By Matt Harrington, BCBA · Behaviorist Book Club · Research-backed answers for behavior analysts
Non-discrimination is the passive commitment to not engaging in discriminatory behavior. It asks practitioners to treat all clients equally and to avoid overt bias. Anti-oppressive practice goes further by actively identifying and challenging the systems, structures, and assumptions that produce inequitable outcomes. It recognizes that simply not discriminating is insufficient when the systems within which we work are themselves structured by oppression. Anti-oppressive practice requires active effort to change not only individual behavior but also institutional practices and professional norms.
Ableism in ABA can manifest in several ways: targeting behaviors for reduction because they appear different rather than because they are harmful to the client; selecting goals that prioritize normative appearance over client wellbeing; using compliance-focused interventions that prioritize obedience over autonomy; dismissing client distress during intervention as a side effect to be managed rather than a signal to reconsider the approach; and framing neurodivergent traits as deficits to be fixed rather than differences to be accommodated. These practices reflect assumptions about disability that may cause harm even when implemented with good intentions.
Sanism refers to discrimination and prejudice directed at individuals perceived as mentally ill or psychologically different. In behavior-analytic practice, sanism can manifest as dismissing the subjective experiences of clients, pathologizing emotional expression, minimizing the impact of trauma, or applying behavioral interventions that prioritize visible behavioral compliance over psychological wellbeing. Sanism intersects with ableism and may lead practitioners to make clinical decisions that do not account for the client's internal experience or that equate behavioral quietness with therapeutic success.
Identifying implicit biases is an ongoing process that requires multiple approaches. Reflective journaling about your clinical decisions can reveal patterns you might not notice in the moment. Asking yourself whether you would make the same decision for a different client can surface biases related to race, disability, or other characteristics. Peer consultation provides external perspectives that can identify blind spots. Reviewing your clinical decisions and outcomes across clients for patterns of differential treatment can reveal systemic biases. The key is approaching self-examination with curiosity rather than defensiveness.
No. Anti-oppressive practice enhances evidence-based practice by broadening the criteria for what constitutes effective treatment. Evidence-based practice requires that interventions be effective, but effective for whom and by whose standards? Anti-oppressive practice ensures that effectiveness is evaluated from the client's perspective, that outcomes include wellbeing and autonomy alongside behavioral change, and that the evidence base itself is critically examined for biases in how research is conducted and interpreted. The two frameworks are complementary, not competing.
Start by modeling anti-oppressive practice in your own clinical work and supervision. Raise awareness about bias through professional development opportunities and peer consultation. Advocate for organizational policies that include bias-checking procedures in clinical decision-making, diverse hiring practices, and mechanisms for client feedback about equity concerns. Be prepared for resistance and recognize that organizational change is a gradual process that requires sustained effort. Build alliances with colleagues who share your commitment and approach change strategically.
Respect for diverse perspectives is a core principle of anti-oppressive practice. If a family prefers goals or approaches that you consider reflective of oppressive norms, the appropriate response is dialogue, not imposition. Share your perspective, including the evidence base for your concerns, while respecting the family's right to make informed decisions. Explore the values and priorities underlying the family's preferences. In many cases, collaborative conversation will reveal shared goals even when initial perspectives differ. Your role is to inform and advise, not to override family autonomy.
Racial bias can affect every aspect of service delivery. It influences referral patterns and diagnostic practices, potentially leading to over- or under-identification of behavioral needs in different racial groups. It affects goal selection, as behaviors may be interpreted differently depending on the client's race. It affects the therapeutic relationship, as racial discordance between practitioner and client may create barriers to trust and engagement. It affects outcomes, as differential treatment quality and cultural mismatches can produce inequitable results. Addressing racial bias requires both individual self-examination and systemic change.
The neurodiversity movement has been one of the most significant influences on anti-oppressive thinking within ABA. It challenges the assumption that neurological differences are inherently deficits to be corrected and argues instead that neurodivergence represents natural human variation. For behavior analysts, the neurodiversity perspective encourages critical examination of which behaviors are truly harmful versus merely different, whose comfort and convenience is being prioritized in goal selection, and whether interventions support the client's authentic self or attempt to make them appear neurotypical. Engaging with neurodiversity perspectives is essential for ethical, client-centered practice.
Supervision is a powerful context for addressing bias because it combines instruction, feedback, and modeling. Supervisors should explicitly include bias examination as a regular topic in supervision, not just when problems arise. This includes reviewing clinical decisions for potential bias, discussing how power dynamics affect the therapeutic relationship, modeling self-reflection about one's own biases, and creating a supervision environment in which supervisees feel safe raising concerns. Supervisors should also ensure that their feedback and evaluation practices are equitable across supervisees from different backgrounds.
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.
Unmasking Bias in Practice: Leveling Up to an Anti-Oppressive Paradigm — Robin Arnall · 1.5 BACB Ethics CEUs · $25
Take This Course →1.5 BACB Ethics CEUs · $25 · 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.