Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Or is the vicar? Noisy DCs in church

861 replies

drspouse · 14/02/2016 13:32

Background so as not to drip feed, bear with me as this is horrendously long: we go to a fairly naice church in a large historic building, locally there is a sought after church secondary school but none of the church primary schools are over subscribed. We've been going to this church for 12 years and we have two DC, aged 4 and 1. The 4yo is being investigated for mild SN and has always, always been very "lively". DC2 is walking.

The church knows us. Current vicar has been there about as long as our DC1 and baptised both of them. Church has a side chapel which is open to the rest of the pews where there are baby/toddler toys, a mat to play on. One other family (who are new to the country and have a 10 month old) use this baby play area every week.

The 4yo goes to Sunday School in term time, one of us goes with him, as we take it in turns and it doesn't last the whole service, both of us get some time during the service actually in the church. He's just starting to be able to stay in for 10 minutes on his own. DC2 is still lively and, yes, noisy in the side chapel. The other regular family's baby isn't walking yet. When smaller, both he and our DC2 could be quietened by feeding or carrying around.

Because of the pressure for secondary admission, most of the families that come have primary aged children. I can think of a couple of other families who are regulars with young DCs e.g. one Sunday School teacher has an 18 month old but I think she is restrained sat with them on non-Sunday School weeks not in the side chapel.

Today was the first weekend of half term, no Sunday school, there were 2 other children at church apart from our "baby chapel" group, maybe 6 and 8, who were using a construction toy in the side chapel for part of the time. Our DC1 was running around, fairly quietly, but was also throwing a small, soft, non-dangerous teddy up and down and catching it or running to get it. Frankly the only way to stop this would have been to physically restrain DC1 leading to shouting, screaming and kicking. This could be seen from the main church. DC2 was very excited by this and was squeaking, and also as a new walker fell over 2 or 3 times and cried, and was cuddled, and then was quiet.

Half way through someone came in and said "did we know the other room was open, we could go there if we wished". We declined and said no, we wouldn't, because where would be the point in being at church if we were not in the church? we might as well stay home. This is the first time in four years anyone has said anything, and I was massively surprised. It's definitely not the first time we were noisy!

The vicar stopped me on the way out and repeated that something had to be done, that it was distracting, people had complained, and that it was "exciting the other children" (the ones quietly using a construction toy? or the 10 month old who was quiet?) I said that the answer was not for us to go out because there was no point in us going to church if we couldn't be IN church. He repeated that "something must be done".

How does your church run this? Can you give us any ideas for suggestions? We want to bring this up and make some constructive suggestions (though frankly if the church can't put up with noise, it can't put up with children, and it will be left with definitely nobody under 5 and probably nobody under 50).

The historic fabric means a glassed off area is not possible (and I'd feel massively excluded in an aquarium every week!). There's only one area out of the church where smaller children could play (so they couldn't run a creche at the same time as Sunday School). We'd also feel pretty excluded if we couldn't go on non-Sunday School weeks (which is probably 15-20 weeks of the year), and I wouldn't bother if we had to be in an area with "piped church", also. It's not a "praise band" church where listening through an audio or video link gets you the flavour of church, it's a trad but (we thought) friendly church with old fashioned liturgy.

OP posts:
GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:32

Children should be raised with good manners. They should take their good manners everywhere with them, even to church.

Sorry kawliga, but that is incredibly complacent and patronising. Try looking after a child with serious SNs for a few weeks and then come back and tell us how you got on with teaching them manner and making them take those manners everywhere with them.

In fact, do tell us about your experience with enforcing good manners at all times in a 1 year old.

And you seem to be yet another who hasn't bothered to read the OP's posts. She didn't let her children run up and down the aisle. She was in a separate partitioned off side chapel set aside with children's toys etc in, they couldn't be seen by the main congregation, nor could they be heard running as they had no shoes on.

gooseberryroolz · 17/02/2016 21:34

Sorry kawliga, but that is incredibly complacent and patronising. Try looking after a child with serious SNs for a few weeks and then come back and tell us how you got on with teaching them manner and making them take those manners everywhere with them.

But the OP's DC don't have serious SN.

It seems some people are discussing the specific scenario in the OP, and some are discussing SN more broadly. Two different things.

GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:36

inlove: sigh. Why are you so much in denial of the fact that the children weren't running around in the main part of the church, and there is no suggestion that they were shouting. OP specifically set out the steps she took to prevent them from shouting.

