If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(WFTV Orlando)   If you thought that force feeding autistic children hot sauce soaked crayons is not an acceptable therapy method, you might want to revise your educational philosophy. Then again, this is Florida   (wftv.com) divider line 119
    More: Followup, educational philosophy, Play-Doh, Osceola County, therapy, WFTV  
•       •       •

6603 clicks; posted to Main » on 18 Aug 2012 at 7:50 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



119 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-08-18 02:58:28 PM
FTA: "On Friday a judge issued an order recommending the district reinstate her job."

"The judge ordered the teacher won't get any back pay, but the final decision about what happens is up to the school board."

So does the district have to take her back or not?
 
2012-08-18 04:05:17 PM
BarkingUnicorn: So does the district have to take her back or not?

I believe it's a recommendation, and as such, carries no legally binding effect other than "Well, some judge says we should re-hire her." (Snickers heard in the background.)
 
2012-08-18 04:11:32 PM
Well the judge may as take her back but what does the state licensing board say? I sure as hell wouldn't want my kids around her anymore.
 
2012-08-18 04:23:18 PM
Did it work?
 
2012-08-18 04:45:13 PM
I guess I understand the initial thought-process behind this, specifically to get the kid to stop eating crayons.

However, the practical application doesn't seem to account for when the kid uses the crayons, then: rubs their eyes, touches other kids, eats something with their hands, etc.
 
2012-08-18 05:19:45 PM
Wonder what the CPT code is for that?
 
2012-08-18 05:24:47 PM
Real autistic kids or "autistic" kids?

Because, if it's some spoiled brat who the parents managed to get labeled as autistic to hide their failings, then the teacher was spot-on.
 
2012-08-18 06:11:25 PM
I say if the kid wants to eat crayons let them. Make them bring their own next time.
 
2012-08-18 06:26:34 PM

BronyMedic: BarkingUnicorn: So does the district have to take her back or not?

I believe it's a recommendation, and as such, carries no legally binding effect other than "Well, some judge says we should re-hire her." (Snickers heard in the background.)


I don't understand what kind of "court" this was heard in. County judges issue orders; they don't just make non-binding recommendations.

Bad reporters!
 
2012-08-18 07:08:12 PM
If you thought that force feeding autistic children hot sauce soaked crayons is not an acceptable therapy method

FTFS. Common grammar mistake. I often retype sentences and forget to remove negative qualifiers, correct tense, etc...

*reads article*

WTF? Sorry subby. Spoke too soon.
 
2012-08-18 07:55:57 PM

Ed Finnerty: I guess I understand the initial thought-process behind this, specifically to get the kid to stop eating crayons.

However, the practical application doesn't seem to account for when the kid uses the crayons, then: rubs their eyes, touches other kids, eats something with their hands, etc.


Yeah, that basically my thoughts on it. A cunning plan that wasn't so well thought out.
 
2012-08-18 07:58:59 PM
What kind of hot sauce? This is important.
 
2012-08-18 07:59:33 PM
Taco Bell announces it's new menu item in 5... 4...
 
2012-08-18 07:59:35 PM
I think hot sauce would probably improve the taste of crayons.
 
2012-08-18 07:59:55 PM

SilentStrider: Wonder what the CPT code is for that?


One of the generic ones, we always required documentation for this type of therapy.
 
2012-08-18 08:07:07 PM

Hot Carl To Go: What kind of hot sauce? This is important.


It really kind of is. I stick mostly to Frank's and Huy Fong Siracha these days, which are only around 1500 scovilles... not that hot. On the other hand, I remember my ex coming into the kitchen while I was cutting up habeneros, then suddenly disappearing. A half hour later, when dinner was ready, I was searching through the house, and she was in the shower trying to wash off the burn. Just from being in the room.

I really wish she had told me about it, I could have offered more immediate comfort (ie, some vegetable oil and paper towels). Poor girl didn't know water just spreads it around.
 
2012-08-18 08:15:11 PM

dahmers love zombie: Did it work?


Probably not. My dude had pics. Regardless parents and a psychologist should have been consulted.

If this was a normal child and a normal teacher, shiat would have hit the fan.
 
2012-08-18 08:16:34 PM
So, contrary to the headline, there was no force-feeding.
 
2012-08-18 08:16:44 PM

fusillade762: I say if the kid wants to eat crayons let them. Make them bring their own next time.


Hrm. They *are* non-toxic and biodegradable. Military rule of thumb: If your body can turn it into a turd, it HAS to be food. So I'm gonna agree with ya on this one.
 
2012-08-18 08:19:05 PM
Magenta with ( name your sauce ).
 
2012-08-18 08:33:16 PM

Gwendolyn: Well the judge may as take her back but what does the state licensing board say? I sure as hell wouldn't want my kids around her anymore.


So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?
 
2012-08-18 08:41:20 PM
This is so wrong.

Everyone knows that you're supposed to feed retards pudding.
 
2012-08-18 08:52:43 PM

Arthur Jumbles: Gwendolyn: Well the judge may as take her back but what does the state licensing board say? I sure as hell wouldn't want my kids around her anymore.

So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?


No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

Also, tainting said crayons is still letting the child eat it. Kind of an oxymoron.
 
2012-08-18 08:54:36 PM

WhippingBoy: This is so wrong.

Everyone knows that you're supposed to feed retards pudding.


Hey, you know it's offensive to actual retards to compare them with autistic kids.
 
2012-08-18 08:55:15 PM
obligatory post about autism being a euphemism for poor parenting

obligatory post about raising an autistic child being more rewarding because of the challenge

obligatory post about vaccines

obligatory post about some kid i saw doing something once

obligatory post about unconditional love

obligatory post about missing the point and making a reference to counting to potato
 
2012-08-18 08:56:05 PM

kidsizedcoffin: SilentStrider: Wonder what the CPT code is for that?

One of the generic ones, we always required documentation for this type of therapy.


Nuts. I hate working those.
 
2012-08-18 08:56:22 PM
Back in the day, they used aversion therapy to "cure" autism. From what I understand, it involved being hugged by Elvis:

www.tcb-world.com
 
2012-08-18 08:57:13 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: WhippingBoy: This is so wrong.

Everyone knows that you're supposed to feed retards pudding.

Hey, you know it's offensive to actual retards to compare them with autistic kids.


I know "welcome to fark" but this really killed my soal today.
 
2012-08-18 08:59:04 PM

sleeps in trees: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: WhippingBoy: This is so wrong.

Everyone knows that you're supposed to feed retards pudding.

Hey, you know it's offensive to actual retards to compare them with autistic kids.

I know "welcome to fark" but this really killed my soal today.


Andy spelling sucks.
 
2012-08-18 09:00:17 PM

sleeps in trees: sleeps in trees: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: WhippingBoy: This is so wrong.

Everyone knows that you're supposed to feed retards pudding.

Hey, you know it's offensive to actual retards to compare them with autistic kids.

I know "welcome to fark" but this really killed my soal today.

Andy spelling sucks.


fark it. I'm going to flap down the hallway and play lego.... Just fark it.
 
2012-08-18 09:03:39 PM

Cpl.D: Military rule of thumb: If your body can turn it into a turd, it HAS to be food


so awesome
 
2012-08-18 09:06:17 PM

Ed Finnerty: I guess I understand the initial thought-process behind this, specifically to get the kid to stop eating crayons.

However, the practical application doesn't seem to account for when the kid uses the crayons, then: rubs their eyes, touches other kids, eats something with their hands, etc.


Reality check here people -- you're talking about hot sauce, a common condiment that you put on your food. You're not talking about radium or arsenic or some drug that must be prescribed by a physician. She appears to have tried to deter crayon-eating (crayons, BTW, being something that doesn't belong in your body) by using spicy food. What's next -- are you going to expect firing for a harsh tone of voice?

Admittedly, if you take the headline at face value you'd think this is an outrage, but subby is a jackass, submitting deliberately false taglines is in vogue these days (maybe this is some kind of ironic/hipster thing) and the teacher doesn't appear to have force-fed anybody anything.
 
2012-08-18 09:12:58 PM
FTA: "Officials said she first got jumbo-sized crayons, put them in a cup, then poured hot sauce over them and she later moved them to a bag and labeled it with the student's name, and let the crayons sit for days. "

Is this that new kind of force-feeding that they're trying to outlaw in New York?
 
2012-08-18 09:13:11 PM

letrole: obligatory post about autism being a euphemism for poor parenting

obligatory post about raising an autistic child being more rewarding because of the challenge

obligatory post about vaccines

obligatory post about some kid i saw doing something once

obligatory post about unconditional love

obligatory post about missing the point and making a reference to counting to potato


Obligatory post about one's surname.
 
2012-08-18 09:18:45 PM

ShannonKW: Ed Finnerty: I guess I understand the initial thought-process behind this, specifically to get the kid to stop eating crayons.

However, the practical application doesn't seem to account for when the kid uses the crayons, then: rubs their eyes, touches other kids, eats something with their hands, etc.

Reality check here people -- you're talking about hot sauce, a common condiment that you put on your food. You're not talking about radium or arsenic or some drug that must be prescribed by a physician. She appears to have tried to deter crayon-eating (crayons, BTW, being something that doesn't belong in your body) by using spicy food. What's next -- are you going to expect firing for a harsh tone of voice?

Admittedly, if you take the headline at face value you'd think this is an outrage, but subby is a jackass, submitting deliberately false taglines is in vogue these days (maybe this is some kind of ironic/hipster thing) and the teacher doesn't appear to have force-fed anybody anything.


Shannon, hot sauce is not as common as you think. Secondly parents with autistic children guard and entrust sp needs teachers to keep them safe (that is part of their pay cheque).

A harsh tone of voice is a rational and impulsive action, not premeditating harm.

Further the school system gets an allotted amount of monies to help with his education and a consultant is legally required to make any behavioral descisions.

I
 
2012-08-18 09:20:39 PM

ShannonKW: Ed Finnerty: I guess I understand the initial thought-process behind this, specifically to get the kid to stop eating crayons.

However, the practical application doesn't seem to account for when the kid uses the crayons, then: rubs their eyes, touches other kids, eats something with their hands, etc.

