If you have a SEN child, would you be comfortable with this?

[Beetrootisthesecretingredient]

Context: DS7 is autistic. Verbal but with lots of sensory issues and is very rigid.
Yesterday we went cycling along the canal tow path, one of our usual Saturday activities. Its usually quiet and we have a nice time cycling to a certain bridge and back. DS is very noise sensitive. Yesterday there was a series of unfortunate events (in our world): someone using a chain saw, a baby cried and then a loud car backfired, all within 2 mins of each other. DS leaps off bike screams and cries and lies on the tow path. Meltdown.
This happened on a very narrow bit of towpath. At this exact same time 4 older male cyclists in all the lycra wanted to overtake us. DP went to DS to sooth/move out of way. Cyclists have now stopped and said loudly 'FFS just move him out of the way'.
I replied 'it won't take a second he's upset'.
More grumbling and general unkindness from cyclists. DP then loudly called cyclist 'inconsiderate twat'.
DP now wants to get DS a high vis vest that says 'I am autistic please be patient ' but I feel uncomfortable about it.
Fwiw we have a sunflower lanyard but these cyclists either didn't know what it represents of didn't care and DP just doesn't want to get in that situation again.... which ended with all stressed and called people twats.

He sounds brilliant @Kirbert2.
Wishing you both the very best.

You really aren't doing a good job at sounding like you understood the situation, who has right of way and what it is to parent a 7 year old having a meltdown. It's not easy watching you trying to justify your position. It's you versus everyone else on this thread and I don't think you've realised this.

You've used the a version of the word dragged at least seven times, and attributed it to me via quoting my post and referring to 'your proposal', yet I can't recall using the word even once.

Just so sorry to read this OP.

Quite.

What a way to have to exaggerate to try and prove a point.

You must of course drag the boy, risking broken bones no less!

God forbid you just move your child. And again, I say this as the mother of a disabled child. But then to suggest something without such ridiculous hyperbole makes it sound like the parents simply should have taken better action and no one has a problem with the child at all.

And we can't have that now, can we. So let's act like the only alternative was to drag the boy, presumably by one toe...

Dragging the child out of the way has indeed been suggested on this thread @FortnumsWeddingBreakfastTeaPlease

Well let's make sure we keep it out of context and try to weaponise that as much as we can then, eh.

Moving the child is what's been mentioned multiple, multiple times. But let's pretend we don't see that bit. If we can find one person who says something once like "drag" or "haul" we can only focus on that in the name of total misrepresentation. That way we can make up that people clearly have a problem with disabled children. We can say how obviously they have disdain, what with their demands to drag children across rocks. It's through a lot of exaggeration and deliberate cherry picking, but we'll get there.

Otherwise we just have to admit the people have no issue with our children at all. We'd have to admit they were just pissed at what appeared to be a lack of our parental action. And we don't like that.

It’s not appropriate to move a disabled person out of the way either @FortnumsWeddingBreakfastTeaPlease.

Some people do have issues with disability. I’ve seen that myself when my mother became a wheelchair user. She immediately started to be treated differently by some, othered.

And the cyclists could have taken a minute to assess the situation. Surely they’ve heard of hidden disabilities? Why should they immediately leap to poor parenting? But people often do, unfortunately.

And I don’t know why you think comments like this one are being taken out of context?

2 grown ADULTS should be able to drag one 7 year old out of the way. As I said if leaving the kid there guaranteed it would be run over then they'd soon bloody move him

Really. We're going to this level of silly.

I shouted to my eldest who still hadn't surfaced from his room by 11am yesterday:

"Up in 5, lazy bones, before I drag you downstairs!"

Naturally, the boy quivered in his room. Fearful of the carpet burns his own mother was threatening to inflict upon his, by her gleeful dragging.

Or, he knew, at age 17, it's a word you say, generally in the context of someone not moving when they should be elsewhere. Particularly when you see no action being taken by that person...or in this case their parents.

But we know that don't we. We have to pretend otherwise, but we very well know.

Here you are, still trying to hang on to one word, to try and pretend people have issue with a disabled child, when there is none. The parents not taking action, they have a problem with.

Yes I mean I’d probably be ok holding back a minute or two if I wasn’t running late on my way to work and if I thought it was helpful to the parents, but absolutely no longer. My expectation would be they moved the child or I would be going around the outside.

2 autistic DC here (one AuDHD)

Your DS isn't ready for bike rides on narrow public paths/roads yet, if he can't cope with hearing normal loud noises that will happen out in public. The problem here is that you placed him at risk of a meltdown, putting him and other users of the towpath at risk. What if there had been other cyclists behind you and him leaping off his bike and lying down on the path caused a pile up or someone crashed into him?

