DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> General Discussion >> Should "behavioral disorder" be a legit excuse?
Pages:  
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 109, (reverse)
AuthorThread
06/18/2007 05:24:10 PM · #76
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

People here are sooo concerned about the well being and tender mental state of the miscreant that they seem to ignore those same issues as they relate to the infant victim.


Really? When did someone say that? I must have missed it.

Rather, what I've seen universally is people saying "by all means, the mother should've been more involved, and by all means you needed to protect your child."

Then there's divergence in whether threatening to kick the kid's ass was appropriate.

But nowhere have I seen anyone suggest that doing nothing was the appropriate response, nor have I seen anyone say that protecting the infant wasn't the most important thing.

That said, I do agree with you on two points:
1) I have no problem with other adults telling my kids to behave and then coming to me about it if they continue
2) If my kids had been doing that, they would've been out of the pool, possibly for a lot longer than that afternoon.
06/18/2007 05:49:25 PM · #77
Originally posted by karmat:


Honestly, though, she probably didn't because she was scared that he would lock his little sister up when they got home, try to set his room on fire again, kill his little brother's puppy, etc. I'm not saying that as trying to stereotype anyone, that was just my experience with one of my students (in jail now, for the umpteenth time, cause someone finally figured out it wasn't a "disability" he just didn't want to follow anyone's rules), who was, indeed, "identified" as having BED (Behavioral/Emotional Disorders). If he got into "trouble" with the school or parents, he took it out on the little brother or sister.



After reading this paragraph I thought of one of Bill Cosbys' stories about his father. "Boy, I brought you into this world.... I can take you out!" When a child is 11 years old it's almost too late to establish dominance as a parent. It will more than likely take some violence initially and modern society doesn't tolerate that well.

06/18/2007 05:54:00 PM · #78
Yep, that's why I concluded by saying that if this doesn't work, then you should remove your child from this dangerous situation. I've been in similar situations dozens of times and this technique has always had positive results. However, if the child is unresponsive, then telling a manager and then probably leaving is the responsible thing to do.

Originally posted by karmat:

Originally posted by PhilipDyer:

I'm completely with Pccody on this one. I have two kids and know that this is by far the most effective way to deal with a situation like this. The only thing I would add is to tell the child how his splashing is affecting you and your child and to make sure he knows that this is unacceptable. Then just tell him if he can stop that negative behavior, you'd be glad to include him in what you're doing.

This is a positive reinforcement of him correcting his own behavior and models a good way for his mother to deal with this problem in the future, if she's capable of that. If he refuses to cooperate, remove your child from the situation and let any nearby supervisors/authority figures know about the problem so that you can focus solely on taking care of your child.


The point that seems to be missing is that if the child has been identified as BD, there usually is a reason for it, and that reason it that for whatever reason, things that would work for most kids, don't work for them. Are your kids labeled "BD?" If not, that is why an fairly unobtrusive method works. Granted, offering to kick his butt may not have been the right thing to do, but "reasoning" with him would not have worked. It would have simply reinforced that when he does something, he gets a reaction from it, and a negative reaction is better than no reaction.

06/18/2007 05:56:22 PM · #79
Originally posted by Kaizer:

I personally favor the size 12.5 "Foot in the ass" solution. Pretty good chance of a photo opp0rtunity at the moment of impact.... I certainly would score it well in the "Free Study", prob a 10.


Perfect for the backsides challenge!!!!!
06/18/2007 05:56:33 PM · #80
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:


Kids generally think that their parents are invincible and can do anything. Especially at a very young age. That feeling decreases as the kid gets older, but trust me, I know.. When I was little, I used to think my dad could save me from anything, and when I was in distress and he DIDN'T save me from it, I got confused. I probably don't make alot of sense. What I'm getting at is that young children expect their parents to stick up for them no matter what, and if they don't, they get confused. They question their parents' love for them sometimes. I know I did.


That really rings a bell with me. I can still remember (vividly) being left to die in the hospital at age 2 1/2; it's how I ended up deaf, from meningitis. here's a poem i wrote on it, for what it's worth:

Felipe Viejo

My first clear memory of my fatherís face
has troubled me for nearly 60 years ó
I felt somehow diminished by the fact
I had seen him in tears.

