Hypothetical question

PrincessKLS · #1 (**permalink**) 09-15-2008, 07:42 AM

If you had a younger sibling with down syndrome or an obvious developmental disability and they were severe enough to the point where they didn't have much skills and when it came to sports and other activities that they perform best in the Special Olympics but not regular sports, would you insist on the child playing regular sports or involved in artistic activities on a regular level that they had trouble achieving? Or in their case, they couldn't play the sport or other activity so the coach or instructor at least agrees to let them sit on the sidelines or help in something else?

I'm asking this hypothetical question, possibly confusing question because I knew this girl online not in real life that's about my age and claims to have a young (under 10) Down sydrome-stricken sister who performs in Special Olympics but she admitted she wasn't really good in anything but math and when the girl tried to play soccer or get involved in ballet the instructors just made her watch from the sidelines.

I'm definitely not against special needs children getting involved in normal activities with children who may not have the same disabilities but at the same time if there's an important game needing to be played a competitive league involved where the athletes need to perform their best, why would you try to put the disabled kid who really couldn't play the game (because they've tested them to prove that they couldn't) into the important game?

Grant it, I don't know the whole situation but I got the vibe from the girl I was talking to online that she was an extremely pushy, bitchy, and aggressive person that probably pushed the coaches and instructors to get the disabled child to participate in something she couldn't really do just to make a pointless point.

Sorry if I come off a bit harsh on the disabled sometimes but I think the acceptance idealisms can go a bit far. A disabled child should be asked to work within their abilities and maybe in the right circumstance be challanged a bit but by the end of the day if there's something they seriously can't do no matter how much you try, it should just be accepted that the child doesn't have that type of ability and move on to something she/he has abilities in.

For example I'm not good in math so I'm not going to push to take calculus or major in math, I'll stick with subjects I know.

**Opunaya** · 09-15-2008, 08:07 AM

If they can't do it on a level of "normal" kids--especially to the point where it could be dangerous for them to partake, why try to force them to participate? With any type of kid, you have to be careful, it's best to play to their strengths, whether it be education or sports. Forcing them to work to an impossible goal is just wrong...not all people are given the same potential...which is why I despise the "No Child Left Behind" Act...

PrincessKLS · 09-15-2008, 09:47 AM

Yeah I agree, I think the "no child left behind act" is a bit stupid, I mean I understand integrating the disabled to some degree but not all children can handle a normal classroom 95% of the time or more and the normal kids shouldn't have to lower their standards for that. Sometimes I feel like they are dumbing down society so much anymore.

And why is it that Bush can have sympathy/empathy for the disabled, but wants to take perfectly capable peoples' rights away because they were pagan, gay, or some other minority.

Okay kind of tounge-in-cheek; but to paraphase Kanye West's "George Bush doesn't care about black people". Well I say, "George Bush doesn't care about pagans." LOL.

**Opunaya** · 09-15-2008, 09:50 AM

Geogre Bush don't care about many people.

PrincessKLS · 09-15-2008, 09:59 AM

LOL, very true so that makes me question why he would at least act like he cared for the disabled when he obvoiusly doesn't. Anything he's done is try to raise his profile to something positive. He's always failed at that. I think the Bushes are the worst political dynasty in America.

But back on topic: I don't know what the deal was with this girl I knew from Royal Forum - Index but she kept on banning me for stupid stuff ( she was one of the admins) and I started an article about disabled dolls for sale and she got defensive very easily by the things I said. I saw those dolls as adding insult to injury and a sad marketing ploy (as if any doll looks realistic) and she was like I want to give my sister one, just because the doll had DS qualities

It was so weird.

But of course the issue ran deeper than the dolls and I pointed out that no matter how hard you try to integrate the disabled, you can't get others to talk to them or be able to see them on their level, and socialize normally. I know that from experience.

And she was like, "Putting two DS children in the same room together is counterproductive." And putting them with someone of a different disability, or reasoning level isn't? What about for the other person involved, does it lower their abilities some by having to interact with them as an equal?

We always tell children to hang out with people their age, instead of the adults why can't the same be asked of various disabled people? I'm high functioning so I can handle other high functioning disabled people but I can't neccessarily handle someone low functioning (I had to go to therapy for having to interact with someone very low functioning at my vocational rehab job) so what good was that for me?