MN is quite happy to let innacurate thread titles be posted that could promote discrimination against disabled children and their famillies

[wasuup3000]

Title say's it all.

Do you not sign confidentiality agreements at work? or code of conduct or dignity at work statements?

I would be hung drawn and quartered if I discussed my patients/customers/colleagues on an open forum. How come this is not the case with local authorities?

Pawmum Casserole left her job becasue of all the abuse she got....

Just in case anyone is in any doubt.

"The legal criterion for statutory assessment is that the local authority should believe that
the child in question probably has SEN, and that the authority needs to determine that
child?s special educational provision by making a statement. The SEN Code of Practice
prescribes that, in deciding whether to assess, the question is whether there is
convincing evidence that, despite the school, with the help of external specialists, taking
relevant and purposeful action to meet the child?s learning difficulties, those difficulties remain or have not been remedied sufficiently"

From (rusty) memory, EBD is just as much an umbrella description as some of the other shorthands (e.g. 'physically disabled children', SLD/MLD etc).

Some LEAs use them more than others.

There is a description here If you put that into diagnostic labels, that could go across into ODD, RAD, PDD-NOS etc...

snowmash, i think the point Claw is making is that the children don't get a statement just for being EBD, iyswim? it has to be impacting on their work/social status at school so much first of all, to be eligible.

we didn't get a statement for dd1 because she is severely ASD.

we got one by proving that she was not progressing at all in school without help, and more shockingly, we also had to prove that she was able to progress, if given the right help

8.64km in 48 minutes. Getting better.... ;)

Right, give me a sec here...

silverfrog - very true. I clearly need to read more of the thread, as I was not posting to disagree with Claw3, more because of the earlier bits where people were not necessarily clear about what EBD meant.

I know how hard it is to get a statement. I developed severe multiple disabilities age 14 (people still assume I have PMLD), and the final reason they gave for not statementing was 'it wont be ready by the time she's 16'.

Obviously I was fortunate in that I had already 'proved' I could do school work to a high level This meant I got full-time 1:1 until I got totally excluded and sent away to residential college (no academic post-16 education for people with phys dis pre-2001).

I dread to think what it's like from the perspective of a young child :(

Sorry, should say no post-16 in my county.

To be angry that 30 year old fatties are moaning!?!

You see, there are other thread titles that upset other people that are left there - it isn't just the SN ones.

If you substitute fatties for black/asian/muslim etc is it acceptable? NO, but it is accepted as it stands. It's no different to the ones about SN.

...and once again, in my opinion, they should all be left to be debted and for us to put the OP's right, not deleted by MNHQ.

ffs what has that thread got to do with sn

Hi all,
As most of you know we don't necessarily delete posts just because they are offensive or indeed ignorant. We do believe that Mumsnet is a discussion site and we do allow posters to express unpleasant views that we certainly don't adhere to or condone.

The title of the particular thread in question was:

AIBU to think that ADHD/ADD is a load of nonsense?

I think there's no doubt we would have deleted a thread not in AIBU, titled ADHD/ADD is a load of nonsense and just caused by bad parenting.

But there is a subtle difference we think between that kind of disablist statement and a discussion of the issue highlighting a (admittedly ignorant and bigoted) all too commonly held opinion, beginning AIBU to think and ending with a ?. I could imagine that question being posed by a member with a child with SN in order to highlight the issue themselves and we wouldn't want to delete that.

I think in this instance, given the original poster's history of posting on MN in an inflammatory way, it's a very close call as to whether we should have deleted this thread and I can see why many of you would argue that we should on the grounds of it being designed to cause offense rather than to promote discussion. We did in fact drop the poster a line yesterday with a reminder of our rules and philosophy but we did decide to let the thread stand on the grounds that it's better to educate than to sweep unpleasant views under the carpet.

I know many find this moderation stance waring however - we've been having this discussion for yonks - and we do of course sympathise with that. Our overriding philosophy is to make parents' lives easier, not the reverse. What I don't agree with is the the premise of this thread and some comments on it that suggest we are more tolerant of disablist comments than homophobic and/or racist ones. Believe me
we are regularly pulled up about similarly difficult calls about whether to allow ignorant comments about gay and lesbian people as well as racial generalisations.

