Autistic children and Sunday School

[Chum]

2 minutes ago, bluebell said:

what if everyone in the stake sides with the bishop? 

I think this is an argument for a passive-aggressive approach. If you have a worthwhile solution that doesn't involve other adults, do that.

[bsjkki]

29 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You do the best you can. I've been steamrollered by the stake when they wanted to do something I thought was wrong. There is still damage from what happened to someone I care about.

My experience, unless you can prove a flagrant violation of church policy, the Stake will support Bishops. Especially if it’s a subjective opinion.

[Kenngo1969]

On 8/10/2021 at 5:41 PM, bluebell said:

I agree that would be a good way to go about it.  But what if everyone in the stake sides with the bishop?  

There really isn't a way to 'steamroll' church leadership.  We can express our opinions about things and our wants and our needs and hope that makes a difference, but in the end that's kind of....the end.

It's not talked about very much, because the hope is that any issues can be handled, if not on the ward level, then on the stake level.  But, of course, the stake president, too, answers to someone in the hierarchy of the Church of Jesus Christ.  I don't know what the bishop said, and I would be surprised if the stake president were to throw up his hands in such a situation, but that need not be the end of the matter, necessarily.

Edited August 15, 2021 by Kenngo1969
"Pat, is there a 'T'?"

[LoudmouthMormon]

 

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

4 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

Ignoring stupid, avoiding stupid, and then finally steamrollering over the top of rude annoying persistent stupid, I think can be done in love and righteousness, if done correctly.

What exactly would be the loving and righteous way of steamrolling over the Bishop?

 

The bishop wasn't being rude, annoying, or persistently stupid.  Hence, steamrolling isn't warranted.

Context!

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, bsjkki said:

My experience, unless you can prove a flagrant violation of church policy, the Stake will support Bishops. Especially if it’s a subjective opinion.

I wish I had more of that experience in my current ward. It seems we have all kinds of people telling the stake things and we get weird instructions on things that often upset the apple cart. I am admittedly biased since I work more closely with the bishop than anyone except his secretary so I generally favor his view since I have often talked it through with him.

[TAO_2]

On 8/9/2021 at 3:52 PM, juliann said:

I have a friend with an autistic child who loves Pokemon. She draws Pokemon in her class. The bishop informed my friend through the Primary President that someone had complained and the child is not to draw Pokemon instead of the approved activities. First, how to you tell an autistic child not to draw what they are fascinated with when nothing comparable is given as a substitute. Second, this seems petty and mean, not to mention a refusal to accomodate special needs children.

Is anyone familiar with any rules, regulations, etc., that could help? 

Hey Juliann,

Others have written pretty much what I would say in regards to rules and regulations.  I have Asperger's, which is semi-related to Autism.  I don't particularly remember having a harder time being still in church than other boys, but I definitely could have had a hard time and just not be remembering.  We do get one-track mind sometimes.

In this case, what I'd probably do is first have your friend talk to the bishop.  Try to be as kind as possible in doing so, there's a chance he doesn't fully understand the situation.  Explain what will occur if the child is not allowed to draw (your friend should have a few experiences with this, and so should be able to relate the difficulty of it).  It's possible the bishop just doesn't know about how difficult it is, and it wouldn't be the greatest to embarrass him if that's the case (and sometimes, us men can be kinda dense).  Worst case you can bring up the rules mentioned in other posts.

If he says no, you can decide whether or not you want to go to to the stake president.  Hopefully it doesn't come to that though.

Just make sure your friend is frank with the Bishop.  Sometimes people just aren't aware, so you have to explain pretty carefully.

Hope it works out for both of you.

[bsjkki]

I heard an interesting story from my sister tonight. They have a mostly  non verbal Down syndrome boy in their ward. He blesses the sacrament. He has the prayers written on larger paper. The words he says are not discernible as words to the congregation but he says them with great care and to the best of his ability. Interesting how even an ordinance, can be accommodated. The SP is in their ward so this has been approved. 

[bluebell]

14 hours ago, LoudmouthMormon said:

 

 

The bishop wasn't being rude, annoying, or persistently stupid.  Hence, steamrolling isn't warranted.

Context!

If someone isn't being treated fairly or their needs aren't being considered, does the bishop have to be rude, annoying or persistently stupid before "steamrolling" is warranted?  And if the answer to that is yes, then what does someone do in the situation I've described?

Context is important, but if your post wasn't relevant to the OP because the bishop wasn't being rude, then what was the point of the post (not being snarky, sincere question)?

[bluebell]

16 hours ago, Chum said:

I think this is an argument for a passive-aggressive approach. If you have a worthwhile solution that doesn't involve other adults, do that.

This is an argument for when there are no other worthwhile solutions within your power to implement.  Which happens more time with these kinds of church issues than we sometimes want to admit, because we don't like no-win scenarios.

