I sometimes can not fathom the way autistic kids are treated.
When one 12 year old autistic boy in Perth, Australia became disruptive, his teachers would simply take him outside the classroom and put him in a cage.
A 12-year-old autistic boy was locked in a “cage” outside his Australian schoolroom several times a day when his behaviour became too difficult to control, the boy’s grandmother claimed today.Mrs Sheila Simons said her grandson, Neil, was sometimes put in the enclosure for up to 80 minutes at a time over a period of months at the Kenwick School for disabled children in Perth. The boy did not have access to a bathroom or water. Mrs Simons said she was horrified when she saw the structure: “It was a cage. When I saw it I just cried.”
While I have never personally experienced anything even remotely similar to having Bobby locked up in a cage, I understand that instances of autistic kids being tied down while at school have occurred in the United States even as recently as last year.
There is a word that I think should describe any teacher who locks any child in a cage or ties him to a desk or to any school administrator who permits such conduct.
That word is “defendant.”
This hasn't been in the news here in Sydney. Don't know about Western Australian, though.
Have you also read the longer story with more details at
http://www.awares.org/pkgs/news/news.asp?showItemID=370&board=&bbcode=&profileCode=§ion=
It sounds more like a securely fenced garden or yard - and they'd consulted with people about the best thing to do to help the boy get away & quiet down.
It may not have been the best they could do (please make suggestions to them), but especially since it was a special school for children with disabilities, it's unlikely they'd just throw someone into "a cage".
Remember that it's in the news people's interest to whip up controversy & heat. Always check as much background as you can.
Posted by: Liz at February 20, 2004 02:46 AMI read the above link with more details.
especially the part where the child is in there for over an hour, having to take off clothes and defecate, urinate, etc...
"defendant." i'm right there with you, Dwight.
mb
the other Mary Beth
The details of the physical plant are elusive, but what is without any doubt is that staffing is withdrawn during the periods of confinement of the child to the area in question. Abandonment is not lawful, therefore if the staff is insufficient to maintain staffing during recurrent episodes presently responded to by confined abandonment, staffing must be increassed.
The salaciousness of the reported details are a distraction, the real issue is the efficacy and legitimacy of destaffing a one-on-one.
Defendant is obvious, a consent decree with manditory minimums for staffing to achieve a constant, uninterrupted level of capable staffing, that is an outcome.
Posted by: Eric at February 21, 2004 09:57 PMWhat needs to be remembered when reading this article is that there is always two sides to a story and that the media have a clever way with words. The 'cage' or quiet garden was actually a garden with shade cloth and a bench. This garden was attached to two classrooms. One, a demountable and one, was a singular classroom designed for that boy. There was no need for a toilet facility in the garden as there was one close by. This boy exhibited extreme violent behaviours that placed the other students and staff at risk. He also exhibited behaviours that were extremely embarrassing to himself such as nudity and defacating in public. The garden was designed for the child's own dignity and safety as well as the other school members safety. There are so many more factors involved that the public never even heard about, so please do not judge on what you don't know.
Posted by: Kirsten at June 8, 2004 06:58 AM