How do people feel when a child is having a meltdown in public

[Suze]

I have just got in from work and noticed as a Mod that this thread is becoming a little heated to say the least.Can we all please just take a step back here.It is important to remember that the forum is primarily here to offer support and advice, please lets keep it constructive and not let personal opinions and views of others get in the way of the overall message we want to convey.This thread will close if things continue in the same vein.

[chris54]

With the risk of being lynched, am going to dip a tie in to this discussion.

I have witnessed in my own professional life and this has been backed up by others, professional and otherwise, that children behave differently for different people.

 

I once cared for a boy of 2-3, Later diagnosed with ASD who admittedly was a handful, but in the main well behaved for me, but run his mum ragged. (It not something that happens overnight but needs to be worked at)

Only the other day I was speaking to a fellow professional how was saying that in her experience a child's behavior often reflects that of their parents and the way they are parented. A view I agree with.

Of course there is the debate as to how much behavior is learnt and how much is genetic.

 

But knowing this does not mean that I get it right all the time, same of the time will do for me.

Edited July 2, 2010 by chris54

[matzoball]

With the risk of being lynched, am going to dip a tie in to this discussion.

I have witnessed in my own professional life and this has been backed up by others, professional and otherwise, that children behave differently for different people.

 

I once cared for a boy of 2-3, Later diagnosed with ASD who admittedly was a handful, but in the main well behaved for me, but run his mum ragged. (It not something that happens overnight but needs to be worked at)

Only the other day I was speaking to a fellow professional how was saying that in her experience a child's behavior often reflects that of their parents and the way they are parented. A view I agree with.

Of course there is the debate as to how much behavior is learnt and how much is genetic.

 

But knowing this does not mean that I get it right all the time, same of the time will do for me.

 

i personally think this is a case of a clash of equally strong opinions. however no parent likes to be made to feel that their child is at fault (whether they are or not, whether they can help it or not). subsequently no parent likes to be made to feel that their parenting skills are being called into question especially if they are trying as hard as they can, with the resources they have.

 

some parents might feel like they have all the solutions, since they have been lucky enough to find what works for them and that's fantastic, but they have to take into account that it's not a cookie cutter world where the same person fits into the same mould. that's why it's called a spectrum.

 

some people on the spectrum can have a lot of valid perceptions and opinions on handling a child because that's the line of work they are in, and they have a unique viewpoint because of that situation. but they are not in the same situation as they person they are having conflicting opinions with, and should have respect for that.

 

while i understand the frustration of parenting skills coming under attack, although it's hard as it is such an emotional subject to remain calm and objective, pm'ing angry message isn't the best course of action.

 

stating that a child's behaviour is only down to parental behaviour, is a bit of a blanket statement - especially on a forum aimed at supporting quite capable parents whos children have challenging behaviour due to a disability. the best intentioned parents in the world with all the resources in the world can still find othat their child exhibits violent and disruptive behaviour no matter what approach they take tp raising them.

 

this isn't a clinical case of nature versus nurture. it's parents and caregivers and individuals reaching out to other people in the same or very similar situations and trying to find solutions and tips to help each other. this fact keeps getting forgotten.

[call me jaded]

I've just started reading this thread - can't imagine why I didn't before - and I just want to say to J's mum that I have been a total failure in dealing with some of my own son's challenging behaviours. This has not been through want of trying. I have been there in the library when he takes his clothes off. I have been there in the doctors surgery as he throws himself on the floor. And not as a toddler, either. At 16 he can and would do these things.

 

The difficulty is, that once a behaviour has been learnt it cannot be unlearnt. Luckily for Baddad and mumble and all those other clever people they have found a way to motivate their ASD people to want to change those behaviours. There is nothing that provides a sufficient incentive to my son for him change his behaviour. Nothing.

 

This does not mean that I ignore how he behaves. It is always work-in-progress. It does not mean that I find excuses for his behaviour either. He has behaviours that are not acceptable. Other than drugging him there is little I can do. I don't drug him. I avoid triggers for the behaviours whenever possible and plan our escape route for whenever it's not. I do not believe have failed to address the behaviours. I have made many attempts and for the sake of my own sanity had to accept that he is someone with severe communication difficulties and has difficulties regarding his environment that I connot even begin to imagine. In the absence of being able to say, 'Mum, this room is making me dizzy' he will lie down, take his clothes off or anything else he can think of that will get him removed from the place he does not want to be.

 

The end result is of course that the challenging behaviour 'wins'. That's not a problem for me. I needed to learn and listen to what was being communicated. I have taken a different parenting route and allowed my son's opinion to be heard and respected it for what it is - a desire not to do something. It doesn't mean I'm a pushover either. My son and I have mutual respect for each other and tantrums are few and far between.

