The Straight Dope

Go Back   Straight Dope Message Board > Main > Great Debates

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-19-2000, 11:41 AM
Pyrrhonist Pyrrhonist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
How should the mentally retarded be treated? Do you treat them as humans with limitations? Or as limited humans?

As I see it, treating them as humans with limitations would entail including them in all functions of normal life such movies, dinning out, road trips, discussions, etc, and understanding that they don’t have the full capacity comprehend the situations or issues. I would call this “emotional” treatment.

Treating them as limited humans would be the “rational” way as I see it, understanding that they can be excluded to no one detriment in many or most cases: For example, if your going out to a restaurant and the theater afterwards, it makes little sense to bring along the mental retarded who would enjoy the outing but would be equally happy with fast food and the TV at home.

I am sure there are many gray areas in this simplification.

I am asking this question because my wife’s uncle is retarded and lives with her mother eight months out of the year; she and my wife treat him on the full blown emotional side. The other four months of the year he lives with relatives on the West Coast; they treat him wholly on the rational side. Although I support the rational treatment, I have stayed out issue as much as I can since he is not my responsibility and I should not dictate how he is treated, but recent developments are forcing me to make a stand. He broke his hip a few years ago and is now physically handicapped requiring the use of a walker; more recently he has increasingly lost control of his bladder and bowels in public places. After once incident when he wet himself in a Red Lobster and we had to drive home, still wet, in a new car, I suggested that he be made to wear Depends or some other adult diaper. My suggestion was ignored. I suppose my wife and mother-in-law believe Depends would hurt his feelings, especially since his accidents are not an everyday occurrence, or so I am told. More than just the Depends debate, his physical handicaps, he is also nearing sixty, and I think it would be rational to find a special care facility for the mental retarded.

Okay, so how should the mentally retarded be treated?
Reply With Quote
Advertisements  
  #2  
Old 09-19-2000, 12:50 PM
SuaSponte SuaSponte is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
I worked as a counselor for two autistic men who were also MR, so I can tell you how we did it:

1. We involved them in any and all social/entertainment activies that (a) they did enjoy, and (b) their behavior would not disrupt the event for others. For (b), we didn't mean "disruption" as "some people are grossed out by the presence of the DD", we meant (for example) "these two individuals respond to being in dark places by screaming loudly, so we won't bring them to the movies."

2. We attempted to expand their social/entertainment activities, but did so with forethought and preparation. If the new experience wasn't to their liking, we didn't force them to attempt it again.

Quote:
Treating them as limited humans would be the “rational” way as I see it, understanding that they can be excluded to no
one detriment in many or most cases: For example, if your going out to a restaurant and the theater afterwards, it makes little sense to bring along the mental retarded who would enjoy the outing but would be equally happy with fast food and the TV at home.
In response, I believe my 4th grade teacher, Sister Mary Atrocious, said it best: "crap". Do you enjoy fast food and TV as much as a restaurant and the theater? The MR/DD may not understand everything going on on stage, but they probably don't understand everything on the TV, either. In this example, what they will enjoy is better food, and real people acting in front of them.
To sum up, your "rational/emotional" dichotomy is a false one. Humans, whether they are DD/MR or not, are emotional beings, so you have to deal with a DD/MR's emotions. Just as you do, they like events, and they (usually) like something new and different.
Finally, your "limited humans" concept is extremely dangerous. Because MR's aren't as smart as us, they are somehow less human? OK, I'm smarter than the average bear, whether you grade that by IQ, schooling, or professional accomplishment. Does that mean I should consider Mr. Joe Average, with a mid-level IQ, schooling and accomplishment, as a "limited human" compared to me? When you get down to it, the difference between my IQ and Mr. Joe Average's IQ is about the same as that between Mr. Joe Average and Mr. MR.
V.
__________________
There is nothing more dangerous than a frightened attorney.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-19-2000, 01:05 PM
wring wring is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Hear Hear, Sua!!!

Here's a radical thought: treat people as , well, people. If there are individual considerations (note the word "consdierations" not necessarily "limitations") then do that.

Everyone has had periods of time needing "considerations". When I was pregnant, for instance, going more than 5 minutes w/o available bathroom breaks was a necessity. I'm particularly pleased that my family and friends didn't decide to leave me home because of this.


Hopefully, you won't get an abject lesson in humility thrown your way.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-19-2000, 01:07 PM
Scylla Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
As I understand it, mental retardation in no way effects the emotional needs of individual.

They crave love, companship, friendship, and fun just as much as the next guy.

Next door to me live two full grown retarded men with their aging mother. They like to walk in the woods, and have asked permission to fish in my pond. They said they would trim the grass and bushes in return for this permission. They have been absolutely faithful in their end of the bargain, and it's been a pleasure to have them next door.

About four years ago their mother went into a diabetic coma, and Rick (one of the retarded guys,) who forgot about using the phone carried her seven miles into town to the fire department.

To me this speaks of love and commitment worth of any man (Though I'd use the phone.)

Both brothers are severely retarded, and I've observed with humor at times when they seem to "stall" (I know of no better way to describe it. They will be walking or doing something, and then they'll just stop and freeze, sometimes for several minutes, than go on again like nothing happened.

They are baically unemployable. However, to exclude them from life to the degree that they are able to participate in it is simply cruel.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-19-2000, 01:44 PM
Pyrrhonist Pyrrhonist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by SuaSponte
I worked as a counselor for two autistic men who were also MR


Would you make one of them wear adult diapers if they couldn't control their bladder and bowels in public?


Quote:
Finally, your "limited humans" concept is extremely dangerous. Because MR's aren't as smart as us, they are somehow less human
I didn't say they were less human, I said limited human. A man with no legs would be a limited human too because he probably wouldn't be much good as a jogging partner but that wouldn't mean is less human. Now maybe a man with no legs could learn to be a good jogging partner by wearing prosthetic limbs, but that is a different subject.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-19-2000, 02:10 PM
Kimstu Kimstu is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Pyrrhonist said: I didn't say they were less human, I said limited human. A man with no legs would be a limited human too because he probably wouldn't be much good as a jogging partner but that wouldn't mean is less human.