[LoudmouthMormon]

2 hours ago, bluebell said:

If someone isn't being treated fairly or their needs aren't being considered, does the bishop have to be rude, annoying or persistently stupid before "steamrolling" is warranted?  And if the answer to that is yes, then what does someone do in the situation I've described?

Context is important, but if your post wasn't relevant to the OP because the bishop wasn't being rude, then what was the point of the post (not being snarky, sincere question)?

I guess to make sure we're talking about the same thing: I'm using "steamrollering" as a phrase that describes the parent just ditching common politeness and acting, not quite aggressively, but "loudly bluntly".  The person being 'steamrollered' gets a clear message that continuing to press is going to be a very unpleasant experience.  I do not claim it is the right or best response.  It's certainly not the most patient or longsuffering response.  It's just the response that works well for my wife when some clueless idiot pushes her too far about her own kid.  And I'm suggesting the OP's friend may wish to consider developing a skin thick enough to employ such a countermeasure if conditions warrant.  Which they rarely will.  

So, to respond to your question:

There are a handful of ways to charitably and calmly push back, and most of the time, they'll be of more use.  The OP's friend may wish to push back, but I'm not suggesting the OP's friend steamroller the bishop.     I'm suggesting that she keep such a response in her toolbag for future encounters.  Autistic behavior is often misunderstood by members of the public.  People are sometimes left with the notion "I need to do something, but I don't know what."  In those cases, they may just decide what needs to happen is to go yell at the mom for being a bad parent and not controlling their kid.  In such situations, dealing with an innocent child and an aggressive clueless person pushing something that isn't helpful, my wife's 3 step program never fails:

1- Ignore the person, don't respond.
2- Increase physical distance between yours and them.
3- If pursued, go full Mamma-bear and provide a disproportionate response, ratcheting things up to a level just shy of physical altercation.  (If you're a sinner like me, you might recognize the acronym FA&FA, but "do you wanna step outside and settle this" are equivalents to a loud "BACK OFF!").

Does this help?

[bOObOO]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

If someone isn't being treated fairly or their needs aren't being considered, does the bishop have to be rude, annoying or persistently stupid before "steamrolling" is warranted?  And if the answer to that is yes, then what does someone do in the situation I've described?

Context is important, but if your post wasn't relevant to the OP because the bishop wasn't being rude, then what was the point of the post (not being snarky, sincere question)?

To be fair the bishop would need to treat others the same, so if he says one person shouldn't draw Pokemon pictures then to be fair he would just need to be consistent and say nobody else should draw Pokemon pictures either.  Considering all as one rather than having different methods for treating each one.  So it sounds to me like what this parent of this autistic child wants is for that child to be treated specially, as is often done for a special needs child.  To be allowed to draw Pokemon characters while no other child is allowed to do that.  Or maybe what that parent wants is for every child to be allowed to draw Pokemon characters, if that is what each child wants to do.  With nobody taking away any crayons or paper from any child. 

So as I see things I think you have 3 options, considering the bishop of that ward is the one person authorized to manage what goes on in that ward building for that ward:

1) Somehow get that bishop's approval for that child to draw Pokemon pictures in that classroom

2) Do nothing to prevent that child from drawing Pokemon pictures in that classroom even though that bishop does not approve

3) Take that child somewhere else to draw Pokemon pictures, providing the paper and crayons needed to draw those pictures

That bishop will do what that bishop will do, so it is up to that parent to choose his or her own course of action in response to what that bishop will do.  As the parent I'd probably just go with option 3, maybe just going out to the foyer with that child, teaching my child myself what I wanted my child to learn.

Edited August 11, 2021 by bOObOO

[2BizE]

Yikes. I hope I don’t get busted for drawing  unapproved doodles on the sacrament meeting agenda.

[The Nehor]

6 hours ago, 2BizE said:

Yikes. I hope I don’t get busted for drawing  unapproved doodles on the sacrament meeting agenda.

As long as you are not drawing those hellish Pokemans you are probably okay. Unless you are drawing My Little Pony. That gets you excommunicated.

[Rain]

8 hours ago, 2BizE said:

Yikes. I hope I don’t get busted for drawing  unapproved doodles on the sacrament meeting agenda.

You're ok as long as you don't give it to the child sitting next to you.

Which reminds me of when we first moved here.  My husband has this beautiful, loud voice.  People often tell him he should be in the tabernacle choir.  Children openly stare at him. 

That first week we sat in back of a girl about 11 or 12.  She has several health and mental syndromes,  but I don't remember what they are called.  My husband started singing and she turned around and stared at him open mouthed for the song.

Then she got busy.  She had her sticker book and created an art piece all over the paper and in the center about 20 stickers high.  Then she gave it to my husband. 

He got a lot of those art pieces until she moved.  He got hugs.  We would come into the building and we were invisible if he was there and if not she would immediately ask,  "where's ________?"

No, we didn't keep those pictures,  but I can tell you the fact that he was given them meant a lot to him.   And I'm jealous! 

Edited August 14, 2021 by Rain