To ask if its fair that inclusivity has excluded my DC from their hobby?

You have a very one-sided view of the law, and of how rights work in a functional society.

"Autism is legally protected", you said. All disabilities are legally protected from discrimination.* *It's not discrimination to say I can't join a walking group because I can't walk. It's not discrimination to tell a pilot with dementia that he can't fly planes any more. It's not discrimination to stop a child joining a team because he can't be a team player.

There are things we can do in spite of our disabilities, and we should be facilitated to do them as far as possible. That is not the same as inserting us into situations we're not capable of, then telling everyone else to suck it up.

I taught this girl every minute of the school day for two years, in a class of just six children. I taught children like her for close on four decades. I was a highly qualified, experienced and empathetic teacher. I knew all her signs of stress (she was non-verbal) and I knew how she expressed pleasure and interest. I had qualms about taking her in the first place, as I thought she'd find it sensorally overwhelming. But the instruction was that every child have the opportunity.

So please don't tell me that I'm ignorant about autism and learning disabilities.

Maybe, or perhaps she just only rates one form of “enjoyment” and disregards the rest as invalid. Carers like everyone have their own world view.

We are in a similar position and my autistic DS1 is leaving a term early. DS's ND needs and NDchild2's needs are incompatible.

I have supported this wider group over many years, and previously worked with NDchild2 in a younger section. The child's parent (understandably) doesn't cope and has a poor handle on their needs (the education system also isn't coping). When the child joined the group, we were not advised about the child's needs and much less how to manage them which was a very difficult learning curve. I have concerns about the leaders' optomism and realism although maybe some of the risks have changed since I knew NDchild2... these are about supervising, facilitating engagement and safety of all participants including the child's welfare.

Both my DCs struggle with this child. DS1 needs order and quiet to function. He was just within his coping threshold anyway. His disability doesn't give him much spare capacity to accommodate others' chaos, and many days it's borderline to get through the day anyway. He's in the awkward zone of superficially coping with an NT lifestyle falling between life expectations of a NT person and the (scant) support of ND services. DS2 has his own challenges, including living with a ND sibling when emotional regulation collapses. He's a good friend to ND classmates, but that has its challenges. Coping with a very chaotic ND child who struggles to engage with activities and lacks specialist support is pushing his limits too.

I respect the leaders' willingness to be inclusive but they can not meet everyones' needs with the resourcing avaliable. I am not going to volunteer further because I am not prepared to take on that level of liability with that resourcing and (lack of) family support.

It has made DS1 reluctant to move on to the next section too, and this social outlet for him will not be replaced. He already has no friends/ casual social life outside school, so this was an important way of facilitating social skills for him. I'm fortunate that DS1's needs do not actively exclude him, but the reality is there's a lot of self-exclusion in his life so losing something safe is a big loss and with his rigidity of thought, shrinks his world long-term.

Inclusion is more than just admitting people into a space, and if it's done badly or is poorly resourced can have difficult wider effects on that community. To work well, the venue and activity need to be suitable, needs and strategies need communicating and needs appropriate supervision both in ratio and training.

I should think the OP's son already knows quite a lot about resilience and empathy bless him as he's already living with ND siblings. Now he can't even do his hobby in peace and no one is supporting him and he is missing out. Much as I sympathise with SN children other children also deserve to be considered.

Similar situation here. My son is constantly pushed, shoved, shouted at and having comments made about him by an older child. He is pretty timid and this is upsetting. When I spoke to the leaders they hinted at ADHD....well the kicker is that my son also has adhd as well as autism and has never pushed, shoved or threatened anyone or intimidated them into wanting to leave.
One child's need to disrupt should not trump everyone else's desire to complete the set activity in an enjoyable fashion.

My DN also has additional needs and is very hands on. My ds hates hugs and being touched, always has. It's a constant source of tension between SIL and I with me explaining her child's need for a hug doesn't trump mines needs to not be touched (an assert an appropriate boundary)

Perhaps, as the person that took her to the event, @saraclara has a tiny bit more insight into the situation than you do?

That must have been really tough.

Unfortunately you can't be 'fair' to everyone, often someone ends up having things taken away from them, or else there is a 'if everyone can't have it, then no one can' attitude, which inevitably leads to resentment.

Ok so you made the decision for your child. Parents and organisers have made a decision for another child. It’s not for a 13 year old child and his mother to decide what is right for a child with a disability.

In law, yes she did have a right to be there. But it was not the right environment for her. She wasn't enjoying it (she wasn't even looking at the stage) and she was severely affecting other people's enjoyment. how on earth do you think you could judge if she enjoyed something or not. The fact you think she had to be looking at the stage shows how huge your ignorance of some conditions is.

''It sounds like the parents are using this as a break for themselves and don’t care about the disruption.''

This.. A ''Dump N' Run'' to get some peace for themselves.

Not fair on the child, or other children. They could well get Pip to help pay for a carer to be with their child, too, if they want a break so much.

I say this as a parent of an autistic child who has been excluded from activities before - it is unfair on your child , yes .

It’s not the fault of the ND child , but being inclusive isn’t just for ND children , it’s for all . Some situations aren’t right for ND children and that could be something that can’t be changed or it could be the fault of those running it . Whilst accommodating for a ND child , it shouldn’t be at the expense of other children. My daughter attended a holiday club once and they told me she just wouldn’t settle and found it difficult and that it was affecting activities for the other children . They could not provide 1:1 so I took the decision to take her out - she was clearly not happy and other children were being affected .

