When staff are the bully

Ironic, isn’t it.  Those in charge of ensuring children aren’t subjected to bullying, often times are the actual bully, or working in concert with the aggressor.  Sadly it’s becoming common place in the special education world, and far too often it goes unchecked until something really horrific happens.  Partly because staff with the intention of malice exploit the very nature of the student’s disabilities, relying on their cognitive functioning level to complicate, or negate believability. Partly because administrative staff have a tendency to turn a blind eye because they are more concerned with staffing and human resource issues that could arise from addressing instances in which bullying has been suggested, or concerns relayed to them.

Parents often lack credibility in the eyes of staff, and are accused of being overly emotional, irrational, or not properly educated in the ways of disability.  Where there are certainly instances in which the above is true, it does not negate all claims made on behalf of their children. 

This is a system that is stacked against you, in which you rarely are the victor, and are often left picking up the pieces of damage that happens to your child, or in some cases, the continued harassment your child is subjected to simply because you suggested bullying may have occurred. 

When you bring up concerns about staff interaction with regard to safety, and professionalism, and suddenly instances of involuntary seclusion, denial of basic civil rights such as access to the bathroom on request, and students being encouraged or allowed to physically assault your child routinely, what do you call that?  Over active imagination?  Coincidence?  Happenstance?  A simple misunderstanding times multiple incidents?  Or is it exactly what it sounds like?

What is it when you work in the same profession, have more education, and know exactly how situations are supposed to be handled, yet your words are worthless?

Why do your tax dollars support a system that can often do more harm than good to the child and there is so little recourse to right injustice?

Where is the intrinsic motivation of the professional to do there job well, properly, and with pride that they are working in the best interest of the child?

How have we come so far since 1975, yet in so many ways, little has changed?

Who is going to ever right this system so that it actually does what it is intended to do on behalf of these children?

My voice is often lost in a myriad of meetings, emails, and grievances, with little to no real resolution..........how then will my child’s voice ever be heard, or for the children who have no voice?

One step forward, ten steps back.

After an exceptionally challenging school year I've come to the conclusion that it's time for change.  Between personal life aspects of the boy and his education, the economy, and my general energy level, it's time to go back to the drawing board.  I had planned on going down this road in the future; just not this near future.  Such as life.

I really do believe that being a Special Advocate is my perfect niche.  I have a fierce justice complex, and the tenacity to back it up when those less fortunate are being screwed over in the mix.  Too many years of games and flaming hoops with regard to my son have created a take no prisoners attitude in me when it comes to the law.

My bigger issue is if I have it in me right now to go back to school.  My time is extremely limited between my own classroom, the boy, the neurotypical daughter I'm putting through college, and that each day only allots 24 hours to get it all done in.  I'm in great hope that I just feel like I've been put through the wringer because this last year was the most physically and emotionally demanding that I've encountered in eleven years; only time will tell with that one.

Normally, I wouldn't even consider taking this leap with all that is my life.  As usual though, change is necessitated through some less than desirable happenings within the public system in my neck of the woods, and that shit aint gonna fly with me.  These are changes that will not benefit the greater good, and they are very swift moving with this new agenda.  While it will always be my responsibility to advocate for my son, and my students, I feel compelled to serve more, as this will affect most children in this district negatively.  And we all know that once one entity starts to make major change, the rest follow suit.

Details will remain in my own head for now; call it paranoia, but since information I receive is confidential in nature, and was not intended for my eyes, I'll just keep it all to myself.  It's sufficiently compelling to cause me to further overwhelm myself, as well as invest a chunk of money that I could certainly use elsewhere just to rail against this new proposal (which should speak for itself).

So, one step forward for me..............because I cannot allow them to go ten steps back.

Look before you leap; the politics of Special Education

For some time now (most aggressively this last school year), there has occurred some major shake ups with respect to special education here in this county.  In theory, it's supposed to equate to nearly a complete overhaul of the system.  As with any issue where tax payer dollars are involved, there will certainly be political agendas behind it.  While change is often for the greater good, the message conveyed behind why the change is necessary, often gets lost, muddied, or was simply an "excuse" to satisfy the people, and hide the real intention behind it.

Based on a report of analysis of the current educational model here, many suggestions were made, that are in fact very legitimate, and in desperate need of change.  They highlighted the disproportionate amount of special ed. students being segregated to special day classes, separate sites, etc., as well as some huge inaccuracies in particular ethnic groups being labeled as disabled, when in fact those issues stem from social maladjustment. 

These are important key points to look at.  Students need opportunity to be placed in the least restrictive environment and to be educated with their non disabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate.  The other students have the right to be educated with their non disabled peers, and not be subjected to profiling based on their color, where they end up inappropriately labeled as something they are not.

It all sounds fantastic and beneficial in theory.  It's as if someone waved a magic wand, and suddenly the district woke up.  Were it not to coincide with a massive budget gap, and a failing economy, it would seem pure in intention.  Some may say that's just killing two birds with one stone, and you're being to cynical to see the forest through the trees.