Hell, in that case I'm a limited human too because I have poor eyesight and can't stand on one foot without losing my balance. I agree with other posters who objected to the term "limited human" applied to the MR: either it's somewhat degrading and potentially dangerous, or it's so general as to be a meaningless distinction.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-19-2000, 03:53 PM
QuickSilver QuickSilver is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Gotta agree with the other posters here, Pyrrhonist. Everyone is limited in some way. It would not be such a far fetched conclusion to classify you as a "limited human" given your lack of desire to procreate. I mean, given that a majority of adult population finds it a desireable and even imperative action, your lack in this area may classify you as being somehow defficient.

It's an extreme example but you can see the kind of slippery slope "limited human" down which these kinds of labels can lead.

To answer your other question, yes, I would certainly encourage your wife and mother in law to reconcider their position on incontinence gear. I can't imagine losing one's control into a diaper would be very comfortable for the wearer, but it must be a big improvement over the current alternative. If nothin else, it would be less embarassing in public for the gentleman in question because no-one will likely notice the problem.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-19-2000, 04:34 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
I always feel like such a JERK because I have to admit, I feel uncomfortable around the mentally retarded. I didn't use to feel this way-as a child, there was a kid who lived up the street from my aunt who was very severely retarded, and, at fourteen, had the mental age of a five year old. He'd always come over to play with my cousins and we had fun.

Now, it's like, I feel very awkward...does that make me a bad person?
__________________
If the shoe fits, buy it in every color.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-20-2000, 04:34 AM
Feynn Feynn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
"Treating them as limited humans would be the “rational” way as I see it, understanding that they can be excluded to
no one detriment in many or most cases:"

The detriment would be to the person with the disability as you would be denying them the opportunities you take for granted.

My career field is Rehabilitation. I have taken my clients to a wide variety of events and activities and guess what? They often enjoy these outings more than I do.

We have worked very hard to expand these people's interests and going to McDonald's is pretty low on the list; the Imax theatre, movies, shooting pool, rock concerts, sporting events, the museum, and the zoo are some favourites. We sometimes grab a burger on our way to someplace but there is much more to life than that.

We'll be going to see David Wilcox in a few weeks and plan to stay out way too late, just like "normal" folks would.
__________________
Be very, very careful what you put into that head, because you will never, ever get it out.
Thomas Cardinal Wolsey (1471-1530)
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-20-2000, 05:57 AM
yosemite yosemite is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
I currently work with retarded/DD people. So this topic hits close to home.

I think that there is an "emotional" element that some parents or family have towards their retarded relative, and it isn't always practical.

For instance, there is this one girl that one of our "clients" (that's what we call the people we look after at my work.) She lives in a residential, state-run home, and is given 24 hour care by caretakers. She does not live witih her parents.

I have never worked with her, because she has such an extreme history of being violent and unpredictable. (I threatened to quit if I was forced to work with her. No one pushes the issue with me anymore.) This young woman is violent and can be very dangerous at times. She has injured staff members. MANY staff members. She has made huge, ugly scenes in public. At times, the police have had to be involved because of scenes she has made in public. Yet her parents insist that she still go on outings, even though they are told about the terrible scenes she makes, even though the police have had to be involved at times. They just refuse to believe that their daughter is at fault. They even refuse to allow their daughter to be given heavier medication to help control her violent behavior. (Why the state puts up with these parents' insistence is a long, long story, and I shouldn't go into it.)

The parents LOVE her very much, but they are not at all practical about what her care should be. They want her to live as "normal" a life as possible, but it isn't possible with this young woman. I don't know exactly what my point is here, but something has to give in this situation. I don't think society as a whole should have to suffer (and that people have to be injured) so that this girl's parents can feel like their daughter is having a more "normal" life experience.

Before I started at this job, apparently policies were different then they are now. Some pencil-pusher decided that all treatment of DD people should be "age appropriate". Meaning, that if you were 40 years old, you didn't wear adult diapers. Ever. So when a "client" was incontinent, they were NOT allowed to wear adult diapers, because it violated the "age appropriate" rule. So apparently staff members spent all their shift cleaning messes. Because some middle-management person (who NEVER would have to clean these messes) decided that it was giving the developmentally disabled person more "dignity" by being treated in an "age appropriate" manner.

The people I look after now are treated in an appropriate way, IMO. They have special staff members that take them on lovely outings, to the store, to the park, to musical events, whatever. One of the women I look after goes to a special "school" each day, where she goes on great outings, does simple crafts, and has a fabulous time. And yes, these people wear adult diapers.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-20-2000, 09:09 AM
GLWasteful GLWasteful is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 1999
Well, just because it affects me directly, I think that referring to anyone as "limited" is pretty cold. Particularly since everyone is "limited" in one way or another.

Now, as far as your wife's uncle, Pyrrhonist, I don't think that adult diapers would be a bad thing at all. Provided that the instances are happening with the frequency that you indicate. However, you also should probably take into consideration that this gentleman is a long-term family member for your wife and your mother-in-law. As such, they're likely to get a mite peeved at you stepping in and telling them how to care for him. Maybe a heart-to-heart with your wife is in order.

I would imagine that you have never had to deal with someone who was MR, and you see things from that point of view, which is perfectly legitimate. After all, most people have not had to deal with someone who is mentally retarded. But for those of us who have, we usually have a better idea of what they can handle than you seem to.

F'rinstance, my daughter dearly loves a duo called Trout Fishing in America. When I saw that they would be at a nearby club, we took her to see them. She loved it, despite her aversion to loud noises that aren't coming from the stereo. What you said in the OP was that she would have been just as happy going to McDonald's and watching her video of them again. And you're right, she would have. But she had a much better time seeing them live, and it never occured to me to not take her. Well, it did, but only because I wasn't sure that I could take her to what was, basically, a bar. I forgot, though, that she can drink me under the table.

Sua and Feynn, it sounds like the folk with whom you work are pretty damned lucky.

Scylla: That was a very sweet story. I can only assume that these young men aren't Amish?

