politician suggests we stop educating kids w/special needs!!

Cherish - posted on 08/21/2012 ( 43 moms have responded )

727

72

180

This man is RIDICULOUS!!Saying our kids are costing alot of money and it is time we stop educating them!!

“I got to be honest with you, I am not in favor of the No Child Left Behind Act. We are spending millions and millions of dollars educating children that have a hard time making their wheelchair move and, I’m sorry, but you’ve got to say, ‘no’ somewhere. We need to educate our children, but there are certain individuals that are just not going to benefit from an education,” Ewing said.

Ewing is now trying to convince people that what he really said was that these children “can’t even figure out how to make their wheelchair work.” Somehow, this is supposed to make it sound better from having “a hard time making their wheelchair move.”

http://foolocracy.com/2012/08/alaska-pol...

I found his contact info...
Mark A. Ewing (Republican)
447 S. Boundary St.
Wasilla, AK 99654
Phone: (907) 232-7089

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Johnny - posted on 08/21/2012

8,686

26

322

You know, after all the stupid comments over the past few months, I've come to the conclusion that we should start a movement to keep all middle-aged and older upper-middle/upper class men out of politics. I suppose we could still let them vote, but maybe it'll just count for half a vote. I said this to my hubby last night when he brought up the Akin rape comment, and even though he would fall into this category, he agreed with me, lol.

Denikka - posted on 08/21/2012

2,160

5

749

And as I mentioned in my post, in a separate environment, in a school specially designed to meet the needs of a person with those issues, absolutely.
I do not think that those who are profoundly disabled, such as the boy I knew, get anything positive out of being in a regular school setting. I DO think that it is a waste of tax payers money to have them there.
I won't deny that they deserve whatever education they are capable of, but somewhere that can meet their needs.
To have them in an environment like a public school, where they are incapable of doing anything but wandering the halls, and to give them a special aide in that environment, is a waste of money. I would much rather see a person like that in an environment tailored to their needs where they can actually have proper stimulation that will actually BENEFIT them.

Denikka - posted on 08/21/2012

2,160

5

749

As harsh as it may be, I find myself agreeing to an extent.
If a child is CAPABLE of being in a school environment and from benefiting from it, by all means. Allow them to be there, allow them the opportunities to learn, even to a limited extent. I personally feel that they should have special classes that cater to their more specific needs, but that is at the discretion of the school.
But if a child is truly unable to function in a learning situation, then what is the point?

In my elementary school, there was a boy. I don't know what condition he had, but he was frequently violent, had no language capabilities, verbal, written, or sign, could not care for himself in any way (dress himself, tie his own shoes, etc). He would never live on his own, with or without help, he could not function in society at just about any level.
He wandered the halls with his aide and yelled a lot. He frequently banged on walls, doors, etc. To be quite honest, for a small child (school was K-grade 7 so 4yrs to 13yrs) it was terrifying.
What, honestly, was the point in him being there? To this day, I can't find any reason, any benefit he had. He was disruptive and, honestly, dangerous to the children in the school. He was roughly 6ft tall and, while not muscular, extremely strong when he wanted to be. There were a number of days where the school had to go into what was essentially a lock down, either because he was throwing a tantrum or because he had slipped away from his aide and was loose by himself.
Do I think he should have been there? No. Absolutely not. I do not think he should have ever been anywhere near a school with normal children. If there was a program available for children with profound disabilities, in a safe environment where he could have been controlled. Then yes.

I don't see the point in an average education for a person who is completely unable to function.
I am not talking generally disabled children. I am talking about the profoundly disabled. Those who will never function by themselves. Who need 24hr constant supervision. Those who cannot talk or communicate in any way. I do not believe that those types of people have a place in the public school system. In a different environment where they can be taught, if possible, and have all of their needs met, then absolutely. But once again, not in the public school system.