All I can say is that getting the balance between wanting to allow discussion of difficult issues versus not wanting to see bigoted or offensive posts on Mumsnet is not easy and we're the first to admit that we sometimes get it wrong. We do acknowledge the strong feelings on this thread from those of you who feel we should delete more and we promise to give this further thought. Do as ever continue to let us know what you think.
Best,
MNHQ

Are people fat due to circumstances out of their control?

I'm fat. I'm dieting. I'm doing something about it.

You can't do something about disability.

I do agree that the term fatties is not pleasant. However the people referred to are not being derided for circumstances out of their control.

Calling someone fat is inadvisable, but certainly not in the government criteria for hate crimes, or counted as an aggravating factor. Also, there is burgeoning legislation about disability discrimination...no such protection in law due to BMI (unless the BMI is of a level to be considered a disability).

Disability (and protection) is very clearly defined in law, in the same way as race or gender.

Riven 10:54 - Your sons looking at this forum is a decision that you and they have made based on their maturity etc. I presume that you aren't suggesting that this place should be moderated to a level that makes it acceptable for anyone of any age that comes along?

Altinkum 11:03 - I'm not sure is that is directed at me or not.

pagwatch 11:05 - Thanks you. (Did you notice how I DIDN'T report the personal attacks? Did ya? I'm taking that moral high ground, and I'm bloody holding it...)

Casserole 11:17 - Thank you.

wassup3000 11:24 - Right. I still don't see how what I said is disabalist. I took a statement made in an inflammatory way and broke it down into less inflammatory language to show that it is a factually correct statement. So do you believe that factually correct statements can be discriminatory ("Some women are shorter than some men." "Black peoples hair is frequently curlier than white peoples") or you believe that one of the statements is inaccurate? If so which one?

Or is it that you think I am being inconsistent?

"Then she said that although her daughter can be a little fucker she would not call her one in real life.

So why is it ok to agree with a statement that calls other peoples children who happen to have ADHD or ADD little fuckers?"

I don't believe I DID agree with a statement that calls other peoples children who happen to have ADHD or ADD little fuckers. If I did where?

(btw - If you have never, EVER though "oh for fucks sake stop doing that you little shit" about your children you have my upmost admiration)

Also, there is a great deal of difference between saying "You little fucker" to a child and saying "Your child is a little fucker" to it's parent.

There was actually a point behind my deconstruction of that post, which I was starting to develop amongst the name calling. It is that where a statement like "Many children just have shit parents who can't be bothered to spend time/say no and then wonder why their children are little fuckers and go running to their Dr's to get a statement." is made, rather than saying "You can't say that! " or "Rubbish!" it is more effective to say, "So what? It's very few for reasons x,y and z" - as if you attack it's factuality there will ALWAYS either be a) an exception you hadn't considered, b) Someone's mate who heard off someone else's mum and if you close down their right to say it you can't challenge it.

Claw3/Riven/Casserole - I think you covered the point - bad parenting can lead to damage to the child to such an extent that they can be statementable SEN. So therefore SOME bad parents whose children DO have special needs, that MAY be a result of their enviromnent, but don't have ADHD/AS will get statements. And these are the anecdotes that you risk having thrown in your face if you challenge the factuality of "Many children just have shit parents who can't be bothered to spend time/say no and then wonder why their children are little fuckers and go running to their Dr's to get a statement.".

wassup3000 11:41 - Am I still failing to see my double standards? I am sorry if I am being sloe :(

snowmash Wed 25-Aug-10 09:48:40
?Some may find this interesting (or not).?

Point of information, plenty of kids regularly call each other ?retard? or? remy? (short for ?remedial?). They also call each other ?gay?!

In fact I had one teenage ADHD diagnosed boy who was particularly obnoxious towards another boy who was homosexual and the little thug made that poor boy's life a misery. In the end, and much to the fury of staff, the powers-that-be arranged for the homosexual boy to be moved to a different class, thereby implying that he was the one at fault.

The ADHD kid was left preening and getting lots of high approval ratings from his mates because he'd got rid of, to use his terms, the "arse-bandit", "bummer" and "paedo"!

so all kids with ADHD are homophobic now?

I have to LAUGH at you I'm afraid

justine it is good to know you had words with the op of that thread

OOPS - slow not sloe - that's not an attempt at a pun or anything.

It is good to know Justine had words with the OP..however it hasn't made much difference