Strict rules with outside caregivers

Post Reply New Topic

Hi:
Has anyone ever had experiences with parents who told caregivers that you were not allowed to do something? Then then jump to conclusions.

For example, my mom had me on the Feingold diet when I was a little because of hyperactivity. So one time she mentioned to the staff at a daycare/ temporary respite for children, that I could not have sugar. So two occasions, when snack time came up, the staff took away my apple juice and gave me water instead. It was frustrating because I was allowed to drink apple juice in the past. Both times I had a mild meltdown. Luckily my mom got things straightened out.

I have seen caregivers being given specific instructions by parents of what they are and not to do. Then the caregivers start controlling the clients without calling and asking the parents.

In the absence of explanation, the default interpretive mode is always "Literal".  Specific instructions should include exceptions, if any.

"No foods with refined sugar (sucrose); fruit sugar (fructose) is okay."  This would have been more effective.

Years ago, for my job, we had a restricted food list for a child that was due to food allergies and/or sensitivities. The caretaker sent a letter that said things like, "No meat, but they like eating ham!" (Yes, the exclamation point was in the list). Or, "Has wheat allergies, but a little bit of cracker is ok."

...This didn't really help me, because I was uncertain of whether they were trying to say that ham was ok, or whether they wanted us to know that the kid likes ham even though they can't have it (Which is useless info). Also, if the child has wheat allergies, why are we even suggesting that having a little bit is ok? I was pretty irritated by this, because it was the most useless bit of info that was needed, and I knew it was going to lead to issues.

I had to call a Social Worker (Who was applied to this case) and explain to them why this list was useless to me, and get clear guidance on what we were allowed to let the child have.

One of my coworkers wasn't really sure what the problem was. In hindsight, my literalism (likely due to possible ASD) was rather beneficial, because it saved us from obvious liabilities.

This would have been effective, because it explained the nuanced difference. Vague exceptions without any qualification don't work for me.

I thought it was odd that it did that, but assumed it was for such reasons.

It was a direct quote. I'm leaving it.

I could also talk from experience when I lived with my aunt, there were times when she would hire some respite providers when I was a young adult if she went out of town.

Of those, she and one of those providers agreed that I would not go to someone's house or get into anyone's car who they didn't know or had no met.

-When the provider didn't do one of the things that she was asked, which was to pick me up from an autism support group meeting. She came up with the idea that I not even ride with any of the members from support group. But at no time did she offer to meet these people or talk to them on the phone. So I ended up walking back to the bus in the dark.

I have also seen it where providers won't let their adult clients do things without permission of the parents or guardians.

Nearest thing to that was when I'd had appendicitis and started a new school 2 or 3 months afterwards. Although I was fully healed, my mother wasn't convinced, and in her protective way she wrote to the school to ask them to go easy on me with sports. Unfortunately when sport afternoon arrived what they did about it was just to take me away from the kids I'd been getting used to and to stick me with the other half who were to go somewhere to play football while my new friends were playing rugby elsewhere. Socially it was a disaster. I didn't know anybody, nor did I any more know the rules of football than I knew rugby (which none of us were expected to understand, being a more unusual sport to most kids). I vaguely remembering protesting that I was physically fine, but predictably they didn't want to take any chances, even in those days. So there I was among strangers who were all familiar with the game while I knew nothing much about it. And as I discovered when everybody swapped round to the other sport the following year, the rugby the school had the kids playing wasn't the violent free-for-all it's often cracked up to be.

In my case, my parents should've been more literal to the teachers about what I wasn't allowed to do in gym class, but they weren't and that caused trouble. They told them that I wasn't allowed to do... what's the word? Not cartwheel but that other thing most kids can do. Google translate says somersault, but is that really the word? Anyway, so my parents said that I'm not allowed to do that due to the reason that my head would be upside down while doing so, even though it's just a moment, and that's a problem since I have a shunt in my head... I'm not sure of the details how the shunt and my head get affected, but having my head upside down apparently makes me dizzy and feel sick far faster than is normal, so I shouldn't do that. But my parents had just told the teachers that I mustn't do a somersault (seriously? This is a word?), and they took it literally and thought it only meant that trick. When I told them that I wasn't allowed to even go to the starting position of a somersault, they didn't believe me and made me do it anyway. Not that they physically forced me or anything, but they bullied me verbally in to doing it, so I did. I told mom at home though and she called the teachers. Again. Bet she had a reputation of one of those difficult parents, but I suppose that comes pretty automatically when you have a heavily disabled kid. It probably made it worse that most kids in that school who had problems had things like severe ADHD or slight mental retardation, but kids with physical problems were rare.

I thought it was only non-NTs that struggled with this?

Excessive fructose plays a role in nonalcoholic fatty liver

check out Lustig, Robert.

Excessive intake of vitamin D plays a role in the formation of kidney stones, but not everyone who has kidney stones has an excessive vitamin D intake.

Every one seems to be able think in differing levels of precision.

Some people perceive the world like a 10 megapixel camera, lots of nuance, lots of detail, lots of complexity.
Some people perceive the world like a 320x240 webcam, no nuance, no detail, the complexity is lost.

This seems to be separate from being ND or NT, there's high-detail and low-detail thinkers within both groups.