My father wept to leave me dying there,
but as a child how could I understand?
I saw him weep. He turned away from me.
He would not hold my hand.

What could I think but that his leaving me
was punishment for begging him to stay?
I thought, by screaming at him, I had made
my father mad that day.

I needed to believe that he was strong,
and even then knew strong men did not weep,
so made an image of him in my heart
I could afford to keep.

I realize now how young he was, and know
he must have been mature beyond his age
to leave his son alone, in pain, to die,
and not explode in rage.

I beg forgiveness now: the child was wrong.
Though tears of grief fell from my fatherís eyes,
he proved, confronting my impending death,
he was both strong and wise.

R.

Message edited by author 2007-06-18 17:57:02.
06/18/2007 06:03:07 PM · #81
Originally posted by pcody:

What do you think happens when eveyone expects him to be a terror?


Actually the mother set the scene into motion by telling the kid not to splash the baby. If the mother had said; "Now don't you dare dive down into the deep end and see how long you can hold your breath." I believe the outcome could have been different. The kids behavior shows he has absolutely no respect for his mother. Wonder if Mom and Dad still live together?
06/18/2007 06:05:40 PM · #82
o, robert.
06/18/2007 07:34:35 PM · #83
Originally posted by levyj413:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

People here are sooo concerned about the well being and tender mental state of the miscreant that they seem to ignore those same issues as they relate to the infant victim.


Really? When did someone say that? I must have missed it.


You did:

Originally posted by levyj413:


But you have no idea what their family situation is, what he's been diagnosed with, or anything else based on one experience of a few minutes.

06/18/2007 07:35:30 PM · #84
Originally posted by xianart:

o, robert.


exactly what I was thinking. That is an awesome poem about what must have been a truly terrifing time in your life.
06/18/2007 07:51:55 PM · #85
Originally posted by PhilipDyer:

However, if the child is unresponsive, then telling a manager and then probably leaving is the responsible thing to do.


Now here's the part I have the biggest problem with and it may just be a fault of mine. I never once considered leaving as I don't see any reason the innocent should have to. I was there enjoying a day with my family when someone decided to try to ruin it for us. He knew the consequences that his mother would make him pay (none) and has probably made many people leave the pool, restaurant, park, or any other public place you care to insert. Was I out of line for saying he was going to have a foot in the ass disorder? Sure. Was I wrong for not playing tattle tale and leaving? Absolutely not - nor will anyone change my mind about that. The only thing that would've made me leave that pool was if mom pulled an RPG out of her purse.

The future well being of an unruly brat wasn't at the top of my agenda at the time. The future well being of another happened to be my main concern. After a day of thought I do think I could've handled it more maturely without the "foot in the ass" comment which is why I asked the two questions; but to grab my family up, tell on a 10 year old kid and just leave when someone else is causing such an asinine ruckus wouldn't have been something I could've slept with last night.
06/18/2007 07:57:54 PM · #86
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Unfortunately, prior experience with security in similar situations had led me to the following observation ....

You are unfortunately right in many professional sports venues. My experience with lifeguards at public swimming pools is that they don't take any BS from anybody, whatever their age or mental condition.
06/18/2007 09:14:01 PM · #87
Originally posted by dudephil:

Originally posted by PhilipDyer:

However, if the child is unresponsive, then telling a manager and then probably leaving is the responsible thing to do.


Now here's the part I have the biggest problem with and it may just be a fault of mine. I never once considered leaving as I don't see any reason the innocent should have to. I was there enjoying a day with my family when someone decided to try to ruin it for us. He knew the consequences that his mother would make him pay (none) and has probably made many people leave the pool, restaurant, park, or any other public place you care to insert. Was I out of line for saying he was going to have a foot in the ass disorder? Sure. Was I wrong for not playing tattle tale and leaving? Absolutely not - nor will anyone change my mind about that. The only thing that would've made me leave that pool was if mom pulled an RPG out of her purse.

