To have certain expectations of autistic brother?

[sniffle12]

My tenage brother has been diagnosed with Asperger's. This was brilliant news at the time as it came after years of bullying and social rejection and he finally feels he can now explain to people why he is the way he is and hopefully get a more understanding reaction as well as the support he needs.

However I've begun to feel that it's now being used as a get out of jail free card for too many things. In my view he's still a teenage boy with all the natural, human faults which come with that - he hates to tidy/clean, eats for England, lives in his room, avoids family events and anything which he doesn't want to do at that precise moment, and spends money like its going out of fashion. Just as I was at that age.

Since the diagnosis, all of this now seems to be going unchallenged. When I question this I'm told 'He can't help it' 'He feels overwhelmed' 'you forget he has Asperger's'. While I'm fully aware of this, I don't think we should stop expecting him to develop some degree of conscientiousness as we would any teenage boy - obviously at the right times, right approach, and in small steps, as I do recognise that his response to demands is also part of his Asperger's.

AIBU?

Yes that's why I said I wasn't meaning dixie.

Eh?

maggie.

You were the one who made a point of saying her social issues and not being able to do the job.

That is two things.
The NAS are not better placed than the actual person to decide what is a symptom and what is not what can be over come and what cannot. ASD is a spectrum condition it impacts people differently.

You had an employee who was stressed enough by your 'interventions' regarding her social skills to threaten legal action very very few people would do that without genuinely believing that they were being bullied or discriminated against.

Hi there Needs

Do you think as an employer we are obliged to employ someone who cannot do the job due to a disability even after adjustments have been tried?

Would you say the same about a blind pilot?

Genuine question.

You seem to be putting the ASD employee in a different category to that of the blind pilot and I'm interested why.

Of course the employee was upset at the prospect of losing her job, and believed she'd been discriminated against but that didn't mean it wasn't the right business decision for us, the employer, who'd tried everything we could to accomodate this employee and it still wasnt' working.

Remember an employer can legally discriminate so long as reasonable adjustments have been considered and/or tried. The employer's responsibility is to make reasonable adjustments, not to accomodate every disability. Otherwise there'd be blind pilots flying planes. Would you like to go on a plane being flown by a visually impaired pilot?

In an ideal world every employer would be able to accomodate an ASD employee but the world is far from ideal.

And one more thing, it's not the employee's decision about what reasonable adjustments to make, it's the employers. That's in the equality act it's not something I've just made up. Sure the employee should engage and tell the employer what they need, but the final decision rests with the employer.

Go and brush up on the EA if it interests you, as some of your reasoning is a little off.

I don't think Yabu. My autistic son doesn't like going out, avoids social interaction etc, etc. He is also a teenager. I still expect him to clear up after himself, tidy his room, be polite and eat a meal with the family each evening. Some if these things he needs more encouragement & prompting to do. But ultimately if he ever lives independently I don't want him living in squalor. I do however strike a bit if a balance when up comes to social events & going out. It is genuinely something that he finds distressing so we encourage him & sometimes insist that he comes but also expect that if we are all going to go out together we perhaps may have to leave a but sooner etc. But my Ds was diagnosed many years ago, it may be that you parents are still trying o work through th do themselves

Interestingly, my employer is now actively discriminating against people with MH problems, even those that were disclosed on health declarations at the beginning of their employment. They do this by having the occupational health person declare that, contrary to their clinician's view that they are not fit to work, they are and must return to work within a week or lose their job. Apparently this is completely legal. They have effectively fired 5 people in my branch alone those year, one of whom was sectioned under the MHA at the time they were declared fit to work by OH.

Looks like the equalities act doesn't do its job.

I'm sorry to hear that Xenophile. Had the individuals with mental health problems been off for a long time? Most employers cannot keep a job open indefinitely although a good employer will look at reasonable adjustments and bringing someone back on a phased return to facilitate a return to work.

It does sound like something went wrong if someone is declared fit to work whilst on a section - are you sure it was not just that the employer could no longer wait for the employee to return as they had been off for too long?

Oh I think the equalities act definitely have issues, and I also think that we need to acknowledge that discrimination very much does still exist. And this is likely a huge part of the issue, because discrimination is still hugely prevalent it is very difficult to talk about genuine cases where an employee with a disability has not been able to fulfill their role purely due to their own inabilities as an employee, because as soon as you highlight one genuine example the people who do discriminate use that one example to justify their own position.

