AIBU to say that not everything can be inclusive all the time?

[Summeriscumin]

A former student has asked for advice and I'm a bit stumped.

She has been running a drama club for 11 - 16 year olds in the village hall. The aim is an introduction to various theatre and circus skills.

These include vocal skills, breathing exercises, trust exercises, mime, juggling, acro, improvisation, script reading aloud, devising scenes and basic contemporary dance skills. It's been going very well and the subs are paying for the hall hire, so she isn't out of pocket.

But she's afraid she's going to have to give it up. A mum came along her son, a wheelchair user, asking to join and he was welcomed. My friend (C) explained what the sessions entailed and said there may be some that her son may not be able to participate in. Specifically she meant the energetic dance stuff and some circus skills and there was an issue with some trust exercises. - DCs have their eyes closed and move around and the wheelchair could prove dangerous.

The lad came for a couple of weeks and seemed to really enjoy it and C tried to make it as inclusive as possible without depriving the others of their skills training. They work in small groups so she always made sure there was a group he could work with.

However, this week the mother has said that her son must be included in everything or it's discrimination and that she should stop the exercises that he cannot participate in.

C says she may as well just give it up as that's just not fair on the others.

AIBU in thinking this mother is BU? I feel so sorry for C who has done her best to include the lad.

No good deed goes unpunished, eh?

This woman is running a club in her own free time, not as a business. Personally I don’t think it’s reasonable to expect her to do any more than she is doing. Voluntarily. In her own time. For nothing.

But if the child is unable to that still relies on the parent advocating and working with the VOLUNTEERS to come up with the best plan. Not just saying “here he is, deal with it”

And then what happens when the mum of a deaf or blind child complains that certain activities can’t be enjoyed by their son/daughter?!

You can’t make every single activity suitable for every single type of disability and it’s ridiculous to pretend otherwise.

I obviously misworded what I wrote when I talked about gratitude and misunderstood that it was a free activity. Obviously parents are grateful to people running activities for their kid but the mother of a disabled child shouldn’t have to be more grateful her child is included just because he has a disability. It came from my frustration that wheelchair users are expected to be grateful for whatever it is that we’re given when we can be included. Also I did agree that the mum was being antagonistic, I just think that C and her could work together to see if there are ways to include him more that C might not have thought of. As for running activities myself if I want them, I do as I talked about in my first post. I also don’t have kids so it’s not like I have to, I enjoy it and can do it in a wheelchair (including scouts!)

I don’t know what this child’s disability is and him being a wheelchair user is vague enough that he could actually be included in many of the activities mentioned. Also activities can be altered for him whilst being the same for others.

I really do think that the best approach for C would be to have a conversation with the mother and son about what else they think could be adapted to include him. I think people also need to remember how hard this must actually be on the child not being able to join in to yet another thing his friends can do. I’m not saying that makes the mothers approach right just that I can understand it and think it’s worth more exploration.

She has made reasonable adjustments, which is what is required under the DDA. It’t not reasonable to ask for others not to do the activities. He wouldn’t be able to ride a bike, so does that mean no one else should? I feel for the mum, must be hard, but she’s being unreasonable.

This. The mother has chosen a mainstream activity in the full knowledge that her child will not be able to do everything included. Please tell your friend that as long as she makes reasonable adjustments where she can it is then up to the child's mother whether that's suitable for the child. If the child continues to attend and the mother continues to make these sorts of threats that is bullying and harassment. If she wants her child to be able to do everything she needs to find a wheelchair dance class.

I quit being a guiding leader over a couple of similar situations. We were a very active outdoor unit and one child's parent insisted on so many activities being stopped that it changed the whole ethos of the unit and lots of kids left. The irony was the child was actually happy and could manage and wanted to do quite a few of the activities that her mum vetoed. Her Mum was also sketchy about the child's disability and claimed we didn't need information that was confidential, so it was difficult to navigate.

One of my own grown up kids has a disability that is always on the forbidden list of many activities that they can do actually do easily. We werr always told health and safety has priority over inclusiveness.

Sorry but this is ridiculous.

SEN covers a vast array of conditions. People need training and a whole load of additional leaders.

The adjustments model mentioned by a previous poster is a good one for C to use in conversations with the mother and the participant.

It’s common sense, but it gives a much stronger impression that things are being done ‘right’. While probably not changing what C actually does.

It's really not clear that she has made reasonable adjustments though, which is my point. Reasonable adjustments would be to modify the activity in a way that achieves the same outcome, where possible. She's just not letting him do the activity at all.

I feel like I've come across as a bit unfeeling to the group leader. I don't think she should close the group or change the entire programme. I just don't think she's fully considered how to actually be inclusive in this case.

I've experienced a parent of this type over a medical issue. We made sure all core activities were suitable without compromising our core offer to the rest of the group. Parent couldn't seem to accept that we weren't massively fazed by the condition and ways to adapt and seemed to struggle that we willingly offered solutions.

Parent didn't want child to do additional trips/ residentials. Fair enough they're optional extras and not all members opt to do them.

Parent then threw their toys out of the pram when we organised a residential that she wouldn't send child to anyway and we took an opportunity to do some activities that we had been avoiding. Made complaints up the chain that we hadn't been inclusive and made up a heap of bullshit about how we hadn't adjusted for the child's needs. The complaint was resolved within a day when we evidenced planning notes and communications with the parent that demonstrated that we had gone "above and beyond" what would reasonably be expected as reasonable adjustments.

It would not have been a reasonable adjustment to withdraw additional activities from every other member.

I have a child with additional needs myself. I'm relatively fortunate that what he finds inaccessible doesn't appeal to him, but we're facing for the second year in a row that his "rewards trip" isn't suitable for his sensory needs and co-ordination issues. For the masses, the trip logistically makes good sense. I wouldn't ask school not to organise it. I do need to raise the issue of DS being rewarded though.

