Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
juliebusfreak

Predjudice towards Autism

Recommended Posts

Discovered this revolting thread. Please note the professions. Houston, we have

a problem...

 

www.tes.co.uk/section/staffroom/thread.aspx?story_id=2101427&path=/opinion/&threadPage=1&messagePage1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi JBF do you think you could post the link again with the http:// in it i couldn't get it to work ..

 

Thanks HHxx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't read the whole thread as it was so long and left me feeling very upset and angry. Just try to take comfort in the fact that if this guy goes out of his way to avoid poeple with disabilities then hopefully he will never cross paths with us :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anonymity is one of the internet's weaknesses, not strengths.

 

The excuse given by those who say it is a strength is that they would be personally harrassed if their names were known, this is false. The real reason is that what they say is often shameful, even by whatever low standards they set themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has been started in the 'opinion' forum - whenever I use to visit TES I would try to stay away from this forum due to the inappropriate and hurtful comments made by some of the posters on certain topics.

Discovered this revolting thread. Please note the professions.

The majority of posters who use this site are teachers - the posters who provided their offensive comments are certainly within the minority and that's what we have to bear in mind.

 

People only have to read through the SEN forum to see that there are a great number of dedicated teachers who do their utmost to help their own colleagues, parents and carers alike. If it weren't for people like these then we would all be in $*** street.

Edited by Helen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:crying: I,m shocked I read the TES web site abit and have never been offended.But barries comments have stunned me.I have tried to reply but could,nt access it.Could someone who uses the site post on our behalf, maybe ask the prejudiced t......ers over here so we could explain the violence and abuse some autistics face from the lovely NT population.I,m sure if studies were compared violent attacks on autistic s would exceed those made by autistics on NT,S.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i feel like locking barrie in a room as i find him too offensive to be out on the streets,lets hope then for barries sake he never has an autistic grandchild /niece/nephew,i pity the poor child if he does,their comments were terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gosh, what a lovely person! I'd really like to meet him/her and shake them warmly by the neck.

 

Karen

x

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been brought to my attention that the TES website and it?s many forums has so much emotive material that it?s very easy for a parents to be offended by the content of some of the postings made by a number of teachers, TA?s, senior management team members, etc.

 

I fear that Krism could be compromised in the way of parent members from this forum who would decide to educate the less knowledgeable on the TES site. Most of the 'professionals' on the site would not welcome views from outsiders. Indeed, would we welcome teachers coming on Krism and telling us how to be good parents?

 

One parent previously tried to do this and she was given a real bashing 'for evesdropping at the door'.

 

If a number of parent members visited the site, read something they didn't like, decided to join and make a complaint about certain posters or their posts, then there could possibly be a lot of negative feedback being reflected back to Krism.

 

I would therefore ask that any parent who chooses to post on the TES website that they do not involve Krism

 

Nellie xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi juliebusfrak just went on the site no wonder society in this country is in the dark ages with people like this hope he isnt a teacher because if he is god help us all our great country spends more per average on every other nation than it does on its own people thats why people like us have to fight for what is so easy in other countries to obtain e.g.sweden,australia,america luv karin xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found his assertion to one parent that their child could 'turn on them any time' to be especially ignorant and unintentionally hilarious.

 

If he is a Psychiatrist, he certainly has NOT been screened for paranoia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, I'm really hoping I don't offend anyone... :pray:

 

I read to page 12 of 15 on this site, and agree that many of the views expressed were unpleasant and in some cases downright offensive :angry:

 

But, and I realise I'm sticking my neck out here...I felt there were some valid points made in this thread.

 

I don't think it helps to view anti-social behaviour by Autistic people (or anyone with Special Needs) as somehow 'excusable' because of the disability. Within my son's Special School and the residential unit where I work there are very clear boundaries for what is acceptable and unacceptable behaviour, with sanctions and strategies in place for unacceptable behaviour.

 

I was left wondering about two examples quoted in the TES site, although of course we don't know the full stories: the AS lad who got an ASBO for staring over the fence at his neighbours, and the Care Home resident who repeatedly called out at neighbours in their garden. Had the parents raised the fence, tried Social Stories, etc to reinforce that this wasn't acceptable behaviour? Did the care staff divert, otherwise occupy their client, try Social Stories, etc??