As for the suggestion that you get round learning difficulties just by talking to the child concerned repeatedly - sorry, but your ignorance is just staggering.

gooseberryroolz · 17/02/2016 21:37

As for the suggestion that you get round learning difficulties just by talking to the child concerned repeatedly - sorry, but your ignorance is just staggering

She didn't say that Gruntled. The perversity that you, Fanjo and others are exhibiting on this thread is astounding.

SquidgeyMidgey · 17/02/2016 21:39

GruntledOne I think people know where her DS was but it's that it's been complained about, and OP did say the flying teddy was visible. Some churches are more open to less traditional goings on, sounds like this isn't one.

GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:39

But, gooseberry, the point is that kawliga's statement that children should be raised with good manners and should take them everywhere with them wasn't in any way limited to OP's children: she was talking about all children, including those with serious SNs.

And, of course, we don't know how serious OP's children's SN are. What we do know is that they can result in shouting and meltdowns, which is what is particularly relevant here - as is the fact that she took a lot of trouble to avoid that happening.

inlovewithhubby · 17/02/2016 21:40

Manners on a one year old - I taught my very spirited one year old not to throw food. Every time she chucked food, dinner was over. She learned pretty bloody quickly. The same principle can be applied to most things - they can understand far more than they can articulate at that age, and model behaviour from very tiny. Taking them out, saying no, following through on things, they pick it up.

OP's first child MIGHT have mild Sen. Does this obviate the need to teach him anything of how the world works? And what of DC2 - he's not diagnosed with anything but is allowed to practice his newly found walking skills while people are trying to pray without any indication from his parents that this is antisocial. Really? Is it really everyone else who is being unreasonable?

Thornrose · 17/02/2016 21:42

when the easy accusation of 'Disablist!' it's not an easy accusation. It's depressing and real and it's everywhere.

The new racist? What the hell do you mean by that?

GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:43

OK, gooseberry, she said that the magic bullet was repeated demonstrations by words and actions. My point stands: for children with certain SNs, that demonstrates extraordinary ignorance.

Squidgey, seriously, do you think it is reasonable for members of a christian congregation to complain that they could occasionally see a teddy being thrown up, if they turned their heads sideways to look at the side chapel?

gooseberryroolz · 17/02/2016 21:43

And, of course, we don't know how serious OP's children's SN are.

I think we can infer a certain amount from the fact that the child in question has gone through the care system and full adoption proceedings without any dx being given, TBH.

A child with serious SN would have some dx or other by the time of placement or AO in those circumstances.

What we do know is that they can result in shouting and meltdowns, which is what is particularly relevant here - as is the fact that she took a lot of trouble to avoid that happening.

I have two autistic DC and have worked with many more. Nothing she described struck me as necessarily anything other than normal NT development in combination with light-touch parenting.

inlovewithhubby · 17/02/2016 21:46

Gruntled - my comments are about the op, and her children as described, not addressed at a population covered by the term SN who each have completely individual abilities. It is you who is generalising and, in so doing, taking my words out of context.

Pontytidy · 17/02/2016 21:46

The church is for all , children who are lively are lively even with or without any other issues - whatever the situation the church is for all, and it is a community. All parishioners should feel it belongs to them and I am saddened that anyone feels excluded, this applies to everyone.

GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:48

inlove: interesting that you chose an example of good manners that only has to be demonstrated for short periods during mealtimes. How about the rest of the waking day?

And when did I or anyone else ever suggest that there was no need to teach the older child how the world works? Or indeed that the OP doesn't do precisely that?

How does a 1 year old walking around without shoes out of sight disturb people praying? And, again, OP doesn't suggest that she shouldn't try to keep him still, she is simply realistic about what can be achieved, and weighs up the benefits of enforcing discipline when it may cause more disturbance than letting him do what keeps him quiet and happy.

gooseberryroolz · 17/02/2016 21:49

OK, gooseberry, she said that the magic bullet was repeated demonstrations by words and actions. My point stands: for children with certain SNs, that demonstrates extraordinary ignorance.

Squidgey, seriously, do you think it is reasonable for members of a christian congregation to complain that they could occasionally see a teddy being thrown up, if they turned their heads sideways to look at the side chapel?

I think a lot of us are at cross-purposes here.

We're taking different mental pictures from OP's post, interpreting her descriptions of her own behaviour in different ways, probably picturing different children known to us in similar circumstances and ascribing different personality types and motivations to the vicar and members of the congregation.

It's not really surprising that we disagree.

SquidgeyMidgey · 17/02/2016 21:49

GruntledOne no I don't actually, would be OK at mine, but they're not at mine and OP's have complained. She and they have to work together not just draw a line and stand either side.