Reality check here people -- you're talking about hot sauce, a common condiment that you put on your food. You're not talking about radium or arsenic or some drug that must be prescribed by a physician. She appears to have tried to deter crayon-eating (crayons, BTW, being something that doesn't belong in your body) by using spicy food. What's next -- are you going to expect firing for a harsh tone of voice?

Admittedly, if you take the headline at face value you'd think this is an outrage, but subby is a jackass, submitting deliberately false taglines is in vogue these days (maybe this is some kind of ironic/hipster thing) and the teacher doesn't appear to have force-fed anybody anything.


So, it's a food product essentially?
 
2012-08-18 09:22:54 PM
I am officially declaring "Hot Sauce Crayons" as the best band name ever!
 
2012-08-18 09:25:56 PM
He's autisic and probably doesn't know better but at the same time this type of punishment is nothing new. I don't know if it's still used now but using hot sauce on a kids thumb was a popular way to break the thumb-sucking habit. That, and lemon juice for nail biters.
But highly inappropriate in the teacher/student discipline relationship.
 
2012-08-18 09:26:11 PM

sleeps in trees: So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?

No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?


A teacher isn't "all adults." Neither, for that matter, are you.

The teacher's job is to help the kid learn how to use the crayons. She can't do that by taking them away. One of the most basic things the kid needs to learn about crayons is that they belong on paper, not in his mouth. So, she decided to make the crayons taste bad, perhaps on the theory that one is less likely to put a bad-tasting object in one's mouth.

Here's something for you to comprehend: she is accused of making something taste bad -- something that is not food and that she had no duty to preserve the flavor of. Depending on how the autistic kid feels about spicy food she may not even be guilty of that.
 
2012-08-18 09:31:37 PM

ShannonKW: sleeps in trees: So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?

No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

A teacher isn't "all adults." Neither, for that matter, are you.

The teacher's job is to help the kid learn how to use the crayons. She can't do that by taking them away. One of the most basic things the kid needs to learn about crayons is that they belong on paper, not in his mouth. So, she decided to make the crayons taste bad, perhaps on the theory that one is less likely to put a bad-tasting object in one's mouth.

Here's something for you to comprehend: she is accused of making something taste bad -- something that is not food and that she had no duty to preserve the flavor of. Depending on how the autistic kid feels about spicy food she may not even be guilty of that.


For all we know, the parents of the autistic kid feed him crayons for dinner 3 nights a week. Maybe that's how he got the autism. Ever consider that??
 
2012-08-18 09:33:08 PM

thamike: So, contrary to the headline, there was no force-feeding.

Lillian Gomez was fired earlier this year after district officials said she soaked Play-Doh and crayons in hot sauce and force-fed them to a student.


I'm not certain what this means... but it does in fact say force-fed. Which sounds bad.
 
2012-08-18 09:34:30 PM

ShannonKW: sleeps in trees: So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?

No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

A teacher isn't "all adults." Neither, for that matter, are you.

The teacher's job is to help the kid learn how to use the crayons. She can't do that by taking them away. One of the most basic things the kid needs to learn about crayons is that they belong on paper, not in his mouth. So, she decided to make the crayons taste bad, perhaps on the theory that one is less likely to put a bad-tasting object in one's mouth.

Here's something for you to comprehend: she is accused of making something taste bad -- something that is not food and that she had no duty to preserve the flavor of. Depending on how the autistic kid feels about spicy food she may not even be guilty of that.


Here is something for you to comprehend, she had no right to do that. According to numerous precedence she crossed the line with no education to back her up.

Further as a tx that works with these children their senses are magnified. You have no idea what you are talking about.

The child commonly ate crayons. She had no "duty" to fark with him. If someone did that to a "normal" child's milk you would be outraged. Aversion is now considered barbaric and abusive.
 
2012-08-18 09:35:16 PM
As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.
 
2012-08-18 09:37:24 PM

jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.


fark I hate you all sometimes.
 
2012-08-18 09:41:19 PM

sleeps in trees: hot sauce is not as common as you think. Secondly parents with autistic children guard and entrust sp needs teachers to keep them safe


Assuming you're serious, it looks like we don't have enough common ground to discuss this. The best I can tell you is that you have a very broad notion of what constitutes a threat from which children need to be kept safe, and you are perhaps hasty assuming that all sensible adults (or even most of us) see it as you do.
 
2012-08-18 09:41:37 PM

sleeps in trees: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

fark I hate you all sometimes.


So what's your solution? The other children are coloring, so you can't remove the crayons "like all adults do." You're in the situation described. Since the proposed solutions are so completely reprehensible as to cause you to hate the people suggesting them (en masse, no less) what is your proposed solution?
 
2012-08-18 09:43:29 PM

jpat: It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.


For me it a long sleeve shirt and gloves duct taped together to get me to stop sucking my fingers.
 
2012-08-18 09:47:09 PM

jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.


Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.
 
2012-08-18 09:48:00 PM

ShannonKW: sleeps in trees: So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?

No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

A teacher isn't "all adults." Neither, for that matter, are you.

The teacher's job is to help the kid learn how to use the crayons. She can't do that by taking them away. One of the most basic things the kid needs to learn about crayons is that they belong on paper, not in his mouth. So, she decided to make the crayons taste bad, perhaps on the theory that one is less likely to put a bad-tasting object in one's mouth.

Here's something for you to comprehend: she is accused of making something taste bad -- something that is not food and that she had no duty to preserve the flavor of. Depending on how the autistic kid feels about spicy food she may not even be guilty of that.


At that age you can warp a kid's mind. Using hot sauce as a 'surprise' teaching aid is borderline child abuse. This teacher is clearly not very bright. You start a kid's academic career off like that, you could very well be farking his or her life up.

That revolting sow has no business working with kids.
 
2012-08-18 09:49:03 PM

ShannonKW: sleeps in trees: hot sauce is not as common as you think. Secondly parents with autistic children guard and entrust sp needs teachers to keep them safe

Assuming you're serious, it looks like we don't have enough common ground to discuss this. The best I can tell you is that you have a very broad notion of what constitutes a threat from which children need to be kept safe, and you are perhaps hasty assuming that all sensible adults (or even most of us) see it as you do.


Or some of us are educated, in autism, unlike this teacher, and you.

Psst, crayons aren't a threat.
 
2012-08-18 09:49:45 PM

PapaChester: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.


And now I love you.
 
2012-08-18 09:53:47 PM

Dokushin: sleeps in trees: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

fark I hate you all sometimes.

So what's your solution? The other children are coloring, so you can't remove the crayons "like all adults do." You're in the situation described. Since the proposed solutions are so completely reprehensible as to cause you to hate the people suggesting them (en masse, no less) what is your proposed solution?


Depends on the situation and methods used. Further if this is his SE a plan is in place. It's just not 123. There are systems in place in the teaching aspect. If this SE does not know aversions are detrimental then she needs a new job.
 
2012-08-18 09:59:27 PM

sleeps in trees: ShannonKW: sleeps in trees: So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?

No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

A teacher isn't "all adults." Neither, for that matter, are you.

The teacher's job is to help the kid learn how to use the crayons. She can't do that by taking them away. One of the most basic things the kid needs to learn about crayons is that they belong on paper, not in his mouth. So, she decided to make the crayons taste bad, perhaps on the theory that one is less likely to put a bad-tasting object in one's mouth.

Here's something for you to comprehend: she is accused of making something taste bad -- something that is not food and that she had no duty to preserve the flavor of. Depending on how the autistic kid feels about spicy food she may not even be guilty of that.

Here is something for you to comprehend, she had no right to do that. According to numerous precedence she crossed the line with no education to back her up.

Further as a tx that works with these children their senses are magnified. You have no idea what you are talking about.

The child commonly ate crayons. She had no "duty" to fark with him. If someone did that to a "normal" child's milk you would be outraged. Aversion is now considered barbaric and abusive.


Milk is made for drinking, crayons for drawing. Letting a child eat non-food items seems like child abuse to me.
 
2012-08-18 10:02:17 PM
Guilty - 'cause she's fat.
 
2012-08-18 10:10:12 PM
WTF TV
 
2012-08-18 10:13:20 PM

sleeps in trees: Further as a tx that works with these children their senses are magnified.


You're... Texas?
 
2012-08-18 10:19:59 PM

ShannonKW: Ed Finnerty: I guess I understand the initial thought-process behind this, specifically to get the kid to stop eating crayons.

However, the practical application doesn't seem to account for when the kid uses the crayons, then: rubs their eyes, touches other kids, eats something with their hands, etc.

Reality check here people -- you're talking about hot sauce, a common condiment that you put on your food. You're not talking about radium or arsenic or some drug that must be prescribed by a physician. She appears to have tried to deter crayon-eating (crayons, BTW, being something that doesn't belong in your body) by using spicy food. What's next -- are you going to expect firing for a harsh tone of voice?

Admittedly, if you take the headline at face value you'd think this is an outrage, but subby is a jackass, submitting deliberately false taglines is in vogue these days (maybe this is some kind of ironic/hipster thing) and the teacher doesn't appear to have force-fed anybody anything.


Except there's two big things you seem to have forgotten and/or are unaware of:

a) Taste sensation in children is different, and often more sensitive, than in adults; things that are bland to grownups can be unbearably bitter or spicy to kids. (There's a reason that most foodstuffs designed for kids are bland compared to adult food. :D)

b) Autism is now recognised as a sensory integration disorder, and is increasingly recognised as a sensory integration disorder caused by an inborn error in neural differentiation--in layman's terms, people with autism have too many neurons and/or have them too connected to other neurons, and this not only causes sensory inputs to bleed into each other at times (synesthesia) but also can cause even normal sensations to be incredibly amplified compared to what neurotypicals sense (a good way to think of this is that the sensory inputs of people with autism are stuck on a gigabit if not Infinilink connection whilst neurotypicals are still on 10BASE-T ethernet :D).

What this means in plain English--even if the kid was a neurotypical it'd STILL have been quite unpleasant, and the woman did this to a kid in a population where even paprika might feel like a mouthful of bhut jolokia or Trinidad Scorpion peppers. (Some folks with autism who would be in the "lower functioning" classes and less mainstreamed have enough sensory issues with even stuff neurotypical folks consider bland that they pretty much restrict themselves to either extremely bland foods, foods of a certain texture, or both--lest their mouth explode into a mass of pain when eating.)

