Portal Submission:

Relevant background: I worked for an ABA agency who was providing hours for a client and the client's parent served in a supervisory role over that BCBA who was providing services for that client. I am concerned that this could be a multiple relationship.

Possible solutions: Unsure

Credentialing: Reporter is an LBA

Committee Input (e.g., considerations for pathways forward, potential barriers, potential solutions):

Disclaimer: This guidance is not intended as legal advice.

Based on the information provided, the committee agrees that this scenario presents a significant ethical concern and reflects a clear multiple relationship as defined in the BACB Ethics Code 1.11 Multiple Relationships. Specifically, this arrangement also introduces a conflict of interest, in which the client’s parent simultaneously holds a stakeholder role and supervisory authority over the BCBA responsible for their child’s care.

While the BACB Ethics Code allows for some multiple relationships to be managed through safeguards, the committee notes that not all multiple relationships are equally manageable. In this case, with limited information provided, this type of dual relationship is structurally complex and may not be reasonably mitigated, even with attempts to implement boundaries. It is unknown if the parent is also a BCBA, which would further complicate the situation and require an additional set of considerations (1.13 Coercive and Exploitative Relationships).

Based on the submission, the committee has the following concerns:

• The treating BCBA may experience real or perceived pressure when making treatment recommendations, particularly if those recommendations conflict with the parent’s expectations (1.11 Multiple Relationships and 3.01 Responsibility to Clients).
• The parent’s dual role may influence professional judgment or create competing priorities between employment expectations and client care (see Glossary Conflict of Interest and 1.04 Practicing Within a Defined Role).
• A parent in a supervisory role may have access to staff performance data, training records, or internal agency information that would not typically be appropriate for a caregiver to review (see 2.03 Protecting Confidential Information).
• The BCBA may not feel able to seek objective consultation or report concerns due to the supervisory relationship, which could interfere with ethical decision-making and professional accountability (see 1.03 Accountability and 3.02 Identifying Stakeholders).
• This structure may expose staff to perceived or actual bias in supervision, assignment, or disciplinary action, which may undermine professional integrity and psychological safety within the workplace.

The committee emphasizes that behavior analysts are responsible for actively identifying and addressing conditions that interfere with effective service delivery (see 2.19 Addressing Conditions Interfering with Service Delivery). In this case, the conflict is not incidental but structurally embedded within the organizational design.

As such, the committee believes that this arrangement is unlikely to be sufficiently mitigated through standard safeguards alone. Without clear structural separation between the supervisory role and the client relationship, this situation may rise to the level of an ethics violation under 1.11 Multiple Relationships, particularly if it impacts objectivity, decision-making, or service delivery.

It is unclear based on the submission if the submitter is still at this place of employment, or if the identified possible multiple relationship is still occurring. If this is not yet resolved, the committee recommends the submitter review the considerations below.

Considerations for exploration:

In accordance with the Ethics Code, the committee recommends:

• Document concerns related to the dual relationship, including potential risks to clinical objectivity, confidentiality, and staff fairness
• Address the concern directly with leadership, outlining the ethical implications of the supervisory structure
• Request a change in supervisory structure, such as:
• • Assignment to a supervisor who is not in a dual relationship with the client
  • Engagement of an external or independent BCBA to oversee the case
  • Ensuring that the BCBA providing services has access to objective consultation and oversight, separate from the client’s parent
• If concerns persist and cannot be addressed internally, consider reporting to the appropriate governing body, including the BACB (if applicable) or the Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners.

Ethics Codes (specific standards that could apply to support/oppose):

BACB Ethics Code:

• Glossary - Conflict of Interest
• 1.03 - Accountability
• 1.04 - Practicing Within a Defined Role
• 1.10 - Awareness of Personal Biases and Challenges
• 1.11 - Multiple Relationships
• 1.13 - Coercive and Exploitative Relationships (if parent is also BCBA)
• 2.03 - Protecting Confidential Information
• 2.19 - Addressing Conditions Interfering with Service Delivery
• 3.01 - Responsibility to Clients
• 3.02 - Identifying Stakeholders

• 3.08 - Responsibility to Client with Third-Party Contracts

Applicable A.R.S.:

• A.R.S. § 32-2091.12(e)
• A.A.C. R4-26-406

Additional Resources:

• BACB Ethics Code for Behavior Analysts
• Arizona Behavior Analyst Licensure Statute A.R.S. § 32-2091
• Arizona Administrative Code (A.A.C.)
• BACB Reporting Guidance