Wtf is wrong with people when it comes to hidden disabilities?

[Whatthebarnacles]

Full on rant incoming! Ready to be flamed in the depths on MN hell for this but it really is a hill I'm happy to die on so whatever will be, will be!

I'm absolutely sick to the back teeth of certain people on here who eye roll and sneer that those with hidden disabilities should be treated the same as neuro typical people.

Non verbal, lashing out? Report to police for assault - how dare they lay a hand on someone else 🙄

Can't sit still / constantly stims? Expel them from school - why should my "normal child" be affected?🙄

Stares and makes noises? Tell them you're uncomfortable and to stop immediately, we have the right not to be ogled.🙄

Can we please just stop it?! It's like the world's gone mad! All the years of effort to try and make people aware of hidden disabilities just seems to have crumbled an i've seen it happenn in here over the last 6 months or so more than ever. There seems to be an almighty wave of this incredibly farcical "BUT ME AND MINE" or "MY RIGHTS" just smash through the work that had been done and its depressing as shit.

Would you call the police or kick off on someone who spilled a cuppa over you then laughed? Or caught your face , if...

1. They were 4 years old? Nope, so why would you for someone with intellectual disabilities? You would talk to the carer. Rightly so.

1. If they had Parkinsons? Would you bollocks. Because you can SEE that disability and because its a physical one, then it can't be helped, right?

1. They were clearly ND?

There are countless people in here who would because, according to them, they do not have the right / there needs to be consequences / they're an adult regardless / i am woman hear me roar etc.

I cant get my head around the lack of understanding

And don't get me started on those who turn these things into "us women" need to defend ourselves. And faux outrage "would they have done it to a man? I don't think so!" Urgh. Yes... they would. A disability is a disability, a stim is a stim, a jolt is a jolt. Hair is dangly, splashing someone or spilling something is funny, stimming is calming on the inside whilst frantic in the outside.

Frankly, it turns my stomach. Why is the world so angry at people who are different at the moment?!

I can only presume that the number of people now having been diagnosed is pissing these people off. I've honestly never ever heard so much "just because they're xyz doesn't mean that..." in my life. See also "they need to learn" or "they should know"...

I fret for my son growing up in this. He doesn't stand a cat in hells chance.

YABU - Of course ND people, should be treated the same as NT people when it comes to differing behaviour, regardless of mental age or physical disabilities associated with their condition.

YANBU - MN is rife with it at the moment, I've noticed that too.

Annnnnd..... crucify me. GO!!

It is secure accommodation. They are locked down whether it be a family home, school, residential placement or a secure psychiatric facilities. In family homes that can also mean siblings are also locked down during school holidays and, unless the garden is secure or respite carers are looked after their disabled sibling, they are unable to go outside or open open window. I know several families who had to live like that until they were able to secure specialist residential school placements. The school where one teenager went, and loved, needs passes to unlock pretty much every door. (In his case the risk was elopement not violence).

Sometimes that’s the case, but for many, many more it’s not.

I thought this thread was about hidden disabilities? Those with hidden disabilities are rarely in secure accommodation I’d have thought?

‘Hidden’ in the sense of learning disability or autism and we are talking about those without capacity so cannot understand why assaulting people is wrong. I don’t know anyone whose accommodation needed to be secured because they cerebral palsy or an amputee.

I wouldn’t consider people without capacity as having hidden disabilities?
Those are obvious disabilities.

@Itisbetter I don't agree that there is a frightening shift towards things being more ableist, racist, etc. Making that claim betrays a startling lack of historical awareness, in my opinion. We are living in an era of exceptional tolerance and inclusivity in most ways.

I do think you and some of the people with similar views to you are lashing out, yes. It seems to be very difficult for you to accept that others want to share their opinions in the thread without being immediately attacked and accused of being vile. You have no idea who has experience of what, and your assumptions are unfounded.

Don’t be ridiculous we’re on page 27 nobody has immediately called you vile and when people respond to posts they are engaging in a discussion (which is the point of MN really isn’t it?). It’s fairly obvious if someone has no experience of challenging behaviour or how it is supported.

I agree, personal attacks on others are unwarranted here and prove nothing.

Its also irrelevant if people have little or no personal experience of disabilities as we are discussing the right to personal safety.
Its really irrelevant who attacks or assaults people because the Personal outcome is no different if the attacker is disabled

@Itisbetter You did specifically characterise the thread as vile, and I presume that doesn't refer to posters with whom you agree. You also framed your objection as a warning that people might become disabled even though you've been told over and over again that many on this thread who disagree with you are already disabled, including in many cases ND.

If you can't see the problem with that, I can't help you.

That’s true, but it’s relevant imho because some of the assumptions made and ways of avoiding the problems have just been completely unrealistic.

Yes OP YANBU. It’s exhausting and depressing.

Isn’t the basic message
Take responsibility
Don’t put others in danger

Basically, the law.

I think sometimes people unfamiliar with the work of a carer, especially a family carer, assume a degree of support by the state that simply doesn’t exist. People can only do their best and sometimes circumstances are challenging. It may be difficult for others to appreciate the level of difficulty and the lack of support some carers face. And sometimes they’re the ones in danger.

You say to take responsibility. But who exactly needs to take responsibility?

I’m no expert on who might be legally responsible for someone who can’t be responsible for their own actions
Thats a legal matter im guessing

Perhaps other MNs on here can offer insight

Parents are legally responsible for their children’s behaviour in a similar way which might be a more familiar idea.. Your charge might do something dangerous (eg step out into traffic) and if you could have reasonably been expected to predict and stop that then you could be responsible for what happens as a result.

I suspect you're partly refering to the thread about the OP's teenage daughter having her long hair pulled by a 20-year-old who was ND.

I'll say on here what I said on there: 'Yes, we should be understanding - but IMO tolerance ends where violence begins.'

If only life was that convenient.

But what does that actually mean in practice? What does your “tolerance” of disabled people ending mean?

It means exactly what I said: I'm understanding of hidden disabilities/neurodiversities - but if someone's ND caused them to become violent, aggressive etc (like the hair-pulling incident) then that behaviour needs to be tackled in the same way as it would a NT person. Violence is violence. The End.

I’m not sure what difference in reaction you are alluding to. If a drunk pulled your hair presumably you’d tell him to stop which is what happened in the incident on that thread.

So disabled people are ok whilst they behave as though they weren't disabled? You seem to be missing the point that some people unfortunately do not have the mental capacity to understand social rules or control their own behaviour. They are not being deliberately bad; they lack the mental capacity to behave differently. Treating people punitively for behaviour outside of their control may satisfy your desire for vengeance, but it won't do anything else. How vengeful do you need to be towards a disabled person? Compassion is a better look for those fortunate enough not to have learning disabilities.

If they don't have the capacity to behave properly - none violent in society - then they would have to be excluded until and unless adequate safety mechanisms can be put in place

Why are you suggesting that disabled people are violent and expecting disabled people not to be violent is somehow not ok? It is very ableist to have such low opinions of disabled people!

Don't be obtuse. People with substantial learning disabilities can behave violently to care givers if they lack the cognitive capacity to communicate in other ways.

The question is about those people with disabilities that mean they do have trouble behaving in society then- not those that don't - which probably make up the majority

Do you feel the same about other undesirable behaviour? Should we be locking up people who drink or take drugs? What about people who swear or smell? What if someone has a seizure and falls on you or damages property? What about if children piss on the floor? What if someone sneezes and gets snot all over the place? Shall we deprive them ALL of their liberty? Should we just say they can’t come into public places?