Theories Used to Explain the Causes of Challenging Behavior - Essay Example

?Introduction In a typical society, disposition and behaviour of an individual plays a major role in determining his or her socialization and interaction with the larger society. Every society has evident norms and values that define how a person should behave in various social contexts. Any deviation from the established conduct is regarded as deviance or abnormal behaviour (Altshuler, 2003). However, different societies have various standards applied in the determination of normal and abnormal behaviour and hence certain behaviours could be acceptable in particular community but abhorred in another. In cultural context, any behaviour that contradicts the established norms and values is considered as challenging (Wearmouth, et al 2004). This paper is critical examination of challenging behaviour and it comprises of two sections. The first section is a literature review examining the causes and responses to challenging behaviour. The second section is a critical assessment of the current policies for challenging behaviour with focus on the underlying theories. Challenging behaviour has various definitions and Boylan and Wallace (2009, p63) argue that it refers to “the conduct or manners that are abnormal in relation to the culture in which the person in question comes from”. Emerson (2001:p6) define challenging behaviour as “any recurring pattern of behaviour that interferes with optimal learning or engagement with prosocial interactions with peers or adults.” Similarly, Emerson (2001) defines challenging behaviour from cultural deviant perspective. According to Emerson (2001, p9), challenging behaviour is “a culturally deviant conduct with powerful intensity or frequency capable of disrupting the physical safety of the affected individual and or others”. Such behaviour could be so disruptive that it inhibits or denies the affected person from using or accessing the facilities and amenities provided for use in the community. Challenging behaviour manifests itself in various forms including unwarranted destructive conduct and high tendency to inflict self-injuries. In addition, individuals demonstrating the behaviour do not comply with the established rules and they show elevated stereotyped conduct. Moreover, people afflicted with the condition demonstrate bizarre sexual conduct and manner that are contradictory to normal and socially accepted behaviour. In summary, challenging behaviour is characterised by socially unacceptable conduct that includes inclination towards violence, destruction, and withdrawal from others (Ayers, Clarke, and Murray, 2000). Various theories have been used to explain the causes of challenging behaviour including behaviourist, psychodynamic, social learning theory among others. Behaviourist theoretical perspective holds that the behaviour demonstrated by an individual is a direct response to the applied stimuli (Clements and Martin 2002). Thus the theory emphasises on the critical role that external environment plays in reinforcing particular behaviour in people. In respect to challenging behaviour, behaviourists argue that it is a learned response arising from failure to meet the needs of the child. Therefore, children with unfulfilled necessities behave in a manner that elicits a response to meet the need. A person who needs stimulation and interaction with others but lack the necessary skills to initiate a relationship may find the attention that emanates from aggression and other behaviours that characterize challenging behaviour (Cromby and David, 1999). Thus, in behaviourist view, attention seeking and lack of appropriate interactive skills are main causes of challenging behaviour. Various factors could contribute to the exaggerated attention seeking behaviour, including assigning the child a complicated task that becomes challenging to manage, which could result to frustrations or boredom. Haynes (2005) argues that attention-seeking behaviour could also be learned through the various developmental stages of the child as a mechanism of obtaining what they want from their guardians or carers. Such children could demonstrate challenging behaviour, if they fail to get what they want through other acceptable avenues. Children with some medical conditions could also demonstrate challenging behaviour so that they can get attention from guardians and teachers about the condition. According to Douglas (1998), a child with underlying medical problems could demonstrate challenging behaviour in class and other social settings. Some of the medical causes include pain or discomfort that could make the child become aggressive and demonstrate self-injurious behaviour such as banging their heads on desks. Other medical conditions include epilepsy, syndrome specific conditions and side effects from prescribed medicines. Examples of such syndromes include Tourette’s and autistic spectrum disorders (Douglas 1998). Psychiatric conditions such as depression, schizophrenia and mood disorders also contribute to development of challenging disorders (Varma, 1997). Therefore, Rogers (2004, p59) emphasises on the importance of examining the family background of the child to establish the presence of psychiatric ailments which are usually genetically transmitted to the children. Children with inherent communication difficulties have propensity of portraying challenging behaviour (Shelton and Brownhill 2008). In situation where children are incapable of using the appropriate language to communicate their wants or needs, using abnormal behaviour becomes one of the methods of expression. Difficulties in use of language could be caused by medical condition or failure of the child to comprehend it (Roffey, 2002). Hence, it is important for the guardian or teachers to determine the cause of language difficulties in children in order to take early interventions such as speech therapy. According to Lee (2011), positive and negative reinforcement are the major principles of behavioural theory. In respect to challenging behaviour, positive reinforcement occurs when the child experiences a positive experience from the response their behaviour generates. Thus, if a child bangs her head due to