(And for the record--paprika is considered to be the mildest of "hot" peppers, with the sweet paprika varieties barely having perceptible spice at all.)
 
2012-08-18 10:21:51 PM
I spent nearly a decade taking care mentally challenged and autistic individuals.
Every day I would watch the special bus come pick them up and haul them to the "special really expensive school that the government says they are entitled to" to educate them.
About the only thing they learned was new masturbation techniques.
I still don't know why we waste so much tax money attempting to educate children like this.
Regardless of if they learn that a banana is yellow they will be a burden on the rest of us for their entire lives.
Lets save a few bucks and stop the charade of entitled education for those that can not learn.

/Not a troll.
//Those people are freaking strong and will tear your arm off.
 
zez
2012-08-18 10:23:53 PM
When my first child was an infant, I'd dip my finger in some hit sauce and let him lick it off. He loved it and now really enjoys spicy foods so I think dipping crayons in hot sauce would only make him want to eat crayons.

Funny thing though. With the second we didn't do the hotsauce for some reason but his first food was fresh avacado, which the older had never had. The youngest will now eat tons of guacamole as long as it isn't spicy and the oldest hates guacamole but will still ask for more hot sauce.
 
zez
2012-08-18 10:25:57 PM
oh yeah, now it's a

HOT SAUCE THREAD!!!!

I think this is the best all purpose hot sauce that you can pretty much pick up anywhere

healthyprofessionals.blog.com
 
2012-08-18 10:28:48 PM
Does anybody have a good recipe for spicy crayon-cakes?
 
2012-08-18 10:36:29 PM
That woman shouldn't be allowed anywhere near children.
 
2012-08-18 10:36:42 PM

Buffet: Guilty - 'cause she's fat.


And Hispanic.
 
2012-08-18 10:41:46 PM

jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.


I have a severely autistic son, and if you don't think this is over the line, then I think maybe you have more to learn about autism.

There's nothing wrong with aversives if they are very clearly and specfically implemented, appropriate to the child, and properly controlled. I don't think that was the case here.

First, autism is a sensory disorder. It is quite likely that the kid feels the burn from commercial hot sauce far, far more powerfully than the average person. This cannot be understated. Much of the extreme behavior of autistic people (stimming, repetitive tics, tantrums, etc.) is actually reactive to sensory stimuli, which should give you some idea of how strongly they feel sensory input. A taste powerful enough to bring tears to the eyes of other ordinary grade-school age kids, as hot sauce often does, is massive overkill for an autistic person. The taste stays in the mouth for some time, too, and drinking water does not necessarily make it go away. While every autistic kid is different, it's very likely that the effect is far more powerful than would really be needed for a successful aversive. The nail stuff your talking about might even be too powerful for an autistic person. Any aversive therapy that is to be considered has to take the reactions of the child into account. Otherwise, it's torture, and a qualified special ed teacher should know the difference.

Second, the crayons were soaked in commercial hot sauce, which contains skin irritants that do not always go away with simple washing/irrigation. If the kid touches the crayons and then wipes his eyes, just for example, now you have a child in pain with no causal connection to the undesirable behavior, which I would say counts as negligence at minimum.

Third, there does not seem to have been an effort on the part of the teacher to narrowly target the undesirable behavior. The use of any aversive should be accompanied by immediate and clear communication with the student through verbal warnings, PECS, etc. The article is not clear on this, but booby-trapping crayons is not consistent with a teacher trying to proactively administer an adversive that is clearly only connected to the undesirable behavior.

Finally, although the article is not clear on this point, it sounds like the teacher did this on her own without consulting with the parents or the IEP team. If any teacher tried that with my kid, I'd make it a personal project to make sure they didn't get a second chance. If the district is coming down against the teacher, and the union isn't stepping up, probably it's a good bet that that's what happened.

We've actually worked successfully with our son's teachers to successfully administer adversives. This teacher didn't. I question her professionalism and her knowledge of autism, and I'm kinda questioning yours at this point, too.
 
2012-08-18 10:42:08 PM
But did it work? Did he stop eating crayons?
 
2012-08-18 10:42:11 PM
My neighbor has an autistic teenage boy. Earlier this summer we had a neighborhood bbq and watched this kid down a bottle of Frank's Red Hot like it was Pepsi. He loved that shiat and it didn't seem to affect him much. Although afterwards he climbed up on his parents roof and masturbated furiously but I don't think it was related.
 
2012-08-18 10:43:42 PM

Kahabut: thamike: So, contrary to the headline, there was no force-feeding.

Lillian Gomez was fired earlier this year after district officials said she soaked Play-Doh and crayons in hot sauce and force-fed them to a student.

I'm not certain what this means... but it does in fact say force-fed. Which sounds bad.


That's what I thought until I read further.
 
2012-08-18 10:54:08 PM

lemortede: I spent nearly a decade taking care mentally challenged and autistic individuals.
Every day I would watch the special bus come pick them up and haul them to the "special really expensive school that the government says they are entitled to" to educate them.
About the only thing they learned was new masturbation techniques.
I still don't know why we waste so much tax money attempting to educate children like this.
Regardless of if they learn that a banana is yellow they will be a burden on the rest of us for their entire lives.
Lets save a few bucks and stop the charade of entitled education for those that can not learn.

/Not a troll.
//Those people are freaking strong and will tear your arm off.


A few problems with your statement:

a) You're talking about two sets that don't always overlap (and are now being found to overlap quite a bit less than previously realised)--people with intellectual disabilities (including those in the TMH and EMH and, in some schools, PMH classes) and people with a neurological disability (which autism is finally being recognised as--all evidence points to autism as being at its root a sensory integration disorder caused by inborn problems in neural differentiation and routing).

Assuming all people with autism are instant TMH and PMH class material is as inappropriate as, say, claiming that all kids with cerebral palsy are hopelessly ineducable and should be warehoused in state ICF/DD facilities. (Of note, this is exactly what used to be done with kids with cerebral palsy, who were (wrongfully, usually) assumed to be "too derpy to be educable"; it wasn't until 1976 that the average kid with cerebral palsy were even allowed into most public school systems.)

b) Pretty much most school systems had no idea how to properly educate and work with kids with autism until very recently, and by this value I mean "usually within the past five to eight years"; before that, kids "on the spectrum" usually ended up being warehoused in the TMH and PMH classes if they were "low functioning" enough to be nonverbal or have regular meltdowns in a class.

Ironically enough, much of the change in how even "low functioning" people with autism are perceived is because--surprise, surprise, surprise--teachers in public schools taught them methods on how to communicate via computer or sign language, or worked with them patiently to deal with the sensory overload stuff...and they've been actually able to describe what the sensory-overload stuff and sensory issues are like, pointing researchers to the idea that we were dealing with a neurological problem (like in cerebral palsy) rather than an intellectual disability.

c) With appropriate teaching and therapy (biiiig emphasis on this) even a fair number of "low functioning" autistics can manage to live outside of an ICF/DD "institution"--either in supervised housing or in some form of assisted living. (Surely you don't suggest we throw Grandma on the ice flows because she needs someone to help her out thanks to her bum hip and is in an "Assisted Living" facility! :D) Some of them even get to pretty major things--one kid who'd have been classified as "low functioning" in her early days did receive appropriate therapy and now not only works in designing humane enclosures for animals, not only discusses animal welfare implications on how different critters sense the world, but also does talks on autism and how the sensory inputs of people with autism are different than that of neurotypicals (and often close to that of non-human animals in some ways). One of their first designs--a humane restraint system for cattle based directly on how "deep squeeze" therapy calms down both bovines and people with autism who are being "over-stimmed".

d) Yes, there are people with autism who have such severe sensory problems that most therapies are going to be nothing but an exercise in pain for them; yes, there will be people with autism who can't function outside of an institutional setting (often these folks not only have autism but other neurological and/or cognitive disabilities that cause a big bowl full of suck--rubella during pregnancy can devastate brain development enough that a kid ends up with autism and intellectual disabilities, as can certain genetic disorders and developmental disorders of the brain in general).

Some of us, however, would argue (whether from a Christian sense of "Whatever you do for the least among you, you also do for me", a religious obligation from the other Abrahamic religions and from non-Abrahamic religions that one should care for the helpless and least-fortunate, or even a plain old secular-humanist-atheist ideal that Decent People Look Out For Those Who Can't Help Themselves) that--at least in a society where we have the ability and resources to do so--the decent thing is to care for those who can't help themselves, yes, even if it is expensive and even if they never will live independently.

(Yes, I know there are cultures who apparently did infanticide of children with disabilities. In almost 100% of those cases, the kids were born to cultures which had very limited resources (the Inuit and certain South American First Nations) or were extremely militarised and may have suffered a resource deficit as a result (the Spartans, and there is some controversy over whether they practiced infanticide). However, I would note that most Farkers reading this do not live in Bumfarkkiaq, Nunavut and are not living traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyles where one's survival depends on how many mouths there are to feed AND how many of the owners of those mouths can throw spears at walrus or shoot arrowheads at caribou to Make More Food Happen. :3)
 
2012-08-18 10:58:15 PM

zez: oh yeah, now it's a

HOT SAUCE THREAD!!!!

I think this is the best all purpose hot sauce that you can pretty much pick up anywhere

[healthyprofessionals.blog.com image 230x230]


I'm sorry, I think you put the wrong picture where the Sriracha sauce picture goes.
 
2012-08-18 10:58:42 PM

Madame Ovary: I have a severely autistic son, and if you don't think this is over the line, then I think maybe you have more to learn about autism.


This is the big problem.

You know all about autism. Most people know next to nothing. I certainly never heard it was a sensory disorder until this very thread.

This teacher was probably just sent to cover the special ed kids because no one else was available and she didn't know what else to do. If the kid was just a normal young kid, the hot sauce on the crayon is still a bad idea, but it would be more reasonable to think hot sauce itself would be an appropriate aversion tool.

