PS498 Unit 3 Capstone Ethics Paper Example

The Bathroom Door, the Water Bottle and the Grade: A PS498 Unit 3 Ethics Paper

[Student Name]

Purdue University Global

PS498: Bachelor's Capstone in Applied Behavior Analysis

Unit 3 Ethics Paper

[Instructor Name]

[Date]

The writer, the clinic, the families and every detail are composite and illustrative; the sources cited are real.

Why an Ethics Paper Comes Early

The children in my capstone are Amara and Leo, two young clients with autism whose toilet training I carry out under supervision. Toilet training is common, socially significant and well researched. It is also intimate. It involves bathrooms, bodies, fluids and accidents, with young children who cannot fully consent, and in my case it is also coursework. This paper works through the ethical questions my supervisor and I identified before training began.

Scope and Supervision

Brodhead et al. (2018) held that competence is specific: a practitioner is competent with the populations, problems and procedures for which training and supervised practice have prepared them, and not beyond. As a technician, my competence is in carrying out procedures under supervision, not in designing them. The ethics code of the Behavior Analyst Certification Board (2020) places responsibility for designing and overseeing behavior-change programs with qualified behavior analysts.

For this project, my supervising behavior analyst designed the protocol, approved each phase and will make every procedural decision. My role is to carry out sessions, collect data and analyze them for my capstone. I wrote that division into the project plan so that no one, including me, could later blur it.

Consent and Assent

Both families signed the clinic's consent for toilet training and a separate release allowing composite descriptions in my coursework. Consent from parents is necessary but not sufficient. Young children cannot consent, but they can show assent or its absence. The protocol states that if either child cries, tries to leave the bathroom or refuses to sit three times in a row, the session ends and my supervisor reviews the procedure before the next day.

Dignity and Privacy

Bathrooms raise privacy questions that most clinic programs do not. Amara's mother asked that only female staff assist Amara in the bathroom, a request rooted in her family's values that the clinic honored without debate. Sits take place in a single-stall bathroom with the door partly closed, and data are recorded outside, not by an observer standing in the room. Agreement checks for voids use sound and a quick check rather than direct watching. Leo's parents asked that his accidents never be discussed in front of other children, and staff change him in a private room.

A procedure that works but strips a child of privacy is not one I would want carried out on me.

Family Practice in the Bathroom

Amara's family is Somali American, and at home the family cleans with water after using the toilet, using a small bottle kept beside it. Her mother asked whether the clinic could do the same, since teaching Amara to use toilet paper alone would leave her with a routine that did not match home. My supervisor agreed, and a labeled water bottle now sits in the clinic bathroom for Amara, with the steps added to her task analysis. The ethics code asks behavior analysts to respect clients' cultural practices and to adapt services accordingly, and here the adaptation cost nothing but a bottle and a conversation. I would not have thought to ask. The lesson for me was that a protocol written for "a child" is really written for a particular family's bathroom.

Medical Clearance

Before training began, each child's pediatrician confirmed that there was no medical reason, such as a urinary tract infection or constipation, for incontinence, and that toilet training was appropriate. Medical causes must be ruled out first, because no behavioral procedure will fix them.

Fluids and Safety

Many toilet training protocols add fluids so that children void more often and can be reinforced more often. Azrin and Foxx (1971), whose rapid method shaped much later work, used increased fluids with adults in an institution. Large increases can be dangerous for small children. Our protocol limits added fluids to a modest amount set by each child's pediatrician, who reviewed and approved it in writing. Staff record fluid intake, and any sign of illness ends extra fluids for the day.

Responding to Accidents

Azrin and Foxx also used positive practice for accidents, requiring repeated practice of the toileting sequence after each one, a procedure that can function as punishment. Van Houten et al. (1988) argued that clients have the right to the most effective treatment available and to programs that teach functional skills. Later research has shown that reinforcement-based methods can toilet train children with autism effectively, so a punishment-based accident procedure is not needed. Our protocol responds to accidents calmly: the child is guided to the toilet to sit briefly, changed without comment and returned to activities. No reprimands are used.

The Grade and the Child

My capstone grade depends partly on producing results, which creates a conflict. I could be tempted to continue a procedure that is not working, to record ambiguous events generously or to push a reluctant child for the sake of a better graph. The ethics code asks practitioners to put clients' interests first and to avoid conflicts that could impair objectivity. Three safeguards address this. My supervisor, who has no stake in my grade, decides when phases change. A second technician collects agreement data. And my instructor agreed in advance that a project with mixed or poor results, reported honestly, can still meet the capstone requirements.

Records and Coursework

Data are stored in the clinic's secure system. My capstone papers use composite names and details, and no identifying information leaves the clinic. Graphs in my papers will show data without dates, initials or locations.

Questions That Remain

Two questions are not fully settled. If one child succeeds quickly and the other struggles, will the contrast make the struggling child's family feel judged? And when the project ends, who maintains the protocol at home? My supervisor will meet both families at the end to plan next steps regardless of results, and the clinic will continue the program after my capstone ends.

Conclusion

Six ethical questions shaped the toilet training capstone before any sit was scheduled. The ethics code and Brodhead and colleagues' account of scope set my role under supervision; consent and assent rules protect two children who cannot speak for themselves; family requests became privacy procedures; pediatricians set fluid limits; Van Houten and colleagues' rights framework supported reinforcement-based accident procedures; and safeguards protect the children from my grade.

References

Azrin, N. H., & Foxx, R. M. (1971). A rapid method of toilet training the institutionalized retarded. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 4(2), 89-99. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1971.4-89

Behavior Analyst Certification Board. (2020). Ethics code for behavior analysts. https://www.bacb.com/ethics-information/ethics-codes/

Brodhead, M. T., Quigley, S. P., & Wilczynski, S. M. (2018). A call for discussion about scope of competence in behavior analysis. Behavior Analysis in Practice, 11(4), 424-435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40617-018-00303-8

Van Houten, R., Axelrod, S., Bailey, J. S., Favell, J. E., Foxx, R. M., Iwata, B. A., & Lovaas, O. I. (1988). The right to effective behavioral treatment. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 21(4), 381-384. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.1988.21-381