Ethical and Professional Conduct Flashcards

A BCBA supervising an RBT discovers that the RBT has been implementing a behavior reduction procedure correctly but has been documenting session data retroactively—filling in data sheets hours after sessions from memory rather than in real time. The client's progress appears stable. What is the MOST ethically appropriate immediate action?

Answer: Address the data integrity issue directly with the RBT, require real-time data collection going forward, and document the corrective action in supervision records

The BCBA must address the data integrity issue directly and document the corrective action — this is a supervision responsibility under the Ethics Code (Section 4 on supervisory competence and 2.12 on data integrity). Immediate BACB reporting is not required for a corrective supervision situation that has not yet been escalated or repeated. Ignoring it because outcomes look stable is ethically impermissible. Restarting baseline is a clinical decision that may not be warranted and goes beyond the immediate ethical obligation.

An RBT is working with a 10-year-old client when the client discloses that a family friend 'touches me in ways I don't like.' The RBT is not a mandated reporter in their state under the specific licensure category they hold. What should the RBT do?

Answer: Document the disclosure verbatim, immediately inform the supervising BCBA, and follow agency and supervisor guidance on reporting obligations

Even if the RBT is not independently a mandated reporter, they have an ethical obligation to protect client welfare (Ethics Code Section 2) and must immediately inform their supervising BCBA. The supervisor and/or agency will then determine reporting obligations. The RBT should never independently question the child in ways that could compromise a potential investigation, and inaction is never appropriate when a child discloses possible abuse.

A BCBA is treating a child with ABA services and is also a close personal friend of the family. The parents ask the BCBA to serve as a character witness in their ongoing custody dispute, arguing it would not affect the clinical relationship since the BCBA 'already knows everything about the family.' What does the Ethics Code say about this situation?

Answer: The BCBA should decline, as providing testimony in a legal dispute involving a current client's family creates a multiple relationship that risks compromising professional judgment and client welfare

The BACB Ethics Code (Section 1.11) prohibits multiple relationships when there is risk that professional judgment or client welfare could be compromised. Serving as a character witness in a custody dispute involving a current client's family is a clear multiple relationship risk — the BCBA's clinical role and personal/legal role would overlap and could harm the therapeutic relationship, the child's welfare, or the BCBA's objectivity. Peer consultation does not resolve a clear ethical conflict, and withdrawing from treatment solely to take on the witness role may itself harm the client.

During a team meeting, a BCBA learns that a co-worker who is also a BCBA has been billing Medicaid for 'supervision' hours during times that session logs show the co-worker was not present. The billing appears to be ongoing and systematic. What is the MOST appropriate course of action under the BACB Ethics Code?

Answer: Attempt to resolve the concern informally with the co-worker first; if unsuccessful or if the co-worker is unreceptive, escalate to organizational leadership and, if unresolved, report to the BACB and appropriate regulatory bodies

The BACB Ethics Code (Section 7) requires behavior analysts to address potential ethics violations, preferring informal resolution first when safe and appropriate. However, systematic fraudulent billing is a serious violation that, if unresolved internally, must be reported to the BACB and relevant authorities. Going directly to fraud investigators without any internal attempt may be premature and bypasses the preferred resolution pathway. Reporting only internally without escalation if the issue persists would leave a continuing harm unaddressed. Consulting an attorney before acting is a personal choice but does not substitute for the ethical obligation to act.

A BCBA is approached by a journalist writing a story about ABA therapy. The journalist asks the BCBA to describe a 'success story' using a former client as an example. The client's guardians have provided written consent for the BCBA to discuss the case. However, the former client, now 19 years old, has not been contacted. What is the primary ethical concern?

Answer: The adult former client must provide their own consent, as guardian consent obtained during the client's minority does not extend to disclosures made after the client reaches adulthood

Once a client reaches the age of majority (18 in most jurisdictions), they hold their own privacy rights and must provide their own informed consent for disclosures. Parental or guardian consent obtained during childhood does not transfer to the now-adult individual. The BACB Ethics Code (Section 2.03) requires practitioners to protect confidentiality and obtain appropriate consent — the adult former client must be contacted and must independently consent. De-identification alone does not substitute for consent when details may be identifiable in context.

An RBT's client engages in self-injurious behavior (SIB) that the behavior intervention plan (BIP) addresses through a differential reinforcement procedure. During a session, the SIB escalates to a level the RBT has never observed before and appears to pose an immediate physical risk. The BIP does not include a crisis protocol. What should the RBT do?

Answer: Follow any agency crisis or safety protocols that exist, ensure immediate safety using the least restrictive means available, and contact the supervising BCBA immediately to report the situation and obtain guidance

Client safety supersedes procedural adherence when there is imminent risk of harm. The RBT must use the least restrictive means to ensure immediate safety and contact the supervisor immediately — not wait for a scheduled meeting. Rigidly following a BIP that doesn't address a safety crisis is not ethically defensible. Removing all reinforcers mid-crisis without guidance could worsen behavior. The Ethics Code (Section 2.19) and professional standards require that safety crises be escalated immediately to the supervising BCBA.