As for the No Child Left Behind Act, I think it's moronic to say the least. If a child has not mastered the skills required at a certain grade level, they SHOULD be held back until they CAN master those skills. I'm in Canada and so we don't actually have the Act on paper, but our result is the same. Kids who can't meet simple math or spelling requirements, You don't even want to know the kind of spelling I have seen in a grade 12 English class. Even better was the fact that the teacher herself said that she wouldn't be counting spelling when giving grades. Sure is not spelled *shure*. Equator is not spelled *ekwater*. Text talk has NO place in school and especially not in ANY English class.
If a child has not mastered the basics, they should't be pushed through the system to the more advanced work. The kids are still being left behind, it's just in a different way now.

Tracey - posted on 08/23/2012

1,094

2

58

Depends what you want to teach them. My son goes to a specialist autism school (which over here comes under education not medical) where over 50% of lessons are a form of therapy. There is no point him learning Latin or the works of Shakespeare but he has lessons on how to get dressed, how to go to the toilet properly, how to speak politely, etc

Jennifer - posted on 09/19/2012

714

1

28

Dennika, I did not read all your posts, only the last one, so I don't know what else you have said that so inflamed everyone. This is my thoughts, though.



First, your idea for schools for the handicapped is actually a good one. Except, it has been tried. The teachers and aides were no better trained than they are now. And it actually cost more money. Abuse was rampant. Most abuse cases now are caught and reported by fellow teachers and the 'normal' kids that are housed in the same building. Abuse is still a HUGE problem, but at least now, other eyes are watching.



Second, a kid that can't tie his shoes can still harber hidden skills that will benefit society. We have a factory here that makes linolium. As the finished product is wound on a roll, several people watch to spot imperfections. For a normal person, it is mind numbing and boring, and they quickly loose interest and miss spots. We trained a few of our students(some who couldn't tie their shoes) for this job. Our kids found the work to be wonderful! They fixate on the differences anyway, so they loved it. Just because we are housed with 'normal' kids, doesn't mean we don't tailor classroom work to our students.



Third, the violent kids should not be allowed in schools period! Is it ok to let non-violent disabled kids be attacked but not 'normal' kids? This, to me, is your most valid point, but putting every disabled child in one school still leaves innocent kids to get hurt! I have dealt with several violent kids, it was my specialty, so to speak. My feelings are that the laws are getting way out of hand. Did you know that a kid that is throwing a violent fit is not allowed to be restrained? We can't isolate them? And even if we see an attack coming, legally we can not try to stop it (restrain the child) until it is to the point of bodily harm?? I have scars from a child who was a known biter. I was severly reprimanded for 'grabbing' him and stopping him from biting another student. My response was WTH?!?



I don't feel that you should apoligize for your views, as some of them are valid. I think your points need to be openned up and discussed. They are similiar to what Ewing was trying to say, you are just nicer in your wording! This topic is not one that is easily discussed with out emotion though, remember, we're talking about peoples children!

43 Comments

View replies by

♫ Shawnn ♪♫♫ - posted on 02/02/2015

13,264

21

2015

@ Tracie Dumm: Stephen Hawking is NOT on the spectrum, nor is he considered to be a 'special needs' child.

Stephen Hawking is affected by ALS, or "Lou Gherig's" disease, which is a nervous system condition. He was not diagnosed until he was in his 20's. Please find a more valid example than one who is a non example.

Nora - posted on 01/25/2015

1

0

0

Stephen Hawkings wasn't diagnosed with Lou Gherig's disease till he was 20. He was a brilliant, fully functioning child through his public school years. Find a different poster child for making the case that severely autistic children will be productive to society if they get special care in public school.

Kate - posted on 09/20/2012

84

0

19

I understand the idea behind the statement. Special education services are insanely expensive. The solution is NOT to not educate these children, but to figure out a way to do it more cost effectively.



When I was in undergrad I did a internship at a school for special needs children, specifically those with autism. This school was specifically for children who could not be accommodated in the public school. And, as such, the public school districts were footing the bill. The schools were shelling out an insane amount of money per child. I took a job at this school when I graduated. The position I was as a one on one behaviorist for a child and it required a college degree. It paid $12.50 an hour. It wasn't full time, so no benefits. I actually enjoyed the work. I couldn't afford to live and pay my student loans on $12.50 an hour. I stayed there for about three months before I found a different position. In the classroom that I worked in there were four others in my position and the teacher. Not one of us was more than 25. None of the staff stayed for very long. Children with autism need consistency. Having a new aid every three months is not consistent, but how can you expect the staff to stay when you pay them what you would get paid at Target? During the time that I worked there (both as an intern and as staff) I was bitten to the point of bleeding twice, had my shoulder dislocated by a child and got a concussion when I was hit in the back of the head. In six months. For 12.50 an hour and no benefits (not a single sick day, no vacation, no health care, nothing).



