safe body positioning and movement during crisis situations, clear protocols for when to disengage and call for support, and access to protective equipment when appropriate. Regular debriefing sessions after incidents allow staff to process their experiences and identify improvements to safety protocols. Supervision should explicitly address the relationship between consistent implementation of non-invasive strategies and long-term reduction in dangerous situations. Data showing that restraint-free approaches ultimately reduce staff injuries can help build confidence in the approach.
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.
Reducing Severe Challenging Behaviors Without Restraint — CASP CEU Center · 1 BACB Ethics CEUs · $
Take This Course →1 BACB Ethics CEUs · $ · CASP CEU Center
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.