This article addresses the lack of communication between child behavio
r analysis (CBA) and what has been referred to as ''mainstream clinica
l child psychology'' (MCCP). It is suggested that the emotionality of
the aversive-nonaversive debate is attributable in part to a lack of i
nformation exchange among these two sub-specialties. Distinct contribu
tions of CBA and MCCP are examined in each of the following four areas
: population, assessment, research, and treatment. Recommendations are
made for enhancing child clinical psychology by (a) promoting constru
ctive communication, and (b) integrating components of the two approac
hes.