 

My son's family (me and the rest of us) are the people who have to live with him, nobody else. I am completely at ease with how we deal with it. Text book techniques did not work. Anyone suggesting that they will if applied consistently enough judst hasn't had my experience, that is all.

 

As Baddad is at pains to always point out that I don't know you or yours so can't comment. I just wanted to say I'm a 'bad parent' and content to be one.

 

 

[call me jaded]

Oh and fingers crossed for us on Tuesday morning at the GP. We struggled many times and I eventually said to my GP that there's just something about the building he doesn't like. He said he doesn't like the building either and he put a note on DS's file so that he goes in virtually straight after he arrives. We sometimes do the consultation in the car park though

Edited July 2, 2010 by call me jaded

[baddad]

i personally think this is a case of a clash of equally strong opinions. however no parent likes to be made to feel that their child is at fault (whether they are or not, whether they can help it or not). subsequently no parent likes to be made to feel that their parenting skills are being called into question especially if they are trying as hard as they can, with the resources they have.

 

some parents might feel like they have all the solutions, since they have been lucky enough to find what works for them and that's fantastic, but they have to take into account that it's not a cookie cutter world where the same person fits into the same mould. that's why it's called a spectrum.

 

some people on the spectrum can have a lot of valid perceptions and opinions on handling a child because that's the line of work they are in, and they have a unique viewpoint because of that situation. but they are not in the same situation as they person they are having conflicting opinions with, and should have respect for that.

 

while i understand the frustration of parenting skills coming under attack, although it's hard as it is such an emotional subject to remain calm and objective, pm'ing angry message isn't the best course of action.

 

stating that a child's behaviour is only down to parental behaviour, is a bit of a blanket statement - especially on a forum aimed at supporting quite capable parents whos children have challenging behaviour due to a disability. the best intentioned parents in the world with all the resources in the world can still find othat their child exhibits violent and disruptive behaviour no matter what approach they take tp raising them.

 

this isn't a clinical case of nature versus nurture. it's parents and caregivers and individuals reaching out to other people in the same or very similar situations and trying to find solutions and tips to help each other. this fact keeps getting forgotten.

 

Hi matzoball -

I do agree with large chunks of what you say, but also believe it is a 'cop put' and an injustice to those parents/children who do achieve things to put it down to 'luck', or even, as CMJ put it, 'clever people finding the right motivators'. For the record I have never stated that a child's behaviour is always/only down to parenting, and certainly for children with more profound difficulties I don't think for a moment it can ever be that simple. But that aside, I do believe that parenting does play a major role in childhood development, particularly regarding standards of behaviour, and that parents who consistantly look for complex reasons to explain and excuse behaviours rather than just dealing with them or accepting them at 'face value' as the controlling behaviours they originate from can exaccerbate the problems. I don't just see that with autism, I see it with all sections of society, NT or disabled. It is generally accepted that the 'bullies' who pick on 'our kids' in schools have learned those behaviours or been allowed to exhibit those behaviours as a result of their parenting - those kinds of assumptions and prejudices are all over these boards. But if anyone suggests that the same rule applies to parents of autistic kids, or that the bad behaviours of autistic kids can arise from the same kind of controlling, manipulative, abusive and downright 'naughty' impulses that all kids exhibit then all hell breaks loose. That's a double standard, and if anything all the evidence suggests that disabled children are more likely to be excused (and, horribly and conversely) or abused by their parents/carers as a direct result of their disability.

My son is not the way he is because I was 'lucky' or because he was 'lucky', and gainsaying of that type is completely unreasonable. By the same token, it is unreasonable to assume that all children who are less well behaved than my son are less well behaved because of 'bad parenting' (which, again for the record, isn't what I've suggested at any point). But the last time this 'parenting row' blew up it was on a thread about a TV programme with discussion based on the children shown on it - yet people still managed to take 'personal offence' while seemingly denying the evidence of their own eyes and/or coming up with all sorts of strange, weird and wonderful explanations for what they were seeing. If that sort of denial is important to people to such a degree that they can't even be honest about the mistakes total strangers are demonstrating what hope has anyone got of talking honestly about flaws that might exist in their own parenting technique?

I take a very simple view of life - if something looks, smells, tastes, swims and in every other way behaves like a fish I pretty much accept that it is a fish. I don't assume it's a stressed duck, or a confused bullfrog or a newt suffering from sensory overload. Which is not in any way to suggest that a stressed duck, confused bullfrog or overstimulated newt might not be capable of appearing fishlike in its behaviour, it is just to say that this will not be the first assumption I make, especially if their is quite a large body of evidence to suggest an absence of 'fishness' in other situations, or if the 'fishness' only emerges in situations that are favourable or desirable to the duck/bullfrog/newt.