I have Aspergers but was diagnosed at the age of 46.
By that time I had always worked, achieved well nationally at my chosen pastime, bought a house on my own, travelled to the USA/NZ/OZ etc alone, met DH, became a stepmum and a mum etc

In short I did things that I ''shouldn't'' be able to do, given my neurology.
Achievement without support has come at a price though.

I think all people should be challenged and encouraged to push individual boundaries, to fulfil their potential regardless of neurology, gender, ethnicity etc etc.

Had my old fashioned Irish mum not challenged me, no doubt I would still be living at home with my now elderly dad.

Wannabe, I think if you approach the equalities act seeing it as a piece of legislation which tries to strike a balance between the needs of the employer and the needs of the disabled employee you may find it easier to understand.

It's not designed purely to protect the employee at the expense of the employer... employers need to be able to operate their businesses effectively hence the concept of 'reasonable' adjustments.

That does sadly mean that some disabled people will lose their jobs and I've ended up dismissing a fair few, of all the work I do these kinds of dismissals are the worst for me as it so unfair but we need to be able to protect the business where reasonable adjustments haven't worked or can't apply.

TBH I'd be concerned about why you've had to dismiss a fair few disabled employees.

I don't agree that someone should be given a job purely because they have a disability, but I do know from experience, both my own and that of others, that employees do use the inability (and more often than not unwillingness) to make reasonable adjustments to prevent them from employing people with disabilities.

A recent survey revealed that nine out of ten employers admitted they would not employ someone with a visual impairment. that has nothing to do with reasonable adjustments unless the employers they surveyed were hairdressers or taxi firms.

There I'll sometimes be instances where a person simply cannot do their job, however for you to be regularly dismissing employees with disabilities and saying that you as an employer need protection is incredibly disingenuous. Why did you employ them in the first place if you felt that the adjustments needed were so far beyond your company's abilities?

"Wannabe, I think if you approach the equalities act seeing it as a piece of legislation which tries to strike a balance between the needs of the employer and the needs of the disabled employee you may find it easier to understand."

Did you mean to be so patronising?

Your attitude speaks volumes about you and your business's attitudes to people with disabilities, although you are trying to come across as eminently reasonable.

WannaBe makes some good points here. The problem is that society as a whole, including workplaces is just not set up for inclusivity - there is so far to go, and it's starts with peoples' attitudes. The straw man of the "blind pilot" (really?!) is so far removed from the everyday discrimination people experience in the workplace for disabilities and illnesses that really could be worked around or accommodated if people really wanted to. But no, people go on about blind bloody pilots and ignore the huge amount of talented, intelligent - and ironically able people with disabilities. More fool you, I say.

I just love all this "I expect..."
Well what would you do if your child CAN'T live up to your expectations? Y'know because their disability prevents them from doing so?

I could 'expect' good toileting from my dcs. I won't get it. DD still peed all over her room yesterday (for various disability reasons). DS2 still smears (despite various strategies including sensory).

I could 'expect' my children to sleep through. Won't make them do it, despite various sleep strategies tried.

Two of my children are secondary school age, the youngest mid ks2.

Doesn't stop both issues being long term goals. But the kids are disabled - it means they have different ability levels with self care skills. If they could do this stuff they wouldn't be considered disabled.

They all have autism too.

Expectation leads to disappointment and frustration from all parties if it's unreasonable.

Bishop I don't know why people keep saying that sort of stuff, with the very obvious implication that if you don't agree you're setting the bar too low and a lot of it is the parents' fault you know

You don't see it with "physical" disabilities so much, funnily enough. People don't say to me that they expect me to start jogging as I need to "challenge" myself. I can expect all I want to be able to walk unaided but it doesn't make any difference, I now have a disability which affects my mobility and no amount of "expectations" will change that. I agree it helps to have what we ironically call in this house a PMA (positive mental attitude) but you also need to be realistic about your abilities and tailor your expectations otherwise it can cause other problems itself. I have had to accept I won't run again, acknowledging this doesn't make any difference to my ability to run or not, but it helps me to accept my life as it is now. There is no magic cures, all you can do is learn to live with it the best you can and I expect this applies to autism too. I wish society would accept this and think of ways to adapt for this instead of encouraging everyone to (for want of a better phrase) meet everyone else where they are, thinking of ways to beat people with differences into a conventional mould.