Have you considered working in education yourself? The demand for qualified special ed teachers is always going to be higher than the supply of people who actually get proper training. You could change the game and put up good advice for teachers who might be thrown into such a gig without proper backgrounds on the internet.
 
2012-08-18 11:13:29 PM

doglover: Madame Ovary: I have a severely autistic son, and if you don't think this is over the line, then I think maybe you have more to learn about autism.

This is the big problem.

You know all about autism. Most people know next to nothing. I certainly never heard it was a sensory disorder until this very thread.

This teacher was probably just sent to cover the special ed kids because no one else was available and she didn't know what else to do. If the kid was just a normal young kid, the hot sauce on the crayon is still a bad idea, but it would be more reasonable to think hot sauce itself would be an appropriate aversion tool.

Have you considered working in education yourself? The demand for qualified special ed teachers is always going to be higher than the supply of people who actually get proper training. You could change the game and put up good advice for teachers who might be thrown into such a gig without proper backgrounds on the internet.


Good for you for taking the time to read the comments and learn something, that's more than most farkers do. :-)

Autism is indeed a sensory disorder, or at least that's what pretty much all current research points to anyway. They've covered it pretty well here really. Much as a disorder like borderline personality is described as lacking an "emotional skin," those on the autism spectrum seem to lack a sensory skin. Their bodies react to stimuli in a way that those of us with average neurological connections literally couldn't even fathom. That's why there are so often behavioral and social problems associated with autism, they literally get overloaded by just being in certain environments. And in extreme cases, almost ANY environment. It's a really tough illness, in truth.
 
2012-08-18 11:16:53 PM

rosonowski: I really wish she had told me about it, I could have offered more immediate comfort (ie, some vegetable oil and paper towels). Poor girl didn't know water just spreads it around.


Try a tablespoon of bleach in 3 or 4 cups of water. That converts the whatever-it is-that-won't-rinse-off into a salt that easily rinses off. At such a low concentration I've used it on my face and eyelids (don't think for a second that I didn't have my eyes slammed shut while I did it). I learned about the bleach thing from watching Alton Brown.

/not a joke, it really works
 
2012-08-18 11:26:03 PM
Oh come on, these kids will turn out fine...
img37.imageshack.us
...mostly.
 
2012-08-18 11:41:26 PM

Dokushin: FTA: "Officials said she first got jumbo-sized crayons, put them in a cup, then poured hot sauce over them and she later moved them to a bag and labeled it with the student's name, and let the crayons sit for days. "

Is this that new kind of force-feeding that they're trying to outlaw in New York?


Only for cups over 12 oz.
 
2012-08-18 11:48:22 PM

Great Porn Dragon: there's two big things you seem to have forgotten and/or are unaware of:

a) Taste sensation in children is different, and often more sensitive, than in adults [...]

b) [autistic kids are abnormally sensitive]


I'm aware of these things and was mindful of them when I posted.

Again, as in the case of another poster here, if you are of the mindset that any sort of unpleasantness visited upon children is a crime beyond the pale and unworthy of an educator, then we don't agree enough to have a meaningful debate on this. If not, then it's a question of degree. Yes, small children react more strongly to bad flavors. It is unreasonable for you to expect that everyone, including an appropriately skeptical judge, share your belief that merely allowing a child to taste hot sauce is a cruelty tantamount to child abuse.

(Small children, it is said, perceive all pain as life-threatening. A child who has skinned his knee in the playground is, presumably, in an agony akin to an adult suffering a heart attack. While it would be cruel to inflict this suffering on a child, it would take an extreme point of view to say that merely allowing a child to play, and sooner or later skin his knee, amounts to criminal cruelty.)

It is in the nature of autism that its victims appear overly sensitive. That's the hell of the disease. An autistic patient may wail like a damned soul at the agony of being transported to school. We'd all assume that he is suffering terribly, but the world cannot be padded in cotton to spare him. The point of sending him to school rather than letting him remain at home in his comfort zone playing with door knobs all day is to get him to cope with the world of the senses, as painful as that may be for him. Some things that you stick in your mouth taste bad. You spit them out and remember not to eat them again. Normal kids and autistic kids are sitting on floors around the world and learning that lesson at this very moment.

By your reasoning it would be cruel -- criminally cruel and cause for dismissal -- to feed the child a salad with radishes in it. Let's say the kid is used to eating salads. Even normal people find radishes wickedly hot and bitter. Perhaps his autistic brain is wracked with agony at the taste of a radish, but this is how normals learn to spit the damned things out, and the autistic kid needs to learn this too, even if the lesson is harder on him.
 
2012-08-18 11:56:12 PM

ShannonKW: Great Porn Dragon: there's two big things you seem to have forgotten and/or are unaware of:

a) Taste sensation in children is different, and often more sensitive, than in adults [...]

b) [autistic kids are abnormally sensitive]

I'm aware of these things and was mindful of them when I posted.

Again, as in the case of another poster here, if you are of the mindset that any sort of unpleasantness visited upon children is a crime beyond the pale and unworthy of an educator, then we don't agree enough to have a meaningful debate on this. If not, then it's a question of degree. Yes, small children react more strongly to bad flavors. It is unreasonable for you to expect that everyone, including an appropriately skeptical judge, share your belief that merely allowing a child to taste hot sauce is a cruelty tantamount to child abuse.

(Small children, it is said, perceive all pain as life-threatening. A child who has skinned his knee in the playground is, presumably, in an agony akin to an adult suffering a heart attack. While it would be cruel to inflict this suffering on a child, it would take an extreme point of view to say that merely allowing a child to play, and sooner or later skin his knee, amounts to criminal cruelty.)

It is in the nature of autism that its victims appear overly sensitive. That's the hell of the disease. An autistic patient may wail like a damned soul at the agony of being transported to school. We'd all assume that he is suffering terribly, but the world cannot be padded in cotton to spare him. The point of sending him to school rather than letting him remain at home in his comfort zone playing with door knobs all day is to get him to cope with the world of the senses, as painful as that may be for him. Some things that you stick in your mouth taste bad. You spit them out and remember not to eat them again. Normal kids and autistic kids are sitting on floors around the world and learning that lesson at this very moment.

By your reasoning it would be cruel -- criminally cruel and cause for dismissal -- to feed the child a salad with radishes in it. Let's say the kid is used to eating salads. Even normal people find radishes wickedly hot and bitter. Perhaps his autistic brain is wracked with agony at the taste of a radish, but this is how normals learn to spit the damned things out, and the autistic kid needs to learn this too, even if the lesson is harder on him.


That's a very pretty strawman, but it doesn't disguise that you have no idea, none whatsoever, what you are talking about.
 
2012-08-19 12:06:26 AM

PapaChester: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.


Then he throws a fit and the other 3 get nothing done for the day. Not that it really matters too much actually but it's easier on the teacher.
 
2012-08-19 12:08:56 AM

sleeps in trees: sleeps in trees: sleeps in trees: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: WhippingBoy: This is so wrong.

Everyone knows that you're supposed to feed retards pudding.

Hey, you know it's offensive to actual retards to compare them with autistic kids.

I know "welcome to fark" but this really killed my soal today.

Andy spelling sucks.

fark it. I'm going to flap down the hallway and play lego.... Just fark it.


I'm laughing way too hard at this. Fantastic.
 
2012-08-19 12:12:58 AM

Madame Ovary: That's a very pretty strawman, but it doesn't disguise that you have no idea, none whatsoever, what you are talking about.


What am I supposed to say to that, or am I just supposed to admire your lazy snark?

[ohsnap.jpg]

It isn't a strawman unless you care to show how it misses the point.

Got an autistic kid? I'm sorry to hear that. I'm sure you know things about autism that I'll never know. For that matter, the folks dancing around with venomous snakes in church know things about venomous snakes that I'll never know. They're not the only ones entitled to speak on the practice when it becomes a public issue and neither are the parents of autistic children.
 
2012-08-19 12:30:58 AM

doglover: sleeps in trees: Further as a tx that works with these children their senses are magnified.

You're... Texas?


Common term for therapist. Sorry pup - pun intended.
 
2012-08-19 12:34:11 AM
I want to see our Navy Seals go into Cuba and SHUT OFF the brainwave ray they've been pointing at Florida since the 60's. Enough is enough. Blow it up already.

It may be old Soviet technology, but it worked, dammit. Floridians are losing their minds, particularly the older ones, like this judge, who have been exposed to the waves for far too long.
 
2012-08-19 12:35:29 AM

insertsnarkyusername: PapaChester: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.

Then he throws a fit and the other 3 get nothing done for the day. Not that it really matters too much actually but it's easier on the teacher.


That's not how it works. Take a look at funding and where it goes. Not to the kids who need it but the motherfarking sparkle ponies.

/did I go too far?
 
2012-08-19 12:38:41 AM

Great Porn Dragon: ShannonKW: Ed Finnerty: I guess I understand the initial thought-process behind this, specifically to get the kid to stop eating crayons.

However, the practical application doesn't seem to account for when the kid uses the crayons, then: rubs their eyes, touches other kids, eats something with their hands, etc.

Reality check here people -- you're talking about hot sauce, a common condiment that you put on your food. You're not talking about radium or arsenic or some drug that must be prescribed by a physician. She appears to have tried to deter crayon-eating (crayons, BTW, being something that doesn't belong in your body) by using spicy food. What's next -- are you going to expect firing for a harsh tone of voice?

Admittedly, if you take the headline at face value you'd think this is an outrage, but subby is a jackass, submitting deliberately false taglines is in vogue these days (maybe this is some kind of ironic/hipster thing) and the teacher doesn't appear to have force-fed anybody anything.

Except there's two big things you seem to have forgotten and/or are unaware of:

a) Taste sensation in children is different, and often more sensitive, than in adults; things that are bland to grownups can be unbearably bitter or spicy to kids. (There's a reason that most foodstuffs designed for kids are bland compared to adult food. :D)

b) Autism is now recognised as a sensory integration disorder, and is increasingly recognised as a sensory integration disorder caused by an inborn error in neural differentiation--in layman's terms, people with autism have too many neurons and/or have them too connected to other neurons, and this not only causes sensory inputs to bleed into each other at times (synesthesia) but also can cause even normal sensations to be incredibly amplified compared to what neurotypicals sense (a good way to think of this is that the sensory inputs of people with autism are stuck on a gigabit if not Infinilink connection whilst neurotypicals are still on 10BASE-T ethernet :D).