 

I hope readers will appreciate that i'm trying to insert some humour into the situation, and not 'having a go' at anyone, or their children/ducks/fish/frogs or newts. But please, please please stop suggesting that parents like me (far from 'perfect' BTW) and our children (equally imperfect, BTW) achieved everything by 'luck' and that our input doesn't/can't apply. I have, as i've often said, absolutely no doubt that if i had taken the kinds of views of my son's 'bad' behaviours that are often presented on the forum that we would not have been so 'lucky'. I also object strongly to the growing tendency for parents of 'HF' kids to appropriate the behaviours of more profoundly affected children as a rationalisation for the behaviours of their own children. It does kids on both sides of the fence a huge injustice.

 

L&P

 

BD

Edited July 2, 2010 by baddad

[Mumble]

Luckily for Baddad and mumble and all those other clever people they have found a way to motivate their ASD people to want to change those behaviours.

Can someone please highlight where I have stated that I have some magic formula and I will gladly explain / rectify it. I appear to have been lumped in with Baddad and assumed to think the same and say the same and apparently have the same experiences. It's even been suggested that I'm a parent. I don't have the same experiences.

 

Just to make it really clear, the points I (not anyone else or Baddad) are making are:

a. How can ASD and ADHD be given as a dx together when the criteria are opposites? I am not challenging that they can occur together or that children have both, I am asking how the criteria are applied because it's something I am interested in.

 

b. It is my opinion, based on having been a very unwell patient in a doctor's waiting room, that there has to be a degree of respect for the rules and well-being of other patients and playing loud music isn't acceptable. That's my opinion, I'm not challenging anyone, just stating things as I see them. At my surgery, patients playing music or talking on phones are asked to go outside or stop, because it it common courtesy.

 

c. If there are issues in waiting in the waiting room then this needs to be looked at and alternatives found. This seems to have happened in both cases discussed here already with separate waiting areas (and I don't actually see this is exclusion - I don't know about other surgery's but mine has a separate waiting area for patients suspected of being contagious - it's just a medical necessity), early appointments, being able to go straight in, waiting in the car, being seen elsewhere (in fact these are all ideas given in the NAS fact-sheets for health professionals so seem the right things to do). I don't know why something that happened in the past is being dwelled on.

 

d. I do not appreciate being abused, particularly by PM, and I would expect an apology.

 

[Lynden]

Only the other day I was speaking to a fellow professional how was saying that in her experience a child's behavior often reflects that of their parents and the way they are parented.

 

If that's the case, then how come siblings, NT as well as SN, who are parented in the same way can turn out very differently?

 

My son definitely behaves differently for my parents/his respite carer than he does for me. Do I think that's because I parent badly? No, I think I do a half decent job. I'm not perfect, I am incredibly patient which goes in my favour I think. I try to listen to his needs, and balance it with that of the family. I also know when I need to ask for help.

 

I think he behaves differently because he feels safe in being himself, he can relax and kick off with me if he needs to.

 

I think what is sometimes forgotten on the forums, is that us/our kids cover the whole asd spectrum, with lots of added difficulties thrown in and some can function and understand better than others, which colours a lot of the answers given and how we as individuals interpret them.

 

Lynne

 

[call me jaded]

Yes I do work with children on the spectrum - please don't accuse me of lying and making such things up. But when I work with them, I don't let them get away with things because they're autistic, they still have to fit within acceptable behaviours that would apply to any child.

.

 

Hi mumble. This was the comment that made me 'lump' you with BD. Both BD and yourself seem to be saying that you have been successful in dealing with challenging behaviour. I haven't.

[Sally44]

I do agree with what is being said about parenting, and I think that probably all involved in this particular thread would totally agree and say that that is what they are doing.

My question is: What do parents like 'call me Jaded' do with a child that strips in the GP's surgery. He may well be doing that for reasons due to his diagnosis that make it impossible for him to cope in that environment and his response is to do something that gets him out that environment. I would agree that this is controlling behaviour, but only because he uses that 'inappropriate' behaviour rather than using 'language' to communicate his immediate need to get out.

My personal opinion is that if a child is using behaviour like that to communicate their need to get out that that need is respected and understood and that that understanding is communicated to the child and the aim would be to try to teach a more appropriate way of demonstrating their need to leave. That would be an acceptable outcome. However I would not aim for a target that was to make the child remain in the environment longer so that they could see the GP in the same way as everyone else does. That is because the child has told us they cannot do that.

And if the child were taught to use something like a visual card to show 'I need to leave now', then that would no longer be 'controlling behaviour' it would actually be good communication.

 

[call me jaded]

I also object strongly to the growing tendency for parents of 'HF' kids to appropriate the behaviours of more profoundly affected children as a rationalisation for the behaviours of their own children. It does kids on both sides of the fence a huge injustice.