Let's examine some of the underlying issues that are prevalent already with the old model, and how they will one, continue to affect the new model, and two, due to the budget, create a massive failure of the new model.

Adequate training.  This is a huge issue in general.  Those classified as special education staff, often lack even rudimentary knowledge in behavioral theory.  They may be sent to a workshop on a particular topic sporadically, but it's often a band-aid at best.  They are not given the opportunity to thoroughly learn the nuances of behavioral theory, and put them into practice.  This isn't just at the parapro level, this is true of the teachers as well.  So, there is a behavior department, which is much more thoroughly trained, has access to creating visuals, and comes out as support to these individuals, to teach them what they weren't given the opportunity to learn.  Once again, sounds great.  Except that within this district there is a growing sense of disdain towards the special ed. population, and the current crop of staff that believe that these students don't have the right to have behavior, or that they as staff, shouldn't have to put up with the level of intensity that some children display.  So the behavior department tries their best to train them, and show them the error of their ways, and give them the tools that will make these students successful, though they are often met with hostility, and refusal by the part of the staff.  They refuse to implement these tools, and ultimately the students suffer.

These are people who are supposed to be best suited to work with the special ed. population, who actively made the choice to work with these students.  They lack the necessary skills, and desire to learn how to help these children.

Now, those issues go mostly unchecked.  The district decides it's going to adopt a new model, and begin mass integrating most of these students back into regular education.  To exposing them to staff that have zero experience or training with this population.  The simplest answer would be to begin training the regular ed. staff prior to the shift, so that these students don't fall by the wayside (or even training them at all).  This is all set up under the guise of providing these students with the least restrictive environment, and trying to be in line with what federal regulations mandate.

But, no such training is taking place.  Add to that, once some students are placed, the request for support can take several months to arrive, meanwhile, once again, the student suffers.  This does not smell of genuine concern to mainstream a child, but rather a means to an end to ease budget woes.  Educating students in special day class, separate facility or even non public settings is extremely costly.  Some non public settings can range between $166 to $235 dollars a day.

Were the district to be actively training and transition planning for this influx of students, this cause would seem genuine.  I find it hard to swallow that this is their actual intention; to provide for the greater good of these students, and not to simply save money.

Even more interesting is that these decisions for this new model come at a time when there is no superintendent, and a blood bath taking place amongst the school board.  Budget cuts,  poor economy, no actual leader, political infighting; very interesting timing indeed.  Change is vital to progress, when the intention is genuinely designed to affect the greater good; not place further constraints on an already broken system.

Maybe I just have a biased opinion from personal experience working in conjunction with this district, and having a child not being served by it adequately.  Maybe I have a skewed view because I have the luxury of intensive training, and staff who genuinely believe in what they do, and are always willing to learn new things. Or maybe, it's just the skeptic in me, that screams this is not what it seems, don't let them pull the wool over your eyes on this issue, while these students get lost in the maze, and will only further regress.

They say patience is a virtue, though I hold little faith that patience will show with time that this move will work out for all, and is a heartfelt sentiment on behalf of the district that is just simply experiencing some growing pains.

My two cents on the subject.

No matter how you slice it, Vaccine debate is always a war zone.

Now days, everyone has heard of the vaccine debate.  It's more front and center, then many other factors of Autism Awareness unfortunately.  Beliefs divide friends and family, and often garner enemies in the blog-o-sphere.  For many, it's an emotional battlefield, where no one is a clear winner.

My view lands on the pro-vaccine side.  I could give countless examples of why I feel that way, but that really wasn't the intention or point of this particular post.

I was recently pseudo-lambasted on another blog over such a debate.  This particular post was in reference to a very difficult decision a family with a history of Autism and vaccine reaction, and where to proceed to next.  There was reference that bends the direction of being pro-vaccine, and some coverage on how the whole debate should be scientifically dead.

Let me preface by saying that I'm an avid reader of the anti-vax nonsense.  On a daily basis, I subject myself to their twisted logic, endless rants, and fervor for their belief that I can only compare to that of common zealotry.  It pains me to no end (and often leaves me wanting to jab a sharp implement into my temple to simply stop the headache I have received from reading their tireless tirades).  I, unfortunately, have a lot of experience with their views on the subject of vaccines, but more so, their view on Autism.

Fast forward (or rewind back to the blog posting I was reading).  The blog author of this particular post, was asking the question as to why it is this debate is even still alive.  Well, don't ya know, I inputted my two cents with the experience (emphasis on my experience, not to be confused with their belief system).  I commented that in my experience, anti-vaxxers need something or someone to blame, and are often "mad" that they didn't get the child they wanted.  Mind you, this is their opinion, and if you read many of their blogs, you will find much in the way of evidence to support my assertion.  Hence why I made the "mad" statement.  This is their interpretation and view, not mine.

Autism in general comes emotionally loaded for those of us either involved with, or affected by it.  There are far too many factors to list why this occurs.  Jumping the gun isn't fairly uncommon when people read posts related to the topic, and glean simply one or two action words that send them into hostility or offense.

