To ask if its fair that inclusivity has excluded my DC from their hobby?

[DImplesandCheese]

TLDR: ND child is causing my DC to quit much loved hobby as ND child's behaviour is ruining it for them.

Full Story: DC (13) attended a hobby/club and has done for years. 2 years ago a new child joined. The child is ND and their particular behaviours include shouting out, not listening, inappropriate use of kit and refusal to fully participate in activities. DC has complained on and off since this child joined that it is spoiling it. I have encouraged DC to be understanding and supportive, I have spoken with the staff at the club to ask if more support for this child can be put in place. Nothing has changed.

Part of the club involves some unsupervised time and this is DC's favourite part of the club. The last two unsupervised sessions have been completely ruined by this child's behaviour, the group have had to call staff for help to sort it out and therefore their final result for the session has been effected. 2 months ago after the last ones of these sessions I spoke with staff and asked why this child doesn't have a 1 to 1 support/parent staying with them as this is hugely effecting everyone else's enjoyment and I was told that my DC is exaggerating and 'fixating' on this child.

DC came home last night as said he's quitting. This child has wrecked the night's activity again. I spoke to the staff and was told that they 'are an inclusive club and they pride themselves in being open to all' and hinted that DC leaving may well be for the best if he's not happy.

I have 2 ND DC, I get the difficulties, I get that they should have access to clubs and activities, I get that allowances need to be made for their behaviour. I am in no way suggesting the child should be kicked out but surely if you have children leaving because of another child then the support in place for that child isn't right?

AIBU to think that more should be done to support this child correctly so DC can continue to enjoy their hobby and that my DC having to leave is not an acceptable situation?

As I've said upthread, I am very mindful of my DC negatively impacting others. I have taken them out of activities if it was causing too much disruption. I ask all their teachers/activity leaders to keep me in the loop if behaviour escalates. At no point to I expect my ND kids to be prioritised to the detriment of others.

The problem is that you don't know if this is down to the other child or not. Your child could be exaggerating. Kids sometimes do not get along. Your ds may dislike this kid. The ND could be a red herring. I think ultimately the club have picked a side here. They think your ds is exaggerating the issue. If the child is such a big issue why would they say this?

Agree it's not an ideal situation. Your DC hasn't actually been excluded though, it was still a choice to leave.

Oh absolutely. I myself have a brother 2 years younger than me with autism and a learning disability. I was a miserable, invisible child who always came second and was often not included/invited to things because it wouldn't be fair for me to experience things that my brother couldn't. It's for that reason that I have firsthand experience of people's attitudes and reactions to other people's disabilities. I have all the sympathy in the world for the OP's son being the sibling of children with SN because of what it means for him as a child in the family. But in society, disabled people face so much negativity, rejection, blame etc from others, through no fault of their own. They didn't choose this life.

The OP's son has every right to leave the group. That is his choice. But it is wrong to say that he is being excluded because of the presence of a disabled child. The OP is very lucky if she hasn't already experienced this attitude towards her ND children.

Exactly this. Replies to thread reminded me about a local walking group I would love to join. I can only walk safely as far as the starting point! To be 'included' I'd need the group to magic up a wheelchair, provide someone to push me, and redesign their walks to avoid steps and rough terrain ... thus completely changing the nature of the group, discarding their objectives, and providing expensive support to the person whose needs destroyed the group's purpose.

Rights and needs must always be balanced; inclusion doesn't mean removal of others' rights or needs.

Rights and needs must always be balanced; inclusion doesn't mean removal of others' rights or needs.

Perfectly said.

Rights and needs must always be balanced; inclusion doesn't mean removal of others' rights or needs.

Well put, @Garlicker.

OP , do you think it might be possible given that your are a group leader yourself to attend his group once
a) to support your son and all the kids
b) to assess for yourself how difficult the behaviour is and how tolerant / intolerant your son is.

Might help to have some clarity?

Okay, that's fair enough @bruford.

I have been quite sensitive lately because it does feel as if disabled folks are being scapegoated (by the government right down to mumsnet). I've had to remove my autistic DS from multiple situations because we are not "loud" or needy enough and I do get it can be very difficult for someone's needs to be dismissed because one can pass as almost "normal". I also feel strongly that a child shouldn't be penalised for being him/herself. It's a bloody complicated intersection of right environment, carer dynamics, and tolerance. In the OP's situation it sounds like they're entirely relying upon tolerance and that isn't fair to anyone.

Being included isn't being "prioritised". Adjustments aren't favourtism. Do you care about your NT son less when you have to give more attention to your ND children? Or are they all still equally loved and important to you even though you have to treat them differently?

This attitude that when you do something positive for one person must mean you take away something for another person is a big problem.

Parent of an ND child (ASD and learning delay). This other ND child in the group that is having difficulties with their surroundings, clearly needs support to access the activity appropriately. It is common for children that need additional support to get short breaks funding, which is basically a set amount of hours per week for a carer to help and support them to access activities etc. This would be the perfect activity for them to seek such support for or a parent/suitable carer needs to attend to support them. By ignoring the behaviour they’re actually letting the child down. Thats not inclusive, it’s borderline neglect in my opinion. The child cannot help their behaviours, but whoever their legal parent or guardian is, must know this is an issue? I completely understand how your child must be feeling. I don’t think it’s unreasonable at all of them to feel the way they do. 2 years of persevering shows great resilience!

I have an older brother that suffered a brain injury as a child.

Attending things such as Scouts was an opportunity to be myself, rather than X's brother. Unfortunately, he'd always moan until my parents buckled and signed him up to the groups as well.