And, yosemitebabe, I'm astounded that your place of employment is able to find people who will work with the young lady that you describe. Although, you are correct that all too often people whose children are MR seem to think that their child is ideal, and that any problems come from others. But some people do that whether their kid is MR or no.

-GLW
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-20-2000, 09:11 AM
Scylla Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
No they are not Almish. I don't hate everybody.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-20-2000, 02:18 PM
Pyrrhonist Pyrrhonist is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Kimstu
[/i]

I agree with other posters who objected to the term "limited human" applied to the MR: either it's somewhat degrading and potentially dangerous, or it's so general as to be a meaningless distinction.
I think people are placing emotional values on what I intended as technical terms, seeing “limited human” as a derogatory term like a Nazi whispering “Jew.” There is no emotional valuation, it is a philosophical classification. For example, some might say “Pyrrhonist is a human who is cynical.” This would mean that Pyrrhonist’s cynicism is in the background. If you wanted to say the Pyrrhonist’s cynicism is in the foreground someone might say “Pyrrhonist is a cynical human.”

When I discussed the “emotional” way I was saying that people used emotional criterion to make judgements. The “rational” way, perhaps “aemotional” would be more correct though not an English word, is say that judgements are made without emotions.

Confusions like this is way the philosophers write tedious page after tedious page of technical terms. Many people, however, emotionally object to the aemotional classification of humans.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-20-2000, 02:26 PM
yosemite yosemite is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Scylla, so they're still the Almish, huh?

GL - yes, it astonishes me that they find people to work with this young woman. Part of it is that the supervisors conceal the truth from new employees, so they'll work this girl. (But the new people always find out! I did!) Apparently some of the people who work with her have good luck, or somehow have developed techniques to avoid being hurt. But few go away totally unscathed. I guess that some staff members won't refuse to work with this girl because they "don't want to make waves", and "she probably won't hurt me". I also suppose that they don't want to risk giving up the good government employee benefits. I dunno.

My adamant refusal to work with this girl really pissed off one supervisor, who tried to put the guilt trip on me. She acted is if I had a lot of nerve to be afraid of this girl. Her attitude was something akin to "How DARE you!!! This girl is a human being!!!" I guess this technique worked on some employees, who were worried that it would look "politically incorrect" to not want to "give this girl a chance". But this technique did not work with me.

And yes, the parents dote on their daughter, and think she is rarely at fault for her behavior. But yet they refuse to take her on these outings themselves - they want staff members to do it. It's a weird situation - they expect staff members to get their daughter to do things that they (the parents) cannot get her to do. Frankly, I am really glad I don't have to deal with these people.

Most of the MR people I have encountered in my job are sweet people, who enjoy going out and doing different things. They benefit from that. But some don't. One girl seems to hate walking for too long, is unsteady on her feet (though she can walk perfectly well) and taking her out somewhere where there would be a lot of walking would just make her miserable and fussy. Each person has to be considered individually.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-20-2000, 10:00 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
I gotta hand it to you, Yosemitebabe. I don't think that I personally could do it, as much as I hate to admit it. I don't think I could have the patience. I hope that doesn't make me a bad person.
__________________
If the shoe fits, buy it in every color.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-20-2000, 10:40 PM
Triskadecamus Triskadecamus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
There are lots of limits on human beings. Some come from the individual, and of those, some are the inherent effects of physiology. Most of the limits on humans are not that simple. Society limits us all far more than our own abilities. When disabling disease or physical injury circumscribes those abilities, the social limits generally get more stringent. That is a sad thing. The people most severely limited by social convention are the exact ones least able to rise beyond those limits.

For every person who fulfills social expectations for the general class of [insert politically correct synonym for various cripples] there are the many others who simply live, however much they are able, as we all do. Yes, mentally retarded people are more likely to have hygiene habits less meticulous than average. Some don’t, though, and some real normal slobs are walking around out there under their own supervision. Diplegiac people take up more room at the club than do ambulatory patrons, especially out on the dance floor! The fact is that you might be less than desirable as a immediate contemporary user of public facilities in some people’s eyes.

Screw ‘em. Me and my quadraplegiac, epileptic, mentally retarded buddy came out tonight to see, and be seen by the jet set, and the hoi polloi. We are going to show you norms how to paaaartayy! You loose lunch cause one of us might drool on our tie a bit, tough luck. The manager knows better than to even suggest that we leave. Besides, he likes us! The waitress knows us, too, and we probably tip better than you do.

So, get your brother in law out in the street, and bring him along. Yeah, a pair of Attends can fit under your good pants, and if no one makes a big deal about it, it ain’t a big deal. But the biggest deal of all is: YOU TEACH PEOPLE HOW TO BE ABLE, NOT HOW TO BE DISABLED.

Tris
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-21-2000, 12:11 AM
yosemite yosemite is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Quote:
We are going to show you norms how to paaaartayy!
This is SO true! I have taken some of the people we care for to many dance functions that are set up for the disabled and retarded people of the area. I have never seen such great partiers! They dance better than anyone! They have great fun, with great enthusiasm. It's very cool.

Guinastasia: Thanks for the kind words. The thing is, I never thought I'd get into this line of work myself, no one who knew me thought I could do it. But you'd be amazed what you can do, once you decide you want to try. AMAZED.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-21-2000, 12:48 AM
Lemur866 Lemur866 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 16,962
I guess the thing to consider is the benefit of the disabled person. If taking them to a fancy restaurant makes them nervous or unhappy, take them to McDonalds instead, where they can talk and if they happen to drop a french fry or two no one cares. If they *like* to go out to fancy restaurants then sure, take them. But you shouldn't take them somewhere just because you like to do it.

It's like the Simpsons: "All honor students will be rewarded with a trip to an archeological dig. All detention students will be punished with a trip to an archeological dig." Just because YOU would rather go to an opera than stay home doesn't mean that a DD person would. And conversely, just because you think a DD person wouldn't like to go to an opera doesn't mean that you are right.

