"If my son was a dog, I'd put him down"

[PoppyAmex]

Yes, I know IBU for reading Daily Mail links, but I just don't understand where they get people like this woman from.

I'm pregnant at the moment and this article really made me sad, it's just so undignified for everyone involved.

here

The article does reinforce the (surprisingly commonly held) view that those with significant disabilities are better off dead. I mean that idiot Brewer was voted BACK IN after saying children with disabities should be put down. Since being voted back in he has gone further comparing disabled children to deformed lambs & saying a farmer would smash them against the wall. This just buys into all that.

Okay - she's struggling to cope & she may well be struggling to access services she needs (don't we all) but I hate the assumption that it's okay for her to make these awful, shocking comments because her child is so disabled or difficult or challenging. If she was struggling to cope because she had PND or difficulties adjusting to motherhood but her child was completely 'normal' would you think it okay to say these things about her son? It is possible to talk about physically challenging behaviours & lack of services without buying into the line that these kids are worth less than 'normal' kids or subhuman in some way & difficult enough for it to be reasonable to put them down. This should be about her inability to cope & lack of support from authorities not how terrible her son is towards her.

She should contact the Challenging Behaviour Foundation as a first step to accessing support (& anyone who feels horrified by families in this position could donate to the CBF)

If he's moving in to resi it's even weirder to come out with all this now. I mean what's the point? She's certainly not speaking for many of us with children with challenging behaviours. She's encouraging prejudice rather than raising awareness IMO.

musu Wed 29-May-13 20:27:34
"I guess I must be the only one to wonder why the diagnosis of herself and her four children was not available on the NHS. Is it a postcode lottery thing? When we were going through the process with ds we found the NHS very supportive indeed. But then that has been the same for the various medical professionals ds has seen."

Not just a postcode lottery ime but a whichever-consultant-you-happen-to-see-on-the-day lottery. I am sure there are plenty of people who get their joint disorders correctly diagnosed on the NHS. That does not change the fact that the dickhead who saw my daughter (a classic case of HEDS) diagnosed her condition as psychosomatic pain likely to have been caused by sexual abuse.

To get a diagnosis you need a referral. If your local doctor happens to be one of the people who don't believe in ADHD you might not get one. They are not obliged to refer you if they don't believe you. And referrals can take a bloody long time.

"Those that have commented on my loss of a career point have missed the point I was trying (poorly) to make. She managed with her younger children but is only bemoaning her 'loss of career' with her youngest. That is one of the points I don't understand in this article. "

That seems obvious to me. The older children needed a certain amount of care but were likely to go on to lead independent lives, leaving her free to work at some stage. With the youngest she can see that this is never going to happen, that she will still be tied to him day and night when she is 80. That's the situation she is in now- looking ahead and realising there is never going to be a let-up. That is a big difference to those of us who foresee that one day our caring duties will ease off.

dayshiftdoris Thu 30-May-13 00:32:05
"Whatever the offer was (if there was an offer) is irrelevant... the exchange was for her child's privacy and dignity. She has failed to protect her child's basic right and worse still she has done that to an incredibly vulnerable child."

I can see your point, but privacy is not the only basic right of this child. He also has the basic right to be cared for by somebody who is strong enough to cope with his needs. He has the basic right not to be put in a situation where he might kill the parent he loves. And that could easily happen in a few years time. How is that protecting him?

"Mim dont be confused between the despair that is felt at times by parents of children with additional needs and this woman's statement that her son should be put down... "

Have you read the article??? She never said she wanted him put down!!! She said that if it was a husband the police would take him away, if it was a dog he would be put down. She did not say a violent husband should be put down, so why on earth should we infer she meant that her son should?

The context was: in any other situation appropriate measures would be taken to protect her from being beaten up. But in this situation she is not protected at all.

From her two examples, it was clear she meant that in any other situation the violence would be dealt with in whatever way was right for the individual involved, i.e. different for humans and animals. Not that her son should be treated like an animal.

Sorry, just checked. Seems all she actually said about the potentially violent husband was "we'd be divorced by now". Which is hardly advocating euthanasia.

Sorry I AM in her situation and I think her comments are horrible. It's particularly dangerous that she has (according to the article) cast herself as the champion of parents in this situation. She doesn't speak for me.

She's very scathing of those who continue to care for their children writing them off as exhausted and she wouldn't want to be like them.

Well, she hasn't said she has cast herself as the champion of parents in this situation: that's what the Daily Mail journalist says of her.

The same Daily Mail journalist who is anxious to point out that many "experts" do not believe in ADHD, who suggests that if a marriage breaks up then that is causing the SN rather than the other way round, that a residential home for a severely disabled child is the same as offloading your responsibilities, who is full of condemnation for the woman who is trying to get help but doesn't say a word about three successive fathers who have just walked away from trouble.

Yes, if she was like she is portrayed in this article then she would be an unpleasant woman. But we would have to take the word of the Daily Mail for it.

There's the usual neurotypical viewpoint crap about resi - (clearly it sounds as if resi or wrap around care as we have here would be in everyone's interests) but what could have been a good article (difficulty of providing services to children with challenging behaviours) has just turned into one that's about how awful he is. She is quoted as saying if he were a dog she would have had him put down. Not helpful.