The future well being of an unruly brat wasn't at the top of my agenda at the time. The future well being of another happened to be my main concern. After a day of thought I do think I could've handled it more maturely without the "foot in the ass" comment which is why I asked the two questions; but to grab my family up, tell on a 10 year old kid and just leave when someone else is causing such an asinine ruckus wouldn't have been something I could've slept with last night.


I've complained to the property manager of my apartment complex before when I encounter unattended children playing on the fitness equipment like monkey bars - it's not just the rules, it's a matter of safety.

The mother's refusal to control her kid doesn't just show a lack of respect for you, but also a lack of respect for the venue in which she's allowing her juvenile delinquent son run amok. It's the management's job to keep their establishment hospitable and safe. If you can't resolve the problem yourself, then escalating it to a person of some authority - the lifeguard on duty, the pool manager, the security guard, whatever - shouldn't be taboo. Especially if the problem is posing a danger to others, like your son whom you mentioned could hardly breathe.

Expressing concern to the local authority for those who pose a threat, however minor, to your or your son's safety should NEVER be thought of as tattling. Too many people look the other way and refuse to speak up because society puts this ridiculous taboo on us. We'd rather take grapefruit spoons to our own eyes than be labeled tattle-tales. As a result, people get away with breaking the rules. As a result, people get hurt.

Message edited by author 2007-06-18 21:14:56.
06/18/2007 09:31:36 PM · #88
If a kid was out there doing something more serious or even against the rules it would get reported. I don't know of any violations for baby splashing. Plus, I'm not going to the manager and telling him that a 10 year old kid got the best of me in water splashing while I carry my things out to the car. The splashing was only the tool he was using - I was way more upset at the fact that he was allowed to deliberately annoy someone while using "behavioral disorder" as a crutch.

Message edited by author 2007-06-18 21:32:00.
06/18/2007 09:41:34 PM · #89
Yeah, it's a tough call. I've only had to resort to this once when a parent just refused to do anything about his kid at a playground. Luckily, there was plenty of room for us to go have fun somewhere else. Kids almost always respond well to a bit of open discussion, and when that doesn't work, there's usually some "higher authority" around to appeal to. Sounds like you tried your best and didn't have many reasonable options -- that's pretty difficult to deal with.

Oh, and since I didn't make this clear earlier, I think it's clear that the mother was being ridiculously irresponsible. Obviously, a child with a behavioral disorder requires more effort and attention, not less.

Originally posted by dudephil:

Originally posted by PhilipDyer:

However, if the child is unresponsive, then telling a manager and then probably leaving is the responsible thing to do.


Now here's the part I have the biggest problem with and it may just be a fault of mine. I never once considered leaving as I don't see any reason the innocent should have to. I was there enjoying a day with my family when someone decided to try to ruin it for us. He knew the consequences that his mother would make him pay (none) and has probably made many people leave the pool, restaurant, park, or any other public place you care to insert. Was I out of line for saying he was going to have a foot in the ass disorder? Sure. Was I wrong for not playing tattle tale and leaving? Absolutely not - nor will anyone change my mind about that. The only thing that would've made me leave that pool was if mom pulled an RPG out of her purse.

The future well being of an unruly brat wasn't at the top of my agenda at the time. The future well being of another happened to be my main concern. After a day of thought I do think I could've handled it more maturely without the "foot in the ass" comment which is why I asked the two questions; but to grab my family up, tell on a 10 year old kid and just leave when someone else is causing such an asinine ruckus wouldn't have been something I could've slept with last night.


Message edited by author 2007-06-18 21:51:25.
06/18/2007 09:45:30 PM · #90
Originally posted by dudephil:

If a kid was out there doing something more serious or even against the rules it would get reported. I don't know of any violations for baby splashing. Plus, I'm not going to the manager and telling him that a 10 year old kid got the best of me in water splashing while I carry my things out to the car. The splashing was only the tool he was using - I was way more upset at the fact that he was allowed to deliberately annoy someone while using "behavioral disorder" as a crutch.