What this means in plain English--even if the kid was a neurotypical it'd STILL have been quite unpleasant, and the woman did this to a kid in a population where even paprika might feel like a mouthful of bhut jolokia or Trinidad Scorpion peppers. (Some folks with autism who would be in the "lower functioning" classes and less mainstreamed have enough sensory issues with even stuff neurotypical folks consider bland that they pretty much restrict themselves to either extremely bland foods, foods of a certain texture, or both--lest their mouth explode into a mass of pain when eating.)

(And for the record--paprika is considered to be the mildest of "hot" peppers, with the sweet paprika varieties barely having perceptible spice at all.)


Sunlight and salt are still a work in progress.
 
2012-08-19 12:38:49 AM

sleeps in trees: insertsnarkyusername: PapaChester: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.

Then he throws a fit and the other 3 get nothing done for the day. Not that it really matters too much actually but it's easier on the teacher.

That's not how it works. Take a look at funding and where it goes. Not to the kids who need it but the motherfarking sparkle ponies.

/did I go too far?


Are you autistic yourself, or are you just under the influence of alcohol or some other recreational substance, tonight?
 
2012-08-19 12:42:32 AM

Morning Coffee: sleeps in trees: sleeps in trees: sleeps in trees: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: WhippingBoy: This is so wrong.

Everyone knows that you're supposed to feed retards pudding.

Hey, you know it's offensive to actual retards to compare them with autistic kids.

I know "welcome to fark" but this really killed my soal today.

Andy spelling sucks.

fark it. I'm going to flap down the hallway and play lego.... Just fark it.

I'm laughing way too hard at this. Fantastic.


It's kind of awesome in a nuts way.
 
pla
2012-08-19 12:44:08 AM
sleeps in trees : Psst, crayons aren't a threat.

Psst - Hotsauce won't exactly kill you, either.


PapaChester : This is an autistic child, not a vegetable.

Well then, that answers SchlingFocker's question from early in the thread.
 
2012-08-19 12:47:40 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: sleeps in trees: insertsnarkyusername: PapaChester: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.

Then he throws a fit and the other 3 get nothing done for the day. Not that it really matters too much actually but it's easier on the teacher.

That's not how it works. Take a look at funding and where it goes. Not to the kids who need it but the motherfarking sparkle ponies.

/did I go too far?

Are you autistic yourself, or are you just under the influence of alcohol or some other recreational substance, tonight?


Nope, sadly I'm normal. I counsel families and do therapy with families with disabled children.

I then, had a babe with autism after the fact. I had a comming to Jesus about my opinions used diagnoses.
 
2012-08-19 12:49:34 AM

pla: sleeps in trees : Psst, crayons aren't a threat.

Psst - Hotsauce won't exactly kill you, either.


PapaChester : This is an autistic child, not a vegetable.

Well then, that answers SchlingFocker's question from early in the thread.


Psst crayons don't burn the mouth. Really are you all functionally retarded?
 
2012-08-19 12:49:42 AM
is this like leaving sweat on your balls so the wife wont wake you from a peaceful sleep by sucking on your man stick in the morning?
 
2012-08-19 12:52:29 AM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: sleeps in trees: insertsnarkyusername: PapaChester: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.

Then he throws a fit and the other 3 get nothing done for the day. Not that it really matters too much actually but it's easier on the teacher.

That's not how it works. Take a look at funding and where it goes. Not to the kids who need it but the motherfarking sparkle ponies.

/did I go too far?

Are you autistic yourself, or are you just under the influence of alcohol or some other recreational substance, tonight?


Also, no need to be rude. I did not agress to you, cool off.
 
2012-08-19 12:54:41 AM

sleeps in trees: Common term for therapist.


It's not a term, it's an abbreviation. You can't pronounce "tx" There's no phonetic component without a vowel.
 
pla
2012-08-19 12:55:07 AM
sleeps in trees : Psst crayons don't burn the mouth. Really are you all functionally retarded?

Uh, neither does hot sauce if you don't eat the goddamned crayons. Thus the whole point of the exercise - Use crayon, pretty colors. Chew crayon, discomfort. Repeat until lesson learned.

Hell, we use bitter spray on plants to keep the cats away from them, and the cats get the point. If TFA involves someone so low functioning that they make Mr. Fluffy look like Einstein, perhaps that kid would do better somewhere other than a classroom?
 
2012-08-19 12:58:37 AM

doglover: sleeps in trees: Common term for therapist.

It's not a term, it's an abbreviation. You can't pronounce "tx" There's no phonetic component without a vowel.


You are funny.. In the nicest way I call my staff tx. Sorry. Pronounced " where is the tee-ex".
 
2012-08-19 01:01:16 AM

doglover: sleeps in trees: Common term for therapist.

It's not a term, it's an abbreviation. You can't pronounce "tx" There's no phonetic component without a vowel.


But it's really fun to try. Seriously, try it. Tx....tcks....ttttttttxxxxxxx...
 
2012-08-19 01:03:08 AM

doglover: sleeps in trees: Further as a tx that works with these children their senses are magnified.

You're... Texas?


No, their (the children's) senses are.
 
2012-08-19 01:04:24 AM

sleeps in trees: doglover: sleeps in trees: Common term for therapist.

It's not a term, it's an abbreviation. You can't pronounce "tx" There's no phonetic component without a vowel.

You are funny.. In the nicest way I call my staff tx. Sorry. Pronounced " where is the tee-ex".


Then it would be T.X. or tee ex or ティーエクス or something.

tx is the noise of a dart piercing something foil covered.
 
2012-08-19 01:06:11 AM

Arthur Jumbles: sleeps in trees: ShannonKW: sleeps in trees: So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?

No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

A teacher isn't "all adults." Neither, for that matter, are you.

The teacher's job is to help the kid learn how to use the crayons. She can't do that by taking them away. One of the most basic things the kid needs to learn about crayons is that they belong on paper, not in his mouth. So, she decided to make the crayons taste bad, perhaps on the theory that one is less likely to put a bad-tasting object in one's mouth.

Here's something for you to comprehend: she is accused of making something taste bad -- something that is not food and that she had no duty to preserve the flavor of. Depending on how the autistic kid feels about spicy food she may not even be guilty of that.

Here is something for you to comprehend, she had no right to do that. According to numerous precedence she crossed the line with no education to back her up.

Further as a tx that works with these children their senses are magnified. You have no idea what you are talking about.

The child commonly ate crayons. She had no "duty" to fark with him. If someone did that to a "normal" child's milk you would be outraged. Aversion is now considered barbaric and abusive.

Milk is made for drinking, crayons for drawing. Letting a child eat non-food items seems like child abuse to me.


What?

lgcdn.candyfavorites.com

These are crayons with flavor added. Just because wax lips are labeled as food and crayons aren't makes eating crayons child abuse? That's ridiculous.

I don't know what the big deal is about eating crayons- I suspect they're good for you, in a cleaning-out-the-intestines kind of way. If you want to keep him from eating crayons, however, give him something else to eat. You know those gummy fruit things you can put in a kid's lunch? Get the sugar-free kind. Damn things taste like wax.
 
2012-08-19 01:07:11 AM

doglover: Then it would be T.X. or tee ex or ティーエクス or something.

tx is the noise of a dart piercing something foil covered.


This is an autism thread, not an Asperger's thread.
 
2012-08-19 01:07:13 AM

pla: sleeps in trees : Psst crayons don't burn the mouth. Really are you all functionally retarded?

Uh, neither does hot sauce if you don't eat the goddamned crayons. Thus the whole point of the exercise - Use crayon, pretty colors. Chew crayon, discomfort. Repeat until lesson learned.

Hell, we use bitter spray on plants to keep the cats away from them, and the cats get the point. If TFA involves someone so low functioning that they make Mr. Fluffy look like Einstein, perhaps that kid would do better somewhere other than a classroom?


And you fail at future humanity. You have taken a commOn functioning child ( although lacking a couple years ) and with no knowledge thought they should be condemned.

Here's a challenge: You pony up. You spend a year with a child with a disability. You spend one hour a week, I will pay you 500 dollars.

You can sit on a step,drink with his parents. You will know them.
 
2012-08-19 01:09:36 AM

doglover: sleeps in trees: doglover: sleeps in trees: Common term for therapist.

It's not a term, it's an abbreviation. You can't pronounce "tx" There's no phonetic component without a vowel.

You are funny.. In the nicest way I call my staff tx. Sorry. Pronounced " where is the tee-ex".

Then it would be T.X. or tee ex or ティーエクス or something.

tx is the noise of a dart piercing something foil covered.


I just call them my girls.
 
2012-08-19 01:22:28 AM

sleeps in trees: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: sleeps in trees: insertsnarkyusername: PapaChester: jpat: As someone who works with autistic students all day, I can understand where the teacher is coming from. Here's the situation - four kids in a room (we are very lucky, we get small rooms), 3 love to color, 1 eats crayons. You can't take the crayons away from the one without taking it away from the other three. She 'treats his crayons' to make them unappealing. It doesn't sound much different than the nail stuff my brother had to use to stop him from chewing on his fingernails.

It's not evil, but it's not good teaching, either.

Same working situation as you, but I disagree. You can totally takes the wax eaters crayons away and not the others. If they want crayons, they should not eat them. This is an autistic child, not a vegetable. Training a person with mental issues just takes longer, but you don't give up before you try.

Then he throws a fit and the other 3 get nothing done for the day. Not that it really matters too much actually but it's easier on the teacher.

That's not how it works. Take a look at funding and where it goes. Not to the kids who need it but the motherfarking sparkle ponies.

/did I go too far?

Are you autistic yourself, or are you just under the influence of alcohol or some other recreational substance, tonight?

Also, no need to be rude. I did not agress to you, cool off.


No offense intended, lady.
 
2012-08-19 01:51:47 AM

ShannonKW: Madame Ovary: That's a very pretty strawman, but it doesn't disguise that you have no idea, none whatsoever, what you are talking about.

What am I supposed to say to that, or am I just supposed to admire your lazy snark?

