Behavioral expressions are almost always a symptom of a larger need not being met by the environment.

If we only see the persons distress as a problem, we will treat with behavioral techniques, while not addressing the underlying need.

Without meeting the individuals real need, we have found a solution that is "staff-centered" and not "person-centered", this ultimately does more harm than good.

What if all the testing protocols are prejudice of the individuals "different minded learnedness", and fails to interpret the real need. What problems might we see? Behaviors?

When we see a person in distress, our primary goal should be to try and find out what his or her "unfulfilled" needs are, and adjust the environment to meet them.

Behavior Intervention Plans are tricky for this reason. The individual may appear less disruptive, but are they truly calm, self directed and engaged with purpose and understanding? Have we replaced the behavior with rote compliance, and without meeting the individuals real need (are they robotic and without internal motivation)?

Dr. Ellyn Arwood, author of, Learning with a Visual Brain in an Auditory World, says "real behavior (self directed) requires conceptualization". "Conceptualization comes from understanding of language".

We need to at least identify alternative indicators of well-being regardless of age, cognition or functional limitations to maintain the dignity of our loved ones and be their defenders.

Some suggestions of alternate indicators of well-being are:
Identity: Have a life story that is well known to your peers and learning partners.
Autonomy: Have choices in many aspects of your day.

Let's talk about other possible indicators of well-being.

This is my new mission in life, can you tell?