Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About baddad

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

3,929 profile views
  1. baddad


    Hee hee hee... the words 'petard' 'hoisted' 'own' 'by' and 'your' come to mind (BNNITO)... Congrats, though, hope they have a lovely time
  2. baddad

    Sunday Sermon

    Returning from my son's morning golf lesson I decanted two bowls of home made soup (leek & celeriac with just a hint of grated horseradish for anyone interested) and sliced some bread. 'Father', he said, as I placed a bowl in front of him, 'Is soup a food, or drink?' We pondered that question for a while together, questioning the nature of other sloppy foods from casseroles and stews to watery mashed potatoes and runny poached eggs, eventually concluding that soup is 'food', because it is eaten with cutlery - to wit, a spoon. 'But what about cuppa-soup,' he then enquired, 'we drink that from a cup?'. 'Then that must be a drink' I replied. He fell silent, seemingly troubled. 'What is the matter, my child,' I asked, to which he replied: 'Should we judge the content, then father, from the appearance of the vessel? Should we divine the nature of what is within solely from that which we can perceive from without?' I threw his soup down the sink and gave him a sandwich... Nobody loves a smartarse, eh
  3. Hi loulou - How do you qualify that he 'doesn't even know he has a bank account' with the idea that he knows about and can manage money? I have an autistic nephew, now 22, who is also MLD and who lives semi-independently in his own flat, works and is now hoping to move on to live even more independently. Helping him with his finances has been the most difficult aspect of support - it's taken years to get him to where he is now. He's had control of his own money since he was sixteen, but if he'd been left to 'manage' it on his own it would have probably jeapordised all of the other aspects of independent living he now enjoys. Of course, that is a very different scenario to the one you think might exist with the boy you know, but until you know more you shouldn't be jumping to conclusions or using words like 'immoral' or 'stealing'. What his mother/family should be doing is helping him to develop self management skills and money skills rather than 'doing it for him', but the fact they are doing it for him doesn't necessarily mean they're ripping him off. Perhaps the bulk of the money is going into a trust fund or something? Of course parents of children of all ages are capable of stealing from their kids - I've known many families who think of DLA as 'family income', and it's often siblings etc who see far more of the benefits of DLA than the disabled child - i.e. a 'disability funded' car for kids who rarely get taken out because the parents say he/she can't 'cope' with things like shopping or cinemas etc while the non-disabled siblings go out with the other parent in the nice DLA people carrier every weekend, so I think there's always room for concern, but I think it can be far more complicated than is immediately obvious. I also agree that if he's a young adult living at home then he should be contributing to the family finances, and if his only income is DLA then it's entirely reasonable to use that to provide for HIS needs (that's what it's for, after all). What percentage would depend on the rates his receiving etc etc. The idea of twenty pound 'pocket money' isn't particularly reassuring, but it would/could depend on the context and how the remaining money is being managed and his input to that. You could try asking some questions about how the parents try to support him in developing his money management skills, but that could cause offence whether your concerns are legitimate or not. As someone who regularly challenges the assumption that 'parents know best' I know first hand that that undeniable logic is often lost on the parents themselves... L&P BD
  4. baddad


