To suggest they ban this child from the SEN session

[Heartofglass83]

DD3 attends a weekly SEN gymnastics session which she loves. It’s got a big inflatable assault course / slide which is obviously really popular. The average age of the kids is probably about 5/6. Occasionally there’s an older child but they would normally have two parents walking round holding their hands etc.

the last few weeks there’s been a boy probably about 12 or 13 with quite visable learning difficulties who is very excitable and climbs to the top of the slide and stops children from going down the slide the supervisor has a few times had to ask his parent/carer to get him down as he jumps about so much the whole inflatable knocks all the other kids down. The parent / carer sits away on their phone the whole time.

DD went into the assault course and I normally follow her down and as she climbs up the ladder I walk back down to the bottom of the slide. As I was walking the boy ran up the slide and sat at the top. DD said “excuse me please” and he grabbed her by the pigtails and yanked them really hard before dragging her by the hair to throw her down the slide. I bellowed at the adults who were with him (who were all slouched away on their phones) and one jumped up the slide to get him off her.
DD has spent the last few hours really shocked and upset. I’m really angry because this is one of her favourite spaces where she can be herself.

i want to flag this to management - am I being unreasonable to say they need to give a warning and then ban this child from attending the session? I don’t blame the child in anyway, I blame the complete lack of supervision and care from the adults in charge of him. He is too big, and too excitable to be playing with small children without an adult constantly being with him. I dread to think of what could have happened as he is already quite a big lad.

I think YABU to ban him but the centre should remind carers to supervise their children.

I also think realistically it’s much easier for a younger child to access mainstream sessions than an older child, so if the age range is too wide I would provide for the older ones.

Ideally they would split the age range.

@Baileyscream
reasonable adjustments are meant to be reasonable. It is not reasonable for other children to be injured when this is predictable due to past observed behaviour and lack of close supervision to mitigate it. Autistic young people and others have been subject to hospital orders or jailed when they need to be removed from society for other’s safety eg the tragic case of Matthew Selby. Protecting others , even if the behaviour is related to disability, is not necessarily discrimination. I do know that autistic people are of course also often abused themselves and that by far the majority of disabled people are not dangerous.

Of course we have no way of knowing if supervision would work in this case, but it should be tried, and/or separate sessions, which might splitting the session and making it shorter for each height/weight range if there was no funding for anything else sadly.

Also, for his future best chance of a life with more choices, the older child is being failed by his parents/carers for not at least trying to use these incidents of his anti social behaviour to teach him to keep his hands to himself and treat others gently. Who knows if he is capable of learning this but surely we have come a long way from when many disabled children were automatically considered ‘ineducable’?

I would flag with management that he's not being properly supervised and hurting others. He has the right to be there but those with him should be supporting him not sitting on their phones.

Op I have to still disagree with everyone saying he shouldn’t be banned.

I keep reading your post and picturing what he did in my head. Yanking someone by their hair and using their to throw them down a slide is extreme behaviour on another level and I think that should warrant an instant ban.

Supervision may not resolve his behaviour so I wouldn’t risk that happening to another child.

I have a child with ASD and LD who doesnt have any sense of danger or social rules, so may well be like this at 12 or 13. He rarely hits out, but I still follow him closely everywhere we go and he is 5. I would do this more so when he's older as the risks are much higher.

The parents should be with the child not on their phones If he is a risk to others. The organisers can't physically stop him, although they can change the age ranges of kids attending. It's a difficult one though as it's very hard to find activities you can do as a family when one of the kids has complex needs. I think the organisers need to have a word with the parents.

Tbh it sounds like you supervise for the safety of your child ie by watching she climbs the steps OK and standing at the bottom of the slide. If your dd grabbed another dc at the top you would not be able to intervene either. That said they should be watching him.

The answer could be that a member of staff is stationed at the top of the slide to supervise or one at the bottom allowing only one child up at a time.

You cannot expect them to ban this child.

I have a question then as I’m unsure of the rules/laws tbh.

If there is a member of staff stationed at the top of the slide, and witnessed the same thing, are they allowed to manhandle the offending the child to make them let go of a kid’s pigtails?

There's a lot of gymnaatics on these posts.

1. Please read my posts. I have repeatedly said he should be supervised.
2. No one has said anything about autism?
3. I have repeatedly said view it from the venues point of view. They cannot and should not take another person's word for it.
4. We're talking about two children in a play centre. Sen session.
5. I have never said let him do what he wants/ don't teach him.... I have said some children need more than discipline and redirection and for some children this doesnt work. Non of us here knows what his needs truly are or how best to communicate with him or teach him.

