adults with learning difficulties on small childrens' play area.

[Bethshine82]

Took DS to the play area on Friday, it is not a huge play area and has one of those signs saying it is designed for use by children 14 and under.
Whilst we were there a group of around eight adults with learning difficulties and their carers arrived. The adults proceeded to go onto the playground.
AIBU to think this isn't very fair? They were adults and they weren't really aware of their strength and size. The carers weren't supervising brilliantly and twice I saw one of the adults just shove the children out of the way. Also some of the adults were shouting and screaming which frightened some of the toddlers. Many of the children left. I'm not in any way suggesting that adults with learning difficulties shouldn't be able to go out and enjoy themselves or that they shouldn't be part of the community, I'm just not sure a small childrens' play area is the place for an adults' afternoon out.

I think that the playground should only be used by children, it isn't safe otherwise really. AIBU?

Athing unless the adults are going to be there every time, it doesn't matter though. That one day you chat to you DC and find another activity...

but your supervising your child sufficiently this shouldn't be an issue. an older child of 14 will pose the same risk and be the same size.

They were much larger than the average 14 year old. And would a big group of teens be on the toddler equipment. Anyway, I accept there is a split decision about this. I even think had it been outside of Easter holidays it might have been better. The playground was already busy, add eight adults into it and it becomes extremely busy.

You see, I know a group of older kids with LD who use a playground in similar circs, and I know the carers simply don't take them in when it is busy. They go elsewhere for a bit and come back - a well-planned outing allows for that.

When you get down to it, the question isn't "should adults with LD be allowed on children's play equipment at all, ever?" When it's done right, it's fine. The question is: "should adults with LD be cared for by the sort of people who ignore the risk assessments and cba to provide the level of support and supervision they are paid to?"

Agree, r3dh3d. And, similarly, the question isn't "Should a four-year-old have to 'compete' with a man in his thirties for access to play equipment?" It is "Should the carer of any person, of whatever age, make sure that person is playing in a way that is compatible with others using the equipment safely?"

It is hardly likely that public playparks designed for adults are going to appear, so of course children must share with learning-disabled adults. It just needs to be done with a high standard of involvement by carers.

at 14 i was 6 foot don't see your point really. If an LD person is cared for correctly. the equipment is not going to break and your being a responsible parent there should be no issue at all.

"but your supervising your child sufficiently this shouldn't be an issue."

Bollocks.

My 4 year old barely needs supervision in our local playground.

I don't need to walk around behind her to make sure she doesn't get crushed by 12 stone of adult male, or shoved out of the way by similar.

If LD adults are to use the children's play equipment, it should be done by appointment. Not just by showing up and using your bigger size and the dangers you pose to force other people out.

Any 14 year old I saw on the small children's play equipment while children were using it, I would ask to make themselves scarce.

Showing up at a play area specifically designated for children with 8 adults and allowing them to take over and push the children out is incredibly inconsiderate.

yes thats right beth

keep those with ld away until it is more convenient to others you know so they are not put out in any way

I dont think people want adulds with LD hidden anywhere , if this was a group of teenage children instead of adults wanting to play on the swings parents would be miffed and think they were up to no good ,

If the playground was safe for the adults, which it presumably was, I see no reason why they should not have been there. They had a good amount of carers with them, as did the toddlers, hopefully, so not much coukd have gone wrong.

I think the more visble people with LD are to children, the less prejudice there might be in future years.

If LD adults are to use the children's play equipment, it should be done by appointment. Not just by showing up and using your bigger size and the dangers you pose to force other people out.

Excellent idea. It's very important that we keep disability discrimination alive and kicking.

That isn't exactly what I meant freudian. sometimes I think what I write doesn't come across how I mean it. I meant that from a safety point of view it was more dangerous and I think if I had been organising the trip I would have waited until after the holidays. It would have benefited the adults too as they would have had more room and less children to contend with.

By appointment lol

I have a 8 year ds with ASD and yes even he would have been 'scared' if a seemily adult pushed him, but i would have explained to him that not everyone has the same understanding, much like if a young child pushed him. I dont think body size really comes into it, none of the children who were 'shoved' were hurt, just scared.

I don't have a problem with allowing adults with learning disablities on play equipment, even if it is designed for children. My problem with this scenario is that there were children already using it. I don't think they should be allowed to put other people at risk. Most playareas will have regular "quiet times" and a playarea designed for under 14's will not be suitable for very young children, therefore being quiet during school times, when it would be acceptable for these adults to make use of it.

What's so hilarious about designating specific times for the ayground to be used by adults?

I don't expect to be consulted.

I just don't expect to have to protect my small children from being hurt by adults at their local playground.

I feel just the same about teenagers or bigger children on equipment for littlies. Being much bigger and stronger poses risks, and that means you stay out of areas designated for the small and vulnerable.

I don't let my small children play on equipment meant for bigger children when bigger children are using it, because it's not fair to demand if them that they look out for the safety of smaller children when they just want to play.