But this is interesting to me. We generally consider our intellectual side to be the most human part of us. But a person can live a happy life...can partake fully in human existance...even with profound mental deficits. If you get to know a downs person they are people in every sense of the word even with their profound limitations. Our humanity doesn't come from our exclusively human characteristics, rather it comes from our animal natures. It is possible to have a profound realationship with a dog, a creature that exists on an entirely different cognative level. But if you take away a person's animal nature, if they are just left with the ability to think but no emotions, then what you have is a monster. Even though such a person could do complex math it would be impossible to have a human relationship with them like you can have with a dog. Our animal selves are our real selves, this cerebrum and language centers are just newly added modules that sometimes help our real selves.
__________________
All that is required for neutral to triumph is for good and evil people to do nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-21-2000, 06:41 AM
TroubleAgain TroubleAgain is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Guinastasia
I gotta hand it to you, Yosemitebabe. I don't think that I personally could do it, as much as I hate to admit it. I don't think I could have the patience. I hope that doesn't make me a bad person.

Guinastasia, it doesn't make you a bad person. Everyone has different levels and types of abilities. As long as you treat DD people as well as you can when you encounter them, then you are a good person. I had students in my class in school (6th and 7th grade) who were "mainstreamed" for whatever *ridiculous reason the schoolboard came up with. I was always finished with my assignments early, so the teacher would ask me to work with them. I did. I was very patient, working with them for the short time that class lasted. I recognized that they were people with feelings and needed to be treated with respect. That doesn't mean I could make my life's work out of working with DD/MR people. I admire people who do, but I couldn't do that. Still doesn't make me a bad person, though.


* I say ridiculous, because these people could only read with LOTS of help, so what benefit did they get from being pushed through a class with "normal" kids, when they obviously needed extra attention? Very little. Mostly they got tormented.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-21-2000, 07:11 AM
Spider Woman Spider Woman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
yosemitebabe:

I wonder why this supervisor felt she could say this
Quote:
How DARE you!!! This girl is a human being!!!"
to you. Just because the resident is a human being doesn't mean other human beings need to put up with her abuse.

I worked at a REM home here in Minnesota for a while. When I was employed, they asked that I commit to a year, which I did. There were two or three out of the fourteen residents that occasionally became violent, and we had a practice (maybe called rule 41?) to physially restrain a violent resident. With one of the residents, it took four workers to restrain him, and he scared a lot of us. His family would not agree to using more medication on him, either, and they eventually took him back into their own home.

I worked there only a year because I did not like the administration. Two very nice women with Down Syndrome shared an apartment, and would often ask me to get their pop out of the locked supply closet where it was kept, and put a couple cans apiece into their refrigerator. I was eventually called on the carpet for this because they were only supposed to receive a can a day upon the successful completion of their "programs" (individually designed to help prepare people to live more independently).

These women always successfully completed their programs, and got their can of pop, but wanted more. The pop was bought out of their money, and they always had extra money at the end of the month. But the administration felt that it undermined the success of their programs for me to give them pop when they wanted it.

I pointed to the "Patients' Bill of Rights" posted in the entryway of the facility, and reminded the administrator that both people were adults, and I continued to give them pop. (It is difficult to keep workers at places like these, which is maybe why they didn't fire me.)

Eventually I was circumvented by them being switched to sugar pop. They were both on calorie restricted diets for health reasons, and the sugar pop was figured into their diets, so giving them more than one can of sugar pop would exceed their calorie limitations.

I was already working full time in addition to this job, so at the end of the year, I quit.

But I still believe that people deserve to be treated as fully human, within the limits of their cognition. If they understand that there is a difference between going out to a movie or doing fast food and staying home, they should have as much a choice as anyone else in a family.

(I myself would prefer fast food and a movie at home, but I would be agoraphobic if I could afford to be; alas, I have a house payment.)
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-21-2000, 01:58 PM
yosemite yosemite is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Spider Woman....tell me about it!!!

It sounds like the programs set up for the developmentally disabled are simular all over.

Yes, the supervisor really had a crappy attitude to treat me as if I was not entitled to any feelings (or worries, or concerns for myself) because I did not want to work with a violent person. I really would have quit over this issue, had it been pressed. It seemed obvious to me (at least from this supervisor) that she wasn't thinking of my safety at all...she just wanted to place someone with this violent girl, by hook or by crook. So I figured - I have to look out for myself, my bosses obviously aren't going to. Pretty sad, huh?

Yes, good staff members are hard to get, and to keep. (That seems to be the same all over too, huh?) Which is probably why I was not fired for abjectly refusing to work with this violent girl.

And yes, sometimes the prescribed "program" for a particular resident is so rigid, it does not give them the dignity they are entitled to as human beings. We had one guy who LOVED going to this day program, where they did various crafts and had various activities. He was in his 40s. Anyway, some of these activities were kind of child-like - but he LOVED doing them. A supervisor found out about the child-like activities he was participating in, and wanted him not to do them anymore. Because it was not "age appropriate" for a 40 year to do these things. It didn't matter that he LOVED doing them, that it brightened and enhanced his life. Oh noooooo.... The staff members that worked with this guy got flak from the supervisor, for letting him do these things that made him SO happy.

It's very irritating!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-21-2000, 06:26 PM
Odieman Odieman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
I helped run a training on the job program for people with disabilities and part of the program involved giving them recreational opprotunities that they would otherwise not get. I'm not talking earth-shaking events either, I mean going to the library, shopping for classroom supplies, eating at restaurants that were more elaborate than McDonalds. We felt that having jobs and doing the things that "normal" people did made them feel like they were a part of society like very one else. They may have a developmental or other disabiliyt, but they can tell when they aren't doing what everyone else does. I saw some people practically glow when they realized that they were finally being allowed to do what their brothers and sisters do. Remember, if you approach someone as limited and only work against their limitations they will start to see themselves as limited too.

Keith
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-21-2000, 09:35 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
I guess I just feel very uncomfortable and awkward around MR. I hate feeling that way, but perhaps I'm just not used to them.