There has to be a better solution.... Money that is spent to reasonably compensate the staff who work with these children. Money to provide training on how to safely stop the violent behavior, so the one on one is not being assaulted. Not throwing away money in inflated administrative cost, New computers every year, super expensive therapy that could be provided in a more cost effective way (for example the children were bussed weekly to a barn to do therapeutic riding- the idea being that caring for the animals and building relationships is important- why couldn't that be accomplished with a therapy dog that comes to the school? saving the cost of transportation and extra staffing for transportation. I love riding and I love horses. But the money is what it is). As a parent, I would rather my child go to a school with three year old computers, but a dedicated staff who stuck around, who had experience, a school where everything was done for the best of the child.



The school system is falling behind. The money isn't there. Children are not getting the educations that they require. We need to examine the idea of a major change. Not doing away with education for special needs children, but figuring out how to make it more effective and less costly.

Jennifer - posted on 09/19/2012

714

1

28

WOW! He's a crass a-hole! I haven't read other post, because my opionion is firm, and I've spent time in special needs classrooms, and have special needs children in my family(one in my home)



I can see through his very offensive speech and get his point. I can agree that some kids do not need to be pushed to learn alegrbra and advanced science.BUT, he doesn't seem to understand that some kids who can't 'move their wheelchair' have perfectly fine brains! My mind goes to the young man with cerebal palsy. He can't even feed himself. But he reads better than my son who is the same grade level. Once he was given a computer to do his work on, they found he was self-taught to a 2nd grade level. My favorite student was an autistic boy. He was in third grade and didn't speak and was not potty trained. He was FINALLY given a communicator. He would type in complete sententes. A touch board computer allowed him to do math.



I was told that my own daughter would never read and needed to be moved to a special ed program. I knew she could read, because she did at home. I fought the school, and got her enrolled in a regular 2nd grade classroom. She came out of 2nd grade testing above grade level in every subject. Turns out it was a horrible teacher conflict! She is not 'normal' even now, but she is doing college level work, and has completed and published poetry and won awards for her writing. She is a Junior this year.



My biggest problem with tossing these kids out of the schools, though, is that it will put them in warehouse type 'daycare'. Parents have to work and have breaks. We will still be paying for their care and will loose some of their productiveness. Those people who clean at McDonalds? The greeters at Wal-mart? They were taught those skills at school.



Also, my kids have benefitted from knowing and helping the special needs kids. My son's self-image is much better after helping a disabled kid learn to count money. My daughter doesn't see herself as disabled because she struggles socially; it's hard to when she sees kids who struggle to walk!! My youngest two learned sign languege to communicate with a classmate. I've even seen teachers change their opionion after having a special needs kid in their class. Maybe these disabled kids can't learn, but they sure have a lot to teach the rest of us!!

Sal - posted on 09/17/2012

1,816

16

34

I haven't read through any post yet and decided to respond to the op first as it appears that there is some off subject responses and I dont want them to muddle my views,

In some respects I do agree that there is a lot of money that is spent on seemingly hopeless cases, but I dont think anyone is going to have a richer life if these children locked away from society like history has them, my children Learn so much from having special needs kids at their schools, they learn to help a person who can't give anything but a (sometines) a smile, they learn patience, they learn that all people have some thing to offer and frankly I doubt many of these kid will ever go on to live independent lives but what they are teaching the future generations of dr, teachers politions Is invaluable

Kristi - posted on 09/17/2012

1,355

3

78

Denikka--



I just read through both pages of comments. I agree with what you are saying. I also feel that you are being singled out as a "bad guy." You're comments make total sense to me. I don't understand why someone would be opposed to having special schools designed specifically to meet the needs of severely disabled children. Personally, I was getting huffy at the bogus arguements being made against your statements...they are clear as a bell. I think you would actually make a good advocate for children with special needs. I know I am off topic, but I was severely frustrated with the contempt being thrown your way that I had to voice my opinion. ; )



In regards to the OP, I was going to read the article after I read this thread. I am too agitated to read something else that will further enflame my disbelief. *sigh and eye roll* But if he truly said that special needs children do not deserve to learn then he is a fuckface.

