DD17 has been inappropriately touched by a customer whilst at work.

[Normansglasseye]

DD17 works at the weekend at a well known store.

We are currently on our way to pick her up as she's just rung me very distressed. She was serving on a till and an autistic young man around the same as DD has grabbed one of her breasts. She is absolutely distraught. The carer/parent has apologised.

I've never been in a situation like this.

I'm so upset for DD.

If it's severe autism and he cannot be excused for grabbing breasts, then why was he taken into a shop?
It isn't unbalanced to expect shop workers to not be assaulted.

It isn't unbalanced to expect shop workers to not be assaulted.
Absolutely agree, but people with intellectual disabilities can’t be locked up at home either. It’s a difficult situation for everyone and more support is needed.

I mean the Op.has been balanced whose daughter actually happened too ,other posters however like to stick the boot in and nobody is excusing snything.

He was taken into a shop because that’s his right as an individual - disabled or not. The reasons for the failure of care have been explained in depth upthread and yet your ableist comments continue. It’s never going to be possible to eliminate the risk to others entirely and it’s unreasonable to suggest locking people up or otherwise curtailing their freedoms to achieve that.

There is freedom to go to places where people don't wear badges and F2F contact with strangers is less likely. Freedom to go on walks and get fresh air, for example. It's possible to avoid shops, I usually do everything online as I can be anxious in crowded areas and queuing and blocked doorways (my ND).
My son has additional needs and will only go into foodshops to specifically buy things or pick things up. He went through a stage of needing to know where we went had a loo and we adapted what we did in terms of going out.

Your narrative all the way through this thread is that he should not have been in the shop. In a residential care setting outings accompanied by carers are risk assessed. Not so with unpaid family care for someone living at home with family. If this boy’s carer was a single parent she would likely have had no choice but to take him shopping if he can’t be left alone and there is no-one else to supervise. What is she supposed to do, tie him up outside like a dog ?

You seem rigid and incapable of underestanding that not everyone receives appropriate support - the resources simply don’t exist and care is allocated according to what’s available, which in many cases doesn’t meet need. The fact that you are managing doesn’t mean everyone can. Infringing on the freedoms of disabled people is not the answer to the inability of society to provide adequate support.

He was at the till alone.

“The parent/carer came over straight away”.

Yes, but OP also said “apparently he left the carer/mum whilst she was in the queue.”
She was obviously still keeping an eye on him though, if she came over straight away when the incident occurred.

It sounds like a difficult situation all round.

Mother/ carer could have maybe chosen a queue with a male cashier.

If you know your child / patient has these tendencies then it's responsible and thoughtful to at least try to avoid it involving female minors.

And if there is no male cashier then stay with the individual. Don't walk off.

Not easy, I do understand that but assault is not acceptable.

I don't think one person has said assault is acceptable ?
And most parents of children _teens with complex disabilities will do.anything in their power to mitigate challenging behaviour .

A couple of people have said it’s just one of those things that someone working in a shop has to accept

They have indeed. And also accused people of being "ableist" or "not kind and understanding"

People with a child or carers of a person with ASD or LD and similar tendencies as the individual the OP mentioned, what do you think the parent / carer could have done in the shop to avoid this happening? What would you have done?

Surely someone has to take responsibility. We definitely should accommodate and be accepting of disabilities; however, it can't be to the detriment of others' safety.

Yes I'm rigid and inflexible on personal safety.
I can compromise on what going out means, it can be a walk to a park rather than going in a shop. Online shopping exists.
I laugh at the ableist comment as every day I compromise to function in life.

From working with disabled youngsters, the police will do nothing about this.

Yes, he shouldn’t have done it, and yes, he may need more carers.

But, the police won’t touch it, and resources won’t allow, probably, for more carers.

There's some clear space between people who's behavioural repertoire might involve making a beeline for and grabbing a 17 year old shop assistant's breast when left unattended to wander off, and locking people with intellectual disabilities up at home.

Well I don't take my son out alone
Normally if we can see if he's getting wound up either me or my dh will remove him from the situation ASAP and take him to the car ,play music etc to de escalate
If he looks like he might try and grab someone thsn I'll grab his arms before he can
That said although he's 15 he's tiny for his age
It must be difficult if it's someone taller and bigger.

Yep. Pity many posters here can’t see that.

Then we have to agree to disagree and leave it there. Life is not black and white as much as you’d like it to be and not all carers are in a position to go out to do routine errands without taking the disabled person with them. Given that you and you’re own child have disabilities, your dismissal of the difficulties of others is unfathomable.

I’ve accused other posters of being ableist in their comments because that’s what they are. There are some disgusting comments on this thread, perfectly demonstrating how little understanding or empathy people have for disabled people and their carers, and how little appreciation of how the shitty system of care in this country is letting everyone down. There are two victims here. OP’s DD who was assaulted - the fact that the boy was disabled doesn’t make that any the less true and doesn’t diminish how she should feel as a result. The boy himself was a victim of a broken care system which resulted in inadequate supervision - probably from an exhausted and overwhelmed parent with little or no support - which allowed him to commit the assault in the first place.

Then lobby your local MP to stop the cuts in the pipeline which will reduce support for carers even further and make this kind of incident even more likely. The care system is broken and is leaving families struggling to cope.

Read the OP’s posts. The boy broke away from the carer while in a different queue and made a beeline for DD.

I agree we disagree.
It's unfathomable that you see things as black and white and cannot consider compromise. The latter would involve not putting a disabled person in a position they could cause harm and face negativity/harm back, but providing positive walks outside the home.
You cannot, after all, take the shop assistants out of the shop and they cannot be expected to face abuse.

As I've tried to explain in previous posts, some kind of intervention needs to be put in place in order to avoid harm not only to others, but to the teenage boy concerned in the original post.

Yes, I agree that society is letting him down.

I've tried not to give too much detail, but I've had the experience of trying to find some form of intervention for someone who was of very low intellect. (There was no specific diagnosis at the time. With hindsight, he had some form of learning disability rather than difficulty but perhaps a personality disorder as well.)

There was none and the outcome was unspeakably awful and tragic for all concerned.

It may be that a police report will not help in any way, but if there's even a faint chance that it would cause the authorities to seek a psychiatric report, then it's a chance worth taking.

As I've already stated, the failure to take heed of the warning signs with regard to the case that I'm mentioning meant that the person concerned will never be allowed out into society again. He is apparently incapable of understanding the impact of his actions on others and cannot now be trusted to be in contact with females of any age.

I keep thinking "If only."

No one is saying that all men with intellectual disabilities need to be locked up. However, as soon as there is a transgression of the kind described in the OP, there needs to be some kind of an investigation. If it's not at least reported, then if - God forbid - it happens again, it will likely be dismissed as a 'first offence'.