banned from church

Isn't this just common sense?



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26182016

Boy, I definitely see both sides, and it doesn't seem like there's a "one-size-fits-all" answer. I think parents of autistic children need to know their child's limits when it comes to taking them out in public, not only if they have a disability, but also when they're younger and are learning how to behave. Believe me, we don't take our kids to church every week (or the grocery store, etc.)...we wouldn't get as much out of it b/c we'd be too busy settling them down (it happens when you have a 3 year old and 2 year old twins). A lot of times we "divide and conquer" and just go seperately while the other one stays home with the kids.

I thought it was interesting that different churches react in different ways. I get really irritated when people bring distractions, be they mentally challenged or just young child, to places that are inappropriate. I don't go to 'family restaurants' very often so I get pissed when some kid is screaming their head off and being ignored when I go to Paula's or Club Soda or somewhere similar but I don't really think twice at Bob Evans. Same goes for the theater, movie house, or even church. I don't mind on the big holidays where whole families want to be together but on an average Sunday I find it disruptive. I really hate kids in the grocery store but I don't expect parents to hire a sitter to run everyday errands.

We don't take our daughter to restaurants unless we know they are loud, that way if she gets loud, it's not as obvious and no one cares. An occasional outburst here and there is ok, but she's a kid.. sometimes they have their own plan.

The parents should have been taking more control of this situation. Maybe trade off every other Sunday to go to church and the other stay home with the special needs person. Or when they begin to get disruptive, get up and take them to another room. There are multiple answers.
I cannot understand why this ended up in court, I would think this could have been handled within the church, that would have been ideal.
Children belong in church just as much (if not more than adults). It is the parents responsibility to teach the child proper behavior in all types of settings. Special needs child or not.
Teaching a pre-school child to sit quietly in church is a great tool to prepare them for school.

Yep, seems like this is all common sense. Why the need for a thread?

moondrop wrote:It is the parents responsibility to teach the child proper behavior in all types of settings. Special needs child or not.

"Lady! Please keep your retarded kid quiet while I pray for heathens to burn in the fire pits of Hell."

God be with you -n- stuff.

The reason this ended up in court is because we have people who feel we need a constitutional amendment about who can get married...

cardinal5150 wrote:We don't take our daughter to restaurants unless we know they are loud, that way if she gets loud, it's not as obvious and no one cares. An occasional outburst here and there is ok, but she's a kid.. sometimes they have their own plan.

To me, it depends on a lot of things... We took our kid of Olive Garden monday, and I feared disaster... but it was early for dinner, we actively tried to keep the kids entertained, and aside from my daughters fascination with her new found potty skills (esp in public) the evening went well. If you show up with hungry and tired kids at 8:30 PM in a quiet restaurant, expecting them to be quiet and above thier age, then it's your fault.

Conversely, if I show up to a kid-friendly restaurant at 6:30 and get upset because a kid is loud, I'm in the wrong place and have no reason to complain that my expectations were wrong.

Sometimes parents dont pull the ripcord when they should, sometimes non-parents create unrealistic expectations. You dont want kids around, go to a bar.

pez wrote:

cardinal5150 wrote:We don't take our daughter to restaurants unless we know they are loud, that way if she gets loud, it's not as obvious and no one cares. An occasional outburst here and there is ok, but she's a kid.. sometimes they have their own plan.

To me, it depends on a lot of things... We took our kid of Olive Garden monday, and I feared disaster... but it was early for dinner, we actively tried to keep the kids entertained, and aside from my daughters fascination with her new found potty skills (esp in public) the evening went well. If you show up with hungry and tired kids at 8:30 PM in a quiet restaurant, expecting them to be quiet and above thier age, then it's your fault.

Conversely, if I show up to a kid-friendly restaurant at 6:30 and get upset because a kid is loud, I'm in the wrong place and have no reason to complain that my expectations were wrong.

Sometimes parents dont pull the ripcord when they should, sometimes non-parents create unrealistic expectations. You dont want kids around, go to a bar.

Being a non kid couple I would prefer not to be seated by kids. I really don't have a problem with kids if the parents are being parents and are trying to keep their kid(s) under control. It's the kids with the idiot parents who do nothing to keep their kids under control that gives all kids and parents a bad name. Unfortunately the idiot parents are starting to out number the good parents.

meta4 wrote:Yep, seems like this is all common sense. Why the need for a thread?

The first post was tongue in cheek I started the thread because it's an interesting topic on many fronts. Where does one person's rights end and another's begin? It's also interesting to me that this occurred in church; a place that many would expect to be more tolerant and loving. Then of course there's the issue of a court getting involved in a church affair in the first place. Labeling an autistic child as dangerous to others doesn't sit well with me. The brother who would institutionalize his autistic nephew and kind of promotes the position that we should institutionalize the mentally challenged. ETC...

The common sense part though is that a majority of people (IMO) realize what is appropriate behavior in a variety of settings and make adjustments. Mostly I posted the thread because it opens up an opportunity to discuss a variety of social issues from various viewpoints.

Vis wrote:

meta4 wrote:Yep, seems like this is all common sense. Why the need for a thread?

The first post was tongue in cheek I started the thread because it's an interesting topic on many fronts. Where does one person's rights end and another's begin? It's also interesting to me that this occurred in church; a place that many would expect to be more tolerant and loving. Then of course there's the issue of a court getting involved in a church affair in the first place. Labeling an autistic child as dangerous to others doesn't sit well with me. The brother who would institutionalize his autistic nephew and kind of promotes the position that we should institutionalize the mentally challenged. ETC...

The common sense part though is that a majority of people (IMO) realize what is appropriate behavior in a variety of settings and make adjustments. Mostly I posted the thread because it opens up an opportunity to discuss a variety of social issues from various viewpoints.

Well, in that case...

I have a friend who's grandfather was a sherrifs deputy or something. He used to say "Your rights end where my nose begins" and it should be noted that he usually stuck his nose about an inch from your face when he said it. So I guess there's some truth to that, when you have offended someone enough to confront you and tell you to stop something, your rights have almost ended.

An Autistic child can be threatening and dangerous to people who have no experience with Autism. They can do unpredictable things to themselves and others. I would compare this with a computer, the less people know about them the more "dangerous" they appear.

I would say my relationships associated with religion have been less tolerant, and less loving to a far greater degree than secular relationships. Go figure!

I heard a quip on NPR today that the largest mental health institution in the country is the prison system. It's not based on treating the illness, only separating it from the rest of society. I would compare that with the reactions to Autistic children in public (and others). In general, as a society we're not as concerned with others as much as we are ourselves, and only to the point where "out of sight, out of mind" yeilds relief from our momentary discomfort.

Oliver's Army wrote:

moondrop wrote:It is the parents responsibility to teach the child proper behavior in all types of settings. Special needs child or not.

"Lady! Please keep your retarded kid quiet while I pray for heathens to burn in the fire pits of Hell."

God be with you -n- stuff.