 

L&P

 

BD

 

Equally I find the suggestion that 'low functioning' children are somehow excused inappropriate behaviours quite patronising. Inappropriate behaviour is just that. And the triggers may be the same in HFA as in LFA.

[Enid]

I really wanted to answer on this thread as its something I have a problem with, from time to time, but one of the reasons I have been away from the forum for so long is THIS..... the scoring of points and smart alec answers, Baddad you cant compare your son to others, they are all different, it is bad enough coping on a day to day basis with children that are "challanging" without being blamed...... I will pm for support re this thread but it is something I find acutely embarassing, a meltdown, in public.

[baddad]

I do agree with what is being said about parenting, and I think that probably all involved in this particular thread would totally agree and say that that is what they are doing.

My question is: What do parents like 'call me Jaded' do with a child that strips in the GP's surgery. He may well be doing that for reasons due to his diagnosis that make it impossible for him to cope in that environment and his response is to do something that gets him out that environment. I would agree that this is controlling behaviour, but only because he uses that 'inappropriate' behaviour rather than using 'language' to communicate his immediate need to get out.

My personal opinion is that if a child is using behaviour like that to communicate their need to get out that that need is respected and understood and that that understanding is communicated to the child and the aim would be to try to teach a more appropriate way of demonstrating their need to leave. That would be an acceptable outcome. However I would not aim for a target that was to make the child remain in the environment longer so that they could see the GP in the same way as everyone else does. That is because the child has told us they cannot do that.

And if the child were taught to use something like a visual card to show 'I need to leave now', then that would no longer be 'controlling behaviour' it would actually be good communication.

 

Hi sally - i don't know the answer to your question, but i think it's a very 'open' one. How does a child learn to do something, if by telling us that they cannot do it they are absolved of all expectation of achieving it?

My son couldn't read, if he had 'said' either verbally or with a cue card/whatever 'I can't do this' and my answer had been 'fair does, fella - well done on a lovely bit of communication there, and in view of that we can forget all about the reading until you let me know when you can do it he still wouldn't be able to read, would he? So a target that aims for him staying in the room longer is actually the target that's going to help him achieve it, whereas walking out isn't.

 

Lynden - to your question I think there are several possible answers, all of which accept fully that all children are different. I've given some of the possible answers below, but the first will almost invariably be assumed as the 'correct' one.

 

1 - The parenting has been equally good in all cases - but the 'naughty' child hasn't responded to effective parenting.

2 - The parenting has been equally bad in all cases - but the well behaved children have responded less dramatically to 'bad' parenting.

3 - The parenting has been largely indifferent in all cases, and it's just 'luck'.

4 - The 'naughty' child was born naughty and the 'good' child born good. Nothing about parenting could have affected any difference in their behaviour.

5 - The children were, despite the parents being largely unaware of doing so, brought up with completely different dynamics at play.

6 - Ineffective responses to 'sibling rivalry'.

7 - Sibling rivalry.

8 - Wider influences (schools, teachers, friends etc)...

 

The list could go on for much longer, but as I said it's a moot point because the assumption made by people posing the question will always be that the first is the one that applies.

 

Mumble - sorry you got lumped in with me! How very distressing for you!

 

Delia - i've not claimed success in dealing with challenging behaviour, and don't know anywhere near enough about you/your son to hazzard a guess even. What I have said is that I have had some success, and I've also pointed out areas in other people's posts that suggest (like excusing and rewarding inappropriate behaviours) responses I haven't demonstrated that would, if i had, undoubtedly have undermined my successes. If I see areas like that in your posts i'll point them out, and hope that you'll appreciate them for what they are rather than taking them as a personal attack.

I don't think parents of low functioning children 'excuse' the behaviours - in fact, I think more often that the very opposite is true... that's the point i was trying (obviously unsuccesfully) to make. I do to some extent agree that the 'triggers' may be the same and totally agree that inappropriate behaviour is inappropriate in either case. I also, however, think that HF kids are for the most part better equipped to 'make sense' of those trigger impulses and to learn to deal more effectively with controlling them, and it is the amount of 'can'ts' that get appended to them by parents/outsiders that often stop them from achieving that understanding. It's never a simple 'black and white' equation, of course, but neither, in most cases, is it as mind-bogglingly complex as some parents would choose to pretend. As I said in my last post - I think it's far more sensible to apply the looks like/smells like/swins like a fish then it is probably a fish logic than to project complicated alternatives onto fish just because you have a personal aversion to fish.

 

Enid - what is a smart alec answer? Does it apply to parents who find all sorts of clever ways of rationalising ineffective parenting or only to the smart alecs who don't need to rationalise ineffective parenting? Or is that a smart alec answer too? Why is it SO wrong to acknowledge that parenting plays a role in behavioural management? Yes, it is hard enough coping on a day to day basis, but burying your head in the sand and refusing to take or allow a child to take any sort of responsibility for the difficulty isn't going to make it easier, is it?