I'm not talking about the law. I'm talking about those responsible for the child.

As per my post about my pupil at the West End show, I had to balance what she was getting from being there (pretty much nothing) with the effect her behaviour was having on those who had paid for tickets and who may well have been looking forward to this show for months.

It was an easy decision for me. But some of my colleagues disagreed. In their eyes she had a right to be there, however much noise she was making and however much she rhythmically banged herself against the back of her seat, disturbing those behind her.

In law, yes she did have a right to be there. But it was not the right environment for her. She wasn't enjoying it (she wasn't even looking at the stage) and she was severely affecting other people's enjoyment.

The law had nothing to do with the situation. Her right to be there did not outweigh other people's right (albeit it not in law) to enjoy the event.

A 13 year old disgruntled at losing and listening to stimming doesn’t get to decide what reasonable adjustments are possible.

How on earth do you know that there is a massive health and safety risk? Lots of children can’t follow instructions. Do they not get to go to school?Not being able to follow instructions in a game does not a health and safety risk make. Loads of kids stop half way in events- they are allowed to. It’s not boot camp.

It's not so clear cut.
The law does not specify inclusion or otherwise. It focuses on the provision of reasonable adjustments. Where this is not possible then yes, the disabled people will have to be excluded.

OP's DC aside there's massive health and safety risk here with the child being unable to follow instructions, stopping halfway etc

my NT kids right to enjoy life without always having to accommodate.

Do they have that “right”? I don’t see it as a part time obligation to accommodate others.

It seems as though your son is always in the same group as the other child. Is that because it's a Scouts situation where they're both in the same Lodge (or whatever they call them in Scouts - I know it's a Lodge for Beavers!)? If so, is one of them moving lodges (realistically your child, given the attitude of the leaders) a possible half-measure?

Threads like this one make my heart sink. Your DS is not being excluded by the group’s inclusivity. That is a perverse and troubling interpretation IMO. He has not been excluded in any respect. He has decided that he doesn’t want to participate anymore due to the way the leaders run the group. That’s fair enough, if he’s no longer getting enjoyment from the experience he can quit.

I remember my sibling who has ASD was actually and routinely excluded from participating in all manner of activities precisely because NT children and their parents objected to their presence. In the case of my sibling, the objections ranged from laughing too loudly, hand flapping, running too slowly and awkwardly, standing too close or not standing close enough, etc. In some cases it’s probably true to say that the team or group didn’t achieve their potential as a direct result of my sibling. The groups used that reasoning to exclude them. They couched it in terms of being for the benefit of my sibling which was untrue and cowardly. This all happened decades ago. I had hoped that understanding of ND children had increased. Judging by some posts on this thread, it seems as though very little has changed.

Should the boy in the OP’s example receive more support? Possibly. But perhaps his parents want to give him an opportunity to learn how to participate in a group independently. They may see this setting as appropriately supportive and relatively low stakes (i.e., a fun extracurricular activity, not an academic situation) and one that provides an opportunity for him to learn how to cope with such situations without being managed tightly. If the group leaders have no issue with how the boy is involved in the activities, then that seems a clear signal as to how they will proceed. If your DS’ frustration with the other boy prevents him from enjoying the group, it’s up to him to decide he’s had enough.

Thankfully the law doesn’t agree with you.

We had a very similar situation with DD's sport, except in our case the behaviour of the ND child was outright dangerous to the other children. I raised it so many times but in the end we moved DD to another club. It was a lot further away, but I was sick of DD being put in danger and her old club refusing to supervise the ND child properly.

That's probably not much help OP, but I understand how frustrating it can be watching your child not being able to enjoy their hobby.

I have physical disabilities, and I've been invited by friends to join the local rambling group many times, but I've always refused as the rest of the group would have to make huge adjustments to their hobby to accommodate me, and whilst it would be inclusive it certainly wouldn't be fair.

Not the stimming, no. I was thinking more about whatever he was doing that needed staff to step in to stop.

I suspect that the OP's son is supersensitive to other ND people because of his own family. He maybe feels like he can't get away from it anywhere, and that is why he is overly focused on this child. But, again, it's not the ND child's fault that the OP son is overwhelmed in life. He could really do with getting some professional support imo. People really underestimate the effect growing up with a disabled parent/sibling can have on a person. I really doubt it is just the presence of this one ND child that is the cause of the OP's son's feelings.

People with disabilities are every bit as important as those without. However, they are not MORE important. And if accommodating them (without extra support) disadvantages everyone else, then the activity is not the right one for them.

In this case, clearly a parent needs to be present so facilitate his involvement.

He's actually having a much loved activity ruined by a child that is failing to behave and is not being corrected/chaperoned.

This is an activity he attends without his two SEN siblings and gets to spend time alone with his friends.

It has been going on for two years with zero effort from the adults to rectify the situation.

How could that not impact his mental health?

He is simply having to listen to stimming and experience losing once a week. If that impacts his mental health there are far bigger issues than this club to worry about.

My brother was very distinctive, so everybody knew him. I was automatically 'his brother' whenever I met anybody new. In any social situation his disability would dominate and he'd become the focus of attention.

As @HollyKnight said, you become the invisible sibling.

When I was 11 my dad took just me to France in the caravan. My brother was excluded and visited grandparents with my mother!

It was bliss.

Sometimes inclusion is detrimental to other people's mental health - as per OP's son and me as a child.