frustration about a task and the teacher responds by addressing the situation, the behaviour is reinforced since it generates a rewarding response. If the reaction from the teacher is quicker when the child’s behaviour is more intense, the challenging behaviour becomes reinforced in the pupil. Negative reinforcement such as ignoring the behaviour discourages such behaviour. Therefore, since challenging behaviour is learned, offering rewards for positive behaviour and denying rewards for challenging conduct is an approach used to address the situation in the society (Harris, Cook, and Upton 1996). In psychodynamic view, unconscious influences, which people are not cognisant cause challenging behaviour. Psychodynamic theorists assert that there is a disguised intention in any behaviour demonstrated by an individual or a child (Hemphill and John 2009). Thus in respect to challenging behaviour, the hidden intentions underlying the child’s conduct is a reflection of how the infant was treated by the parents or guardians in the formative age. O’ Mahoney, (2003:52) argues that during the early childhood, especially before five years, the extent at which the parents meet the needs of the child play a major role in influencing the infant behaviour in the later stages. According to Roffey (2002), psychodynamic theorists argue that the behaviour of an individual arises from the compromise of three elements, namely, the id, superego and ego. The id comprises of biological motives, namely food, drink, sex and aggression. The superego is the moral component that controls these drives through feelings such as guilt to regulate people from being controlled by the id. The ego is the middle ground that ensures the id impulses are met without violating the superego (Lee, 2011). In respect to challenging behaviour, satisfying the id is manifested by adopting a defensive mechanism, such as projecting anger to their peers because of the failure of the parent to provide the needs during the formative early childhood stage. The environment that the child grows therefore plays a critical role in causing challenging behaviour. The environment entails both the physical and social surroundings, which influence behaviour or character of a growing child. Some of the environmental factors include family background, cultural values and norms in addition to the economic status of the family. Poor parenting, which often contributes to development of poor social skills and language acquisition children, could contribute to development of challenging behaviour in children as defensive mechanism to the prevailing environment (Sterne, and Poole, 2009). Other factors include living conditions such as the type of accommodation and presence of opportunities to interact with other persons (Sterne, and Poole, 2009). Douglas (1998, p92) established that unfavourable school setting and background of the place where children spend their time influence the character and could result to development of challenging behaviour. Some of the major physical environmental conditions include intense heat or cold, lighting, noise, or intruding the space that children use to play (Altshuler, 2003). Roffey (2011) noted that children especially those suffering from autism demonstrate elevated levels of sensation to disruptive stimulus such as noise could initiate abnormal response by portraying challenging behaviour. In addition, the training and skills impacted on the child by the guardians and others carers influence the development of challenging behaviour. Social development theories have also been used to explain the causes of challenging behaviour in children. Several theorists including John Bowlby and Albert Bandura made important contribution in expounding how interactions between the young child and their guardians at formative age influences the child’s character in the later stages of development. The social learning theory, which was formulated by Albert Bandura, holds that children imitate behaviour of adults through keen observation. Thus, in relation to challenging behaviour, the social environment that the child develops in influences its onset. Some of the behaviours that child observe and imitate from other people include violence and aggression, which are some of the major defining characteristics of challenging behaviour (Douglas, 1998). Part 2 According to Altshuler (2003), society responds negatively to individuals demonstrating challenging behaviour. Systematic negligence, abuse, dehumanising treatment and denying the afflicted individuals the available opportunities and privileges are the most common ways in which the society treats people with challenging behaviour (Boylan and Wallace 2009). In organisation that caters for such individuals, the caregivers demonstrate heightened anger, and other negative emotions such as anxiety while dealing with people demonstrating challenging behaviour (Clements and Martin 2002). In educational institutions, children with challenging behaviour are usually excluded from learning. According to O’ Mahoney (2003), children with challenging behaviour are one of the major causes of severe stress to teachers while undertaking their roles in learning institutions. Consequently, various policies have been formulated to address the needs of individuals with challenging behaviour society and the interests of the wider society, which suffers from the aftermath. Some of the policies include every child matters, ecological policies and antisocial behaviour orders (ASBO). This section briefly examines the fundamentals of the above named policies, in relation to the aforementioned theoretical explanation of the causes of challenging behaviour. Every child matter policy is founded on the principle of ensuring holistic development of all children by providing their fundamental rights. According to DfE (2003), every child matters seek to address all factors that contribute to development of challenging and other anti social behaviour in children by providing a favourable environment for healthy growth and development at home, school and the larger society. The policy indentifies five major needs of children and the youth in the United Kingdom and the world at large. These needs include