Yep, rules are arbitrary like that, which was my point. I wasn’t saying anyone who tries real hard should get a letter. I was saying that this kid’s activity, participation, commitment, etc., does not get a varsity letter because the school has decreed so. Period. Or so it seems. I just grow weary of the endless “this kid didn’t earn it” posts when it seems to me the rules are entirely up to the school–as you point out. Other schools do award varsity letters to similar activities. Did those kids not earn the letter?
I know this is GD; however, there’s already a shi…er, lot of opinion being offered here, so I’m going to offer MHO on how the whole thing could’ve been avoided:
[ol][li]Whatever activity the school offers should have two levels: Varsity or intermural and Junior Varsity or intramural. Heck, the school can even require that to be on the varsity/intermural team, the student has to have spent one year (semester, even) on the JV/intramural team first.[/li][li]Everyone who signs up for the team gets to be on the team.[/li][li]Everyone on the team plays every game. “Oh, but we’ll lose” is not an acceptable reason to not follow this rule.[/li][li]Stop treating the school athletic teams as the training ground for professional sports. NBA, AL, NL, NHL, NFL, etc. can run their own youth leagues for that purpose.[/li][li]All school athletic teams should be treated just like any other school club.[/ol][/li]
Oh, left off one: No more letter jackets.
There is a simple way to ensure the whole student body (I’m using hyperbole here) doesn’t sign up for just one team (club): allot a certain number of spots–just like for the regular classes. The football club would obviously need more spots than the tennis club–the school would have to determine how many students could realistically use the school’s facilities for each club. I recall one year (I think it was 8th grade) where all of us students were required to sign up for two extra-curricular clubs; I signed up for chess and music, my best friend signed up for chess and bridge (he had to drop one when the schedule changed).
Come on people! This is high school. It’s not like the student in question is showing up at a Memorial Day or Veteran’s Day event sporting a US Army uniform with a Congressional Medal of Honor*. This student has autism severe enough to prevent him from doing what he apparently really wanted to do: play on the school’s basketball team. The school, like others in its district, has a special needs student athletic team. But, unlike other schools in its district, this school does not have inter-mural competition for that particular team.
Think about all the “feel good” stories you’ve seen with some child with some condition (usually fatal) and the child’s fondest wish was to be a firefighter, a police officer, or the like. Instead of giving the kid the finger, the fire department, police department, or equivalent outfit for whatever the wish was has a great big ceremony making the kid an honorary firefighter, honorary police officer, honorary dog catcher, whatever. That’s cool for those kids. For this kid, though, he actually is doing the sport and actually is on one of his school’s athletic teams.
This whole issue is, again IMHO, because of how caught up in sports hype too many people are. And the woman who complained reminds me of Al Bundy.
*BTW: the reactions I’ve seen in the news, on social media, etc., of how some veterans and others handle that kind of thing are also completely wrong. Report the offender and leave it at that. Causing a scene is just childless, yet again IMHO.
The debate isn’t about giving him a letter–it’s about prohibiting him from wearing a letter he bought himself. The school just needs to stay out of it.
If the “smallish bookworm” shows up with an unearned letter, he will be mocked and teased and dismissed as a pretentious jerk. He certainly isn’t going to fool anyone.
How is denying him this little potion of joy in his “best interests”? This kid has both Down’s Syndrome and Autism. He has to be very low-functioning. He’s pretty much shut out of all normal human interaction. He’s not going to have any of the joys most everyone else in his class will have over the next few decades.
Honest to god, the only joys he ever has will be things given to him out of pity–if we go with “real world” standards with this kid, he never gets anything, ever.
He doesn’t always get what he wants. There is no danger of him being left with this impression. Why can’t he have it this time? All the school has to do is stay out of it. He’s found something that makes him happy and they want to actively take it away . . . why? Who is served by this?
This is the most bass-ackwards sentence I have read in a long time.
The problem who fake credentials in real life is a common problem, and it causes people actual harm. We have laws dealing with it. We have institutions who take severe action against people who have faked credentials.
The problem of “people who refuse to acknowledge that they can’t always get what they want” is a problem only in the sense of “there are people in the world who annoy me.” It’s not a genuine problem.