Thornrose I meant that for years racism and disablist went unchallenged. Then the world grew up and said it's not ok. Then it goes too far and any comments about anyone who happens to be different, whether about that difference or not, are immediately attacked, by a minority, and called racist/disablist. The words then begin to lose meaning and we slide backwards a little.

kawliga · 17/02/2016 21:52

What are you expecting, is she supposed to tie them down and gag them?

No need to tie them down and gag them, when she could simply remove them. Go outside. Lots of parents do. Gather up your noisy dc and go outside. Stand around for a while. The dc calm down. You go back in. If they act up again, gather them up again and go outside. Repeat as needed. They soon learn that unless they want to spend the whole time bobbing in and out of the church/pub/theatre (this strategy works anywhere) they should settle down.

If you can't go outside because you are on a train or a plane, gather up the dc and take them to as remote a corner as you can find. This is what most parents do. We call it parenting. Teaching the dc that annoying other people is bad manners. Sorry if that sounds patronising, but most parents put a lot of effort into parenting and yes, it's a huge effort and hard work.

gooseberryroolz · 17/02/2016 21:52

Then it goes too far and any comments about anyone who happens to be different, whether about that difference or not, are immediately attacked, by a minority, and called racist/disablist. The words then begin to lose meaning and we slide backwards a little.

Yes, it's that overuse (and so dilution of the real meaning of) 'disablism' on this thread that is so annoying.

inlovewithhubby · 17/02/2016 21:54

Gruntled - I think you overlooked the second sentence of my first para about manners, it explains that which you ask in your following post.

I'm not the one to answer questions about how it could be that the op and her kids were possibly disturbing anyone - the vicar and congregation has done that already. Running around quietly is still really irritating for anyone who has that in their eyeline whilst trying to concentrate on something else, especially when that is seemingly ignored by their parents.

GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:54

I think we can infer a certain amount from the fact that the child in question has gone through the care system and full adoption proceedings without any dx being given, TBH.

What a bizarre thing to say. It is only too often the case that SNs aren't discovered till children are quite old. The waiting list for CAMHS appointments, for instance, can stretch well past 18 months, and then all that results from that tends to be that the child joins another waiting list for assessments. Do you imagine that there is some sort of automatic comprehensive assessment carried out on children in the care system? If only. Guess what, it's a fair bet that if the child had to be taken into care his mother may not have been fighting for him to get assessed beforehand, and if he has moved from her to foster parents to OP, there may well not have been time for the foster parents to flag up concerns.

One of the really sad aspects of the care system is that there is a disproportionate number of children in it who have SNs, and unsurprisingly that tends to be exacerbated by neglect and attachment difficulties.

gooseberryroolz · 17/02/2016 21:57

I think we can infer a certain amount from the fact that the child in question has gone through the care system and full adoption proceedings without any dx being given, TBH.

What a bizarre thing to say. It is only too often the case that SNs aren't discovered till children are quite old. The waiting list for CAMHS appointments, for instance, can stretch well past 18 months, and then all that results from that tends to be that the child joins another waiting list for assessments. Do you imagine that there is some sort of automatic comprehensive assessment carried out on children in the care system? If only. Guess what, it's a fair bet that if the child had to be taken into care his mother may not have been fighting for him to get assessed beforehand, and if he has moved from her to foster parents to OP, there may well not have been time for the foster parents to flag up concerns

It's not bizarre at all. DC in care waiting for adoptive placement do NOT sit in two year plus CAMHS waiting ists. Severe SN would be picked up.

GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:57

inlove, if your comments about parenting techniques were directed solely at OP's children, (a) you need to make that clear and (b) that is even more extraordinary. It is, shall we say, eccentric to think that you know infallibly what techniques will work with children whom you have never seen or met and about whom you know close to nothing.

honkinghaddock · 17/02/2016 21:57

Kawliga, are you talking about all children there because I could name a few with severe sn, who that will not work with.

GruntledOne · 17/02/2016 21:59

GruntledOne no I don't actually, would be OK at mine, but they're not at mine and OP's have complained.

But does the fact that people have complained automatically mean they were justified in doing so?

gooseberryroolz · 17/02/2016 21:59

And, again, OP doesn't suggest that she shouldn't try to keep him still, she is simply realistic about what can be achieved, and weighs up the benefits of enforcing discipline when it may cause more disturbance than letting him do what keeps him quiet and happy

No, she didn't. She explicitly said that she enjoyed watching her child learn to walk increasing distances up and down the aisle and climb up and down steps.

inlovewithhubby · 17/02/2016 22:00

Gruntled - exactly the inverse applies to you - how do your presumptions hold any more water than my own?