And I'm not suggesting for one minute that parents who choose to shouldn't be free to bury their heads in the sand. all i'm saying is that it's not unreasonable for other parents who don't to offer their input too

 

L&P

 

BD

Edited July 2, 2010 by baddad

[matzoball]

Hi matzoball -

I do agree with large chunks of what you say, but also believe it is a 'cop put' and an injustice to those parents/children who do achieve things to put it down to 'luck', or even, as CMJ put it, 'clever people finding the right motivators'. For the record I have never stated that a child's behaviour is always/only down to parenting, and certainly for children with more profound difficulties I don't think for a moment it can ever be that simple. But that aside, I do believe that parenting does play a major role in childhood development, particularly regarding standards of behaviour, and that parents who consistantly look for complex reasons to explain and excuse behaviours rather than just dealing with them or accepting them at 'face value' as the controlling behaviours they originate from can exaccerbate the problems. I don't just see that with autism, I see it with all sections of society, NT or disabled. It is generally accepted that the 'bullies' who pick on 'our kids' in schools have learned those behaviours or been allowed to exhibit those behaviours as a result of their parenting - those kinds of assumptions and prejudices are all over these boards. But if anyone suggests that the same rule applies to parents of autistic kids, or that the bad behaviours of autistic kids can arise from the same kind of controlling, manipulative, abusive and downright 'naughty' impulses that all kids exhibit then all hell breaks loose. That's a double standard, and if anything all the evidence suggests that disabled children are more likely to be excused (and, horribly and conversely) or abused by their parents/carers as a direct result of their disability.

My son is not the way he is because I was 'lucky' or because he was 'lucky', and gainsaying of that type is completely unreasonable. By the same token, it is unreasonable to assume that all children who are less well behaved than my son are less well behaved because of 'bad parenting' (which, again for the record, isn't what I've suggested at any point). But the last time this 'parenting row' blew up it was on a thread about a TV programme with discussion based on the children shown on it - yet people still managed to take 'personal offence' while seemingly denying the evidence of their own eyes and/or coming up with all sorts of strange, weird and wonderful explanations for what they were seeing. If that sort of denial is important to people to such a degree that they can't even be honest about the mistakes total strangers are demonstrating what hope has anyone got of talking honestly about flaws that might exist in their own parenting technique?

I take a very simple view of life - if something looks, smells, tastes, swims and in every other way behaves like a fish I pretty much accept that it is a fish. I don't assume it's a stressed duck, or a confused bullfrog or a newt suffering from sensory overload. Which is not in any way to suggest that a stressed duck, confused bullfrog or overstimulated newt might not be capable of appearing fishlike in its behaviour, it is just to say that this will not be the first assumption I make, especially if their is quite a large body of evidence to suggest an absence of 'fishness' in other situations, or if the 'fishness' only emerges in situations that are favourable or desirable to the duck/bullfrog/newt.

 

I hope readers will appreciate that i'm trying to insert some humour into the situation, and not 'having a go' at anyone, or their children/ducks/fish/frogs or newts. But please, please please stop suggesting that parents like me (far from 'perfect' BTW) and our children (equally imperfect, BTW) achieved everything by 'luck' and that our input doesn't/can't apply. I have, as i've often said, absolutely no doubt that if i had taken the kinds of views of my son's 'bad' behaviours that are often presented on the forum that we would not have been so 'lucky'. I also object strongly to the growing tendency for parents of 'HF' kids to appropriate the behaviours of more profoundly affected children as a rationalisation for the behaviours of their own children. It does kids on both sides of the fence a huge injustice.

 

L&P

 

BD

 

you have a strong opinion about what i have said in a previous post, that's fair enough i did expect some kind of backlash. you are focusing on one very small part of it, in fact one word - i realise now that again i have used the wrong word as i previously did with 'meltdown' as this has triggered a great deal of umbrage with you so for that i apologise as offence was most definitely not intended. if you recall my post in it's entirety i addressed negative behaviour in a positive way and tried to suggest that we all be more supportive of each other, however you have taken offence to my use of one word and expanded that into me insulting parents by using a 'cop out'. it's a word. that's it. not a personal attack, not some draconian measure taken to insinuate some sort of autism lottery that allowed you to manage your childs challenging behaviour, or your child's ability to manage his own behaviour. i have no doubt you work hard every day with your son and he works hard too. why is it so hard for you concede the point that what works for you may not work for others, without attacking at the same time?