Obviously, you’ve never worked customer service or retail.
Yes, it is a problem that so many people thing “I want” = “I get”. It’s not the most earth-shattering problem facing the world, but it does exist.
It’s not about “sport hype”, it’s not about whether a particular award is a big deal or not. You aren’t supposed to have X unless you earn X. Purchasing a symbol of X and displaying it as though you did earn X is a falsehood. It’s not a felony and it may require nothing more than people stating “you didn’t earn that”.
This still seems to me like mom was unhappy her child didn’t get X due to his impairments and then went out and bought X - which also brings up the issue that so many people think money fixes everything. It doesn’t.
Maybe some schools hand out varsity letters like poker chips. So what? His doesn’t. If it’s that big a problem move to a different district.
If it’s not that big a deal to have a varsity letter then it’s not that big a deal to NOT have one.
In this case, it would have fixed everything, except that some meddling grownups couldn’t stand the idea of this kid wearing a varsity letter he wasn’t eligible for. Otherwise everything would have been golden. It’s those adults that caused the problem.
Why are people upset that it has been pointed out that the kid in the OP did NOT earn the award he was displaying? He didn’t. Again, it’s not like it’s a Noble Prize, but if just anyone can buy the award then the award has no meaning.
“Special needs” shouldn’t translate to “special privileges”. This isn’t accommodating someone’s disabilities, it’s giving them something they didn’t earn and don’t deserve.
No one is upset that it’s being pointed out. They are upset that he was made to take the jacket off (if he was–and if he wasn’t, I assume the people on the other side of this debate think he should have been).
Also, the argument isn’t that he should have been given a letter–it’s that the school shouldn’t have interfered when he showed up with one.
Again with the “earn.” Other districts / schools do award special needs students varsity letters for similar activities. Did those kids “earn” them? The question for me is how arbitrary are the rules that say “this is worthy of a letter, that isn’t.” If identical activities in different schools result in a letter in one place and “not a letter” in the other, then somebody is wrong, or it’s not about “earning.”
Here’s a hypothetical to illustrate. Suppose the school next year decides, by fiat, that the baseball team that competes in the varsity league will not be awarded letters. Everything is exactly the same, same coaches, same level of competition, same required commitment. But the school says, “no letters.” Would the baseball players have a legitimate bitch? Would the issue be whether or not the policy is stupid, or would you say, “Sorry, you didn’t earn it. Suck it up”?
Sure they did. Different school districts set different criteria for their awards. I even stated that earlier. Is this news to you?
We do not set identical standards across the entire nation for primary schooling. Some countries do, but we’re not one of them. Therefore, yes, what earns an award at one place does not earn one at another.
No one is entitled to an award. Standards for earning awards can change from place to place and time to time. Is that fair? Not always. Sorry about that, as my dad used to frequently remind me life isn’t fair. Part of growing up is learning that.
If the award is discontinued you don’t get the award. Sorry about that and yes, deal with it. Bitch if you want, you’re always free to bitch, but things like that happen in life.
You know, my generation now has to work until 67 to get full social security instead of 65, and we’ve basically been told to “suck it up”, and that’s about something a LOT more critical to life than a varsity letter. Hey, we work just as hard as our elders, why shouldn’t we get the same privilege? Is mommy going to come rescue me and give me two years of pension payments to “fix” it? No, she isn’t.
The idea is to learn these life lessons with the little stuff so you know how to deal with the big stuff later on.
Your dad was part of the problem. Sorry you got a dad who excused his behavior to you with a repetition of this old saw.
Yeah, life’s not fair. And sometimes there’s nothing we can do about it, and in those cases we gotta deal with the unfairness. But a lot more often there IS something we can do about it, and in those cases, if we just accept the unfairness, we suck.
In this case, life’s not fair because people have set it up that way. And the mom found a way to make it a little more fair. The mom was in the right, in this case.
As stated before, the idea that this kid, who drew the black spot in the genetic lottery, needs a chance to learn the lesson that life’s not fair–that’s borderline insanity. To the extent that a kid with severe intellectual disabilities is able to understand an abstract generalization like “life’s not fair,” he’s got the point. Thanks much, but you don’t need to give him another example.