It isn't against the rules to disturb other swimmers? And why NOT stop on the way out to the car? I think management has a right to know why their paying customers are leaving in a huff. It's a customer service issue for them, not just an annoyance or pride issue for you. If they don't know why their customers are leaving unhappy, then they don't have an opportunity to fix the problem.
06/18/2007 10:20:58 PM · #91
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

People here are sooo concerned about the well being and tender mental state of the miscreant that they seem to ignore those same issues as they relate to the infant victim. What will the infant victim of such terrorizing feel and think, "Gee, Dad just let that big kid almost drown me.... etc

Wow, how dramatic. There was no suggestion that the baby was "almost drowned", and nobody has suggested, until you did just now, that the older kid be coddled due to his mental state. In fact, you might have read in my post that I for one didn't consider the kid had the "behavioural problems" the mother said he had. It would have been more honest to see that the general consensus is that the kid did wrong, and that most people applauded the aggressive reaction of dudephil, but a few others didn't. Seemed pretty clear to me anyway.
06/18/2007 10:23:44 PM · #92
Ok, DPC GTG at the Dudes swimming pool, saturady morning at 11 am. Everyone bring water balloons, squirt guns and buckets. No cameras allowed ... no evidence just lots of DPC witnesses. We'll drown the punk back into normal behavior ;)
06/18/2007 10:31:41 PM · #93
We could just throw him into the deep end and watch him squirm..
06/18/2007 10:35:55 PM · #94
Originally posted by Spazmo99:

Originally posted by levyj413:

Originally posted by Spazmo99:

People here are sooo concerned about the well being and tender mental state of the miscreant that they seem to ignore those same issues as they relate to the infant victim.


Really? When did someone say that? I must have missed it.


You did:

Originally posted by levyj413:


But you have no idea what their family situation is, what he's been diagnosed with, or anything else based on one experience of a few minutes.



No, Spazmo. What you quoted doesn't say "the boy was the only thing worth worrying about; ignore the infant's distress." In fact, I even clarified that specific point later: I was simply saying no one in this thread could possibly know what was going on in that family. I then went on to suggest actions that would've protected the baby without threatening to kick the boy or otherwise physically respond.

Please don't mischaracterize my posts.

And Robert - wow. I'm so, so sorry.

Message edited by author 2007-06-18 22:37:19.
06/18/2007 10:51:19 PM · #95
Phil,

No idea what you "should have done" but normally I would tend to speak very loudly to the child with a tone of disapproval in hopes that the mother would overhear and through defense of her charge or desire to take advantage of a training opportunity come to engage the situation with me. If that didn't work I would probably leave, find someone to complain to and hope that I wasn't the only one who had complained. In the end, your rights to physically engage either the child or the parent stopped short of the child physically touching you or your baby (and even if he did touch you I think you'd be a pariah on the stand trying to defend taking any action against the little boy who would certainly be dressed and on whatever his best behavior is). I, too, think many social issues would be less expansive if anyone could spank children and send them home where they'd catch another spanking but then again, I wonder how many physical or sexual abuse cases weren't tried decades ago when this type of social behavior was de rigeur.

No one truly knows that society was better or that it would again be mended (my worldview tends to lead me to believe that the world is broken and won't be fixed barring supernatural intervention) but I can tell you positively that if you choose to put your body into contact with an 11- or 12-year old or his mother then you're the one that's most likely going to jail. Similarly, if you and others complain about the lack of control exhibited by the child's custodian over a period of time, some allowances may be made by the management that will provide you and other legal relief from subjecting your family to the child and his behavior. I find this frustrating but it is how our society works today and unless someone else has a good reason to expect it to change anytime soon I guess you can best help your son by staying out of the courts (where someone could try and characterize you as angry or violent which might further inhibit your rights and time with your son).

Hope this is too much of a wet blanket but I think that as much as this type of mentality ticks me off, its better to face up to it than assume that you could get away with threatening the child or parent.

Kev
06/18/2007 10:54:12 PM · #96
well I skimmed over most of the posts but you said something that made me think the Mom knew what was going to happen. She told the child don't splash the baby, before he even did it. Which means this child has acted that way before. She ignored the act.

I think what you did was valid and more so the foot should have been aimed at Mom.

I also work at a school and luckily I am not a teacher because I do not have the temperament to put up with children who have been raised without discipline.

I knew the line with my Mom and my children knew the line with me. The problem with most parents now is they are not consistent. These are the same people who have dogs who behave badly. That makes me angry too..