health, safety, education or training, socialisation and integration to the society in addition to economic wellbeing (DfE, 2003). Children and young people need facilities and services to cater for their physical and mental need to ensure that they lead a healthy lifestyle. A safe environment, where children are protected from physical and mental harm and neglect is a major objective of every child matter policy. Children also need to grow in an environment where they enjoy and achieve. These needs are achieved in learning institution, where the policy emphasises on creation of pleasurable environment and developing the skills of the young children to enable them succeed in adulthood. In addition, every child matter policies acknowledge that children and young people need to make positive contribution in the society. Thus, it is imperative that the children develop appropriate and acceptable behaviour that would enhance their integration in the societies in various capacities. Every child matters policy therefore strives to instil good behaviour and address the factors that contribute to antisocial and challenging conduct. Finally, the policy recognises the need of economic empowerment, especially to the families with the low family income in order to ring up children in an environment characterised by deprivation of the fundamental needs (DfE, 2003). Every child matters policy is founded on various theories, including behavioural theory, social learning, and psychodynamic and cognitive development theories. From behaviourists’ perspective, the policy strives to provide a favourable environment for all children, including those with challenging behaviour in order to elicit positive response. Such provisions include creating an attractive environment at home, school and the society through provision of a positive reinforcement. In poor families, the policy strives to provide economic assistance so that the child has enough and suitable nutrition, proper housing, and medical care. In schools, the policy emphasises promoting the standards of both primary and secondary education in addition to encouraging all children to continue with post secondary education (DfE 2003). This includes every child, even those with challenging behaviour. In learning institutions, excluding learners that portray characters considered risky to peaceful running of the learning institutions is currently becoming the most acceptable method of dealing with challenging behaviour. This directive is based on behaviourism theory, which holds that punishing or negative reinforcement discourages children from misbehaving. The most common behaviours considered as risky to school community include aggression towards peers and others members, violence and disruptive behaviour such as screaming, truancy, verbal abuse, screaming and lack of cooperation with the established school rules and regulations (Ayers, Clarke, and Murray 2000). Douglas (1998) notes that suspending children demonstrating behaviours less intense than challenging behaviour is gradually increasing in developed countries. In contemporary society, challenging behaviour in schools is currently considered as “truancy, disrespect to authority, insubordination, disorder and misconduct”. Such behaviour is considered to warrant automatic expulsion (Haynes, 2005). In atypical learning institution, Altshuler (2003, p58) argues that school administrators “demand conformity and compliance just for the sake of obedience”. This attitude is often mistaken as instilling discipline to the children. This attitude is tantamount to perpetuating status quo of the prevailing authority in learning institution in order to make teaching easier. Hence, it is important to instil appropriate disciplinary measures to students on based on established anomalies in behaviour of the targeted child. This convectional method of instilling discipline in learning institutions is attributed to the increasing reported incidents of behaviours regarded as challenging just because the children do not comply with the established norms of character (Altshuler 2003). Every child matters policy strives to improve the school attendance and behaviour. Children suspended and expelled for portraying challenging behaviour are provided with supportive services at school and in the society to ensure that they continue with learning. It is within the policy intentions to increase the capacity of the teachers to enable them cope with the challenging behaviour. Providing pre natal and postnatal attention to women in the society is another important objective of every child matters. This ensures that medical conditions that could cause the behavioural problem are detected early (DfE, 2003). Thus, every child matters policy is informed by several underlying theories. Behaviourist theory informs the provision of rewards and negative reinforcement. To ensure adherence to the rules, Rogers (2004, p66) recommends the use of reinforcements such as rewards and praise. In order to promote positive behaviour, Rogers, (2004) emphasizes on the importance of providing affirmative response for students who comply with the established rules and consequence for non-compliance as well. To reinforce positive behaviour using rewards suitable behaviour should be rewarded as quickly as possible after the children demonstrates positive character. In addition, the school administration should encourage all students to cooperate in order to be rewarded. Roffey (2011) warns that a reward given to a child should never be revoked once it is given. Every child matters’ policy of providing a safe home environment, where all needs of the child are taken care of is linked to psychodynamic theory. In addition, ensuing that children acquire relevant skills in schools to enhance their socialisation in the society is informed by the social learning theory. Antisocial behaviour order (ASBOs) is another policy that seeks to address challenging behaviour in the society. According to CPS (2012), the legal institutions reinforce ASBOs as a deterrent measure to contain individuals with disruptive behaviour in the society. ASBO therefore seek to discourage individuals whose behaviour interfere with the prevailing peace and order in the