And I agree about mainstreaming-often, it's done as a feel good thing, and not for benefitting the kids.
I remember our principal would talk about them like they were sooo angelic and soooo special. It was extremely patronizing. They're not just here to be "special". They're here to be humans, just like us.
__________________
If the shoe fits, buy it in every color.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-21-2000, 11:43 PM
yosemite yosemite is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Guinastasia:

Your discomfort is because you are not used to them, nothing more. I felt exactly the same way you do, until I took this job.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 10-02-2000, 02:15 AM
Feynn Feynn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
I am in agreement with Odieman, we do very similar things for a living and seem to see things in much the same way. It is amazing what can happen when you start treating these "limited people" like people and offering them the opportunities that we all take for granted.

The guys I work with amaze me everyday, if one takes the time to get to know them you soon discover many of their limitations are ones that we "normals" have put on them. I work with staff that tell me that so and so can't do this or that... there is no greater joy in showing them that they can do this and that and a whole bunch more they never even thought of. So many people come to us with labels as being this or that, my first priority is to tear off the labels and find the person underneath.

A gentleman that I work with tells me that he wants to be a "good man" and a "normal guy" like me. I find it funny that I aspire to be more like him as he is one of the kindest and most caring people I have ever met. He always puts other people first and never fails to tell people how much he cares about them or how important they are to him. These are enviable qualities indeed. His is as pure a soul as I have ever seen.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 10-02-2000, 07:05 AM
Idnew Idnew is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
And They Call Them Retarded

This is a true story:

A few years ago, at the Seattle Special Olympics, nine contestants, all physically or mentally disabled, assembled at the starting line for the 100-yard dash. At the gun,
they all started out, not exactly in a dash, but with a relish to run the race to the finish and win. All, that is, except one little boy who stumbled on the asphalt, tumbled over a couple of times, and began to cry.

The other eight heard the boy cry. They slowed down and looked back. Then they all turned around and went back. Every one of them. One girl with Down's Syndrome bent down and kissed him and said: "This will make it better." Then all nine linked arms and walked together to the finish line.

Everyone in the stadium stood, and the cheering went on for several minutes. People who were there are still telling the story.
Why?
Because deep down we know this one thing: What matters in this life is more than winning for ourselves. What matters in this life is helping others win, even if it means slowing down and changing our course.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 10-02-2000, 07:31 AM
Spider Woman Spider Woman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Idnew

What an eloquent post. It brought tears to my eyes. To me, that sort of thing is much more important than winning. Just out of curiosity, did they give them all medals?
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 10-02-2000, 09:16 AM
Smitty Smitty is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
I spent nearly 10 years working with MR patients, mostly those who are dual diagnosed (those with mental retardation and psychological problems). While I, too, have seen good things, I have also seen a lot of bad. I don't think there is a single way to treat MR people. You treat them on an individual basis. Some can function in public with little to no supervision, some need to be in a locked, maximum security environment. I would have to put myself in the "rational" category, but with the understanding that a lot of the "limitations" of the MR can be overcome, or at least compensated for, with training.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 10-02-2000, 01:42 PM
SuaSponte SuaSponte is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by Pyrrhonist
I think people are placing emotional values on what I intended as technical terms, seeing “limited human” as a derogatory term like a Nazi whispering “Jew.” There is no emotional valuation, it is a philosophical classification. For example, some might say “Pyrrhonist is a human who is cynical.” This would mean that Pyrrhonist’s cynicism is in the background. If you wanted to say the Pyrrhonist’s cynicism is in the foreground someone might say “Pyrrhonist is a cynical human.”
and:
Quote:
I didn't say they were less human, I said limited human. A man with no legs would be a limited human too because he probably wouldn't be much good as a jogging partner but that wouldn't mean is less human. Now maybe a man with no legs could learn to be a good jogging partner by wearing prosthetic limbs, but that is a different subject.
I'm not buying this, Pyrrhonist. In your OP, you asked:
Quote:
How should the mentally retarded be treated? Do you treat them as humans with limitations? Or as limited humans?
Obviously, you think there is a difference between "limited humans" and "humans with limitations". At the very least, the term "limited humans", by your words, means that the limitations are to be considered at the forefront, which is unnecessary and wrong-headed.
I interpret the difference to be that a "human with limitations" is a fully-formed human being with the inability to engage in certain activities, while a "limited human" is someone who is weak/lacking in some essential element of humanity. If there is no difference to your mind, I don't know why you posed the question in the first place.
If my interpretation is incorrect, please explain.

As for your question re: adult diapers -- if one of my guys had been incontinent, I would have insisted that he be allowed to wear adult diapers outside the house (inside the house, if one of the training goals was to develop continence, diapers would probably be a bad idea). Obviously, your wife's relations diagree with me, but our motivation is the same -- the dignity of the individual. I just see it as more embarassing to the MR/DD person to have the chance of losing control in public than to be seen wearing diapers. YMMV.

Spider Woman, Yosemitebabe, what are the morons who run these programs thinking? "Age-appropriate" is simply not a proper consideration.
When I was in college, I helped out with a boy scout troop for MR boys my frat had started a dozen years before. At the time I was involved, about half the troop was made of guys who had been with the troop since the beginning, and were in their mid to late 20s. No one even thought of suggesting that it inappropriate for them to continue with the troop.
I could go on for pages about the idiocies that finally drove me to quit. My personal favorite revolved around Mike [fictional name], one of my guys. Mike loved, of all things, for me to bounce his basketball off his forehead. This was a reward for him -- when he did something well, like make his bed, etc., he'd often chase me around the house with the b-ball! 'Course, one time I made the mistake of letting my supervisor's supervisor see me do this. I got written up.

Sua
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 10-02-2000, 08:19 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Good lord, a lot of things I like are age-inappropriate.
Playing with dolls-I love my Barbies!
Coloring
Paper dolls

I guess I'm undignified!
__________________
If the shoe fits, buy it in every color.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 10-02-2000, 09:19 PM
yosemite yosemite is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Guinastasia:

Actually, I heard of a 30-ish old woman with DD that had a nice collection of dolls that her parents bought for her. A whole room-full of dolls. They gave this girl such happiness, she'd look forward to each of her parents' visit, because they'd bring her a new doll. And then some nit-wit paper pusher decided they were not "age appropriate", and took them all away. Where, no one seems to know. Just *poof*! Gone. If I were the parents, I would have sued to get the dolls back - they paid for them! DAMMIT!