 

I don't think ASBOs are appropriate for people with Special Needs. But excusing anti-social behaviour on the grounds of disability is, in my opinion, both collusion with that behaviour and a restriction of that person's independence by assuming that they are unable to modify their behaviour, implying that they don't have the ability to learn.

 

Hope you see what I'm trying to say, and I hope I haven't caused offence!

 

Bid :ph34r:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I appreciate that this in an opinion forum, it is an opinion forum run under the TES banner, and this organisation is frequented by people in loco parentis of children. Ergo, responsible for children, teaching them, guiding them. I fortunately Home Educate my ASD child. I have met people like this. Whilst it is useful to bear in mind that prejudice infiltrates all sections of society, my own preference is that I know if the people who influence my children are prejudiced. I would not encourage anyone to misuse the group name in any way, I am confident that the majority of parents of children with ASD (And adults with AS/ASD) are able to make up their own minds on how they feel. If it is cotentious to warn of dangerous bias being circulated amongst the profession, then I am proudly subsersive. Isolated dangers do not make them less dangerous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bid, I read those points to but quickly realised that they didn't have points at all.

 

Those points rely on the assumption that the word 'Understanding' or 'Compassion' equate to letting Autistics get away with it.

 

It wasn't helpful that some people said that Autistics can't help their behaviour; that is not the case. The case is that Autistics have valid reasons for just about everything they do, when people ask for understanding, they want people to stop assuming that an Autistic does not have a valid reason for acting in a certain way.

 

The case given about the boy staring over the fence constitutes a 'biased sample' because all the facts are not known. He will not stare over a fence for no reason and he will not stare over a fence simply because he's Autistic. The assumption made is that the boy's parents were lazy, but nothing is described about what they were doing

 

If that idiot is in a position of eminence like Psychiatry, he would know a biased sample when he sees one. He didn't, I don't believe he is being honest.

 

When an Autistic CHOOSES to do anything, they are not thinking in the realm of 'acceptable-unacceptable', so it is unfair to judge in that way, to do so immediately creates a biased sample where an observation can not possibly be accurate(another one of the ethical issues with ABA).

 

When you MAKE an Autistic think about what is acceptable and what is not, you are making their lives impossible. Many will literally stand in the road as a car is about to hit them and they will still be trying to work out if moving out of the way will be acceptable behaviour. I know I would.

 

Autistics think in the realm of 'What am I supposed to do? What am I not supposed to do? What are other people supposed to and not supposed to do?'

 

But there is no distinction between acceptable and unacceptable because it's a vague matter of opinion with blurred lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lucas :)

 

Autistics may very well have a valid reason for everything they do, but what happens if the thing they are doing is unpleasant or dangerous to another person?

 

Bid :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bid

 

I see where you are coming from, but:

 

Unfortunately the debate on the site isn't really going anywhere because one half is arguing that unacceptable behaviour needs to be dealt with (which is true) and the other is arguing that ASBO's are inappropriate for children with Autism (Also true)

 

Where the argument goes wrong, IMHO, is when they say that this behaviour should not be allowed to continue, so an ASBO is justified. An ASBO should be al last resort where eveything else has been tried, not a tool for pacifying the neighbours.

 

In most cases an ASBO would not achieve the desired result, and would in many cases be an unacceptable alternative to dealing with the issue properly via appropriate interventions. It is demoralising to see that we have reached a point where ASBOs are seen as a routine alternative to tackling underlying issues.

 

Imagine, as an example, that one of our children injured a child that was teasing them. Imagine a little further that the local bullies decided getting an autistic child into trouble was fun, the bullying continues and the child loses control and hurts again. The parents of the other children complain to the council about routine violence from the autistic child and the learned members of the panel decide that this sort of violence cannot be tolerated and issue an ASBO. The children continue their taunting, the child once gain loses control and is taken to prison. Not that implausible is it?

 

We have already discussed a tragic case this week which shows how badly things can go wrong when people in Authority with no knowledge of Autism feel that they know best. We should also remember that 97% of all ASBO's applied for are approved, no 'proof' is required, just heresay evidence.

 

If we are going to get to the point where people with autism could be put in prison for behaviours that they may not even fully understand are wrong, nor have any meaningful control over then I fear for the future.

 

That is why I feel ASBO's should not be issued for people with autism.

 

Simon

Edited by mossgrove

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Simon :)

 

Totally agree with you that ASBOs shouldn't be given to Autistic people, or anyone with learning difficulties for that matter.

