So have you folks heard about that 5 year old kid?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't care. I don't care, No free passes for autistic kids, ever. Why? Because it's better they learn about consequences from people who care about them than from people who don't. Strangers will not be so understanding of oral stim biting or other outwardly seemingly aggressive behaviours.

What if I punched you in the face and rationalized it away as a stim for my fist? Would you okay with that? Let's say I molested your sister and called it a sexual stim? Acceptable or unacceptable?
And if I shot someone in the face? A stim for my trigger finger?

For God's sake, people.

Last edited by slowmutant on 29 May 2008, 11:05 pm, edited 3 times in total.

You're absolutely right, there are consequences to actions and his freedom ends where mine begins, and vice versa. No one is arguing to give them a free pass.


This is what the argument is about, and why this teacher needs to learn that her actions have consequences as well.

First of all, nobody is saying "Dammit, let's give this kid a free pass because he's autistic."

Doing something malicious for malice's sake and then lying and saying it was a stim is morally reprehensible. Stimming with no understanding of the pain caused to others BY the stim is not.



Teaching a kid the consequences of a stim need not involve public humiliation, EVER. If there are other, LESS emotionally scarring ways to teach consequences - which there are, because public humiliation is NOT the standard consequence teaching method, then WHY should the more painful public humiliation be allowed?

Sympathy is irrelevant here. If you have to remove a harmless snake from your garden, do you drop a rock on it, or move it with a stick and a bucket?

http://lastcrazyhorn.wordpress.com/2008 ... lden-rule/

(Autistic minors usually have access to weapons?)

It's not about free passes.

If you think this, you misunderstood it entirely obviously. It's not even about 'letting the kids do what they want'.

I'm totally quizzed that people think there's only ever one answer. It's as if I were telling a child to solve all conflicts by beating everybody into a bloody pulk.

If stims are a problem (to the person themselves, to other people or just inappropriate), of course there must be attempts for prevention and redirection.

But you don't teach a child not to stim/stop inappropriate behaviour by beating it. Humiliating it. Or something like that.

That process is a bit more complicated! More like: recognise the stim, teach child to recognise the stim is possible, find an alternative for the stim, teach the alternative, go through crucial situations, search for triggers for the stim/behaviour, make sure the stim doesn't come back... takes a long period of time...

Was everybody taught to grow into a person by violence that nobody can even imagine there's something else meant with 'teaching' besides physical and emotional violence??

I mean, I'm really... quizzed...

I think the basics are so entirely logical, about how to teach a child.

hasnt the teacher already left her job because of this?


agree with LostInSpace,Who_Am_I and Sora.

the rest of those children and the teacher will have problems of some sort themselves,so why single out in this way?
he;s still a toddler,not a contestant on big brother,he needs his own 1-1 in class if his problems are affecting others,what am do not understand is why so many on the spectrum are so quick to accept and hype good parts that some have like high intelligence and hyperfocussing,but when it comes to the parts that arent so good,they automatically treat the autie/aspie as if theyre in control and understanding of what is happening.

in a way,it is good that this has become so well known,as they might now do something about his problems,and get him a 1-1 for when he goes back to school.
if he is hf and able to cope in school,he should be allowed to stay in mainstream and not be forced into special school or home ed as he should have the same chances as others,as long as he doesnt give others poor quality of life even when he has his own support, then why not.

As I said just now in the other thread: This is a Reductio Ad Absurdum of the whole Democratic system.

People who don't understand exactly what they're voting on can't be relied upon to give an informed decision.

.

I had a similar thing happen in a Baptist Sunday School classroom about 25 years ago. I was a teenager when I was gleefully voted a straight "zero" in everything from physical attractiveness to intelligence and it was still traumatic. I can't imagine what it would be like for a little guy.

Patricia

I can tell that you don't have children.

I'd say he was right in that case, to be fair.
Someone harmed by our behaviour won't simply accept "I can't help it" as an excuse to pretend it doesn't happen.

.