I heard this story second-hand, so perhaps some of the details are blurred, but I have every reason to believe the essentials are correct.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 10-02-2000, 09:42 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
They took them AWAY?
What MORONS! Any idiot who took MY dolls away would be missing fucking limbs!
Personally, I wish I knew her-I'd order her the prettiest, most expensive doll from the Franklin Mint!
(Speaking of which, my next outfit for my Titanic Rose doll should be arriving soon...)

To me, that's totally patronizing and treating the mentally retarded like subhuman. I hope the parents did indeed complain.
__________________
If the shoe fits, buy it in every color.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 10-03-2000, 01:24 AM
Feynn Feynn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
A lady I used to work with is 25. This is only physical age. Inside she is in many ways a little girl and as many little girls do, she loves Barney. Yes... I said Barney.

More than a few of my peers were aghast that she watched Barney and had a stuffed Barney she wanted to bring with her everywhere she went. It wasn't age appropriate they said. I wasn't against Barney (I bought him for her) but I agreed that he should stay home. They thought that he should be taken away from her if she insisted on taking him out but my solution was to simply tell her that Barney should stay at home to guard the house when we were gone because he was brave. She would sit him on the floor facing the door before we went out. When she was at home Barney was her constant companion and comfort when she was afraid. Like I said, Barney was brave as well as being purple and cuddly.

This lady had suffered horrendous abuse and devastating losses all through her life. Her reaction to many things was extremely violent and often based on fear. When her temper would get out of control we told her to go and give Barney a hug. This defused more dangerous situations than you would believe and it was so much better than having her injure herself or the staff.

Barney was and is still a constant and the lessons she has learned from watching a simple and sometimes annoying children's show taught her things that no one had been able to. Like how to treat other people with kindness. That hugs aren't always bad. You should have seen how many times I sang the "I love you" song when things got out of control... it always worked.

To this day I am one of the few men that can work with her such is her fear and distrust of the male gender. I was transferred out of her program under great protest from many people. It seemed that I had a way of dealing with her that few had and more importantly, I had and still have her trust. I still see her and phone her from time to time as I promised that I would always be her friend even though I was moving. It is a promise I intend to keep. Many other staff that have worked with her do the same so she knows that even if people go away it doesn't mean that they stop caring.

I am proud of her and enjoy watching her grow in so many ways because I remember what things were like at the beginning, when many people basically wrote her off as someone who could never learn any more.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 10-03-2000, 12:50 PM
The Asbestos Mango The Asbestos Mango is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Barney? AIIIYYYYEEEEE!!! Somebody get this woman a Blues Clues tape, quick, before it's too late!!!

I agree that the Developmentally Disabled, or whatever the current politically correct term is, should be involved in "normal" activities as much as possible. It enriches their lives, as well as the lives of family members who might otherwise have to find a "sitter" or be deprived of these activities themselves. I even think that, if at all possible, they should be employed. As long as they are capable of handling the situation.

I was at a Taco Bell a couple of years ago, at a bit past nine in the morning. I ordered, well, lunch. The obviously retarded woman at the counter said, "We don't start serving lunch until ten." I told her, " I was here at nine yesterday, and was served lunch, how come it's different today?" "We don't start serving lunch until ten" "But I was served lunch at nine yesterday. Why can't I be served lunch today?" "We don't start serving lunch until ten" This went on for several minutes.All she could do in response to my question as to why I could not be served lunch at the same time as I had been the previous day was repeat, parrotlike, the same phrase. She was unable to answer a very simple question. You would think that at some point a manager would come over and explain the siuation to me, and help this girl out. I was angry because I could not get the same service I had gotten the previous day, that I could not get an intelligent answer as to why, and that the manager had seen fit to put this woman in a position that was obviously beyond her capability. Someone in a customer service position should be able to answer questions and solve customer problems. Customers who are given poor, or in my case, inconsistent service can become irate, but more often than not, a simple explanation will smooth the ruffled feathers.

I think it was cruel to put this young woman in this postion without giving her some sort of training in how to deal with customer questions or problems. I doubt if I was the only angry customer this poor girl had to deal with that day, figure on mistakes in orders that weren't keyed in properly, etc. I wouldn't doubt that she left the job soon after because people were "mean" to her, when some manager thought it would be a good idea to put her in a position she wasn't capable of handling.
__________________
Go, Speed Racer
Go, Speed Racer
The power of Christ compels you--Manduck

When the big one drops and we're living on rats and dandelions I want you in my mutant army! - astro
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 10-03-2000, 01:00 PM
wring wring is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
quick question agosofia - Did you ask her to go get the manager? Frankly, that's what I do whenever the person at the counter can't handle my request, regardless of the reason (DD or not).
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-03-2000, 02:17 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Feynn-that was so sweet!
BTW, if you're still in contact with her, why not give her a little stuffed Barney keychain to take with her when she goes out?

Hell, I know that on days when I come home in a miserable, cranky, disheartened mood, I'll put on my pjs, watch tv while hugging my huge stuffed teddy bear. It's a creature comfort thing.
__________________
If the shoe fits, buy it in every color.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-03-2000, 05:09 PM
The Asbestos Mango The Asbestos Mango is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by wring
quick question agosofia - Did you ask her to go get the manager? Frankly, that's what I do whenever the person at the counter can't handle my request, regardless of the reason (DD or not).
Manager- that would have been the person wearing the jacket and tie and the name tag that said manager who was watching the whole thing go on, and doing nothing... Remember, this was a fast food joint. There is nearly always a manager visible in one of these places. And very few of them care about the customer getting good service.

I've been in customer service jobs, and whenever there was a customer question or problem that I hadn't been trained to deal with, I would immediately fetch one without the customer needing to ask. I think this should be doubly true of a DD person- managers should train them to get help from a supervisor if they're in over their head.
__________________
Go, Speed Racer
Go, Speed Racer
The power of Christ compels you--Manduck

When the big one drops and we're living on rats and dandelions I want you in my mutant army! - astro
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-03-2000, 06:26 PM
smilingjaws smilingjaws is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
I would just like to know how many of you would like to be referred to as as negative physical characteristic all the time? It fries me to see people with developmental disabilities called the retarded, morons, retarded people, etc. Do you get categorized by your intelligence level? Do you get referred to as the average, the below average, the subnormal, the bright, the gifted ALL THE TIME?