[deleted account]

yeah, this guy is an idiot.



though i don't exactly agree with the No Child Left Behind Act either, at least not how it was implemented in my area. schools that didn't meet the "standards" were just shut down, and so we ended up with fewer schools and fewer teachers but more students per classroom. a lot of good that does for the students who need more one-on-one time with the teachers.

Denikka - posted on 08/28/2012

2,160

5

749

I wasn't intending on posting to this thread again, but seeing as there's a post directed at me, I feel I should respond, although I would appreciate that if you take the time and effort to single me out, please spell my name correctly.

I fully realize that I am only a car accident away from being in a vegetative state. In that circumstance, I have told my family what I would like done and am in the beginning process of have a will started.

I, personally, would not want to live in that state. For myself, I would be completely for assisted suicide. That would be My choice, if *I* were in that situation. If assisted suicide were not an option, institutionalized care would be my next choice. I would not willingly put my family through the stress of caring for me.

I'm not sure you understand the concept of a *vegetative state*. There is no rehabilitation. Leaving a person in that state in the woods would be tantamount to murder. A person in a vegetative state has no capability to care for themselves. A person in a vegetative state has only partial arousal, instead of full arousal as a normal person would. They are not consciously aware of their environment at all. Institutional care, or home care, would be the only option in that particular situation.



I don't pretend to be better than everyone (or ANYone) else. I'm human, just like you. Obviously, certain parameters would have to be set out. For example, if a child were able to complete certain tasks, then public school would be for them. If they exhibited certain behaviours that would be deemed unmanageable in public school (such as extreme violence when confronted with a specific color for example), then public school would not be a good environment for them.



I still don't understand why there is so much hostility towards my point of view. Special needs children need things that normal children don't. They need extra attention. They may require extra time and teaching to learn to do basic things, such as tie their shoes or brush their teeth or hold a pencil.

I'm saying that we should give them specialized teachers who are trained to help them, instead of the half trained, completely unprepared aides that are currently available. I'm saying that we should give them a safe environment, because public schools are NOT safe, in which to learn. I'm saying that they should be able to focus on the highest sense of learning they are capable of. A child who is unable to tie their shoes may have no use for and no understanding of algebra. So instead of attempting to drill a useless skill into their head, focus instead on what they are capable of, what they can do, to give them the greatest independence they are capable of.

Instead of wasting school money on FAILING to educate certain children in public school, use that money on the children who WILL benefit from it. Separately, create an environment that is tailored to suit those with special needs and educate them to their level, whatever that happens to be. If that remains only at basic life skills, so be it. If all they are capable of doing is brushing their own teeth, then at least that is something they can be proud they have accomplished. If they are capable of complex math problems then teach them to that level.

The public school system, as I have been through it and seen it, is not much more than a daycare for extremely special needs kids. They don't have the resources, time or money to help each normal child reach their full potential, let alone a special needs child who requires so much more.

I don't understand why you people are SO against HELPING special needs children learn, mature and grow to their greatest potential. Why you are so against giving them all the resources and tools they may need to succeed.

I am NOT saying they should be locked away somewhere. I am not saying that there should be no interaction with *normal* kids. If they are able to be involved in a cooking course at the local highschool, then let them. If they want to take art, or english, or math, or acting,and are capable of being there in a productive and non disruptive manner, then let them. But give them a separate environment, tailored to their needs, where they have all the resources available to them to learn to their greatest potential, which is not going to be the same level in the same time frame as a *normal* child. If it were, they wouldn't be special needs!

Beyond that, I am NOT talking about minor special needs. I am talking about EXTREME special needs where the child or person is not going to be capable of caring for themselves completely independently.

I don't get where this is all getting lost in translation.