 

i actually respect your opinion, even when it's something i don't agree with. however what i don't appreciate is when you for want of a better phrase take me down to size then use it as a platform for your views on asd, parenting, problems people have with managing their asd. if you want to do that fine, but please stop making me feel like the scum of the earth while you do so and ending it with a smiley.

 

I have noticed more recently that you think that people like me fake LF traits to garner more sympathy or recognition or some sort of favour, or even use it as an excuse not to manage their condition. that's also rather insulting. but if that's what you want to believe - fine. i just wish you wouldn't use my posts to somehow jump from me trying to get everyone to support each other as we should be doing, to soapboxing your beliefs. you've done it in several posts of mine, and i am finding it really hard not to take it personally.

 

i've never once asked you to apologise because i respect your right to an opinion - i just wish you would respect mine. or me.

[Enid]

you have a strong opinion about what i have said in a previous post, that's fair enough i did expect some kind of backlash. you are focusing on one very small part of it, in fact one word - i realise now that again i have used the wrong word as i previously did with 'meltdown' as this has triggered a great deal of umbrage with you so for that i apologise as offence was most definitely not intended. if you recall my post in it's entirety i addressed negative behaviour in a positive way and tried to suggest that we all be more supportive of each other, however you have taken offence to my use of one word and expanded that into me insulting parents by using a 'cop out'. it's a word. that's it. not a personal attack, not some draconian measure taken to insinuate some sort of autism lottery that allowed you to manage your childs challenging behaviour, or your child's ability to manage his own behaviour. i have no doubt you work hard every day with your son and he works hard too. why is it so hard for you concede the point that what works for you may not work for others, without attacking at the same time?

 

i actually respect your opinion, even when it's something i don't agree with. however what i don't appreciate is when you for want of a better phrase take me down to size then use it as a platform for your views on asd, parenting, problems people have with managing their asd. if you want to do that fine, but please stop making me feel like the scum of the earth while you do so and ending it with a smiley.

 

I have noticed more recently that you think that people like me fake LF traits to garner more sympathy or recognition or some sort of favour, or even use it as an excuse not to manage their condition. that's also rather insulting. but if that's what you want to believe - fine. i just wish you wouldn't use my posts to somehow jump from me trying to get everyone to support each other as we should be doing, to soapboxing your beliefs. you've done it in several posts of mine, and i am finding it really hard not to take it personally.

 

i've never once asked you to apologise because i respect your right to an opinion - i just wish you would respect mine. or me.

Wow, That what I meant but couldnt quite put it like that

[matzoball]

Wow, That what I meant but couldnt quite put it like that

 

thanks

[call me jaded]

Delia - i've not claimed success in dealing with challenging behaviour, and don't know anywhere near enough about you/your son to hazzard a guess even.

 

[my bold] BD have a look at Post #20 in this thread. You seem just a little smug.

What I have said is that I have had some success, and I've also pointed out areas in other people's posts that suggest (like excusing and rewarding inappropriate behaviours) responses I haven't demonstrated that would, if i had, undoubtedly have undermined my successes. If I see areas like that in your posts i'll point them out, and hope that you'll appreciate them for what they are rather than taking them as a personal attack.

 

I'm sure you will. I'm uncertain whether you think I've taken your comments as a personal attack. Just to let you know that the thought didn't cross my mind.

 

I don't think parents of low functioning children 'excuse' the behaviours - in fact, I think more often that the very opposite is true... that's the point i was trying (obviously unsuccesfully) to make.

 

I've not really bothered to say this before but I find distinctions between HFA and LFA bizarre. Autism is autism.

 

I do to some extent agree that the 'triggers' may be the same and totally agree that inappropriate behaviour is inappropriate in either case.

 

Yes, we agree.

 

I also, however, think that HF kids are for the most part better equipped to 'make sense' of those trigger impulses and to learn to deal more effectively with controlling them, and it is the amount of 'can'ts' that get appended to them by parents/outsiders that often stop them from achieving that understanding.

 

This is a very complex sentence! My own experience of what is labelled LFA is that there is no motivation to learn. DS knows that he shouldn't take off his clothes, but no sanction or reward outweighs the fact that he does not want to be in the doctor's surgery. It's quite high level thinking to realise that he will achieve his desired outcome by doing something he knows will result in me removing him. Various teachers have commented to me over the years that he is 'clever'. There are some wonderful sweeping statements about LFA on this forum and I do wish people would desist. I doubt though that I'll point out every single case as it gets a little boring.

 

It's never a simple 'black and white' equation, of course, but neither, in most cases, is it as mind-bogglingly complex as some parents would choose to pretend.

 

Choose to pretend or have not yet got the skills to work out what's going on? How can you judge? Having crested my own particular learning curve I can get to the root of most difficulties fairly swiftly, but crikey it was really tough getting all the way up here.