AND SUBHUMAN???? Hell, who decided that i.q. determined your degree of humanity? Frankly, Pyrrhonist, should be referred to as the subhuman for his obvious distain for people who happen to be different from him--at least when he's not being referred to as one of the asshole subgroups.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 10-04-2000, 08:28 AM
wring wring is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by agisofia
Manager- that would have been the person wearing the jacket and tie and the name tag that said manager who was watching the whole thing go on, and doing nothing...


then why didn't you direct your question to that person?

yea, I've done customer service, I've also taught "customer service skills". And yes, one of my standards is "offer to get the manager".

BUT. IRL, most of the "customer service" folks I've dealt with day to day, don't do this. period. Getting over and beyond did the person with a DD do so. Most of them (dd or not) did NOT. So, I ask. I've even been told "there is no supervisor". And I go find one.

Do I think the ALL customer service folks should be taught to "get a manager" if there's a dispute/angry customer. Yes. Do I think it's always taught? No. Does it always happen? absolutely not. What do I do under those circumstances? Go to a manager. While discussing with the manager, I also make the recommondation that their employees be taught this.

But, until real life matches my ideal, I won't wait for the customer service person (DD or not) to suggest or offer to get a manager, I won't wait for the manager standing right there to offer to help, I'll speak right up and ask for one, thank you.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 10-05-2000, 04:55 PM
Suo Na Suo Na is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Quote:
Originally posted by smilingjaws
I would just like to know how many of you would like to be referred to as as negative physical characteristic all the time? It fries me to see people with developmental disabilities called the retarded, morons, retarded people, etc.
So how is referring to them as developmentally disabled any different? It's still negative. It's still a characteristic.

One has to refer to them somehow, and "retarded" is the word I prefer. Despite the negative connotations it's the most descriptive for the type of people discussed in this thread, and for my DS brother. Denotatively it means "slow or limited in intellectual or emotional development".

"Developmentally disabled" could refer to anything; I know a 30+ year old woman who never reached puberty. She'd be DD too, although she has a fully developed intellect.

As an aside, I do loathe the use of "retard" when applied to anyone, but most especially when applied to stupid "normal" people.

Guinastasia: Some people don't get over the feeling of discomfort, and it's okay, since you realise that retarded people have rights too. I'll never be comfortable around my brother's retarded friend, who is much, much larger than I, and comes running at me to hug me. I'm always afraid that he'll hurt me somehow (he also has CP, so his balance isn't good).

Even with 25 years close experience with my brother and other DS people, I still wouldn't be able to work directly with them (that is, besides my brother, over whom I had complete (hah!) control) for more than a few hours at a time. I don't have the patience.
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 10-05-2000, 06:04 PM
smilingjaws smilingjaws is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
You're right--it's not different. You refer to a person with mental retardation or developmental disabilities as a person, boy, girl, woman, man, child FIRST then when NECESSARY by their characteristic. It's insulting to refer to people who are mentally retarded as if they are nothing more than their limitation.

I know this reeks of the dreaded "political correctness" but what is being expressed is true stereotyping.

A quick test--substitute the word Jew or Black in statments about someone with mental handicaps.

Quote: I guess I just feel very uncomfortable and awkward around MR. I hate feeling that way, but perhaps I'm just not used to them. (I'm not saying the speaker is mean or evil here--just hasn't thought this through)

Try this: I guess I just feel very uncomfortable and awkward around Jews. I hate feeling that way, but perhaps I'm just not used to them.

Quote: How should the mentally retarded be treated? Do you treat them as humans with limitations? Or as limited humans?

Try this: How should the Blacks be treated? Do you treat them as humans with limitations? Or as limited humans?

Do you see how this is stereotyping? It sure sounds a LOT like the stuff I heard in the Deep South during the desegregation era and still hear from bigots.

People with mental retardation are MORE than some label that actually is not well defined. For example, there are plenty of people with down syndrome who have IQs that can be in the low-normal range--and as more education and specialized training is provided the average IQ of people with down syndrome continues to rise. Somehow, though, a person with down syndrome and an IQ of 80 will never be accepted like the person of low-normal IQ of 80. What makes the difference--not abilities but perceptions. Boy does the initial poster make that perfectly clear.

If you want to read something totally fascinating on this check out:

http://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au/~borth/Majority.htm

Mental Retardation, Dementia, and the Age of Majority
By Chris Borthwick
Reprinted with thanks from Disability & Society, Vol. 9, No. 4, 1994

A reality that corresponds to ‘Mental Retardation’ is taken for granted; indeed, mental retardation may almost be
defined as that area of deviancy that is taken for granted. Historically, socially, and geographically ‘Mental Retardation’ is what is left over when

rogues, vagabonds, the idle, beggars, fortune tellers, diviners, musicians, runaways, drunkards, prostitutes, pilferers, brawlers, (Wolfensberger, 1975, p. 65)

have been taken out of asylums (all these groups have at one time or another shared the asylums with people with intellectual impairment) and sexual deviants, deaf people, people with mental illness, paupers, people with cerebral palsy, habitual drunkards, consumptives, unmarried mothers on welfare, epileptics, habitual criminals, drug addicts and people engaged in the white slave trade (all these groups have been targeted by eugenicists) have been removed from the sanctions imposed on the feebleminded (Kevles, 1985). As we have successively become conscious of each group its placement within ‘Mental Retardation’ has appeared anomalous and it has been removed. What remains after each successive extraction is specifically the unexamined, the group that does not arouse questions, the group that seems a ‘fact of nature’ and is not seen as the outcome of a social process. The ‘fact of nature’ serves as an explanation of subordination and a justification for differential
treatment.

