In certain contexts, just about everything a disabled person does will result in someone following them around with a clipboard, taking notes on their behavior, and designing a behavior plan for them.
This is often called ‘listening to what the behavior is communicating’ or ‘keeping in mind that behavior is communication.’
I know that nothing I’ve ever done was intended to communicate ‘please put me on a behavior plan’. If anyone asked me, they would know with certainty that I don’t want them to do anything of the sort.
I’m not alone in this. Very few people would willingly consent to intense data collection of the kind involved in behavior analysis. Far fewer people would willingly consent to the ways in which that data is used to control their behavior.
A lot of people never get asked. People do these things to them that very few people would willingly consent to — without asking, and without considering consent to be a relevant consideration.
Somehow, an approach that involves ignoring what someone might be thinking gets called ‘listening to what is being communicated’.
That is neither ethical nor logical. Behaviors don’t communicate; people do. If you want to understand what someone is thinking, you have to listen to them in a way that goes beyond what any behavior plan can do.
Collecting data is not the same as listening, modifying behavior is not the same as understanding what someone is thinking, and disabled people are fully human.