Torn on this. Autistic little lad in restaurant.

[EggsBenedick]

Hi all,

I firstly want to make clear that I am not wanting this to be a bunfight or an ableist type of thread. I'm genuinely interested to hear people's views on this, as the family in question have asked to put in a complaint to the restaurant along with them.

We were eating an all you can eat type place, mostly Indian / Bangladeshi cuisine. I've added this as this may be relevant from a culture perspective.

It's a nice place, not somewhere too posh but not your run of the mill everything you can eat for a tenna place. Was quite busy in there too.

Seated next to us was a family of 3, with a little lad about aged 8 or 9. After he came back with his plate of food he took his jumper and T shirt off. People were looking over but the parents didnt seem bothered by it.

A member of staff came over and asked the parents if the boy could put his top back on. The member of staff was pretty polite initially. The parents refused to ask the boy to put his top back on. The staff member then went to get another member of staff, who came over and said he just put his top back on during the meal or they would have to leave. The mum then said to the waiter 'if we put his top on he will just scream the place down and ruin everything for everyone'. And explained that the child is autistic.

The parents made no effort to put the top back on the boy.
The staff member said to the family that they would have to eat quickly and leave. By this point the mother was visibly upset and indirectly spoke to us saying 'I wish my son could just be accepted.'

The boy was completely topless in the middle of the restaurant with lots of other diners around.
They had a few mouthfuls and came over to our table and asked if we would leave a Google review complaining about their time at the restaurant and how they aren't inclusive or family friendly.

AIBU to be torn in this? I'm genuinely intrigued to hear people's opinions on this. I could see how difficult it was for the mum. But on one hand I think the parents should've at least tried to put the T shirt on the child as it's not appropriate for a child of that age to be topless in a restaurant. But, the child shouldn't be confined to their home to eat. I would be concerned about strangers / men looking at my semi - naked child most of all.

I don't think I am going to do a review as I can see it from the restaurants POV also. I said to the mum that I was sorry she had such a stressful time. She clearly needed support. The dad didn't say or do a lot which was most helpful!

We're on page 24 so, as tends to happen, conversation has grown organically and we have been talking in more general terms about what inclusivity looks like.

I've made my points on same in previous posts, there's no purpose in repeating.

@Jumpingthruhoops

yes, it can, it really can. He's an 8 year old boy. No one can explain what's SO offensive about his chest that they need shielding from.

This is a difficult one. I have a 12 year old dd with autism, who struggled with clothing at this age. We’ve spent a long time trying to help her understand that her body is private and areas of her body must be covered when she is not in her bedroom/bathroom. Fortunately, she gets it now but if we had taken her out topless, we would have been giving her mixed messages.

Children do need to be taught in a way they understand, autistic or not.

@Zyq

why?

how does it affect you?

it's a child sitting topless at their own table not a pole dancer in a thong grinding in your face

It's not about offence. There will always be other families in restaurants with kids, and that boy has his top off, so I want to take my top off. And if I can take my top off, what else can I do that's not usually allowed.

There is psychology involved in what we wear (you 'feel' professional in a suit, laid back in joggers). With men and boys, tops off (or 'taps aff' as we call it in Scotland 😂) is associated with letting loose and having a good carry on.

Well, no, she didn’t. She was advocating that there has to be a middle ground somewhere, and acknowledging that it’s very difficult for all concerned - the rights of disabled people to inclusivity shouldn’t impinge on the rights of others.

I’m largely in agreement with that, but I’m reading some heartbreaking posts here from those who feel isolated because their lives are so difficult. I think common sense has to prevail, but in equal measure. In this example, the boy taking off his t shirt wasn’t affecting anyone else, and it was preventing a meltdown which the parents knew would come if they tried to stop him. Despite that it attracted complaints from other diners - probably largely based on ignorance and misconception, as with the slew of comments here, implying that it was disgusting behaviour, and the parents should have ‘disciplined’ him.

For me the real problem is the ignorance with which a lot of people come at disability issues, and the lack of understanding/intolerance of the disabled point of view. And there are establishments who do try to hide behind health and safety issues simply because they can’t be arsed to comply with a law designed to protect the rights of disabled people to be sociable without their disability putting them at a disadvantage. It’s not about the rights of one group over another, it’s about creating a level playing field so that disabled people have better access to, and enjoyment of, the society we all take for granted.

I personally think people should focus on their own company and their own dinner and just , well. Mind their own business. I don't mean that personally to you OP.

If I went out for dinner with someone ajd they sat judging this I'd be appalled.

Anybody saying a wee boy with his shirt off would ruin their dinner needs to give their head a wobble.

By this logic - the man over there has champagne so I want champagne and can have it. Yes?

Surely children can be taught that that little boy is different and everybody is different?

Lots of disabilities are non visible, so you won't know with any certainty whatsoever that the little boy was different. Indeed we generally teach our kids the opposite (ie not to judge on appearance).

So then parents can and should shut it down by using the situation as a learning opportunity, and explain in childrens’ terms that he has a condition which makes it difficult for him to understand the world around him, and that certain things, including taking off his t shirt, allows him to relax and not get upset. Perfectly acceptable for other children to learn that they need to have compassion and understanding for others. Are you seriously suggesting that a disabled child should be denied an opportunity to socialise for fear of being a bad influence on other children ? Do you not think their lives are difficult enough as it is, without holding them responsible for the behaviour of other children who are perfectly capable of understanding what is, and is not acceptable ?