The first commenter to take my post out of context, relayed that in her personal experience she had never come across a single parent that was mad their child had Autism.  While she is obviously fortunate, I cannot say the same for myself.  I have had the displeasure personally, and as I stated before, such beliefs are alive and well in the anti-vax forums.

Second commenter, reiterated them same sentiment.  Blog author then had to feel as though he may have offended some people by saying previously that he understood the view I had mentioned on certain parents out there feeling anger for their children being Autistic.  She then responded by saying that she understood that was not his view, but that the statement had come from a comment made by someone else (that someone else of course being myself).

Here, is where emotion enters the picture, as often happens with this particular debate.  Evidently, my statement that there are other parents out there who are "mad" that their children are Autistic, and not that this is my particular view on the subject gets muddied.  I at no time asserted that was my sentiment, feeling, or opinion on the topic.  Often times emotion leads to cherry picking of a particular statement or two, or confusion of the context.

As I have mentioned, spend some time on the more popular anti-vax website, blogs, boards, and forums.  You will find statements such as "Autism stole my child's soul", "Autism kidnapped my child", and "Autism stole my child's future".  These are their statements, not mine.  Such statements are indicative of anger and hostility about the condition.  They are not child centered; they are complaints of loss on the parents part.

I need not clarify my view on my son's Autism, but since we're here, and people want to misinterpret what I say, might as well make a go of it!  Am I sad that my child has a disability, of course.  Am I sad that he will not be afforded as many options, opportunities, and experiences as a "typical" child will be; absolutely.  I am however, in no way angry about it.  I get angry at the ignorance, and prejudice he often encounters.  In retrospect, his disability is almost a blessing in disguise.  I have a "neurotypical" teenager, who in less than two months will graduate from high school.  Who has been afforded every opportunity to succeed, and have a plentiful life.  Said child, lacks such motivation or concern for her impending future.  In many ways, the issues we as parents encounter with "typical" children are far more difficult than that of a disabled child.  My son will not encounter the typical trials and tribulations of being a teenager, and for that, in many ways I am thankful.

So in the future, I suppose I will have to be more careful how I paraphrase others opinions, so as to avoid having them confused with my own.  It's rather unfortunate, when it seems so clear, but often this is the case when it comes to human interaction; it can result in war, rather than peace.

Soap box moment

Im having a moment after stumbling onto a post about "safety vests", or more commonly referred to as a "harness" on a Wrightslaw blog.  Such devices can be a hot bed of debate amongst parents and professionals, with people on either side of the issue.  I certainly have my opinion, and well, many people might just tell me to take a hike in my support for and belief in there use;  that there akin to torture devices for children.

I could go into the length the reason's why I support there use (and that my child has been in one for many years now, as well as the majority of students that I work with), but simply put, I don't need to.  My child, my choice.

The point in my rant?  The main gist of the woman's commentary was how pissed off she was that her children are now being forced to wear safety vests on a daily basis.  She had explained that previously they were used at driver discretion, when her kids were having a "bad day", otherwise the standard seat belts were usually utilized. 

I must be missing something here.  Your not opposed to there use, just not on a daily basis?  I'll play devil's advocate for a moment, and pretend I think what may be going on in her head to come to this belief that safety vests are on a "as needed basis".  Ya, in theory, children with disabilities don't always have behavioral episodes.  They may need to learn their own self control, and sensory regulation when navigating life.  Some days are good, and some days are bad.   But like any other proactive intervention (though a "harness" may not seem like it), it has to be implemented consistently, to be completely effective.

What if, the driver or aide misses the escalation phase, and can't get a safety vest on your child safely?  What if your child (or children in this case) are so escalated that they injure the driver, aide, or another student?  How would you react if your child/children was injured due to an un-restrained child that was having a behavioral episode?

So many "what if's" to consider.  Also consider that children, special ed or not, still have guidelines that they have to adhere to when it comes to transportation.  I agree 100% that transportation is more often than not a broken system, with less than adequately trained staff, who jump at the smallest infraction.  I live it on a daily basis.  With that being said, they do have guidelines they have to follow, and if the policy is that a child is to be harnessed at all times, then they can no longer use their discretion in deciding the when, and how.

Would I want such a device to be used based off their opinion of the situation..........that would be a resounding "Um no, not on your life"!  Leaving it up to their determination sounds much more like a restraint situation (as the blogger was suggesting) than the consistent use of the device on a daily basis.  And I might add, that seat belts are essentially the same thing, only slightly easier to operate.  Most children can get out of a harness given very little effort (as wonder boy has shed his harness and made it out the window into traffic before).

Maybe Im just over protective, and tend to air on the side of caution.  Caution that I am very well aware of his capacity to injure others on the bus, and himself, should he be given opportunity.  If you were o.k. with the use of a safety vest on your children previously, Im going to guess your well aware of their potential yourself, and should maybe not take this as a personal attack by transportation.  They have a responsibility to all students on the bus, and keeping them safe, whether you feel the change in policy is appropriate, or not.

Disabled or not, we are responsible for our children's actions, and with that comes some less than desirable decisions at times.