Guin quoted some glurge earlier, so I’ll tell a joke:
Q. What did the blind deaf paraplegic kid get for Christmas?
A. Cancer.
Yeah, life’s not fair. But don’t be that person who decides to make it even shittier for someone who’s already got it rough.
You know, I know there’s the idea of “participation trophies,” and they’re one of the less proud parts of how baby boomers parented. In general, it’s not a great idea to give participation trophies to kids.
In general.
But this isn’t a general case. This is a kid who is never going to fit in socially or intellectually with his neurotypical peers. In order for him to function in a group, neurotypical folks are going to have to make allowances–reasonable accommodations. Letting him wear a letter jacket is about as reasonable as an accommodation can get.
And this? Are you kidding me? This is practically dripping with envy for a kid with severe intellectual and social disabilities. How come HE gets to have something he didn’t earn when I don’t?! You ask. THAT’S NOT FAIR!
Yeah, it’s not fair. Neither is his array of genetic disorders.
No, your mommy’s not going to come rescue you. You’re a grown-ass adult who’s able to function independently in society. Chances are good that he’ll never be able to function fully independently. Chances are good that he’ll always need someone to act as a caretaker for him in some role or another. Yeah, mommy fixes things for him that she’ll never fix for you.
Wanna trade places?
Couldn’t say it any better. The idea that this is some entitled kid is pretty eye rolling. My brother is developmentally disabled, and he is reminded every day that life is not fair without anyone else helping in the effort.
Black belts, social security benefits, gay marriage, Nobel Prizes. Who knew a school letter would be emblematic of so much?
After reading more about this story, I’m not so sympathetic of the mom of the special needs student. But I’m not impressed by the arguments about this kid “cheapening” the award by wearing a store-bought one. The moment the school decided on a letter that’s so generic it could easily be bought from a store, with no proper credentials, the school lost the right to regulate its use, IMHO.
To go back to the NHS pin analogy, let’s pretend there’s a student who gets inducted into the NHS for his 3.0 GPA, the minimum requirement for his school’s chapter This student later gets transferred to a different school–one where all the NHS students have to have a 3.5 GPA. Should the school ban the kid from wearing his NHS pin? No, I say. The school doesn’t have exclusive rights to the NHS pin. If the NHS students feel this student “cheapens” their accomplishment, the administrators should wait for them to raise a fuss about it. Perhaps his classmates will exert enough negative pressure on the student to make him voluntarily leave the pin at home. Otherwise, it’s none of the school’s freakin’ business.
I also say if an item of clothing is the cause of disharmony, the probem lies not with who’s wearing it, but the attitudes of those wearing it.
I think there’s a ridiculous disconnect from folks in this thread (and real life, apparently) who can’t separate what should happen with completely well, functioning, normal people and those with severe mental and physical handicaps. Yes, the world should learn that life gives you lemons and one just must deal. But trust me, children like that in the OP, have undoubtedly known it since birth. For the smartest, hippest humans on the internet, the inability to recognize the difference here is astounding. :dubious:
That’s a job, not a “problem.”
That’s merely a negotiation between a merchant and a customer. That’s the marketplace, not a “problem.”
I agree with this post 100%.
Some people seem to be losing sight of the reality of the situation. This boy is highly unlikely ever to live an independent life. His life will be limited in so many ways. While he is still in the relatively protected environment of a school community, why begrudge him something that presumably makes him happy and truly doesn’t hurt anybody else? It seems the height of irony that some people think it is vitally important to teach him some sort of life lesson about fairness, when every day for him is an exercise in the unfairness of the universe.
And I just realized I missed the entire last page of the discussion, where others had already pointed out the same things I mentioned. Oops. Oh, well, I guess some things bear repeating.
Hasn’t it occurred to you that the same thing is going to happen to the kid in the article? Teenagers can be cruel and the fact that he is a special needs student will not (and to a certain degree should not) shield him from viscous taunting. Actually, when I read the article my first thought was the school decided forbidding the unearned jacket was easier and fairer than having to put a body guard on this kid.