Lisa - posted on 08/28/2012

5

0

0

So Dennika, then who gets to choose who gets educated and who doesn't? A pious you? Or will there be some type of committee? Will we vote on it?



You do realize that you yourself are just one car accident away from being just above a so-called vegetable...right? So maybe you could update your will as to what you want us to do with you, since you don't feel that then you would be entitled to the same rights as everyone else? Shall we just take you out into the woods to fend for yourself? Rehabilitate you, in hopes that you do gain skills.......or just institutionalize you?

Momma (MeMe) - posted on 08/25/2012

76

0

1

When it comes down to it, this guy is just an idiot. ALL children deserve an education and they deserve to have it publicly funded. It does not mean they ALL need to be under the same roof. It means, no child is better than the next and they all deserve a fighting chance! Bullshit that some are too disabled to give a shit about and provide an education tailored to their needs.



I am not talking medical needs, either. I am talking education. There are so many ways to teach children, of all sorts. So, pick one or multiple and give them a damn chance.



If it were my kid and I was being told they were not worth an education, I can tell you, I would be raising the biggest stink, that they would be wishing they had brought their deodorizer.



When my daughter was in kindergarten, they tried getting me to agree to have her segregated with a folding wall around her desk, in her classroom. She has severe combined ADHD but she is VERY intelligent. I lost it on them and they never ever said such foolish things again. My daughter is now going into gr.8 and she has always been an A/B student. So, just because a disabled child may have some mental issues, does NOT mean they can't comprehend.



No one should be stating such ignorant things and I can only hope, karma finds the bastard...

Tracey - posted on 08/25/2012

1,094

2

58

Maybe politicians should go to a special school as they all seem to suffer from foot in mouth syndrome.

Janice - posted on 08/24/2012

1,890

18

63

Tracy I do agree with what you are saying that NCLB is terrible, but I really dont think that is what Mr. Ewing was saying. I think he is just straight out saying that we shouldnt spend money on children with severe disabilities because its not worth it- they "are just not going to benefit from an education.”

If he does really mean what you think he does, it would help him greatly to clarify those specific thoughts because I think most people believe that their a ton of issues with the current testing system. But he hasn't clarified so at this point he has just made a shit load of enemies.

Tracey - posted on 08/24/2012

236

440

0

He references No Child Left Behind, and as a person with both teachers and special kids in the family, one of the problems with NCLB has been that it forces mainstreaming on kids for whom it is not appropriate, and it also mixes their test scores in with the kids who do not have their challenges. This does not serve their needs, nor does it help the schools they go to to be forced to include their scores.



So perhaps he's awkwardly saying that kids with special needs should be disconnected from the NCLB scores and laws so that their needs could be better met. I would wholeheartedly support that.

Kathy - posted on 08/24/2012

0

0

3

"Like I said before I was NEVER saying that they "all" belong in their home school,again I said they need to be in the least restrictive environment to the maximum extent appropriate,and if the home school is not the LRE,then the parents and the school decide that." Cherish.



Ok. I hear you. You made few statements in other posts that came across to me as favouring local school placement for all kids - however, you have clarified, so it is all good.

Cherish - posted on 08/24/2012

727

72

180

Denikka-

You say "According to YOUR first post, he does NOT say that all special needs kids need to be removed from schools. "...READ the story,that is EXACTLY what he is saying!!!!He said we need to STOP educating them.PERIOD.He said nothing about public schools or special programs....

You said "Learning how to tie your shoes, feed yourself, dress yourself, colour a picture, that is not *education* to me. Learning, yes. Education, no."

Education is LEARNING:

education  [ej-oo-key-shuhn] Show IPA

Part of Speech: noun

Definition: instruction, development of knowledge

Synonyms: apprenticeship, background, book learning, brainwashing, breeding, catechism, civilization, coaching, cultivation, culture, direction, discipline, drilling, edification, enlightenment, erudition, finish, guidance, improvement, inculcation, indoctrination, information, learnedness, learning, literacy, nurture, pedagogy, preparation, propagandism, proselytism, reading, rearing, refinement, scholarship, schooling, science, study, teaching, training, tuition, tutelage, tutoring

Antonyms: ignorance



Gotta LOVE the antonym of education :)

my response to you saying"To be quite honest, YOU don't understand how severely disabled people function either."...and "You seem like an over protective mother responding to a perceived threat towards your child."....I am not saying anything to those 2 things because you will NEVER see what I am saying,I give up.You are no longer worth my energy.I tried.