Additional needs are a slog (and I'm at the light end of it) but there are some parents who are so used to battling for things that they'll automatically battle people who are being good enough and making reasonable adjustments which does no one any favours.

I think a class like this should be inclusive. Couldn’t one of the dances be choreographed so that the new student and their wheelchair are at the centre of the dance? Surely it is a valuable skill to teach the young students how to dance with someone in a wheelchair. Look at Strictly and how they have found ways to include deaf and blind dancers (please forgive me if I have used the wrong descriptors and please correct me if this is the case.

Being inclusive doesn’t mean that everyone has to do the same thing. The leader has adjusted some of the exercises, so the boy can do them and as the sessions evolve, I’m sure she’ll think of different things and different ways to involve him further.

There may well still be some routines or exercises that would be difficult for him, even with adaptations, but they may well be adjusted to make it possible.

I think his mother is being unreasonable, but I imagine she’s very protective of her son and has probably had to battle for him. It would be a shame if the sessions folded because people weren’t able to compromise. That’s unfair for everyone.

Running something voluntarily doesn't mean that you don't need to make reasonable adjustments under disability legislation.

We were always told health and safety has priority over inclusiveness.

Indeed. I'd love to grab one of the package holiday deals I keep seeing. I'd need specialist insurance for people with existing conditions (£££), taxis to get me to the train and then to the airport, special arrangements as I can't stand and wait at check-in, would have to check whether I'd need transport from the gate to the plane, and the same palaver at the other end. No wandering the hill villages for me, and most historic sites would be inaccessible. Going on holiday is possible but it's in no way the same holiday my fellow travellers would be enjoying.

This is just how it is. I've had to give up nearly all the things I used to enjoy because I simply can't bloody do them! Inclusivity means facilitating disabled people (sorry, those who identify as having disabilities) to do the thing, not changing the thing itself so it doesn't challenge able-bodied participants.

I wonder how many over-invested mums have tried to get Mastermind to include their learning-disabled kids? Quite a few, I bet!

FFS and we wonder why so few people are prepared to volunteer their time.

Your friend is doing a lovely thing in running this club, out of the kindness of her heart, and is (quite rightly) clearly prepared to make - and has actually made - reasonable adjustments for this child.

If the mother is not happy with that, I would probably document the reasonable adjustment considerations formally for posterity, and then call her bluff. I would explain that this is how it's going to be following assessment of the needs of all, and safety of the same, and that while I very much hoped the child would continue to attend, the mother is of course free to make her own decision on that on that basis.

There is always some entitled cheeky fucker who has no intention of donating their own time to the community but wants to dictate unreasonable terms about how everyone else ought to do so!

She is being unreasonable. I think your friend needs to simply explain that she believes she has made reasonable adjustments and that she will continue to do so. This does not mean that every activity will be suitable but that there will always be an alternative. If the woman doesn't like it she knows what to do.

I've seen this exact thread before, a while ago. Right down to the OP posting on behalf of a "friend." Does anybody else remember? It's a hard thing to find through search...

Many disabled people are campaigning to make the world more accessible. It isn’t that difficult to do. And no it isn’t just the way it is. It is the way we have made it. So we can make something else. You have as much right to a holiday as anybody else. And this young man has as much right to enjoy dancing as everybody else. I bet some of the other kids can’t do the energetic stuff either.

I think the mother is being ridiculous. As the OP says, not everything can be inclusive. And it's not even specific to disabilities: would you expect a school not to offer A-level maths because some pupils aren't capable of passing their GCSE?

This child is only likely to be sitting on the sidelines because his mother has signed him up for an entirely unsuitable activity.

@BusMumsHoliday Yes, but volunteers need advice and help to make these adjustments and who better placed to do this than the child’s Mum?

IME, volunteers are constantly asked to do more by people who don’t want to pitch in themselves, regardless of the activity. I volunteer with a green space group- we organize trees plantings, clean up green spaces in our neighborhoods, etc. We’re constantly told that “you should do more cleanups, replant this area, etc., etc.” (I.e. we should give more of our time), by people who have no intention of volunteering their own time!”

If the Mum wants further adaptations, she’s going to have to pitch in herself.

Not from me you haven’t. I can imagine it has happened to others, though.

I'm saying, if you have a wheelchair user who can self propel and you have an exercise where people are walking, the group leader should be able to say something like, "is it safe for you to do the activity like this?" Rather than just sit them out.

But it's not just about whether it's safe for him to do it. The group leader has to consider whether it's safe for everyone else too. For example in the eyes closed exercise, how do you prevent collisions with his wheelchair?

She's doing this activity for free- it's not her job! And yes, I do think the mum should be greatful. As a mother to an autistic son I have always been greatful when people (basket-ball coach/tennis coach/judo leader) have been willing to help him out a bit (ex explaining directly after having explained to group etc). And these people were paid. Why shouldn't we be greatful when people are doing something extra for our disabled children? It takes up some extra time and patience and should be acknowledged. Being disabled doesn't give you a pass for being entitled.

I think she only has to make "reasonable adjustments" and legally that recognises that some groups have more resources for this than others. If she can't reasonably make the adjustment, she doesn't have to.

You can see it on the scout website where it says:

"What does ‘reasonable adjustments’ mean?
Reasonable adjustments are changes that organisations providing support and services have to make to prevent a disabled person being at a disadvantage compared with non-disabled people. It’s a legal term and recognises that organisations and groups will have different practical resources to meet the needs of disabled members. "

https://www.scouts.org.uk/volunteers/equity-diversity-and-inclusion/supporting-people-with-additional-needs/understanding-our-responsibilities/