[ohsnap.jpg]

It isn't a strawman unless you care to show how it misses the point.

Got an autistic kid? I'm sorry to hear that. I'm sure you know things about autism that I'll never know. For that matter, the folks dancing around with venomous snakes in church know things about venomous snakes that I'll never know. They're not the only ones entitled to speak on the practice when it becomes a public issue and neither are the parents of autistic children.


OK, sure. Neither sleeps in trees nor Great Porn Dragon argued that any sort of unpleasantness visited upon children is a crime beyond the pale and unworthy of an educator, that allowing a child to taste hot sauce is tantamount to child abuse, nor that it is criminally cruel to feed a child a salad with radishes in it, nor that the world be padded in cotton to spare him. These, and the overarching notions behind them, are all your inventions. They are arguing, as I am arguing, that putting hot sauce on crayons and leaving them out for an autistic kid to handle is sloppy, irresponsible and ineffective (if not counterproductive) discipline that will cause unnecessary pain to the child. There are ways to teach autistic crayon-eating children not to eat crayons, but this isn't one of them. It is emphatically not the job of the teacher to inflict pointless pain on students.

There are a number of specifics offered in our above posts, most of which you have either marginalized with no supporting evidence (specifically, sensory reaction to hot sauce and the differences in perception between autistic and non-autistic persons), or ignored altogether (specifically, risk of secondary irritation and disciplinary ineffectiveness). Your opinions about how the autistic feel pain or can be successfully disciplined are clearly ill-informed conjecture.

I am the parent of a severely autistic child. Every other autism parent on this thread will know what that means. You are some random jackass on the Internet with an opinion he can't support, and who doubles down when he's called on his BS. Whatever. You have every right to speak. Just don't expect to be taken seriously.
 
2012-08-19 01:55:44 AM
Gomez denies ever force-feeding the student and said she only used the hot sauce to prevent him from eating the crayons.

Frankly, that makes a lot more sense than what the prosecution was claiming. If she wanted to use hot sauce to punish the kid, why wouldn't she just spoon-feed it to him? The only logical reason for putting it on crayons and Play-Doh is as a deterrent, to discourage him from eating those things. (People use the same tactic with dogs to keep them from eating their poop.)
 
2012-08-19 02:13:36 AM
I did a hot sauce soaked tequila shot 2 weeks ago for the first time in 16 years. It will be at least that long before I do one again.
 
2012-08-19 02:16:10 AM

ShannonKW: sleeps in trees: So.... she should let the kids eat crayons?

No, you remove them like all adults do. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

A teacher isn't "all adults." Neither, for that matter, are you.

The teacher's job is to help the kid learn how to use the crayons. She can't do that by taking them away. One of the most basic things the kid needs to learn about crayons is that they belong on paper, not in his mouth. So, she decided to make the crayons taste bad, perhaps on the theory that one is less likely to put a bad-tasting object in one's mouth.

Here's something for you to comprehend: she is accused of making something taste bad -- something that is not food and that she had no duty to preserve the flavor of. Depending on how the autistic kid feels about spicy food she may not even be guilty of that.


"Spicy" isn't a taste. It's a sensation.
A painful sensation to some and a child, let alone a special needs child, might not correlate the process of eating crayons with a painful sensation. Especially if this is not consistently reinforced. So the child learns nothing.
 
2012-08-19 03:18:35 AM

ShannonKW: By your reasoning it would be cruel -- criminally cruel and cause for dismissal -- to feed the child a salad with radishes in it. Let's say the kid is used to eating salads. Even normal people find radishes wickedly hot and bitter. Perhaps his autistic brain is wracked with agony at the taste of a radish, but this is how normals learn to spit the damned things out, and the autistic kid needs to learn this too, even if the lesson is harder on him.


As others have noted, I said no such thing--I'm not saying "ohgod don't correct the kid" or even "ohgod don't use aversives with the kid".

What I am noting is the following:

a) Children with autism--particularly those on the "lower functioning" end of the autistic spectrum--are far more sensitive to potential aversives, both directly and in ways that can actually cause sensory disruption and potential meltdowns outside of the sense being used in the aversion.

It is probably not an exaggeration, of note, to state that the entire sensory apparatus of your average kid with severe autism resembles a gigabit ethernet link (in a world of 10Base-T and 128-ISDN connections) with a non-negligible amount of cross-talk that develops when they get a lot of sensory data. (And yes, this pretty much IS a good description of what is going on with kids with autism; it's why they tend to stim and wall themselves off from often painful stimuli, it's why they tend to have synesthesia and meltdowns when a particularly strong stimulus or set of stimuli throw ALL the senses haywire into what amounts to God's own migraine times eleventy.)

A hot-sauce aversive usually isn't even recommended with kids with intellectual disabilities, because there are better aversives available. In a kid with autism, a hot-sauce aversive will likely not only be FAR more painful but could potentially cause visual and hearing and general body sensory problems (including frank body pain) as his neural network pretty much overloads and crosstalks all to hell.

In general, if aversives are used at all in kids with autism (and generally this is done less often, mostly for stuff that is literally "this will permanently maim or kill a kid") they must be far gentler than those used even in kids with intellectual disabilities and in a way the kid can associate with an action (which--again, because of sensory overload issues thanks to kids with autism having sensory equivalents of Big Pipes With Horrible Crosstalk Issues--is also problematic in some cases).

Usually (and especially in cases like crayon nomming, etc.) the more appropriate response would be to a) figure out why the kid has a fixation on eating paste and crayons (i.e. is it a form of "stimming"--that is, an action the kid is taking to try to dampen down the neural crosstalk--or is there another reason like pica, the kid having a general oral fixation because that's how they can sense the world without pain, etc.) and b) redirect the activity appropriately (in cases of stimming, work on a more appropriate "stim response" and see what may be overloading the kid, investigate for possible mineral deficiencies in case of pica, redirect oral stimming and/or oral fixations to a more appropriate tool like a chew ring, and so on).

Yes, it's more work than just dousing the crayons in some Cholula, but--interestingly enough--redirection and investigating WHY the kid keeps wanting to eat the crayons or modeling clay tends to be a more effective way to get them to stop.

(For all we know, the kid could be investigating whether the purple Play-Doh or crayons taste like grape because they smell like grapes--scented modeling clays and crayons are a lot more common nowadays. Hell, I've known neurotypical kids long before the days of scented crayons try to taste the crayons when 4-5 years old to see if they tasted purple and I've known neurotypical (but ultimately diagnosed with anxiety disorder) kids who chewed crayons and pencils as a nervous tic. There's a definite reason WHY he's chewing on this stuff, and it's better to find out WHY and redirect appropriately; it's NOT like he's chewing on electrical wires.)
 
2012-08-19 04:00:46 AM
t0.gstatic.com

crayola NIGHTMARE!!
 
2012-08-19 05:02:22 AM

Madame Ovary: They are arguing, as I am arguing, that putting hot sauce on crayons and leaving them out for an autistic kid to handle is sloppy, irresponsible and ineffective (if not counterproductive) discipline that will cause unnecessary pain to the child.


If that's all you're arguing, then it's a matter of professional opinion on which techniques are more effective than others (and which are not effective at all) in the esoteric world of autistic education, and I have no dog in this fight. The judge in TFA goes no further than to say it was "inappropriate" to use hot sauce, which these days could mean about anything.

The post that you responded to (walking around the filter here) was referring to posts by Great Porn Dragon and one other whom I'd rather not name (not you) in which there were apparently appeals made to pity (e.g. that it is cruel to expose even normal children to hot sauce). I don't recall reading any of your posts at the point you waxed pompous and accused me of attacking a strawman, though I may have been influenced by their tone. Mostly, though, you were attacking a comment which was not addressed to you.

One comment of mine that does seem to apply to your writings is the expectation that the world be padded in cotton. You deny holding this belief but it appears quite evident. The world is full of "aversives" for even closely watched children, hot sauce is not an outlandish one, and many of them are more intense. Expecting everyone in contact with a child to hem out these stimuli is an effort very much akin to padding the world in cotton. You may argue that an educator can be expected to, but there's no point unless you shrink the kid's world down to home and school, in which case you're back to Square One.

Like many people trapped in an intensely stressful situation, you appear to have lost some objectivity. You may have for ages of hopeless end busied yourself every waking day with not spinning up your autistic child, and you may be too ready to assume that others do likewise. I, and many others of voting age, am concerned that badly defective children not be subjected to wanton cruelty (found not to be the case in TFA) on my dime, but we have no practical interest in holding already hard-to-find and expensive teachers to such high standards that they be summarily fired for an instance of employing (what after expert analysis is thought to be) a suboptimal method, especially in the case of children so far gone.
 
2012-08-19 05:36:00 AM

ShannonKW: Madame Ovary: They are arguing, as I am arguing, that putting hot sauce on crayons and leaving them out for an autistic kid to handle is sloppy, irresponsible and ineffective (if not counterproductive) discipline that will cause unnecessary pain to the child.

If that's all you're arguing, then it's a matter of professional opinion on which techniques are more effective than others (and which are not effective at all) in the esoteric world of autistic education, and I have no dog in this fight. The judge in TFA goes no further than to say it was "inappropriate" to use hot sauce, which these days could mean about anything.

The post that you responded to (walking around the filter here) was referring to posts by Great Porn Dragon and one other whom I'd rather not name (not you) in which there were apparently appeals made to pity (e.g. that it is cruel to expose even normal children to hot sauce). I don't recall reading any of your posts at the point you waxed pompous and accused me of attacking a strawman, though I may have been influenced by their tone. Mostly, though, you were attacking a comment which was not addressed to you.

One comment of mine that does seem to apply to your writings is the expectation that the world be padded in cotton. You deny holding this belief but it appears quite evident. The world is full of "aversives" for even closely watched children, hot sauce is not an outlandish one, and many of them are more intense. Expecting everyone in contact with a child to hem out these stimuli is an effort very much akin to padding the world in cotton. You may argue that an educator can be expected to, but there's no point unless you shrink the kid's world down to home and school, in which case you're back to Square One.

Like many people trapped in an intensely stressful situation, you appear to have lost some objectivity. You may have for ages of hopeless end busied yourself every waking day with not spinning up your autistic child, and you may be too r ...