 

Bid :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bid, if you ever find me performing an exorcism in a busy resturaunt(whether on food or people), please assume that I have a VERY good reason for it.

 

Have you ever wondered how some Autistics keep absolute composure even when odd or extraordinary things may be happening around them? It's the same line of reasoning: I don't react to strange people doing strange things because of the common wisdom that people have their reasons.

 

Autistics I think are baffled that the same courtesy is not extended to us. Mutual Social Reciprocity was the buzz-word for it, and a lack of MSR is a major cause of problems for Autistics.

 

But I suppose you mean a situation where the Autistic is acting without appropriate information, such as kicking someone in the groin because the crotch on their baggy trousers is irritating. The Autistic may not be aware that it is causing extreme discomfort to another person, or they don't care, but there are very few who take that attitude.

 

I have nothing against Autistics being informed, we crave information.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi again Lucas :)

 

I can't go into details because it wouldn't be fair, but my son has done things to his sibs which were basically life-threatening :(

 

Now, while I understood that he behaved like this because he was in acute distress because of his experiences at mainstream school, I also had a responsibility to my other children to make sure he understood that this was completely unacceptable behaviour.

 

Bid :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucas

 

Likewise parents of autistic children crave understanding of their children, which is why your contributions are so useful.

 

To give a small real-world example of a problem that illustrates both sides, here is what happened yesterday evening.

 

Our 7 year old (aspergers) wanted our 5 year old (ASD) to play on the games console with him. Our 5 year old didn't want to and said so. Our 7 year old tried everything he could think of to make him play, eventually threatening to hit him if he didn't play. Our 5 year old didn't play, so he hit him.

 

Discussing it later, he had no understanding of where the real problem lay. He badly wanted a multiplayer game, so he felt he was justified in hitting to bring this about. It was the aforementioned very good reason for the apparently unacceptable behaviour.

 

But this behaviour could not go unchallenged, as our 5 year old was in a position where he must play a game he didn't want to or get hit, and you will understand how unacceptable that would be for a 5 year old autistic child.

 

So understanding and accepting the elder childs behaviour will only get us so far. It is not acceptable and needs to be challenged because carrying that approach forward into adult life will cause him all manner of difficulties (And probably an ASBO!). So we need to find strategies to change that behaviour, even if he doesn't understand why it is wrong.

 

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well explained, Simon! :)

 

I also think we do our Autistic children a dis-service if we don't challenge unacceptable behaviour...ultimately they would end up with less independence.

 

Bid :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been reading the debate with interest, and as has been said it is not really going anywhere, I think the real problem is that ASBO's can be given out so easily without hardly any challenge, and as has been said often on hearsay, is the real problem. Is there such outrage at the number of ASBO's that are given out to black youths or the 'hoodied teen', not all are the perptrators of anti social behaviour, but they become guilty by association, ignorance breeds fear. Cultural differences cause misunderstandings which also causes fear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed, but you can't do it working in a realm of deduction which even I'm puzzled by.

 

What makes hitting someone to get them to do something unacceptable?

 

Is it because people wouldn't like being on the recieving end of it? If it's that then most children can just say that they are not on the recieving end of it, so what's the problem?(I know it can be frustrating to argue)

 

When an Autistic child argues like this it isn't usually because they are trying to excuse themselves for doing it; that only happens if they KNOW what is wrong in the first place.

 

Those who do not know what is wrong are genuinly wanting to find out.

 

Morality isn't a hard solid fact, so it is difficult to understand and explain. Morality is something a person must believe in without a reason.

 

EVERYBODY has an emotional need to believe in something of a transcendal nature: Religion, Morality, Honour, Trust, even what another person says.

 

The terms 'Acceptable' and 'Unacceptable' imply a matter of opinion, they are not solid and therefore not useful. They are politically correct but without any practical purpose for it.

 

Why are they PC? Because some people have a problem with plainly calling anything RIGHT and WRONG. Those words imply that something is transcendant, irrefutable, universal, absolute. We live in a world of such diversity and such diverging ways of life that people do not want to call what other people do right or wrong, so the terms acceptable and unacceptable are used instead.

 

Where as right and wrong have a fixed value, acceptable and unacceptable change depending on where you are.

 

In Texas is was perfectly acceptable to force-feed a mentally ill death-row inmate antipsychotic drugs so that in the Govenor's(this was George W Bush) mind, he was legally sane enough to be executed as federal law prohibits those not of sound mind from being killed by the state in custody. But is it right?

