8 year old naturally has a really sick sense of humour... discipline issue or not?

[emmaporter]

Hi folks,

I haven't posted here for years, but today I think I need to dip into a broader pool for some wisdom.

My eight year old son has specific language impairment, and although he's able to function very well with his peers, sometimes there are some slight issues over what is appropriate when. He's a smart little thing, exceeding all the averages academically.

A few weeks ago, I was stopped at the school gate by the deputy head, who had been approached by the speech therapist. "Oh good, they're talking to each other for a change" I thought, then she continued. The speech therapist had come to her with some concerns as the child had started talking to her about bunny suicides.

Yes, I did. After listening to him laugh like a drain for half an hour in Waterstones, I gave in and bought it for his birthday and he was chuffed. I took the time to explain that other grown-ups might think it too sick and twisted for a child his age, and that I was trusting him to not talk about it at school, especially with adults looking after him. Clearly he felt a bit too chummy with the speech therapist and forgot himself.

So I thought I was in the clear when he promised again to keep his mouth shut, and I did my best to apologise to the deputy head who had no sense of humour about it whatsoever.

Some of you will be turning purple right now and calling me all the names under the sun. And I totally get you. However, you've got to understand that this kid just finds this stuff absolutely hilarious. Anything involving comic injury or peril makes him sometimes literally pee his pants. He draws pictures of elaborate machines with stick-girls being fed into them and turned into cupcakes, curry, etc. I am definitely not the instigator in this issue, and his amusement began long before the ill-fated shopping incident.

Since the child is just expressing his natural preference for comedically violent deaths, but does not have any tendency towards violence (in fact, he becomes terribly distressed if he accidentally hurts one of his brothers or friends) should I consider this to be a problem or discipline issue, or just hope that somehow he grows out of it or at least makes us some cash writing marketable books, comedy scripts etc...

Anyone else been in trouble like me?

[OolonColluphid]

My son was into this last year at 9/10 after being told about it by a girl at school and shown the book there, we did chat about how some people might not like it, but he wanted the book enough to use his pocket money, and his doodles were quite bunny for a couple of months until they moved on to the next thing. Must admit I dug out my very old 101 Uses for a Dead Cat from the 80's to show him it was nothing new, and he thought that was hilarious too. He still laughs at the ones that make me wince on You've Been Framed, but is a gentle sensitive boy in person.

[adoptmama]

But it doesn't matter if the speech therapist "perhaps finds the fact that an 8 year old is asking for, and being given books which present suicide as a joke and then being told to keep quiet about it, somewhat distasteful."

It's not her job to pass moral judgement on his reading choices or the parents decisions. It's her job to pass on concerns about safeguarding - nothing more. And nothing about this presents as a safeguarding issue. It was oversensitive of her and ludicrous of the HT to take it further. I've seen plenty of kids over the years with material I would consider unsuitable for their age, including young teens with 50 Shades (given by parent). I think that is a bad parenting choice but as a teacher it is not my job to disagree with their parenting choices; only to raise safeguarding issues. I can of course tell her the book is not suitable in school, and this school would be perfectly within their rights to say that. But that is not what they were doing.

And yes it is making a joke - about suicidal bunnies, not suicide per se, - but in the same way the Road Runner made a joke about killing coyotes by blowing them up with dynamite or dropping tonne weights on them from great heights. It is cartoon humour, it is not meant to be a serious comment on suicide at all, nor is it mocking suicide or those feeling suicidal. It's not supposed to be offering a serious commentary on issues around suicide. The fact that someone is personally offended by the humour of another is not reason to criticize or condemn their choices.

[SirChenjin]

She passed on concerns - which is what SL&C staff in joined up services should do. It's impossible to know exactly what was said because we weren't there, or what the back story is. On the face of it, it seems to be she didn't realise the context of this v unfunny cartoon and spoke to the HT. Good on her.

[MollieCoddler]

The cartoons are funny and popular but your sons delight in them seems disproportionate, probably because of his specific speech and language difficulty.
The fact that your speech therapist shows zero appreciation of this is what would worry me the most.

[MollieCoddler]

Not a discipline issue, it will just go underground

[Lottapianos]

Completely agree with SirChenjin. I'm a speech and language therapist and I may well have done the same. In all of our safeguarding training, we are told to raise concerns that we have with the appropriate people - its better to get it wrong than to ignore something that could be a serious issue. There's no 'moral judgement adoptmama - it was a potential safeguarding issue that needed to be looked into more closely.

[adoptmama]

It was not a potential safeguarding issue at all. Safeguarding is about being vigilant for and raising concerns about issues which could indicate a child is at risk of harm from physical, sexual or emotional abuse or neglect. Having reading material of this nature does not constitute a safeguarding issue unless you are going to start stretching the parameters of definition way beyond where they are meant to go. Specific safeguarding issues highlighted in the most up to date documents for schools include things like sexting, cyberbulling, radicalisation and fgm. There is no way in the 2015 document on Keeping Children Safe In Education that reading a book like this at home and attempting to draw similar style cartoons (which are no more gruesome by the sound of it than anything in The Twits or Charlie and the Chocolate Factory) could be deemed to be a safeguarding issue.

[BertrandRussell]

Is it possible that the teacher didn't know the books and thought the pictures came entirely from your child's imagination?

[Kleinzeit]

Well, it sounds as if through humour and drawings he’s found a good way to deal with his anxieties. And lot of kids his age do enjoy gore (any other fans of “Stupid Deaths” out there?) So he’s not going to grow up to be some kind of crazy violent person. But because of his communication issues he may need extra clarity and repetition about what’s appropriate and what’s not.

I wouldn’t expect him to keep things to himself. Eight year olds don’t, not even smart ones. I have saved questionable things til the start of the summer holidays so my DS (who has an ASC) could get over the first joy of them by himself. It’s not so much the sharing it with adults, it’s what happens if he shares his humour or his creepy drawings with other children. My DS probably wouldn’t understand that some of the other children might feel shocked or scared instead of amused, he might not find it easy to recognise if other children are getting upset and he wouldn't know when to stop. And although we haven’t had exactly this situation my DS’s sense of humour with other kids could be a bit dodgy and I occasionally found myself reminding him “yes but is it kind?”

It might be worth having a chat with the speech & language therapist about helping your DS to understand appropriate humour.

[SirChenjin]

Not at all adopt - a child under the care of her service started talking about rabbit suicides and drawing pictures of girls being fed into machines. She did the right thing. Perhaps not in your opinion, but from a professional pov she was right to do what she did - now the context has been clarified I'm sure that will be the end of it from her.