TY - JOUR
T1 - An argumentation analysis of testimony about positive behaviour support and chemical restraint in Australia’s Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability
AU - Hayward, Brent A.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The British Society of Developmental Disabilities 2023.
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Introduction: Australia’s Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability (2019–2023) is examining, amongst many issues, how positive behaviour support (PBS) can address challenging behaviour and reduce the use of restrictive practices, particularly chemical restraint. This study explores the basis of the claims made about this during testimony. Materials and methods: Applying existing recommendations for the study of Royal Commissions, this study uses argumentation analysis of testimony. Results: Three central claims about PBS were identified: practitioners, behaviour support plans, and chemical restraint. Comparison with Australian research shows preparation of behaviour support practitioners is poor, behaviour support plans do not show a clear benefit to people with disability, and chemical restraint remains a persisting issue with no viable way forward. Discussion: The analysis highlights the difference between perceptions of PBS and the current Australian evidence underlying it. The barriers to the promotion of PBS to address restrictive practices in Australian disability services prompts reconsideration of the policy expansion to address restrictive practices in other sectors.
AB - Introduction: Australia’s Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability (2019–2023) is examining, amongst many issues, how positive behaviour support (PBS) can address challenging behaviour and reduce the use of restrictive practices, particularly chemical restraint. This study explores the basis of the claims made about this during testimony. Materials and methods: Applying existing recommendations for the study of Royal Commissions, this study uses argumentation analysis of testimony. Results: Three central claims about PBS were identified: practitioners, behaviour support plans, and chemical restraint. Comparison with Australian research shows preparation of behaviour support practitioners is poor, behaviour support plans do not show a clear benefit to people with disability, and chemical restraint remains a persisting issue with no viable way forward. Discussion: The analysis highlights the difference between perceptions of PBS and the current Australian evidence underlying it. The barriers to the promotion of PBS to address restrictive practices in Australian disability services prompts reconsideration of the policy expansion to address restrictive practices in other sectors.
KW - argumentation analysis
KW - behaviour support plan
KW - behaviour support practitioner
KW - chemical restraint
KW - Positive behaviour support
KW - Royal Commission
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85165661332&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1080/20473869.2023.2238153
DO - 10.1080/20473869.2023.2238153
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85165661332
SN - 2047-3869
VL - 71
SP - 361
EP - 373
JO - International Journal of Developmental Disabilities
JF - International Journal of Developmental Disabilities
IS - 3
ER -