So what it comes down to is that you do not think that there is harm in using ineffective and outdated methods. Would you also defend a teacher who spanks kids in the classroom? Spanking in general is not technically illegal, afterall, they're just "employing suboptimal methods" of discipline. As someone in the psychology field, I know the history of my area of study, and just how badly some of those outdated "suboptimal methods" can actually cause more damage. If these methods HAVE been found to be suboptimal, which they most assuredly have, then yes, having standards that include knowing what NOT to do is a good thing. Rather than looking at it as "otherwise good teachers will be fired," how about we let them know there are consequences so that these good teachers put in the effort to educate themselves, especially when they are dealing with special needs kids.
 
2012-08-19 06:01:24 AM

Great Porn Dragon: Children with autism--particularly those on the "lower functioning" end of the autistic spectrum--are far more sensitive to potential aversives, both directly and in ways that can actually cause sensory disruption and potential meltdowns outside of the sense being used in the aversion.


You are saying, in short, "there are better ways of doing what that teacher set out to do." This is fine.

What I was trying to point out with the example of the radish-laced salad bowl was that unpleasant sensations are part of everyday life, even for sheltered children, and even when you don't incorporate them into an educational method and call them "aversives". If we were talking about some exotic chemical that the child couldn't have come in contact with, that would be a different matter. We're not. Somewhere within reach of that kid is bound to be something that is as unpleasant to put in his mouth as a lick of hot sauce. Naturally, it may end up in there as he explores the world, no matter who left it there or why.

Now, when a normal child. or even a relatively primitive animal does this, he gags it up and maybe learns not to do it again. Perhaps the far-gone autistic child is too ill-wired to react like this and, as you say, he "melts down" instead. I'd take your word for it for the sake of argument. In the worst case he has yet another meltdown in what is likely to be a long day of sticking things in his mouth and learns nothing, which is sad but unsurprising in a creature which is failing a mental task which can be performed by a healthy sea anemone. Regardless, the same task will be presented to him every day that he can find interesting but nasty things to eat, even if it isn't presented deliberately as a flawed lesson. So it seems unreasonable to get upset over it.
 
2012-08-19 06:06:50 AM

sleeps in trees: I had a comming to Jesus about my opinions used diagnoses.


what does this sentence even mean? they are all real words (except comming) but mean nothing in this arrangement.

wait, I have found a definition for comming from the urban dictionary

1. comming

A common misspelling of a word that seems so easy to spell that it hurts your brain when it's actually misspelled in this fashion. Even if you sounded out the word "coming" phonetically, to try and spell it, you would not get anything resembling "comming."



Also, it seems this kid needs 1 to 1 attention just to stop them eating crayons. That is a stupid waste of resources on a planet where so many children with a better chance of being productive members are denied food, water and basic education.
 
2012-08-19 06:48:34 AM

batcookie: So what it comes down to is that you do not think that there is harm in using ineffective and outdated methods. Would you also defend a teacher who spanks kids in the classroom? Spanking in general is not technically illegal, afterall, they're just "employing suboptimal methods" of discipline.


There is no harm in an ineffective method. There simply isn't any good in it. It doesn't make one whit of difference that a method is outdated, though the assumption that a method is better because it is in vogue (or because it is traditional) can lead to trouble.

Personally, I've never seen anything to suggest that spanking in itself would be effective in school, but I have seen good behavioral results from the plausible threat of it. I'm sure it's nothing like a disciplinary cure-all though, so it's not near the top of the list of approaches I'd endorse. In the case of a colleague who resorted to it (legally) I'd neither approve it on principle nor thump a psychology text and denounce his unorthodoxy. I'd observe the results and point these out if asked about the matter.

In the case of severe autism I'm less interested in the soundness of method because there is typically so little to be gained compared to what can be expected of normals. For a few hundred thousand dollars, top-notch experts using the best thought out techniques can teach a gorilla 2000 words of English. If I personally had commissioned the project, or it was my gorilla, I'd be pissed to find them using suboptimal methods; but if it was state law mandating education for all primates, I wouldn't care -- because an ape who knows 2000 words isn't significantly more valuable to society than one who knows only 1800. It's sunk money, and there's no use crying about it unless you intend to change the law.
 
2012-08-19 09:22:16 AM

ShannonKW: Madame Ovary: They are arguing, as I am arguing, that putting hot sauce on crayons and leaving them out for an autistic kid to handle is sloppy, irresponsible and ineffective (if not counterproductive) discipline that will cause unnecessary pain to the child.

If that's all you're arguing, then it's a matter of professional opinion on which techniques are more effective than others (and which are not effective at all) in the esoteric world of autistic education, and I have no dog in this fight. The judge in TFA goes no further than to say it was "inappropriate" to use hot sauce, which these days could mean about anything.

The post that you responded to (walking around the filter here) was referring to posts by Great Porn Dragon and one other whom I'd rather not name (not you) in which there were apparently appeals made to pity (e.g. that it is cruel to expose even normal children to hot sauce). I don't recall reading any of your posts at the point you waxed pompous and accused me of attacking a strawman, though I may have been influenced by their tone. Mostly, though, you were attacking a comment which was not addressed to you.

One comment of mine that does seem to apply to your writings is the expectation that the world be padded in cotton. You deny holding this belief but it appears quite evident. The world is full of "aversives" for even closely watched children, hot sauce is not an outlandish one, and many of them are more intense. Expecting everyone in contact with a child to hem out these stimuli is an effort very much akin to padding the world in cotton. You may argue that an educator can be expected to, but there's no point unless you shrink the kid's world down to home and school, in which case you're back to Square One.

Like many people trapped in an intensely stressful situation, you appear to have lost some objectivity. You may have for ages of hopeless end busied yourself every waking day with not spinning up your autistic child, and you may be too ready to assume that others do likewise. I, and many others of voting age, am concerned that badly defective children not be subjected to wanton cruelty (found not to be the case in TFA) on my dime, but we have no practical interest in holding already hard-to-find and expensive teachers to such high standards that they be summarily fired for an instance of employing (what after expert analysis is thought to be) a suboptimal method, especially in the case of children so far gone.


Please direct me to where I or anyone else on this thread said that everyone in contact with an autistic child must hem out all aversive stimuli, or anything even close to that.

Also, please explain how criticizing a teacher for a sloppy, ineffective, counterproductive disciplinary measure that may actually hurt the child is the same thing as expecting the teacher to hem out all aversive stimuli.

Finally, please explain how I somehow don't have objectivity. While you're at it, you can justify your incorrect assumptions about my parenting technique.

Those are all straw men.

I expect special education teachers to be highly qualified, meaning that they know enough about autism and teaching to properly design disciplinary measures, and to work with me and with a team of qualified professionals to design any unusual disciplinary measures. I also expect special education teachers and the school not to act negligently in the care of my child, and of everyone's children. Those expectations are also the expectations of US law.

It has been explained elsewhere in this thread why the teacher's approach is not merely suboptimal, but counterproductive and injurious, to the point of placing the teacher's qualifications in doubt.
 
2012-08-19 09:48:44 AM

ShannonKW: batcookie: So what it comes down to is that you do not think that there is harm in using ineffective and outdated methods. Would you also defend a teacher who spanks kids in the classroom? Spanking in general is not technically illegal, afterall, they're just "employing suboptimal methods" of discipline.

There is no harm in an ineffective method. There simply isn't any good in it. It doesn't make one whit of difference that a method is outdated, though the assumption that a method is better because it is in vogue (or because it is traditional) can lead to trouble.

Personally, I've never seen anything to suggest that spanking in itself would be effective in school, but I have seen good behavioral results from the plausible threat of it. I'm sure it's nothing like a disciplinary cure-all though, so it's not near the top of the list of approaches I'd endorse. In the case of a colleague who resorted to it (legally) I'd neither approve it on principle nor thump a psychology text and denounce his unorthodoxy. I'd observe the results and point these out if asked about the matter.

In the case of severe autism I'm less interested in the soundness of method because there is typically so little to be gained compared to what can be expected of normals. For a few hundred thousand dollars, top-notch experts using the best thought out techniques can teach a gorilla 2000 words of English. If I personally had commissioned the project, or it was my gorilla, I'd be pissed to find them using suboptimal methods; but if it was state law mandating education for all primates, I wouldn't care -- because an ape who knows 2000 words isn't significantly more valuable to society than one who knows only 1800. It's sunk money, and there's no use crying about it unless you intend to change the law.


Since we're all of a sudden placing economic measures on the education of primates, which I infer to be a simile to autistic children, let me just point out that it is vastly less costly to society for a severely autistic child to be able to communicate as effectively as possible, be as well socialized and best able to self-moderate behavior as possible, and to function cognitively to the greatest possible degree. It's the difference between independence and dependence, between assisted living and institutionalization, between having a happy adult life and being abused, ill, incarcerated or dying alone in the street. Leaving aside the moral obligation of a society to protect its most vulnerable members, it's also less costly for society for autistic adults to live in a safe, appropriately independent setting than is institutionalization or any of the bad outcomes above. This, along with the aforementioned moral obligation, is why US law mandates the free and public education of the disabled, and why special education professional practices are what they are.
 
2012-08-19 12:20:50 PM

Madame Ovary: Please direct me to where I or anyone else on this thread said that everyone in contact with an autistic child must hem out all aversive stimuli, or anything even close to that.


I'm not sure I can put this any more clearly, but here goes. You are arguing against leaving a bad-tasting object within reach of a child. To the extent that it would take an extreme effort to remove all such objects, this amounts to "hemming out" stimuli. I'm assuming, of course, that you consider it bad to leave to leave strong flavors out whether or not one is trying to teach the kid something by it.

Madame Ovary: explain how criticizing a teacher for a sloppy, ineffective, counterproductive disciplinary measure that may actually hurt the child is the same thing as expecting the teacher to hem out all aversive stimuli.


Wasn't saying that. For one thing, neither I nor the court thinks this was disciplinary. I have nothing to say of your judgment of the effectiveness of the teacher's methods. I am very skeptical of the claim that hot sauce could harm a child, and even more skeptical of the implicit belief that it would harm him worse than anything else that might be found laying around the school. Again, I get the idea of "hemming out" bad tastes from your claim that the teacher is culpable for leaving out a single spiced object.