    I think you should ask the adults concerned for their perspectives on what happened rather than just accepting your son's very subjective (and possibly very manipulative) account as 'fact'. As for threats that he will kill himself if you force him to go back, rather than acknowledging that he's 'unlikely to follow through' I think you should tell him to grow up (based on the assumption that if he is old enough / sensible enough for you to even consider taking his accounts of events in school at face value without even bothering to ask a responsible adult who was on the scene about it he is certainly old enough/sensible enough to be taken to task over making hysterical threats and demands like that). No, you shouldn't give him the rest of the week as a holiday, and you shouldn't be rewarding him for stomping out of the classroom. If he had been calling the boy names then regardless of whether provoked or not the 'two wrongs don't make a right' rule should be applied, and you should be supporting the teacher in seeing that he fulfils the detention. I suspect that might not be what you were hoping for when you asked 'what do you think', but hope you'll find it helpful anyway L&P BD
  5. Hi - I think the whole idea of sanction the following day being 'too big a gap' is one that gets overworked, TBH. Ideally, immediate 'act' and 'consequence' is better, but I think only severely autistic children would be unable to connect the events of the previous day with a sanction. And of course the sanction fits the crime, which provides a connection and context, as would a teacher simply explaining 'you are in today because of what happened yesterday when you...' I think having more structured lunchtimes would help, but this should not be a matter of somebody effectively 'trailing' your son to intercede when he looks like becoming violent/aggressive or to structure his playtime for him, as that's just setting a precedent that may well continue for the rest of his school career. Your son needs to take 'ownership' and responsibility for his behaviours and to know that there will be consequences - and meaningful consequences (i.e. things he will not like/want to happen that genuinely impact on his day) - when he enacts violent, aggressive behaviours. Reading between the lines, are you saying in your last paragraph that he is also sometimes violent and aggressive at home and that you are trying to curtail this by reading social stories? If so, it is, IMO, a huge error of judgement, because you are basically rewarding aggressive behaviour with 'golden time' - a one to one reading / story lesson. Further, if his understanding is so compromised that he can't understand the concept of a following day punishment, then it is a huge assumption to think he can understand the concept of a social story about hitting without any other reinforcers. He may well be just enjoying the 'hitting bits'. If he is hitting there needs to be a real, meaningful consequence that impacts directly on his life in a way that he will recognise. After all, that's exactly the effect his violence has on his victims. Whatever he likes doing most, take it away for a fixed, specific period of time and do it consistently, regardless of any tantrums, demands or short term escalation in behaviours. Social stories are a good additional tactic, but make sure they are completely clear in their intentions (include the consequence, for example, and why this is necessary) and offered after the 'real' consequence/sanction, not instead of. You've said your son is getting 100% 1-1 support throughout the school day, so the problem isn't schools willingness to support your son but your son's unreasonable behaviour when he doesn't get his own way: That's not going to be resolved by giving him his own way more, for looking for possible excuses for the behaviours beyond the fact that he is a five year old acting like any other five year old given a free pass, or by putting all expectations for controlling the behaviours onto tha adults on the scene. HE needs to learn that not all food is swamped in gravy, that he's not in charge of playground games and that he can't squelch around in mud when the fancy takes him. My guess would be that even at five and with potential autism he already does know those things, but at the moment is free not to acknowledge it, and basically has everyone dancing to his tune. Give that kind of power to any five year old, and it aint going to be much fun for anyone on the sidelines. HTH L&P BD
  6. Hi Julia - got to say I agree with the two posts immediately above. Would also add that I find this part of your post slightly disconcerting: Because you seem to be looking just for reinforcement of your own feelings rather than advice, which can be very dangerous. Much better to listen to all opinions and make as informed and objective choice as you can. I know that can be really difficult sometimes as a parent, but giving our kids what they think they need or even what we think they need might be a million miles away from what they actually need. Allowing and enabling your daughter to disable herself now doesn't bode well for her in her future, and she's nowhere near mature enough to make long term predictions about that kind of thing. If you help her to socialise and she makes up her mind as an adult to say 'thanks but no thanks' that's her informed choice, but she's not old enough to make that decision yet, and hasn't the practical skills that would make it an informed choice... HTH, even if it's not the agreement you were looking for. L&P BD
  7. No I'm not. Read it again. I have said I think you are (possibly both) too keen to blame autism for things that have nothing to do with autism, and highlighted that you have, from the information given in your post been in relationships - including very physical and intimate ones - with non-autistic people that have also gone t!ts up, which shows pretty much conclusively that relationships, whether with autistic people or otherwise, are more often difficult than not. The fact that other posters have all made pretty much the same observations regarding the mood swings, the inconsistency regarding intimacy and contact, have been equally baffled at why you are staying in an unfulfilling relationship that has been 'not nice' pretty much since day one and have been concerned at the very negative view you seem to take of autism/autistic people very much makes it sound as though I do know what I'm talking about, regardless of my relationship status in the here and now or at any time in the past. The only response which you seem to have accepted as useful is one that 'fits' your existing preconceptions - regardless of the inherent flaw (inconsistency) that I and others have pointed out. You will be able to find many people who will reinforce your existing preconceptions and prejudices for you if you look around, even on some websites 'about' autism that seek to make martyrs or victims of carers and families rather than looking realistically at relationships in the wider context. Though these days it seems sometimes to be hanging on by the skin of its teeth, this forum isn't yet one of them - Sorry you didn't get the feedback/confirmation you were hoping for. L&P BD