 

As I said in my last post - I think it's far more sensible to apply the looks like/smells like/swins like a fish then it is probably a fish logic than to project complicated alternatives onto fish just because you have a personal aversion to fish.

Sure. Most sensible thing you've said for ages.

 

I'm done on this thread...

[baddad]

you have a strong opinion about what i have said in a previous post, that's fair enough i did expect some kind of backlash. you are focusing on one very small part of it, in fact one word - i realise now that again i have used the wrong word as i previously did with 'meltdown' as this has triggered a great deal of umbrage with you so for that i apologise as offence was most definitely not intended. if you recall my post in it's entirety i addressed negative behaviour in a positive way and tried to suggest that we all be more supportive of each other, however you have taken offence to my use of one word and expanded that into me insulting parents by using a 'cop out'. it's a word. that's it. not a personal attack, not some draconian measure taken to insinuate some sort of autism lottery that allowed you to manage your childs challenging behaviour, or your child's ability to manage his own behaviour. i have no doubt you work hard every day with your son and he works hard too. why is it so hard for you concede the point that what works for you may not work for others, without attacking at the same time?

 

i actually respect your opinion, even when it's something i don't agree with. however what i don't appreciate is when you for want of a better phrase take me down to size then use it as a platform for your views on asd, parenting, problems people have with managing their asd. if you want to do that fine, but please stop making me feel like the scum of the earth while you do so and ending it with a smiley.

 

I have noticed more recently that you think that people like me fake LF traits to garner more sympathy or recognition or some sort of favour, or even use it as an excuse not to manage their condition. that's also rather insulting. but if that's what you want to believe - fine. i just wish you wouldn't use my posts to somehow jump from me trying to get everyone to support each other as we should be doing, to soapboxing your beliefs. you've done it in several posts of mine, and i am finding it really hard not to take it personally.

 

i've never once asked you to apologise because i respect your right to an opinion - i just wish you would respect mine. or me.

 

I did say at that outset of my post that i agree with huge chunks of what you said - so where's the 'focus on one word'? But claiming that all parents who help their children to manage their behaviour have achieved that through 'luck' is a cop-out, regardless of the huge chunks of your post i do agree with.

The smiley has been part of how i sign my posts for years, along with the 'L&P' sometimes I remember to leave it OUT when I think people will think it's being 'sarky', or something, but other times I don't and other times i worry whether leaving it in or out will be taken as some sort of snide comment. If you think that sounds a bit paranoid, have a look back through this post to see just how much time has been spent and by just how many different people (including some who seem to have reappeared seemingly purely to join in the pecking party! ) 'taking me down to size' purely for having the audacity to express an opinion. Yes, I do think that some people fake autistic traits to garner sympathy etc. and I do find it hugely offensive... whether you're one of them or not i wouldn't know, but again, as with j's mum and her 'bad parenting' hang up, if it is a personal sensitivity of yours that is your problem, not mine, and I should be free to express my view that some people will manipulate autism/autistic traits to garner sympathy and/or achieve 'aspilebrity' without you taking my impersonal obserbvations and opinions as a personal attack.

 

I do fully accept that what worked for me 'may not work for others' - but that doesn't blind me to the inconsistencies of what they are doing, and i shouldn't have to pretend otherwise for the sake of protecting them from their own insecurities. I have seen countless programmes on TV etc where consistency, sanctions, clear boundaries etc etc etc have produced results with children whose parents have said they do all these things yet quite patently don't. Despite all the talk about it, I have never seen a programme where ignoring or rewarding negative behaviours has had a good result, and though it's been a good decade since I last worked in care professionally the notion of 'extinction' as a reliable strategy was already dead in the water...

 

Delia - respect fully your desire to bow out and hope (but won't hold my breath!) others will allow me the same opportunity! I don't need to look at post twenty - I probably did come across as a 'bit smug'... it's probably a defence mechanism when i'm stressed and under attack so i weely weely can't help it And i too agree that there are some sweeping genarlisations about 'LFA' on the forum - but probably coming at it from a slightly different (but not diametrically opposed) angle.

 

Anyhoo, to recap for the sake of ' a fresh start'

a) I thought the comments made about mumble were somewhat unreasonable.

B ) I think parenting can influence a child's behaviour.

 

Dunno why either of those things are so provocative to some people, but i'm not going to not say them because some people do find them provocative.

 

L&P

 

BD (no smiley, but forgive me in advance if i forget the next time i post)

 

Oh ps - just had a look at post twenty and it didn't seem to be particularly 'smug' to me. maybe I just have a poorly developed sense of smug or something? Do accept, though, that I can be in certain circumstances, but as I've often said i've never claimed 100% perfection (well, except in the batcave sometimes, but that was just for fun).