 

Autistics distinguish the difference between what is right and what is acceptable. You can subliminally affect how a person thinks by changing the words that are used. Orwell called it Newspeak.

 

So teach them right from wrong, but NEVER acceptable and unacceptable. Courtesy isn't beyond us either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucas

 

One of the points I was trying to get across is that there may be times when you do have to teach in terms of unacceptable and unacceptable.

 

To use the hitting example, it may or may not prove possible to exlain to our son WHY he should not hit in a way that he understands. If we cannot do this we still won't be able to accept his hitting. This is because the fact remains that if he consistently hits to get what he wants he may well find that in the future he cannot remain in school, get a job, make and keep friends or a whole host of other things because, in the society in which we live, hitting is not acceptable and his quality of life in the future will be much worse if he continues to hit.

 

We would be failing to do the right thing for our son if we contined to allow him to hit, even if he does not understand or accept that. It is one of the reasons that parenting an autistic child is difficult but it does not mean we do not value him for who he is.

 

I also accept that you may not understand either, and there are times that you will need to do things you neither understand or agree with. It is I am sure intensley frustrating, but it is also unavoidable. I have no easy answers to this.

 

 

Simon

Edited by mossgrove

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mossgrove, I don't think you read my last post in it's entire.

 

I said that the problem was with the terms 'acceptable/unacceptable' being used to substitute 'right/wrong'. You can teach the same thing you are doing, but change the terms from the subjective matter of opinion realm of 'acceptable-unacceptable' to the simple, solid and matter of fact realm of 'right-wrong'.

 

Langauge is a big issue, it isn't superficial; a tiny change will give off a completely different message.

 

My point is that your son will NOT stop hitting unless he has a reason for believing it is WRONG. If it's merely unacceptable, then it's merely a matter of opinion and therefore unlikely to be of any interest to him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a really useful point about the ambiguity of language, Lucas!

 

The whole question of explaining 'absolute morality' is a tricky one, though... :blink:

 

Bid :)

 

Looks like we're off on another of our mind-stretching threads...where's Baddad?!

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lucas

 

I *think* I did read it all. He may never believe or accept that hitting is wrong (It is not as if we haven't tried to convince him), so whether we say it's wrong or it's unacceptable comes back to the same thing, we are asking him not to do something because there will be consequences if he does it. This is because he doesn't currently accept that it is 'wrong', so we can't appeal to his sense of right and wrong. It will frustrate him and make him angry at times, and I sincerley hope we do get across that it is 'wrong' as well as unacceptable, but right now we only have 'unacceptable', or more specifically 'there will be consequences' as he doesn't agree about the 'wrong'.

 

I think we are debating the difference between the way we would like it to wprk and the situation as it really is. Does that make sense?

 

Simon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest flutter

my duaghter can be very violent

i dont want ehr to do it cos she hurts me,

and if she does it outside it will eventually affect ( hurt) her, she will be left out of life and laughed at, ( more than now?) is them being a ccepted not part of our jobs as parents?

it was hard for me when i fell down the stairs cos a few thought she had pushed me :( and she didnt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Slight digression, but it still involves tolerance and ASBOs!!

 

We have the dubious pleasure of backing onto the 'roughest' road in town :ph34r: Only last week two brothers from this estate were both given ASBOs! Such interesting things as cars being set alight happen at the (rougher!) end of our road :fight:

 

But...when we moved in nearly 3 years ago, I was really worried because my son was under huge amounts of stress and as a result had started to do a lot of verbal tics, his favourite being a sort of 'whale song'!

 

My concerns came to a head one evening when I was in the garden. I could hear his 'whale song' echoing out of his bedroom window...only to be 'answered' by the lad two doors down (Special Needs too)!! :o

 

The next day I desperately apologised to various neighbours (quite a scary lot, too :ph34r: ).

 

The reply from them all?

 

'Don't worry, we're all a bit odd round here!' :lol::lol::lol:

 

So now I grit my teeth at the gangs of 'hoodies' who lurk around outside at all hours...although I have to admit the burning car did get me down!

 

Bid :lol:

Edited by bid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's your problem Mossgrove! If you tell him something is wrong or unacceptable because of the consequences, simple logic tells him that as long as he avoids the consequences, then it's alright.

