Scouts sued, pay out 42K to family of autistic boy

[ILookedintheWater]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-43519296

The family successfully sued on the grounds that after an incident where the boy ran away from the group on an outing the leaders wanted additional support for him for travelling on a bus, athletics activities etc. The boy and his family felt that the additional support would make him stand out and was effectively banning him from these activities.
I see this from both sides: of course any parent wants their child to be able to join in the maximum of his abilities in all the activities. Scouting should be making that happen for anyone who wants to join and gets a place. As a volunteer myself (albeit in Guiding rather than Scouting) I would want to ensure the safety of the child and the group as a whole. If I felt that some activities were triggers I would be talking to the parents to come up with a strategy and putting extra support in place if I felt it was necessary for the safety of the group overall.
What I don't understand, and isn't made clear from the article, is why 42K was awarded. It's a hell of a lot of money from a charity because they couldn't accommodate him as the parents wanted in a club.

I saw that-and thought it was a huge amount of money, too.

Clubs should be inclusive, yes-but in the case of things like cubs-they are manned entirely by volunteers. Many local packs have shut down as there were simply not enough people willing or able to give up their time to do it, so they are restricted in what they can offer. If I was the parent of a child that needed additional support, I would be going with them myself to provide that support.

Were the parents both lawyers or did I remember that wrong?

He did not need constant support. He ran off briefly and on the back of that incident the leader said he would need one on one supervision in future.

The fact is and rightly so that if somebody has a disability then organisations are required to make reasonable adjustments for that person.

This organisation didn’t. And they paid the price.

Just because you are a charity you aren’t above the law

I think there were data protection breaches too, which would be reflected in the award.

A close friend has a DD with ADHD. She was due to go on a guide camp and at the very last minute was informed that she would not be allowed to go unless my friend could attend too. This was impossible for my friend, as she works and has a younger child. The guide leader suggested my friend's DD was a risk to herself and others, despite various communications from school and health professionals that she was not. My friend suggested another person to attend the camp and supervise her daughter, but the guide leader refused as that person would need to be DRB checked and it was too late to do so.
I agree with the PP that stated the law applies, charity or not. Discrimination and equality acts apply to invisible disabilities just as much as they apply to visible disabilities, race, belief, gender etc.

I imagine here's more to it than has been reported. I would guess the family tried more reasonable discussion with the scout group with no resolution before it got taken to court. Even charities have to abide by the law, and hopefully this case will publicise the fact that reasonable adjustments have to be taken. Reasonable in this case probably meant having some autism awareness training so they could manage this lad's anxiety without resorting to requiring 1:1 support. He doesn't get 1:1 at school.

Conversely my DS2 did get 1:1 support at school but a very inclusive scout group meant that he was included on all camps and activities. It shouldn't be dependent on each individual scout group, there should be (and in fact there is) a national policy within scouts of inclusivity. This scout group was probably not following it.

I'm pleased to see this and admire the parents. I know fighting for my DS it is terribly stressful. So I am grateful for these parents as these people make life easier for other special need children. My son was excluded from a organisation despite being the best in the country for his age
for this skill. People need to be more understanding, my DS was never violent, annoying yes, but in-spite of having excellent school reports they insisted my son required 121, I offered to be there, they refused. Some people want to teach children with ADHD a lesson like they are just naughty. It's cruel and wrong!

@5plusMeAndHim, if the Scouts paid them £42k to withdraw their claim, then they feared that the 'dickhead parents' would win, and it would cost them in excess of £42k, didn't they?

If they hadn't breached the law, they wouldn't have a case to answer. No other parents had been asked to supervise their children. A child with a disability should have the right to experience the trip in the same way as any other, and a huge part of that is having the independence from their family. How do you think the other Scouts would have reacted if he had "Mummy" or "Daddy" with him?

We've had mixed experiences. DS1 ended up leaving scouts as they wouldn't make any adjustments for him to be able to join in effectively. I'm not talking huge things, an example is that at camp they handed out hotdogs with ketchup on and he ended up not eating as they wouldn't give him another. It would have been easy enough to let the kids choose ketchup or not. Another time they made chicken kebabs and wouldn't let him do his plain. DS2 goes to beavers at a different group and loves it. No one is left out and the group as a whole has several disabled members. It's lovely. Ds1 and 2 are both autistic.