|
| Facilitated Communication and Its Relatives: Expert Witness Observations on the Role of Behavior Science in Court |
| Saturday, May 24, 2025 |
| 4:30 PM–4:50 PM |
| Convention Center, Street Level, 149 AB |
| Area: PCH |
| Instruction Level: Intermediate |
| |
| Facilitated Communication and Its Relatives: Expert Witness Observations on the Role of Behavior Science in Court |
| Domain: Theory |
| JAMES T. TODD (Eastern Michigan University) |
| |
| Abstract: Facilitated Communication (FC), Rapid Prompting (RPM), Spelling to Communicate (S2C), and similar pseudoscientific interventions for non-speaking people with autism and other conditions are growing in popularity despite accumulating and overwhelming science evidence against their effectiveness, and much documentation of their dangers. This presentation will offer observations on the role of behavior science in court, particularly in testimony on the scientific status of facilitated communication (FC) and its relatives. The significant deference given by courts to precedent, tradition, and procedure means FC and similar interventions enjoy a surprising level of legal acceptance despite their status as well-documented pseudoscience. This presentation will include illustrative examples from several high-profile criminal, civil, and administrative cases participated in by the author, including the Wendrow false allegation criminal and civil cases in Michigan and the Stubblefield criminal assault case in New Jersey. Guidance and recommendation to behavior analysts who might find themselves involved in legal testimony in cases on FC-related pseudoscience will be offered. |
| |
|
| |