I'm not quite clear why having LD means you get a free pass on being considerate about the needs of others.

Adult bodies, without adult understanding, pose risks to toddler bodies with toddler understanding.

Figuring out a way to make sure LD adults get to use appropriate equipment should not mean putting children in harm's way.

The only disinterested risk assessment had indicated that this park was for children under 14, as was clearly signposted.

Variations to that should have been arranged, not imposed by just showing up and leaving other people to deal with the considerable extra dangers you create.

AIBU to mind that a large group of adults uses the playground for several hours every day and monopolises it during the holidays and after school? YANBU

AIBU to that a large group of adults used the playground once when I wanted to?
YABVVVU

HTH

I dont see how they were putting anybody at 'risk', no more than another child poses a 'risk' to other children. If these adults were 'violent' or a serious risk to anyone, they wouldnt have been in a children playground.

"It's very important that we keep disability discrimination alive and kicking."

I'm not suggesting we discriminate on the basis of disability.

If that were the case I would be saying LD children should be kept out, which I am not.

I'm suggesting that it is entirely normal to discriminate on who uses play equipment based on size and that LD don't make you smaller, or less strong, or less likely to cause an accident and hurt a smaller child.

The carers were apparently not being all that caring though, considering they just laughed when one of the people in their care hurt himself.

People are suggesting that if the children were being sufficiently supervised then there wouldn't have been a problem, but the adults were not being sufficiently supervised.

I've seen people on here being openly critical of helicopter parenting, which is effectively what is being suggested here as a solution to the problem of small children being scared by adults playing in both sections of the play park, because the OP does say that it is split into a toddler area and a section for children up to the age of 14 and these adults were using both areas. And an average 14 year old will not necessarily be the same size as an average 30 year old or even an 18 or 20 year old.

There is a big difference between a parent taking their child down the slide and an adult playing on the slide. And a toddler would perhaps be equally as scared by a running, shouting teen as a running shouting adult, which is why the carers at the very least should have ensured that they didn't use the toddler equipment or play in the toddler section.

There are a couple of threads on here right now, one about the OP's son not being allowed on a bus in his wheelchair because there were prams on board and another about a swimming club for children with SN that received a complaint because they use a shutter to make part of the changing rooms private and a woman thinking she couldn't reach her locker while they were there. In both those cases I think the bus driver and the complaining woman were very wrong but in this case the carers didn't seem to be doing anything to help anyone share the playground in a reasonable way and they were in the wrong not to do so.

I don't think adults with ld or sn should be hidden away, and I am currently seething at my friends new neighbour, who has pointedly ignored my friend for a few weeks before openly laughing at her when she went out one day on her mobility scooter and commenting that she should be forced to move into special accommodation so a normal family can have her house. My friend is 38 and has suffered a series of strokes which have left her unable to walk unaided. It makes me furious that someone can be so petty and vile to a woman she knows nothing about other than that she relies on a motorised scooter to maintain her independence.

But in this case, both parents and carers needed to take appropriate steps to ensure that the children and adults in their care were safe, happy and using the equipment and play area appropriately so that everyone could enjoy their time there and nobody had to leave.

I don't think this has anything to do with whether people are disabled or not. It is a simple and very practical question of size and scale. Bringing eight large and presumably energetic people into a confined space designed for smaller people is always going to cause problems, in the same way that suddenly bringing a whole school class or nursery group or whatever all at once might do. The way around this is to either choose playgrounds with larger equipment, or that are more spread out, or to plan ahead and have dedicated times for groups that are publicised in advance. Bury St Edmunds has gone further and has specialist equipment that can be used alongside non-specialist equipment in a carefully planned setting, which is probably an ideal to aim for.

Just because you are disabled (or the carer of someone who is disabled) does not mean that you can ignore common sense, practical measures, nor does it mean you should never compromise. We all have to live together on this planet.

A park is a different situation than a soft play centre, at my local park there are adults with LD's who come and play and I have no problem with that. However in most soft play areas it is a confined space and 8 adults running about in a kids area whether with LD's or not is just not really appropriate imo. It's not about discriminating against these individuals but ensuring that those other children who are playing there can do so in relative safety too as it's essentially a children's play area.

Why not take the adults after 4.00pm or before 10.00am when it's less congested and they can have more of the equipment to themselves

I'm not suggesting we discriminate on the basis of disability.

Yes you are. You are suggesting that a service should be provided to those with disabilities on a lesser basis than those without. That is disability discrimination.

Unless of course you are suggesting that everyone uses the facilities by appointment.

(Kladdkaka - I saw you in my local grocery shop on Saturday, in the freezer section. I finally understand your name.) - sorry for high-jack.

An example of compromise: when on a bus in my wheelchair, we managed to budge up quite substantially to allow a harrassed mother with multiple tired children to park her shopping all around my wheels, and my carer gave up her seat near me so the poor women could sit down with the smallest on her lap. Yes, she and the children should have stood, yes, shopping was not supposed to go in that area, yada yada yada, but how selfish would that have been, to ignore her needs?