I thnk we shouldn't be so quick to judge, as this is pretty complicated:

-if the teacher is old..did she ever get training to handle autistic children? Maybe not..maybe she has no adequate training and/or experience with what's required to do to accomodate such a child. Just like many others, maybe she just doesn't understand the limitations of that 5 year old..and she STILL thinks (consciously or not) it's just "spoiled kid" behaviour...or that the child CAN control himslef he he only would try to:)

-I understand she kept writing almost DAILY notes on the child's papers (not even sure what they were..drawings maybe?). Notes addressed to the parents, in which she complained daily of how distruptive the child was. One was saying that he talked continuously during class. I wonder how involved the parents got BEFORE this unfortunate event...did they just hope it will all pass on its won or did they really try to talk to the teacher and ALL try to find a solution? Just dumping it all on the teacher (if that's what happened) may not have been the best thing:)

-Do try to think about the rest of the class. If he was trully loud and disruptive all the time, what should the teacher have done (other than notify the parents)??? Spend all her time on him and neglect the others? I would be at my wits end too if I had to constantly deal with someone very disruptive. It's such a confusing situation...

Of course, her own "methods" for solving this real issue she was having were...childish and stupid. He is 5!! !! He doesn't understand anyway! No 5 year old really does. If she just couldn't handle the disruptions, she should have conntacted the parents directly and the school psychologist or something.

I don't know...it all sounds like a mess where neither the parents nor the teacher were doing the right thing for the kid and for the entire class.


***gimme a break, he wasn't "traumatised"...he's 5. He'll get over it. But those parents need to do something too, not dump it all on others.

Last edited by northern_light_girl on 30 May 2008, 9:06 am, edited 1 time in total.

It is a horrible thing to do, and why would you point out the flaws of a 5 year old?! I want her to go through the same exact thing with her peers and see how she likes it!! !!
(sorry, but I used to go through similar things in my life)

What did the parents do when the first 2, 3, 5, 10 notes came home from the teacher, where she complained how disruptive the child was? Why did THEY allow this to go this far? If a teacher would send my kid home with notes like this every day...I'd try to see if they were true and then find a way to correct the behaviour...or if they weren't true I'd conclude the teacher is harassing my kid and make a huge scandal! But just closing my eyes and ignoring the notes?

Individual self-expression tends to cause dissonance in situations where what were individuals are merely reduced to components of a single entity. And that is what being "loud and disruptive" tends to be; exclusive personal regard. Fairness doesn't factor into it, and it only balances out if everyone is doing it perfectly equally..... which doesn't occur in practice.

That said... classrooms do tend to be taught, as is practical, in a component-reductive environment.... where the need of students for individuality is suppressed. This is not helpful for Aspergians like ourselves.


In other words.... NOT allowing him to be loud and disruptive is akin to telling him that he is unimportant and essentially unwanted, as being individual is all we're really good at.
There is no winning... basically.

.

What? Come on! Not allowing him to be loud and disruptive ..not allowing the rest of the kids (NTs) to be loud and disruptive. I think she would apply the rule to all kids.

As you were saying, the practical limitations of a classroom, whith 1 underpayed, overstressed teacher who has to deal with the needs, wants, cries, tantrums, questions of many kids...these limitations mean that the teacher cannot really be too phylosophical about her day-to-day workload. To her I think it's just another day when she will get a headache...another day when she (or any teacher) could count as good if she was able to pass a bit of information forward and control the class a little better than usual. A teacher is a HUMAN BEING too! Not a perfect machine, in an ideal world:( BTW, she's an individual too...what if a teacher also would demand that his/her individuality be expressed by being loud and mean and disruptive? We'd all be enraged!

I don't think that any manifestation of individualism (such as being extremely disruptive) is necessarily a positive! As a society, we all agree to certain ways..we obay a few rules (like no killing, stealing etc..). As someone else was saying, otherwhise, chaos would ensue.

If a kid is being disruptive of course they should be told off. But making other kids make nasty comments is below the line. NOT acceptable.