"People don't say to me that they expect me to start jogging as I need to "challenge" myself." ha, you're lucky so far then 😕

But yes, to yours and bishops posts. As I said, there are ways people are advising dealing with him here that I am finding rather triggering re my own teenage years.

Luckily the tribunals understand that business owners have rights too, the right to be able to operate their business without unnecessary impediment. I've worked in this field for a while and most employers IME do take the equality act seriously and will consider reasonable adjustments where these can be accomodated. They have to.. otherwise they run the risk of a discrimination claim. It's my job to make them aware of those risks.

I'm not going to apologise for dismissing disabled people, not when we have tried to accommodate the disability through reasonable adjustments. I actually have a disability myself and many jobs would be closed to me, for example I could not fly a plane or drive a truck, if I wanted to. Yet I don't go on mumsnet complaining about this, I accept it and choose another career that is compatible with my condition.

If I come across as patronising, I don't mean to but it's probably because you're looking at the Equality Act from a very simplistic angle, looking only at the rights of the employee and not the right of the employer to run their business effectively and competitively so that they can make a profit and survive.

Where there is a good business justification not to make an adjustment, that's the point that it becomes unreasonable and the employer's legal duty (to accomiodate the disability) is discharged. The EA does expect employers to pick up reasonable costs, but again there is a fine line in the sand as to where this becomes unreasonable and it's for the employer to make this decision (or the tribunal should it go as far as a claim).

HTH

Except that many employers only pay lip service to the equality act, hence why people with disabilities, women of childbearing age, people over a certain age etc are regularly discriminated against. And very few have the confidence to take it to a tribunal for fear of being labelled a troublemaker and it affecting their future prospects.

Let me give you an example:

A large financial organisation who prides themselves on being "the most accessible" of their kind also operate under the two-ticks scheme which guarantees an interview to anyone with a disability who meets the minimum criteria. Their application process consists of an online application form followed by an online assessment. At the point when you have completed the assessment you will be invited for interview. Except the online assessment is not accessible using a screenreader. They know this. It states in the email they send you with the link to the assessment that it's not accessible, except there is no protocol in place to enable a screenreader user to access the assessment in any other way. Thus said large, multi million pound organisation have removed any possibility of anyone with a visual impairment from being able to access their application process and therefore be able to be employed by them.

And there are no aeroplanes in the equation...

They're breaking the law. Not because of the two ticks system - that isn't binding anyway, but by having no process in place to enable users of a certain demographic to apply for a role within their organisation. But nobody would dare challenge this because of who the company is - it would make it to the media, and people like maggie wouldn't look at that candidate twice because she would feel the company are quite justified in not having to make any kind of adjustment....

Maggie your attitude is what's wrong with capitalism.

I think I understand what you're saying Maggie

I also understand her meaning

I understand Maggie and belive she has articulated her view and the law very well.

Social situations and household jobs are two very separate areas.

From experience, the room tidying, household chores and spending are all things that possibly could be learnt with support and time. Small steps. Some parents have a tendency to completely mollycoddle their teens, resulting In the teens not reaching their domestic potential. The teen then becomes an adult who struggles domestically.

Teens often like being in their bedrooms anyway. It might be an idea to work on small low key social situations with professional guidance. Small slow steps

Oh, the lazy parenting schtick again? Mollycoddling? No.

Any contribution to family life my children make is within their capabilities, no more. Of course we model 'ideal' behaviour and demonstrate and encourage skills. But we don't ask what isn't possible for them at that point.

Maggie. I cannot quote your original post because it's been deleted for breaking talk guidelines.

But in it you specifically mentioned you knew the employee had issues with social interactions in the same line as stating you knew she had a disability that effects social interaction and went on to say that you kept telling her how she could improve thise skills despite being fully aware that her inability was a symptom of her disability. Did you think your helpful and gentle suggestions were somehow going to cure her or that you gently giving her these tips would not be incredibly stressful. It would have been far less harmful to just focus on her actual job, unless your now going to say she was a meet and greeter or something.

It is that aspect that is an issue.
It is not an issue that your company for what ever reason couldn't accomadate her enough in order to retain her as an employee