Madame Ovary: explain how I somehow don't have objectivity.


To people who don't spend much of their time pondering the theoretical psychiatric consequences of spicy sauce, flavoring a crayon is a 5-minute act worth 5 minutes of thought. It looms large in your mind, and you seem to think it should do so in others' to the extent that a public servant who has charge of autistic children may not be forgiven such a lapse, assuming it even is one. This is a standard of conduct fit for air traffic controllers, and you would be lacking in objectivity to think (having an autistic child of your own) that your teachers should be held to it.

Madame Ovary: While you're at it, you can justify your incorrect assumptions about my parenting technique.


I have no idea what your parenting technique is and less interest, though I assume it involves not exposing your child to strong flavors. You want to fire people who do that.

Madame Ovary: This, along with the aforementioned moral obligation, is why US law mandates the free and public education of the disabled, and why special education professional practices are what they are.


I do not believe this, nor can conceive of any honest adult believing it, though it makes for heart-warming campaign rhetoric, and some version of it may be scrawled on the posters and pamphlets of the offices you have to visit. The reason for it is that there is a small pool of intensely interested citizens who want education for hopelessly defective children, a larger pool of people who know it's a waste of resources but who second it because they can't endure looking callous, and a still larger pool who don't give a damn because it's none of their affair and the government wastes more money on worse things.
 
2012-08-19 02:01:50 PM

ShannonKW: Madame Ovary: Please direct me to where I or anyone else on this thread said that everyone in contact with an autistic child must hem out all aversive stimuli, or anything even close to that.

I'm not sure I can put this any more clearly, but here goes. You are arguing against leaving a bad-tasting object within reach of a child. To the extent that it would take an extreme effort to remove all such objects, this amounts to "hemming out" stimuli. I'm assuming, of course, that you consider it bad to leave to leave strong flavors out whether or not one is trying to teach the kid something by it.

No. The "all such objects" is you creating a straw man, and your assumption is completely invalid. This has been explained at length.

Madame Ovary: explain how criticizing a teacher for a sloppy, ineffective, counterproductive disciplinary measure that may actually hurt the child is the same thing as expecting the teacher to hem out all aversive stimuli.

Wasn't saying that. For one thing, neither I nor the court thinks this was disciplinary. I have nothing to say of your judgment of the effectiveness of the teacher's methods. I am very skeptical of the claim that hot sauce could harm a child, and even more skeptical of the implicit belief that it would harm him worse than anything else that might be found laying around the school. Again, I get the idea of "hemming out" bad tastes from your claim that the teacher is culpable for leaving out a single spiced object.

No. Yes, you were saying that. They are your words. Your skepticism is based on willful ignorance at this point, because its invalidity has been explained at length. Your two attempts to generalize the issue ("worse than anything else that might be found laying around the school"; ""hemming out") are you creating straw men.

Madame Ovary: explain how I somehow don't have objectivity.

To people who don't spend much of their time pondering the theoretical psychiatric consequences of spicy sauce, flavoring a crayon is a 5-minute act worth 5 minutes of thought. It looms large in your mind, and you seem to think it should do so in others' to the extent that a public servant who has charge of autistic children may not be forgiven such a lapse, assuming it even is one. This is a standard of conduct fit for air traffic controllers, and you would be lacking in objectivity to think (having an autistic child of your own) that your teachers should be held to it.

No. The act fails to meet an acceptable standard for special education practice for multiple reasons explained to you by several experts in this very thread, and I am not seeing, nor do I expect, anyone claiming actual expertise riding to your rescue. You clearly have no understanding of how special education classroom procedures are actually developed and executed and make up nonsense about how you imagine it's done, as has also been explained at length. If anyone's not being objective here, it's you.

Madame Ovary: While you're at it, you can justify your incorrect assumptions about my parenting technique.

I have no idea what your parenting technique is and less interest, though I assume it involves not exposing your child to strong flavors. You want to fire people who do that.


Oh, I think you do have an interest. You wrote:

"One comment of mine that does seem to apply to your writings is the expectation that the world be padded in cotton. You deny holding this belief but it appears quite evident. The world is full of "aversives" for even closely watched children, hot sauce is not an outlandish one, and many of them are more intense. Expecting everyone in contact with a child to hem out these stimuli is an effort very much akin to padding the world in cotton. You may argue that an educator can be expected to, but there's no point unless you shrink the kid's world down to home and school, in which case you're back to Square One.

Like many people trapped in an intensely stressful situation, you appear to have lost some objectivity. You may have for ages of hopeless end busied yourself every waking day with not spinning up your autistic child, and you may be too ready to assume that others do likewise."


While I appreciate your ingenuity in trying to make an issue of special education professional practice about me, personally, your assumptions have no basis in fact, and are a little creepy.

Madame Ovary: This, along with the aforementioned moral obligation, is why US law mandates the free and public education of the disabled, and why special education professional practices are what they are.

I do not believe this, nor can conceive of any honest adult believing it, though it makes for heart-warming campaign rhetoric, and some version of it may be scrawled on the posters and pamphlets of the offices you have to visit. The reason for it is that there is a small pool of intensely interested citizens who want education for hopelessly defective children, a larger pool of people who know it's a waste of resources but who second it because they can't endure looking callous, and a still larger pool who don't give a damn because it's none of their affair and the government wastes more money on worse things.


I'm not inclined to assign a lot of weight to your beliefs at this point. You've spent significant time and energy in this thread enunciating beliefs with no actual basis in fact, and stand revealed as a hateful, disingenuous nutter, so I won't go into the economic data supporting the fairly intuitive fact that independent and productive living is cheaper than institutionalization, incarceration, etc. - it's a waste of my time and I expect you will only come back with more straw men and unsupported conjecture. I will simply quote 34 CFR Part 300, Subpart A of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act:

"Section 300.1 Purposes. The purposes of this part are:

(a) To ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education, employment, and independent living;

(b) To ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected;

(c) To assist States, localities, educational service agencies, and Federal agencies to provide for the education of all children with disabilities; and

(d) To assess and ensure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities."

The fact is, it works. The great majority of the people engaged in special education today are caring, committed professionals, and they have helped many, many disabled people lead happier and more productive lives. I'm grateful to them.

You, however, seem not to be able to understand basic argumentation and reason, construct alternate realities to avoid inconvenient facts, can't seem to stop digging when you're in a hole, and increasingly appear to be driven by narrowness and hate. I actually feel a little sorry for you.

Enjoy your day.
 
2012-08-19 05:53:26 PM

ShannonKW: Madame Ovary: They are arguing, as I am arguing, that putting hot sauce on crayons and leaving them out for an autistic kid to handle is sloppy, irresponsible and ineffective (if not counterproductive) discipline that will cause unnecessary pain to the child.

If that's all you're arguing, then it's a matter of professional opinion on which techniques are more effective than others (and which are not effective at all) in the esoteric world of autistic education, and I have no dog in this fight. The judge in TFA goes no further than to say it was "inappropriate" to use hot sauce, which these days could mean about anything.

The post that you responded to (walking around the filter here) was referring to posts by Great Porn Dragon and one other whom I'd rather not name (not you) in which there were apparently appeals made to pity (e.g. that it is cruel to expose even normal children to hot sauce). I don't recall reading any of your posts at the point you waxed pompous and accused me of attacking a strawman, though I may have been influenced by their tone. Mostly, though, you were attacking a comment which was not addressed to you.

One comment of mine that does seem to apply to your writings is the expectation that the world be padded in cotton. You deny holding this belief but it appears quite evident. The world is full of "aversives" for even closely watched children, hot sauce is not an outlandish one, and many of them are more intense. Expecting everyone in contact with a child to hem out these stimuli is an effort very much akin to padding the world in cotton. You may argue that an educator can be expected to, but there's no point unless you shrink the kid's world down to home and school, in which case you're back to Square One.

Like many people trapped in an intensely stressful situation, you appear to have lost some objectivity. You may have for ages of hopeless end busied yourself every waking day with not spinning up your autistic child, and you may ...


Dude, you kind of farked yourself with the last paragraph.
 
2012-08-19 05:58:24 PM

dready zim: sleeps in trees: I had a comming to Jesus about my opinions used diagnoses.

what does this sentence even mean? they are all real words (except comming) but mean nothing in this arrangement.

wait, I have found a definition for comming from the urban dictionary

1. comming

A common misspelling of a word that seems so easy to spell that it hurts your brain when it's actually misspelled in this fashion. Even if you sounded out the word "coming" phonetically, to try and spell it, you would not get anything resembling "comming."


Also, it seems this kid needs 1 to 1 attention just to stop them eating crayons. That is a stupid waste of resources on a planet where so many children with a better chance of being productive members are denied food, water and basic education.


Sorry, tired as crap last night and wasn't paying attention. Good to know you still understood what I was saying and took the time to correct me.
 
2012-08-20 02:21:15 AM

sleeps in trees: dready zim: sleeps in trees: I had a comming to Jesus about my opinions used diagnoses.

what does this sentence even mean? they are all real words (except comming) but mean nothing in this arrangement.

wait, I have found a definition for comming from the urban dictionary

1. comming

A common misspelling of a word that seems so easy to spell that it hurts your brain when it's actually misspelled in this fashion. Even if you sounded out the word "coming" phonetically, to try and spell it, you would not get anything resembling "comming."


Also, it seems this kid needs 1 to 1 attention just to stop them eating crayons. That is a stupid waste of resources on a planet where so many children with a better chance of being productive members are denied food, water and basic education.

Sorry, tired as crap last night and wasn't paying attention. Good to know you still understood what I was saying and took the time to correct me.


I have nothing to do with this thread, but I did read quite a bit of it, and I just want to applaud you for your "gracious on the surface, with only a slight undertone of *zing*" response to someone who was being a total dick in the part you quoted.

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with any of the special-ed/autism stuff; I don't have enough knowledge in that area. It's just nice to see that someone is able to keep a cool head after being repeatedly belittled in one of these threads.

That's all.
 
Displayed 119 of 119 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report