As I have previously stated yes I would raise merry he'll if my child was banned from something they enjoyed because of something to do with their disability.

@GinForBreakfast you really think comparing a blind adult driving a bus to a child in an sen session at a play centre is the same thing and demonstrates the health and safety principle your trying to convey?

I'm aware people can be excluded for health and safety reasons and it not be discrimination but think about how this would play out in reality. It's a sen session for children. He's a child with sen.

It’s also about protecting him, one day this young man may go out into the “wider world” and if he starts pulling people out of the way like he did here he could find himself in a lot of trouble. If he isn’t capable of understanding then he needs a level of supervision high enough to protect him and others

Just to add, it was me that suggested going down the safeguarding route for the very reason that he isn't being adequately supported.

@Squirrelsonthescaffolding removing people with autism from society is actually a national scandal that has been reported on quite widely over recent years. The use of atu's and mental health facilities in their care isn't something to be championed. Nobody should be locked away because of their disability.

You talk about people being unable to be educated but seem to support their removal as an easy solution?

You may want to watch this:-

https://www.channel4.com/programmes/locked-away-our-autism-scandal-dispatches

@Squirrelsonthescaffolding Mattew Selby committed a horrific crime but there is a world of difference between this and a boy at a play centre. He was locked away because of what he did as anybody would be. People without autism commit these crimes too.

Autism isn't an excuse for bad behaviour however some people have very severe autism and do not know or understand their actions. They should be supervised.

It's also worth noting that the OP said the child has learning needs and is excitable, which you can have without having autism. Not everyone with ld has autism. Maybe you should consider if your jump to autism and linking to tje Matthew Selby case is your own bias coming through?

I wonder if they realise this policy excludes anyone who can’t cope with involuntary noises due to their own disabilities? It would be interesting to know how they handle conflicting needs.

I think that’s the issue across the board. It is impossible to cater for all needs because of the wide variety of needs.

we went to a relaxed show at the Lowry a few years ago and the way they did it was fantastic - but DS couldn’t cope with the noise of others. He can’t access the “normal” performances because of his need to move and not be in crowds.

its an impossible balancing act really and places can only do their best.

@Sirzy the largest theatre at the Lowry has boxes which they can allocate to just your party. There is enough room at the back of them to move about a little as they have a coat area. There is also a door which leads right out into the corridor. You could try these if there is something in particular your son wants to see.

@ZebraPensAreLife no idea what they'd say. I'd guess they'd offer a refund or tickets to another show if it was a standard show. If a standard show i dont think it would happen often in that many shows wouldnt have a person making involuntary noise, so i think it'd be difficult to say 'i can't cope with that one person' type of thing. If it was a relaxed show some noise is expected as its usually part of the description of the shows remit. Eg extra lighting, movement and noise.

I would consider this incident more extreme than ‘hair pulling’

@GinForBreakfast when have I said he doesn't need supervising? I have repeatedly said he should be supervised. What I have done is try to the OP other views rather than just an echo chamber of 'ban him' and make her aware of what could be said in return.

I have said some people cannot be taught via discipline and distraction and that some people may never understand or their understanding of the situation maybe different because of their needs.

I used to be a support worker for a young man with SEN who due to his additional needs had committed various assaults and had no insight so was on a community treatment order with a forensic LD service managing his care. The first step towards this was documenting his assaults with the police as a teen when his parents could not stop him from physically harming others.

@Baileyscream I never once said 'All Sen can be countered using discipline?!?!?!' You've just made that up!

The management needs to go sessions...one for younger ones one for older ones... maybe a height limit rather than age limit ..

Where have I said that?

I have referenced your comment in the quote above about using discipline and redirection and made a comment something along the lines of 'I wish the sen could be disciplined out of my child' or similar. It's a common response when people make this sort of remark.

I spoke to the manager of the gym this morning who said she was taking the incident with the utmost seriousness to ensure safeguarding for all children. They are sending out a mass communication tomorrow to remind all parents and carers that children must remain supervised at all times, as well as adding a tick box during ticket booking to say you agree to the T&C of supervising children. She has said the manager on site will be given extra training and support to ensure she has the confidence and backing of management to approach parents/carers whose children are not being supervised and that if the behaviour did not change, they will be asked to leave.

I am happy with this - I feel more confident as well to approach the carer again if the child is being too boisterous/physical and blocking the children again.

Good for you. If it happens again though I'd take further action and report the carers and the incident to the police.