 

The fact that he disagrees with your assertion that it is wrong means that he does have a sense of right and wrong. He can not disagree with with you on the subject unless he already has a right-wrong recognition model in place. You just have to learn what it is.

 

If I hit someone for hitting me and I am told that what I did was wrong, I would wait for the other person to be told it too, otherwise I would disregard the chastisment. If I was later told off for hitting someone without provocation, I now have a reason to disagree with why it is wrong.

 

So you're son can't argue on rights and wrongs unless he already has a fair idea of what they mean in place, you just need to work from what he has.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<sigh>

 

I don't know what profession 'Barriesmart' is in, but it is one that cannot spell 'unprovoked', 'Assault' and 'receiving'.

 

Anyone who makes that number of mistakes in my class can expect to sit at the thinking table for a while. Something possibly beyond the likes of barrie.

 

Every staffroom has this sort of frothing loon in it...the rest of us just ignore them and they end up telling the potplants how they'd run the country.

 

He is of no moment ...ignore him!

 

Jester :jester:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just another thought...

 

Certainly one of the posters on this thread used a horrible term to describe children with Special Needs, and then asserted that it was widely used by professionals amongst themselves.

 

Well, I've only worked in a residential setting with young adults with Special Needs for 6 months...but I have never heard any member of staff speak in that way about any of the students or adult clients.

 

Obviously this is only one unit, but I did want to reassure people that there are many very caring professionals out there who would never dream of speaking like this!

 

Bid >:D<<'>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the Barriesmart thread yesterday and was upset for a few minutes. I then remembered reading a few of his/her other threads and he/she simply likes to upset people.

Jester, you are quite right about the frothing loon in the corner of the staffroom. We have had our fair share and we all breath a collective sigh of relief when they move on to pastures new!

Loraine

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ooooooooohhhhhhhh -

Don't like the look of this one 'cos it seems to be a bit of 'wooslum bird' (i.e. it's going to just fly round and round in ever decreasing circles until it vanishes up its own a***)...

Jester, I think, hit the nail on the head by (very eloquently) pointing out that eejuts with small brains and big opinions are best left to stew in their own juices.

For what it's worth, my view is that physical aggression - whoever the aggressor or whatever his reason - should not be tolerated. The next crucial point (and yawning 'grey area'!) is that responses to aggression should be appropriate to the nature of the act; the 'stage' in which that action takes place; the motivation behind the act and the circumstances/condition (?) of the actors...

So, where (i.e.) autism would certainly be a 'circumstance/condition' where greater tolerance should be expected, it should not imply acceptance of the behaviour or an expectation that other people's rights should be 'waived' to accommodate the autistic person - regardless of whether they have acted 'knowingly' or whether the 'rules' of the situation are redundant to them.

Now, that said, I think most sensible people would agree that ASBOS are a completely INappropriate response where autism is a factor, unless it can be demonstrated that the autistic individual can fully understand the nature of the other parties objection, can fully understand the implications of the ASBO, and that they COULD actually stop the behaviour in the first place... [NB: that is in no way an exhaustive list of 'conditions that would need to apply', but it is, I hope, enough to make the point!].

Don't think anyone's got any "answers" on this one, 'cos there are so many shades of grey in the equation, but the p**t on the other forum would probably get a real buzz from all the anger he's generated, and to be honest I really don't think he's worth it... ;)

L&P (& Tolerance!)

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
my duaghter can be very violent

i dont want ehr to do it cos she hurts me,

and if she does it outside it will eventually affect ( hurt) her, she will be left out of life and laughed at, ( more than now?) is them being a ccepted not part of our jobs as parents?

it was hard for me when i fell down the stairs cos a few thought she had pushed me :( and she didnt

sorry -

missed flutter's post first time round...

Short, sweet, and bang on target - thanks flutter.

One other thing I forgot to say in my last post: I will put up �100 on 'barrie' being a PE teacher :lol::lol: I've never met a spearchucker yet who could (metaphorically speaking) see further than the end of his nose! No offence meant ;);) to PE teachers, but do us all a favour and stick to rope shinning and 'swaggering' in future!

Now ain't I the tolerant one?! :lol::lol:

L&P

BD :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't agree completely, Baddad! I too have always had a deep seated prejudice against PE tachers, (having been born with two left feet). But the one person who has been continually supportive to my daughter and our situation in the last few months has been the SENCO who took on the role in September. Before that he was... a PE teacher.

 

I must admit I was a bit surprised. :unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...