  8. Those are completely different things: to say 'I have been used by people because I have been too accomodating' is one thing, but you're taking one extreme and responding with another extreme. If you are saying you apply some moderation - i.e. you offer others some consideration and exercise a degree of control then it isn't 'without moderation' - you're just moderating your behaviour on your own terms rather than more general terms (which may or may not be selfishness, depending on the circumstances, but certainly has the potential to be). Additionally, to say 'I have been used by people' may well be true, but it is also a personal/subjective appraisal... it could equally be that people haven't responded the way you have wanted them too and you perceive that as being 'used'. The reality might be that your expectations of other people are too high, and that from their perspective they feel 'used' when they fail to live up to your expectations and you consequently stop bothering to moderate or mediate your behaviour in order that they can meet you somewhere in the middle. Look again at the title of your post - 'let the sheep be sheep and I'll do my own thing' - seems a pretty dismissive attitude towards the rest of the human race (the sheep), doesn't it? Which is fine if that's how you want to live your life, but don't expect the sheep to accommodate you in that lifestyle choice. If my son spoke to me like that I'd tell him he's a baaaaaaaaad baaaaaaaaad boy and where he could ram it! L&P BD
  9. No they don't. People have strengths and weaknesses, and they will vary from person to person. There is no strength that is 'unique' to autistic people generally or collectively; each autistic person is an individual, as is every non autistic person. There is nothing wrong with being different, but 'difference' is not unique to autistic people, and autistic people are no less or more different to each other than NT people are to each other...
  10. Absolutely. If your partner used to be physical and intimate the problems you have now are nothing to do with autism - he's either not interested, or not trying. If the latter, and he was previously just going through the motions to please you, then that's a problem you need to address with him IF you want to find a happy compromise. If it's the former and he's just not interested, perhaps he's feeling as frustrated with how your relationship has panned out, but he's demonstrating that frustration/anxiety in a different way to you. Please Note That By 'Different Way' To You' I Do Not Mean 'An Autistic Way' - I suspect a big part of the problems you have may be down to you - or possibly both of you - blaming autism for negatives that have nothing to do with autism whatsoever. He could be using it as an excuse for the mood swings you seem to be reporting you've 'struggled to come to terms with', and the fact that you have 'struggled to come to terms with it' rather than just saying No Way, Jose suggests a rather patronising level of martyrdom in your responses to him. Equally, you could both be using autism as a means of 'control' - i.e. him to bully/guilt trip you into compliance with his behaviours or you to blame and undermine him ("he's autistic, so the problems must be his fault" seems to be the thrust of your post here) into compliance with yours. As Justine has said, sex and intimacy does tail off after the first few months - that's perfectly natural. If it reaches the point where intimacy becomes uncomfortable or non-existent it suggests something else completely, and if you've spent 18 months in a relationship that's been difficult and not nice from the outset then you've probably both been barking up the wrong tree. Don't exclusively blame him, though, or his autism: If you're used to very physical and intimate relationships, this is obviously not first time round for you, so regardless of whether the problems are 'different' to ones you've previously experienced you do know that relationships with non-autistic partners have also broken down. I think you also need to look at yourself, and ask the question why you've invested 19 months in a difficult and unhappy situation, because if my suspicions about that patronising/martyrdom issue are correct it could haunt you in relationships for the rest of your life. L&P BD
  11. I think you are too keen (needy, perhaps?) to project your own point of view (or what you want to project as your own point of view) onto others. Maybe you want to justify the feelings you have (or say you have / believe you have) by projecting them onto others, in which case your sense of 'alienness' falls into the category of 'something else'. Either way, it has nothing to do with the way either autistic people or non autistic people think, because there is no such thing as a way of 'thinking' that is universal to all autistic people or all non autistic people; that's an illusion you've created and invested in for yourself. L&P BD
  12. No, to be oneself and forget about moderation is selfishness in its purest form. Honestly. L&P BD
  13. The error of attribution: to think the way YOU think (or think you think) is in any way indicative of a general way of thinking that can be sweepingly applied to the rest of the autistic community, or to think that what YOU think (or think you think) about the way 'most other people' think is in any way indicative of a general way of thinking that can be sweepingly applied to the 'nt' community. Additionally, I don't know if it's what you meant or just the way you said it, but the sheep / NT comparison you make is both inaccurate and insulting: inaccurate because sheep and NT's do the things they do for all sorts of reasons that go way beyond boredom and a desire for exercise, and as insulting, as, say, me suggesting that people who make sweeping generalisations about the nature of others are bovine idiots. L&P BD
  14. A toasted toast sandwich might be nice - a slice of toast between two slices of toast... Or what about a toasted bread sandwich: two slices of hot buttered toast with a slice of bread in the middle?
  • Create New...