You need to plan cycling routes with him better, use wider paths so you can get out of the way of other users, go to parks or woodlands with family friendly cycling trails, etc. Not narrow canal towpaths.

I agree with you completely

Yes you’re right actually.
The onus is on parents to manage this and actively avoid situations where this sort of situation could arise.
Or go wherever they fancy but be prepared to manage it in a way that doesn’t inconvenience others.

But this situation actually has very little to do with the child's needs. It was a canal towpath, there are often obstructions of varying types. The chain could have come off his bike, he could have fallen off, there could be an angry swan on the path, two bikes collide, a pedestrian tripped and fallen etc etc. Canal towpaths get blocked easily because they are narrow and there is nowhere to go and anyone using them has to live with this.

Of course , you should not try new experiences for autistic kids. It might cause someone 20 seconds of inconvenience. Their needs should always be put ahead of your child who finds life’s so easy to navigate.

( obviously I’m joking - as a parent of a ND I can’t tell you the amount of effort that goes into planning any trips out, we think it all through but occasionally no matter how many times you have been somewhere or how meticulously things have been planned, things go wrong. We try our best to manage a situation, we are considerate of other people , but surely this consideration works both ways and I want my child to experience life- I teach my children to show compassion to others. Luckily most people we meet do too)

PP’s comment was said from the pov of a loving mother, was it?

I think the cyclists should have been more sensitive to people obviously struggling with an extremely upset child in any case, disability or not. And I also think they’re old enough to know that some parenting journeys are more difficult than others.
A bit of compassion goes a long way in most circumstances.

So I wouldn’t excuse the cyclists as easily as as you seem to do. The parents weren’t sitting chatting and laughing while their child had a meltdown on the path. They were actively trying to calm him and manage the situation. So the cyclists couldn’t have seen them ‘not taking action’. They wanted more aggressive action to be taken so they weren’t delayed for a minute, that was the problem.

If you want to be absolutely certain that an autistic child doesn’t have a meltdown that may mildly inconvenience someone for seconds that means never leaving the house basically.

You can prepare and prepare, but sometimes circumstances conspire against you and something unexpected occurs which is a trigger.

It’s okay to expect parents to prepare and to do their very best to manage a situation. It’s not okay to expect disabled children to stay at home in case someone else is mildly inconvenienced occasionally.

I would make a distinction between causing inconvenience to others if a child has a meltdown and it being a safety risk. A child suddenly getting off their bike and lying down on the path on a narrow public cycleway is a safety risk, because if there were others close behind it could cause an accident if there's no room on the path to divert around them. I couldn't give a shiny shite about someone's Strava segment, but if your kid's behaviour may causing a hazard to themselves and others, or could do, you have to reassess whether they can cope safely in that situation at the moment or not. Doesn't mean they never will, it just means you have to adapt to where they are now, build up their confidence in safer, less unpredictable places, etc. DS1 used to be terrified of tractors, so for years we couldn't cycle round with them on our local country roads. Even though they were quiet, the risk of him melting down in the road because a tractor came past was too big a risk to take. We used to have to drive 40 mins to the local forestry commission place instead, until he developed the self regulation skills to warn us he was feeling overwhelmed or pull over safely.

I do get where OP is coming from about how the cyclists were being, but the answer to that isn't a vest, or having a go at them. It's thinking about how to ensure that they try to minimise the likelihood of future issues, especially if it may pose a safety risk.

OP said that 99% of the time, he does cope with that route because it is quiet. Unfortunately, that day it wasn't. Should it be avoided just because he had a meltdown once but the vast majority of the time, he was absolutely fine?

Cyclists also need to have some responsibility. It isn't a cycle path for bikes only, it is a public path and cyclists can't expect to go hurtling through it at speed without a care in the world. Things like this are going to happen on a public path.

Why are you focusing on the idea that 'cyclists also need to have some responsibility' and that this location isn't just for bikes? OP and her family ARE cyclists because they were cycling on this path on their bikes and use it regularly for their own purposes.

There is no difference between that group of men and the parents with their child (and the comments about lycra don't really add anything, as that's a normal material for cycling clothes or Strava because it's fine to track your activity, just as it's fine to take your child on a bike ride), in that each is entitled to be there or the fact that they have to exist alongside others.

'Things like this' happening in public include people coming along and expecting not to have their way blocked by someone discourteous who thinks they're more important. And autism isn't the automatic excuse some seem to think for parents to be ignorant of everyone but their child.

I’m unclear what you think the solution to this should have been? Can you explain?

They were blocked for a few seconds. It really wasn’t a big deal, certainly not enough to be so impatient and swear.

@CrazyGoatLady
I do agree about minimising risks whenever possible. The trouble is it can be hard to eliminate risk completely without severely compromising quality of life.

Bloody entitled cyclists at it again being twats!