I understand whar youre saying.
That's my point though. Pp seemed to suggest that all the children in the restaurant will want tot ake their top off and will ask why they can't.

Children understand difference far better than we do.

A friend of mine hosted a birthday party and along came a child who had no arms. A full school year and her child had never mentioned it. My pal was worried about safety on the equipment they'd hired and said something along the lines of you never said x had a disability.
Her child replied 'why would I?,'

My bigger point is all the handwringing of 'think of thenchildren ' when in atualy fact i doubt they care.

This. Put more eloquently than I did!

So you’re suggesting that we hold disabled children responsible for the behaviour of other kids ? Parents can easily explain to their own children that the child may have a disability which is not visible, but nevertheless affects them in different ways, and that it’s not a reason for everyone else to think they can misbehave. There’s nothing judgmental or ableist about that and it encourages inclusivity and understanding from an early age.

I think you’ve got the wrong end of the stick. If you read the comment string, @Zyq was actually defending the boy.

The rights of disabled people to inclusivity shouldn’t impinge on the rights of others.

You write that as though we were living in a fair society for disabled people. The reality of course is that the rights of non-disabled people to exclude disabled people because they make them feel uncomfortable or believe they are less deserving of services or resources, blight disabled peoples lives and excludes them from employment, leisure and social activities, health care and education, resulting in shortened life expectancy, stigma and distress. But, hey, what's that compared to a 'normal' person's inalienable right to a cup of tea without a disabled person producing sound in their vicinity.

As the PP said, that would be taking inclusion too far...

Being substantially disabled and a wheelchair user all my life I’m fairly familiar with the fact that we don’t live in the fair or inclusive society a lot of people think we do. If fairness and inclusivity for all came naturally to people, we wouldn’t need the Equality Act. If you re-read my post you’ll see I’m actually saying much the same thing as you, but not quite in the same way. The Equality Act wasn’t designed as a ‘disability trumps all’ act. It was designed so that wherever humanly possible, disabled people can enjoy what society has to offer without being disadvantaged by their disability. It doesn’t confer the right to be inconsiderate of the feelings of others, by dint of disability. That’s all.

You can only explain if you know there is a condition. How would a fellow diner know the child was autistic? The OP only knew because the Mother spoke to her.

Are you seriously suggesting that we assume disability on the basis of a single behaviour?

In terms of your question about disabled people being denied opportunities to socialise, I simply don't have the answer to that. You and a few others seem to think you do though, whilst busily chastising anyone who doesn't entirely share your view. Challenging behaviours often present, for example, with learning disability. Who leaves the restaurant if the person with learning disability is lashing out (through absolutely no fault of their own - entirely due to their condition). Does the parent whose buggy has just been kicked leave, or does the person with learning disability leave? Or do you think the parent should stay put, and use it as a learning opportunity for the 2 year old in the buggy?

But it isn't your business.

Mum, that child has his shirt off.
I know darling. But we just focus on us and our minds and bodies don't we?

You're using a false equivalence here. If someone is physically harming your child or hitting the buggy, that's an entirely different conversation. Of course we don't teach children it's okay for people to hit us.

I get thay this has become a wider discussion but the two things have no relevance.

And by the same token, does the boy who has the disability responsible for what is perceived as bad behaviour leave the restaurant, or do the children who are using that behaviour as an excuse to misbehave themselves ? I’m not suggesting we assume disability, I’m suggesting that in this kind of situation where something is clearly amiss, then we should consider it a possibility and allow for it.

And I’m not ‘chastising’ anyone. Simply expressing a point of view. Same as everyone else here.

I expressly asked the question (and yes I asked it explicitly to expose the complexity of 'inclusivity') of who should leave the hypothetical restaurant? The 2 year old, or the faultless person with learning disability?

Do we have a situation whereupon someone should be excluded purely by virtue of their disability?

In my humble opinion, if a child wirh complex needs was kicking someone's pram, then yes the child doing thar should be taken away, fault or no fault.

I follow a tiktokker who allows her ND child to scream and bawl in cafes and people must just accept it. I don't agree with that.

I know, I normally am in violent agreement with your posts @Rosscameasdoody.

The problem comes when disabilities mean that people behave in a way which is socially unacceptable. Does that mean these disabled people need to be kept locked away for fear of discomforting others; that was the answer for quite a lot of the last century. This is obviously a particular source of exclusion for some groups of disabled people, like people with learning disabilities. The right to be included in the life of society even if some people consider behaviour arising from a disability 'inconsiderate' or 'unseemly' needs defending.

It's not humble though, it's the unequivocal answer. And it illustrates the challenge that the expectation of inclusivity can (often) present.

But what does this have to do with a boy having a tshirt off?him having it off doesn't affect anybody apart from the frightfully offended.

Yes we've (well, some of us) diverged a bit! Apologies; many of the replies have encompassed a bigger picture vis a vis disability and inclusivity.

Edited to say the bare chested lad wouldn't have fazed me at all, I'd've been happy to have him do his thing. Just offering possibilities/reasons the restaurant acted as they did.