Er Cory *Since the furore over her outburst, she has appointed herself unofficial cheerleader to despairing parents of children with special needs.^

"but what could have been a good article (difficulty of providing services to children with challenging behaviours) has just turned into one that's about how awful he is"

And who would be to blame for that, do you reckon?

I understand perfectly where you are coming from, it must be absolute shit to read this spin. It's ghastly.

But this is one occasion where I think we should all be shooting the messenger. Because there is no knowing what was in the original message.

"Er Cory *Since the furore over her outburst, she has appointed herself unofficial cheerleader to despairing parents of children with special needs.^"

Says the journalist. It is a description by the journalist, not a quote from her. Which was my point.

Well she is then quoted reinforcing that view.

I did say in my first post that she may have been misquoted, however as someone in the same sort of situation I find it incredibly worrying that people seek to understand her comments because her child is so bad. He may be difficult, support is hard to access, but her comments help no- one. I believe there would be outrage if for example a non-coping mum said this about a neurotypical child & I find it saddening that people don't feel the same sense of outrage when it is said about a child who is vulnerable.

The reason I am sticking to this point is not because I approve of what was reported but because I think it is impossible to know how accurate the report was, and because I think it is important to distinguish between direct quotes and journalistic embroidery.

Even direct quotes can be strangely distorted by careless or biased journalists. We've had threads in the past when posters have described how completely fantastical statements have been invented and put in their mouth. This is very different from columnists writing their own columns about their situation.

Not just journalists for that matter, happens in all sorts of contexts including medical reports. I particularly remember the occasion when my statement: "dd hates using the wheelchair but it's the only way she can attend school" was taken down as "corydd is enjoying being pushed around the playground in her wheelchair". Gave rather a different impression of dd and the seriousness of her needs. This was a doctor who was anxious to prove that I was a Munchausen parent and that dd would be fine if she could only be forced to push against the pain.

Oh I agree about inaccurate reporting, but there are plenty of people saying her quotes about putting him down if he were a dog are justifiable & understandable (so treating them as accurate) & I object strongly to that. There also seems an assumption from some that anyone in get situation would feel the same - and I don't.

For anyone interested in this area there are some videos on you tube of a boy from Cornwall who has very challenging behaviours who has bitten off his own tongue. He had to go to hospital in Birmingham because nowhere closer could deal with him, making life very difficult for his family. Throughout the videos - where the family are trying to raise awareness for the need for more specialist units - the family's love for their child shines through. A much better way of understanding what families go through than this article.

I didn't want to click on the daily mail link, but googled other articles, this one for example www.parentdish.co.uk/2013/05/22/mum-jenny-young-says-she-would-have-her-violent-adhd-son-ryan-put-down-like-an-animal-this-morning/.

I have to agree with Mrs DeVere, Saintly and others.

I am still about the comments about FAS Indeed the poor lad does display some of the facial characteristics, though whether or not he has the condition is anyone's guess. - really?!

Further up thread some one posted

"i thank God everyday that my the child he blessed me with is fine and has no disability issues or behavioral issues..."

I too am deeply grateful for my children, both nt and with sn. I consider them all my greatest accomplishment and most precious gifts. Pity is entirely inappropriate. Understanding would be helpful.

Yes to^^ this, that zzzzz said.

Here is a bit about the Cornish boy It doesn't sanitise his issues, but it doesn't blame him for the situation the family find themselves in. It's a subtle but important difference

Actually Cory the DM article is a rehash of a story that broke last week - She made the original comments in a magazine and then went on This Morning - which I have watched...

She was asked why she made the comments and she said a relative had been through a traumatic time recently making the decision yo have their dog put down: this dog was violent, interventions had made no difference and it had cost a lot of money, he couldn't be deboned so was euthanised... Her words, from her not via the DM were....

'At least with a dog there is that choice, when you are the mother of a violent child there is no choice.'

Philip Schofield then said 'but you wouldn't be without him?' And she quickly said 'oh no course not' but without even pausing for breath she reiterated her family member had the choice to euthanise her dog whereas she had no choice....

So no she did not say she would put him to sleep but she is strongly believes she should have the choice to do so as a way out....

And actually her son's rights are paramount in this - her right to cope is not superior to his rights....

Deboned - rehomed.... Autocorrect!!!!

If you google 'Jenny Young ITV' you can watch it for yourself - the quote above is about 1-2mins from the end...

Cory I hadn't read the DM article when I first commented on the thread - I have now and want to think even less of her but resist because the DM is hardly good reporting....

In fact have tried to avoid comment in anything I learnt in that article as its not her words....

At best she made a huge mistake in an attempt to highlight the issues faced by families, at worst she has given fuel to the fire of the disabled people are useless feeders argument.

^^ This is what I reckon, too.

I was really worried that I'd upset people with my questions last night, so I really hope I haven't. It's just that I'm trying to get into the mindset of parents who face these daily, weekly, yearly struggles.
It's alright for people to keep these parents and these children at a remove, to keep them as "other", but your life can be rocked by a car crash, a bout of bacterial meningitis....you name it. Then your children are useless eaters and you're in an alien landscape that you might have helped to create.

I woke up this morning and groaned out loud when I remembered my part in this thread. I'd had a very bad day and had more wine than was good for me.
I wish I could delete my posts but I'll just hide it and ignore