Am I being oversensitive re terminology?

[Vitalstatistix]

My lads have just started getting some 1:1 support outside school (they both have ft 1:1 in school - youngest 2:1 as required). This support is to enable them to have some sort of social life without us. They are both teenagers and require adult supervision, but they have the right to do things without parents there! As any teen would want. My eldest is 15 and my youngest turns 14 tomorrow.

So they have support workers, and they do things that teens like to do - bowling, cinema etc.

But the organisation refers to it as 'Sits'

as in "we've booked X in for a Sit next wednesday"

I am really uncomfortable with it.

It feels like Babysit.

I feel like it infantalises them.

But am I being oversensitive? If I am, then I will accept that with good grace. But if you think I am not, what alternative terms do you think would be more appropriate? I was thinking about raising it and suggesting alternatives.

Isn't it sits as in sit / stands in for an adult?

I don't know. It didn't occur to me that it could mean sitting in for someone, tbh. It still just feels like 'babysitting' even so.

Maybe I am overthinking it.

Do your kids mind it?

They aren't at a level where they would be able to analyse things and make such comparisons, so no. It's just me that feels like it's this idea of people coming in and sitting for my kids.

whereas I think supporting them to be active in the community and to have a social life should have a term that is less like, well, we're going to mind them for a bit for you...

What would you like them to be called?

Good question. I don't know. IL opps? Community activities? days out? trips? hours? support?

Think of it as Supported Integration Trips

I like that.

I suppose it must seem daft.

But they are teens treated like toddlers all the time and it just weighs on me

thanks

My ds 17 has someone who does similar activities with him. He is called an enabler. I'm not overly keen on this term myself but it is much better than 'sits'. I agree that it sounds as if they are babies (or very elderly).

I suppose it must seem daft.

doesn't seem daft at all.

enablers sounds like something from doctor who...
OH NO THE ENABLERS!!!!

It wouldn't bother me. Maybe if should. Perhaps it will when my DD is older and needs the same service.

My gut reaction is maybe you're being over sensitive.

I think everyone can be a bit over sensitive at times, so don't worry

Could be worse and called Teens integrated Trip Support

Does it make me a bad person that i would LOVE 'tits'?

Does it make me a bad person that i would LOVE 'tits'?

Sneeze cakes love it

I don't think you are being 'over sensitive' - things like this are important. It is hard for older children/teens/adults with SN who need help to get the terminology right - and frankly, we're a long way from there yet. Carer/Enabler/Pal - they're all 'urgh' aren't they.

However, in this case, I think I could go for SITS being what Jason said (Supported Integration Trips) and save my energy for a different battle (ie making sure I got as many as possible for them!!).

Terminology is important though and if it continues to upset you after this, there is no harm in seeing what can be done.

I think you'd be pushing it with TITS though

What's on their payslip/ zero hours contract/ job spec?

Probably support worker. In which case, why bother with stupid acronyms.

Supported Integration Trips is a workable solution but still makes me think of [[https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=168411156508971&refsrc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.uk%2F&_rdr
Mrs Kwan]] from Cat in the Hat . I guess you could sneakily reverse engineer it into their organisation by using it so often that it catches on, and everyone believes it was always an acronym.

Though TITS still does appeal...

It does, doesn't it?

I don't see their docs, so I don't know.

I am replying to things using the word sessions. Hopefully it will catch on.

But of course, now I am thinking TITS.

Which is making me grin a lot.

They're going to think I fancy them.