It's very, very hard growing up in that environment.

I have huge sympathy for OP's son of his respite and enjoyment has been ruined by a child that should be being kept under control.

Except it’s not a walk it’s access to a club and if it was a physical disability needs would need to be accommodated. Group or settings aren’t ever going to exclude a child for being ND.Autism is legally protected. He is stimming. Your son will have to put up with that. He causes the group to lose- tough. I think the child in the op needs to learn some coping strategies as regards losing and tolerance.

Autism is a massive spectrum and the OP should know better .Just because the poor child involved doesn’t present like her dc doesn’t mean he should be written off as badly behaved and not included. The whole world, schools and the workplace is a diverse place with laws for protection. The op’s son will struggle if he doesn’t learn to cope with it.

I don’t know the ages of the children involved but is there a safeguarding risk of this child being unsupervised. My now adult son is ND. I wouldn’t have allowed him to stay at any club unsupervised. I would also have stayed with him till I was sure he could cope with the demands of the activity, join in and get enjoyment from it and not disrupt or spoil it for others. It sounds like the parents are using this as a break for themselves and don’t care about the disruption.

But do you recognise that it was not your brother's fault that your parents failed to treat you as an individual? In the same way that it isn't this ND child's fault that the organisers aren't doing anything to actually enable him to participate in the activity fully.

Just opening the doors and saying "anyone can join" isn't actually being inclusive. Treating everyone the same isn't treating them equal.

People need to stop blaming disabled people for the failures of others.

Well to be fair the only person moaning is the op’s child. You have no idea what the organisers are doing. Either way they can’t stop stimming or losing and nor should they.

My brother was very distinctive, so everybody knew him. I was automatically 'his brother' whenever I met anybody new. In any social situation his disability would dominate and he'd become the focus of attention.

As @HollyKnight said, you become the invisible sibling.

When I was 11 my dad took just me to France in the caravan. My brother was excluded and visited grandparents with my mother!

It was bliss.

Sometimes inclusion is detrimental to other people's mental health - as per OP's son and me as a child.

He is simply having to listen to stimming and experience losing once a week. If that impacts his mental health there are far bigger issues than this club to worry about.

He's actually having a much loved activity ruined by a child that is failing to behave and is not being corrected/chaperoned.

This is an activity he attends without his two SEN siblings and gets to spend time alone with his friends.

It has been going on for two years with zero effort from the adults to rectify the situation.

How could that not impact his mental health?

People with disabilities are every bit as important as those without. However, they are not MORE important. And if accommodating them (without extra support) disadvantages everyone else, then the activity is not the right one for them.

In this case, clearly a parent needs to be present so facilitate his involvement.

Not the stimming, no. I was thinking more about whatever he was doing that needed staff to step in to stop.

I suspect that the OP's son is supersensitive to other ND people because of his own family. He maybe feels like he can't get away from it anywhere, and that is why he is overly focused on this child. But, again, it's not the ND child's fault that the OP son is overwhelmed in life. He could really do with getting some professional support imo. People really underestimate the effect growing up with a disabled parent/sibling can have on a person. I really doubt it is just the presence of this one ND child that is the cause of the OP's son's feelings.

We had a very similar situation with DD's sport, except in our case the behaviour of the ND child was outright dangerous to the other children. I raised it so many times but in the end we moved DD to another club. It was a lot further away, but I was sick of DD being put in danger and her old club refusing to supervise the ND child properly.

That's probably not much help OP, but I understand how frustrating it can be watching your child not being able to enjoy their hobby.

I have physical disabilities, and I've been invited by friends to join the local rambling group many times, but I've always refused as the rest of the group would have to make huge adjustments to their hobby to accommodate me, and whilst it would be inclusive it certainly wouldn't be fair.

Thankfully the law doesn’t agree with you.

Threads like this one make my heart sink. Your DS is not being excluded by the group’s inclusivity. That is a perverse and troubling interpretation IMO. He has not been excluded in any respect. He has decided that he doesn’t want to participate anymore due to the way the leaders run the group. That’s fair enough, if he’s no longer getting enjoyment from the experience he can quit.

I remember my sibling who has ASD was actually and routinely excluded from participating in all manner of activities precisely because NT children and their parents objected to their presence. In the case of my sibling, the objections ranged from laughing too loudly, hand flapping, running too slowly and awkwardly, standing too close or not standing close enough, etc. In some cases it’s probably true to say that the team or group didn’t achieve their potential as a direct result of my sibling. The groups used that reasoning to exclude them. They couched it in terms of being for the benefit of my sibling which was untrue and cowardly. This all happened decades ago. I had hoped that understanding of ND children had increased. Judging by some posts on this thread, it seems as though very little has changed.

Should the boy in the OP’s example receive more support? Possibly. But perhaps his parents want to give him an opportunity to learn how to participate in a group independently. They may see this setting as appropriately supportive and relatively low stakes (i.e., a fun extracurricular activity, not an academic situation) and one that provides an opportunity for him to learn how to cope with such situations without being managed tightly. If the group leaders have no issue with how the boy is involved in the activities, then that seems a clear signal as to how they will proceed. If your DS’ frustration with the other boy prevents him from enjoying the group, it’s up to him to decide he’s had enough.

It seems as though your son is always in the same group as the other child. Is that because it's a Scouts situation where they're both in the same Lodge (or whatever they call them in Scouts - I know it's a Lodge for Beavers!)? If so, is one of them moving lodges (realistically your child, given the attitude of the leaders) a possible half-measure?