Message edited by author 2007-06-18 23:05:01.
06/18/2007 10:59:32 PM · #97
Originally posted by Beautiful-Joe:

We could just throw him into the deep end and watch him squirm..


lol i think i'm the only one that caught that comment, ' . substr('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', strrpos('//www.dpchallenge.com/images/user_icon/21.gif', '/') + 1) . ' Beautiful-Joe
06/18/2007 10:59:40 PM · #98
Kevin.....karmat...... you are both right on. Good replies.
06/18/2007 11:02:17 PM · #99
Wow.. Thanks for sharing this, You are so lucky to have survived. Meningitis took the life of my 19 year old son, so I too know how weak you feel as a parent....

Originally posted by Bear_Music:



That really rings a bell with me. I can still remember (vividly) being left to die in the hospital at age 2 1/2; it's how I ended up deaf, from meningitis. here's a poem i wrote on it, for what it's worth:

Felipe Viejo

My first clear memory of my fatherís face
has troubled me for nearly 60 years ó
I felt somehow diminished by the fact
I had seen him in tears.

My father wept to leave me dying there,
but as a child how could I understand?
I saw him weep. He turned away from me.
He would not hold my hand.

What could I think but that his leaving me
was punishment for begging him to stay?
I thought, by screaming at him, I had made
my father mad that day.

I needed to believe that he was strong,
and even then knew strong men did not weep,
so made an image of him in my heart
I could afford to keep.

I realize now how young he was, and know
he must have been mature beyond his age
to leave his son alone, in pain, to die,
and not explode in rage.

I beg forgiveness now: the child was wrong.
Though tears of grief fell from my fatherís eyes,
he proved, confronting my impending death,
he was both strong and wise.

R.


Message edited by author 2007-06-18 23:02:48.
06/19/2007 01:41:32 AM · #100
Wow, some really beautiful posts here. specially Beautiful Joe and Robert for their personal experiences from within.

I've been teaching for almost five years now. I've had some excellent results in correcting behavior of naughty kids and have turned 'the worst kid in the class' into 'the best kid in the class' on a handful of occasions. I have taught for the last three years in classes with kids who have quite a bit of difficulty with their behavior, including some pretty shocking violence.

Positive reinforcement has its place. It works very well. However in extreme cases, it takes a great deal of effort to first get the child's attention, make sure the positive reinforcement is delivered when the child is in the right frame of mind and the younger the better.

By the time a child is 13 years old, positive reinforcement can be viewed as being patronizing so can have quite the opposite effect. I had someone try positive reinforcement on me the other day because he was misinterpreting a particular rule about something, and I was offended. Effectiveness by this age is largely hit and miss. If a kid doesn't believe that you are being genuine, this will fall flat. Many kids by this age don't believe that anything is genuine.

A child of 10 years is far from dumb. their circumstances will influence whether they fall more into the category described above or if they are more malleable and receptive. Sounds like this kid wasn't receptive.

In my experience (and I've taught kids in classes numbering up to 50), positive reinforcement can work sometimes, and works well over a longer term, but is not an absolute standard.

karmat said it well when she said that each kid is different. If you are a parent and you are fortunate enough to have had no problems solving problems with positive reinforcement, count yourself lucky. But don't kid yourself by thinking that every problem can be solved with a smile and a friendly word.

I have a rule that I never yell at kids, but I have broken that rule. And that is appropriate - specifically when one child puts another child in danger or harms/hurts the other child. The same goes for getting physical. If a kid needs to be removed from a situation because he is endangering others, then he might get picked up or blocked.
As a foreign teacher, i don't have a need or a place to spank or strike (although the practice is still widespread and often considered acceptable and normal in this country).

Incidentally, that's one difference between spanking and beating. One hurts, the other harms. hurt is temporary. harm is lasting. Another difference is that spanking is done with purpose and reason. Beating is done out of emotion and response.

Think hurt is an absolute bad thing? Try taking it away. It's the sensation of hurt that makes soda pop tingle in your mouth.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 03/30/2020 11:38:50 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 03/30/2020 11:38:50 AM EDT.