Church Bars Family of Autistic Child from Church

Post Reply New Topic

Seems to me that keeping the boy from church is the best thing for the boy, who cares what his mother thinks.

My son would probably go nuts at church if I brought him there. The huge crowd of people, the strange smells and sounds, the loud bells, the long quiet sermons, I would be insane to make my son sit through all that. Hell, I don't even like church myself for many of the same reasons, and once passed out from overstimulation.

Some autistics can handle church, but I'm guessing most can't, especially ones with lower functioning. There's no reason to make the poor boy go to church except the mom needs to complain about something.

It's not a matter of autism, it's a matter of behaviour. A lot of autistics wouldn't act like that. I think it's very popular to scream discrimination in these cases, but I've worked with violent autistics and they do need to be separated from people. It's a shame there wasn't another way, like when I was a kid our church had a "crying room" which was a glass room. If they had something like that the boy could go in there.

But honestly, it's probably not the best place for him. Like Mage and some others said, it's too overwhelming for him and it's not fair to torture him every week. They should find a babysitter or some kind of care for him while they attend without him. It's not fair to him or the churchgoers who don't want to be hit or disrupted.

This is not good

It would just be better if they went somewhere else. Church sessions, obviously, only stress him out and he doesn't get anything out of it. About the mother thinking she has to attend. Yeah, my mother does think it's vital to attend to. I don't, but she was raised to think that way. The mother in question could or could not be one of those sorts who thinks attendance is "soul saving" or vitaly important for the after life. So that's why I don't think she was going for attention or purposely forceing him to endure anything.

Churches can be loaded with scensory things, though. Many churches have bright lights, very loud speakers for elders, loud singing, sitting still, the rough fabric of the seats, ect. I wear ear plugs to my mom's church for that reason, and I don't go sometimes becuse I don't care for the 'kindly' personlities. You know, the 'niceness', verbal sort of thing that NTs need to feel welcomed or something. It just annoys me a little, and they know it. I still get an annoying soft pat sometimes. 'sigh' I hate soft patting, touching and pokeing!

There might be a sensory issue, and that wasn't adressed properly by anyone (so the article claims). All I read was that they tried to calm him down after he reacted, and the church people just kick them out after time. Shows what they all know doesn't it?

i agree with everyone who said the kid is better off not having to go to church, but a restraining order to keep him out is awful. the church says that his behaviors are dangerous, but the only documented behaviors are almost causing someone to lose their balance when he ran out of church after the service (i always thought the crowded aisles blocked up by groups of people exchanging small talk were pretty overwhelming too. after the incident the family started leaving before the end of the service, to avoid a repeat.), pulling a girl onto his lap (the girl was his age or older, and lived with him. if he pulled her onto his lap, then he was sitting and she was right in front of him. no matter what the churchlady in the pew next to them thought about it, the girl's gotta know and expect and accept this kind of behavior, what with living with him and all.), and revving a car engine (someone left a car empty and running? i've known 13 year olds that would have gone joyriding and probably wrecked.).

it's really interesting that they want to protect their members from these behaviors, but the same diocese didn't bother to protect it's members from a molesting priest and hid/ignored the evidence for years while allowing him to continue to serve (and molest):
http://www.poynter.org/search/results_a ... hScope=all

there's a lot i don't know about catholicism, so it would be nice if someone could set me straight, but in that belief system isn't it considered essential to receive communion from a priest, and to participate in confession, and probably some other stuff? so isn't the church basically saying that the disabled kid upsets people and therefore deserves to go to hell? or at least, if he (or his parents) don't want him to go to hell, then they better find someone else to help them with that? that's pretty awful, no matter what others' opinions of that belief system might be.

According to South Park, the disabled go to hell.

Tough call... Its a shame that the parishioners took it upon themselves to make the priest the bad guy in this issue. Heaven forbid anyone actually talk directly to her and take a proactive approach. If the mother wants her son to go to church, she may have a better selection now that their story is in print. Who knows, there may be a church more than willing to educate their congregation about autism. I thought church was supposed to be a sanctuary. Of course, if you have a 6ft tall over 200lb person having a meltdown it may be different. I like the idea of the stronger men stepping up to usher him and assist. But then it may be too much to ask. Many people in the churches dont like to be interrupted in their spiritual time. Of course compassion is as spiritual as anything else one could learn from a church. Having a staff that is educated on how to deal with these types of issues would be beneficial to any church. It could have been handled differently, without the sheriff being involved.

As I always say, if I go to hell, you're going to hell.

A god that sends me to hell for I have problems with group activities, social activities (church is a social thingy after all), even though I don't harm those who don't harm me directly, or those I care for, isn't a god I wish to exist with.

If Danny can't go to Heaven, no one can?

I think I understand.

As a former priest I can understand the position of the parish and the diocese. One of the articles I read about the case indicated that the child was, at times, physically abusive and would occasionally urinate in church.

People with disabilities do have limits. If you're disabled in such a way that you're disruptive to an environment and are preventing people from doing what they're in that environment to do, then perhaps you shouldn't be in that environment. Accommodation only goes so far.

If he had tripped the priest while the priest had a censer full of smoldering incense or tripped one of the altar servers while carrying a lit candle or heavy processional cross, injury could have been the result. It's unfortunate that he couldn't be accommodated, but sometimes there's nothing that can be accommodated.

Adverb, in this case the individual isn't obligated to take communion because developmental disorders prevent him from doing that safely. I don't really feel like digging up the relevant parts of the Catechism or digging out Aquinas's Summa (IIRC he deals with ability to reason, handicap, and salvation somewhere in the ginormous text).

I don't particularly care for religion, and I think he'll be better served in the long run if he isn't exposed to it, but if he really wants to go to church he can find another.

You used to be a priest and yet you don't care for religion?

A very curious statement.

I'm glad that someone on WP aggrees with me on this issue.

I'd rather go down to the burning pits of Christian Hell than heaven, though it would be fun to use the Stone Paradox to make god become completely destroyed