Edited July 3, 2010 by baddad

[KezT]

I'm ready to stick my oarin now- Idid post a waaay back, but I think the thread has moved on a bit since then

 

Re parenting skills - OF COURSE parenting makes a diference to a childs behaviour, whether they be NT, ASD or anything else! The reason that parenting skills are the irst thing that profesionals look at in any case of a child behaving badly/inapropriately is becaus in a depressingly large number of cases itis all about the arenting! A sad buttrue fact - some people just get it wrong because they don't know the best tactics to use, and some because they really don't care enough to use them (for various reasons) and some because they can't be bothered to put in the continous effort. This does not mean that all bad/inappropriat behaviour is bcause of bad parenting, just that there majority of it is!

 

As to why some children can have "exactly the same parenting" yet be differently behaved, that's pretty obvius too imo - children are people/individuals in their own right,with personalities. They will react differently to the same stimuli. some will be more passive, some more agressive, some more flamboyant, some more retiring etc Also, whatever the parent thinks, they will never parent two children EXACTLY the same - the parent is also an individual with good/bad moods etc whe child Adoes something nauhty on a quiet,relaxed day they will get a different response to when child B does he same thing 2 seconds before the parents is off to an interview/vital meeting!

 

As to what would I do do if my child stripped off in the GP surgery - as BD says, hopefully I would have stopped that behaviour in the safety of my own home. My son did used to strip off all over the place - when he was young it was not so inappropriate so I could concentrate on changing the behaviour without the worry about what othrs were thinking/feeling/saying, and by the time he was old enough for it to become totally inapropriate, he had stopped. I have not been anywherenear sosuccessful with his aking loud noises inappropriately - we are still working hard on this! But if he does it in a GP surgery either as a sign of anxiety OR as a way to get out of doin something he doesn't want to (and the noises happen for both reasons) the reactionis the same - I tell him to stop, if he refuses he will be removed from the communal area - the receptionist will happily give me a shout outside when he is called if he is causing a disturbance inside. If the anxiety was because of the numberof people ten yes,the bad behaviour got him what he wanted - but itis an appropriate tactic to deal with that situaton. I the noises were to avoid the dr, then it hasn't suceeded. That is because avoiding crowds is something that he can manage to do throughout his life, but avoiding dr's is not!

 

 

 

 

apologies for typos -got a new computer at last) and still geting used to the keyboard!

[Suze]

We seem to be going over the same points in this thread now................shall we close it and start the day a,fresh???

[call me jaded]

I'm all for that!

[Mumble]

Yes I do work with children on the spectrum - please don't accuse me of lying and making such things up. But when I work with them, I don't let them get away with things because they're autistic, they still have to fit within acceptable behaviours that would apply to any child.

 

Hi mumble. This was the comment that made me 'lump' you with BD. Both BD and yourself seem to be saying that you have been successful in dealing with challenging behaviour. I haven't.

Thank you for giving me the chance to explain myself more clearly. I think there are two parts to this worth explaining.

 

The comment that I do work with ASD children wasn't intended in any way as an 'I work with them so I know' comment but I can see how, without context it could easily be read that way. In fact, it was a reply to JsMum who directly challenged me in a PM regarding this and not believing what I had said about my work. The emphasis was on it is something I do, not something I do and therefore know everything about. I certainly don't know much at all and often feel out of my depth; it is also only a few hours a week whereas you as parents have your children 24/7. The only reason I brought this up originally was to highlight that yes, I know there are kids with a dx of ASD and ADHD and I wanted clarification about the dx criteria application. I could equally have said "I know there are kids with both" rather than "I work with kids with both" - that's the level at which I was using it, no more implied meaning what so ever.

 

The second part, all I'm saying is that I feel, and this is personal opinion, that every child has the right to appropriate behavioural models/expectations/etc. regardless of a diagnosis. Some people will agree, some people won't, but for me, I wouldn't just let one of the ASD children I work with hit another kid with no reaction at all, in the same way as I wouldn't have let a child do that when I taught in mainstream schools. It is my personal opinion, and people are free to agree or disagree with me as they see fit, that it doesn't matter whether they're autistic or not, there are some behaviours that are right and some that are wrong, and children need to be taught these. Now for some children, that learning process will be a lot longer and harder but that doesn't mean (in my opinion) you shouldn't try and in fact is probably (in my opinion) all the more reason for consistency as that may help something to be learnt quicker. I certainly haven't been successful (I have the bruises to prove it! ), and I'm sorry if it came across that way, I just believe we shouldn't give up trying and believe that someone can't improve.

 

I hope that makes more sense. I never intended to upset anyone on this thread, but I was upset to receive abusive PMs.

 

[call me jaded]

Thank you mumble I will read that properly later. Think I will close the thread now as trampolining lessons beckon.