society. ASBOs comprises specific rules and conditions, which elaborate on specific actions or behaviours that an individual is not permitted to do in particular location or time. Some of the regulated behaviour includes drinking alcohol, where ASBOs establishes the minimum age and regulates drinking hours (CPS, 2012). Others behaviour include playing loud music, where the orders restrict the place and time. Some areas that loud music is restricted include residential, medical institutions and other places where noise disrupts the normal functioning of the community. ASBOs policy is founded on behaviourism theory, because it (policy) seeks to attain suitable behaviour in people by restricting various environmental stimuli. For instance preventing access to particular area because of having a past characterised by distressing behaviour deters other people who have never been accused of violating ASBOs from violating the rules. Thus, the policy is informed by negative reinforcement where individuals demonstrating challenging behaviour are not rewarded. Other policies for addressing challenging behaviour include ecological based principles of action. Ecological policies are founded on the critical role the interaction between experience and biological factors play in influencing human behaviour and development (Shelton and Brownhill, 2008). This policy recognises that culture and human relationships make up the human experience. The policy also recognises that timing of early experiences in childhood play an important role in influencing human development and behaviour for the rest of life. Thus, the ecological policy provides a mechanism of modelling environmental events in the life course of the child in order to instil appropriate growth and behaviour (Dowling, 2010). The ecological policy is identical to every child matters policy. Both policies address the holistic needs of children especially from the early childhood with an objective of preventing development of challenging behaviour. In ecological policy, behavioural, psychodynamic and social learning theories are the major theoretical structures that inform the rationale of the policy’s principles. Conclusion The major advantage of every child matters and ecological policies is that they address the biological, social and economic needs of the child from early age. This preventive approach ensures that incidents of challenging behaviour are indentified and managed in the early stages of the child development. Prevention and early management of challenging behaviour increases the chances of the child leading a normal life characterised by effective socialisation in the society and achievement in educational institutions (Porter, 2003). However, implementing every child matters and ecological polices require heavy capital and human resources investment. The main limitation of antisocial behaviour order policy is that it does not address the biological, social and economic needs of young children especially those aged below five years. In addition, it is a deterrent measure that does not address the underlying causes of challenging behaviour in the society. However, compared with the other two policies, ASBOs are easier to implement especially in controlling antisocial behaviour among the youths and adults. Bibliography Altshuler, S.(2003). From barriers to successful collaboration: Public school and child welfare working together. Social Work, 48(1):50-65. Ayers, H., Clarke, D., and Murray, A. (2000). Perspectives on behaviour: A practical guide to effective interventions for teachers. 2nd ed. London: David Fulton Publishers. Boylan, C., and Wallace, A.(2009). Engaging in learnscapes: Connecting community and school. The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education, 38: 90-103. Clements, J., and Martin, N. (2002). Assessing behaviours regarded as problematic for people with developmental disabilities. London: Jessica Kingsley CPS (2012). Antisocial behaviour orders on conviction(ASBOs). [Online]. Available from http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/anti_social_behaviour_guidance [Accessed on 28 April 2012]. Cromby, J., and David, N.(1999). Social constructionist psychology: A critical analysis of theory and practice. New York: Open University Press. DfE.(2003). Every child matters. [online]. Available from http://www.education.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/EveryChildMatters.pdf [ Accessed on 27April 2012]. Douglas, J.(1998). Behaviour problems in young children: Assessment and management. London: Routledge. Dowling, M.(2010). Young children’s personal, social and emotional development. London: Sage. Emerson, E.(2001), challenging behaviour: Analysis and intervention in people with learning disabilities. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Harris, J., Cook, M., and Upton, G.(1996). Pupils with severe learning disabilities who present challenging behaviour. Kidderminster, Worcs: BILD. Haynes, B.(2005). The paradox of the excluded child. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(3):333-342. Hemphill, S., and John, H.(2009). The impact of school suspensions: A student wellbeing issue. ACHPER Health Lifestyle Journal , 56(3):6-13. Lee, C.(2011). The complete guide to behaviour. London: Sage. O’ Mahoney, P.(2003). Challenging behaviour information and guidelines for boards of management. Dublin: NABMSE. Porter, L.(2003). Young children’s behaviour: Practical guide for caregivers and teachers. 2nd ed. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Roffey, S.(ed). (2002). School behaviour and families: Frameworks for working together. London: David Fulton. Roffey, S.(2011). Changing behaviour in schools. London: Sage. Rogers, B.(2004). How to manage children’s challenging behaviour. London: Sage. Shelton, F., and Brownhill, S.(2008). Effective behaviour management in the primary classrooms. Berks: Open University Press. Sterne, A., and Poole, L.(2009). Domestic violence and children. London: Routledge. Varma, V.(ed) (1997). Troubles of children and adolescents. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Wearmouth, J., et al (2004). Inclusion and behaviour management in schools. London: David Fulton Publishers. Read More