One of the considerations associated with the distinction between the neurological model and the psychological model of disability is the presence or absence of rights; it is not necessarily a coincidence that the boundaries of ‘Dementia’ coincide with the age of majority.
[note: Psychiatric definition of dementia and mental retardation are similar--the difference is age of onset of symptoms] It is time to concede to these people the right to be freed from a classification that stigmatizes them, denies their specific impairments, and conceals their individual potential. The term ‘Mental Retardation’ should in future be used only as part of the phrase ‘diagnosed as mentally retarded’, a reference to a social condition rather than a characteristic of the person. If we are called upon to name more precisely the condition of people so described the least that they have a right to expect is that we will attribute to them their own individual cognitive problems rather than those of a carelessly drawn social stereotype. ‘Mental Retardation’ is to, say, ‘apraxia’ as ‘act of god’ is to ‘road trauma’ — a transferring of manageable contingency into the realm of the unchanging and inevitable. We are moving these people out of segregated settings back into the community; it is time we desegregated their diagnoses and appraised their problems not against the name we created to explain them but against the same conditions we are prepared to attribute to other people in the community.
End Quote

There's another interesting article on the same web site--fascinating comparison of African-Americans and IQ and people with Down syndrome and IQ

http://www.vichealth.vic.gov.au/~borth/down1.htm

I know it seems so picky to worry about what individuals call "the mentally retarded" but naming practices influence treatment and self-valuation and societal acceptance and treatment.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-05-2000, 06:21 PM
Suo Na Suo Na is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
smilingjaws:

"I guess I just feel very uncomfortable and awkward around Jews. I hate feeling that way, but perhaps I'm just not used to them."

I don't see what's wrong with this statement. Let me give you an example:
A year ago I moved to Los Angeles from Ontario, Canada. Now, everywhere I've lived in Canada (and that includes two of the three biggest cities) I haven't encountered many black or hispanic people. I got here, where whites are the minority, and I found, to my shame, that I felt nervous around black and hispanic people I met on the street. Mostly I was afraid of offending them, but I did have to force myself to act normally around them.

Do you know why? They were exhibiting body language I wasn't accustomed to. It took me almost six months to finally adapt to reading the different body signals, and to normalise my own body language. Now I have no problems at all.

Everyone goes through this when meeting people of a culture they have no experience with. I went through it in eastern Europe too, although (almost) everyone there shared my skin colour. It's just not a problem, unless you make it one.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-06-2000, 09:41 AM
BiblioCat BiblioCat is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
I have a question about this "age-appropriate" issue, with regard to the people who are 25 or 30 or 40 years old wanting to do crafts or play with dolls or watch "Barney".
Sure, they are 25 (or whatever) chronologically, but what is their developmental age? If someone who is DD is actually at the intellectual level of a child, then why not let them do activities for a child?
What is the harm in letting them do something they like and which gives them pleasure? What is wrong with doing crafts? I watch "Barney" and "Blue's Clue's" with my 4-year-old...is that okay?
What administrative dipshit made this rule anyway?

FTR, I have a neighbor who collects dolls (the ones from QVC and The Franklin Mint)...is she exhibiting behavior that is not "age-appropriate"?
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-06-2000, 10:47 AM
Spider Woman Spider Woman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Kinsey says

Quote:
What administrative dipshit made this rule anyway?
This is one of the things that really bothers me also. If a child or adult has a hobby or interest that does them no physical harm, and brings them great enjoyment, why should some other adult be able to deny that person enjoyment just because s/he happens to be developmentally delayed or disabled. Power seems to corrupt people in all walks of life, even those in the field of caring for developmentally disabled people(who seemingly would have entered the field in the first place to help others).
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-06-2000, 10:59 AM
wring wring is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Kinsey , if I may try to shed some light on the reasoning (PLEASE NOTE I am NOT necessarily defending the practice as it is played out)

Remember the movie "What ever happened to "Baby Jane?" and the creepy sense you get when seeing an aged Bette Davis dressed as a child? that's pretty much what they're concerned with.

The problem with the term "Developmental age" is that it attempts to place a number that refers to a mental image of how mature some one would be at any particular point. When I look around at my friends, my son, etc., there isn't one that I would assign a "single" developmental age to. My son, for example, would be a "30" year old in dealing with girlfriend relationships, a "8 year old" when it comes to doing math homework, a 16 year old when it comes to the telephone, etc.

So, with an individual who is chronologically 30, they may have the cognative abilities of a 12 year old, the relationship maturity of an 18 year old, a hobby interest similar to a 10 year old, etc.

When working with folks with developmental disabilities, the goals include allowing the person to progress and integrate within society in the best way possible.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-06-2000, 12:08 PM
Spider Woman Spider Woman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
wring

I can see what your point is and that can be a good thing, to help people fit in with other people and avoid ridicule in public situations. But if a developmentally delayed or disabled person wants to have dolls or toys in their residence, as many non-delayed or non-disabled people do, I think they should have that right also to choose what hobbies and/or recreation they would like to do.
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-06-2000, 01:36 PM
wring wring is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Spider woman I don't disagree. I was attempting to paraphrase the official rationale for why. I have lots -o- friends who work with that system, and have heard it all.

Frankly, when you come into MY office, you'll see my Bugs Bunny basket, my looney tunes calculator etc. And while I don't have a stuffed Barney, I do wear my Bugs Bunny musical watch to high power meetings, just 'cause I think SOME levity would be good.

So, I think the group that convinced the woman to leave the stuffed Barney at home to "guard the house" did a good thing (to bring it to a restaurant would attract potential negative attention to her) but to take Barney away totally? nope.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-06-2000, 01:41 PM
Spider Woman Spider Woman is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
wring

Sounds like we're on the same page (unless this sends the thread into page two).
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-06-2000, 02:55 PM
Guinastasia Guinastasia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Thank you, Suo Na!

And like I said-leave the big stuffed Barney at home (he'd be kind of awkward as well!) and maybe a little Barney keychain to take out!



Smilingjaws-I think you took my remark TOTALLY out of context.
__________________
If the shoe fits, buy it in every color.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-06-2000, 06:28 PM
smilingjaws smilingjaws is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Sorry if I took your statement out of context. I was using it as an example and meant ABSOLUTELY no personal insult to you.
I hope that you will accept my most sincere apology.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:36 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2013 Sun-Times Media, LLC.