Kathy-My son is fast too,and unpredictable at times,My son seems to "target" some people for whatever reason,and if you nephew seems to be aggressive toward your kids,for no apparent reason,then I can see how you need to avoid the situation all together.



I agree that parent and schools need to come up with the best placement for the child.As far as the aide goes,and protecting other students,again that is a plan that is made between parents and school.There was one kid in my sons class he did not like for whatever reason,the solution was,her and my son were NOT to be with in 3 feet from each other,that way if either of them tried to "get at" each other there was enough room so they could not reach each other and the aide or teacher could get between them before anyone got hurt.



Like I said before I was NEVER saying that they "all" belong in their home school,again I said they need to be in the least restrictive environment to the maximum extent appropriate,and if the home school is not the LRE,then the parents and the school decide that.

Ash - posted on 08/23/2012

78

9

7

Why does money matter,This country has so much money for everything else,I can even say the MAIN prority should be getting are special needs children the educations and all medically things they need without any problem,for him to say this is unbeliveable and it hurts my heart.No one know the mind of a disabled child period,and even if it takes the child years or months with extra help from the school system this should not matter at all. We shouldnt give up on are children no matter what teacher or doctor tells us. God works. Give these kids are chance no matter how long it takes and start thinking about all the other issues in the world.

Kathy - posted on 08/23/2012

0

0

3

"I get that you feel the need to protect your kids from him...But I do not understand why his parents are not doing that,or why you can not tell your kids to get away from him when he starts to get upset?

It is not naive to think a aide can prevent another child from being injured… " CHERISH





We disagree.



My sister tries very hard to prevent a violent outburst - but she is not perfect - and my nephew is very, very fast. His violent outbursts seemingly come out of nowhere. I cannot tell my kids to get away from him, as he can literally be laughing one minute, and biting you the next. I do not think an aide can prevent it. A well trained and tuned in one might be able to lessen it - but prevent all the time? Absolutely not. He was kicked out of a special needs summer camp no more than a month ago for biting his one on one aide.



To be clear: in almost all cases I think the parents and school system should decide together on placement, and that placement could include regular school with aide, or a special school, depending on resources and what is best for the child. It is only for cases of extreme violence or disruptiveness that I think regular school should be ruled out.



"I said I agree that all kids need to be safe in school...but removing the kids w/special needs is not going to guarantee that.What about inner city kids that take weapons to school? "CHERISH



Kids who bring weapons to school should not be allowed in school.



People who are violent (special needs or not), and whose violence cannot be curtailed, should not go the local school.

Denikka - posted on 08/23/2012

2,160

5

749

According to YOUR first post, he does NOT say that all special needs kids need to be removed from schools.

My interpretation is the he is saying exactly what I have been saying. That there are certain individuals-he specifies those that can barely work their wheelchairs-that are not going to benefit from an education.

To me, that says traditional schooling. To mean, an education is what prepares you to move on in your life towards something like a career. To me, an education is math, science, spelling, writing, etc.

Learning how to tie your shoes, feed yourself, dress yourself, colour a picture, that is not *education* to me. Learning, yes. Education, no.



Dictionary definition:

ed·u·ca·tion   

noun

1.the act or process of imparting or acquiring general knowledge, developing the powers of reasoning and judgment, and generally of preparing oneself or others intellectually for mature life.

2.the act or process of imparting or acquiring particular knowledge or skills, as for a profession.

3.a degree, level, or kind of schooling: a university education.

4.the result produced by instruction, training, or study: to show one's education.





I don't think that there is some perfect school out there for special needs kids. I know there isn't. There SHOULD be more resources available. That's what I'm saying. Instead of spending the money to place these children in public schools where they DON'T get the benefits they require, where they DON'T get the advantages that they should, where they are essentially set up for failure, where the time, energy, resources and training are NOT available for those who look after them during school hours, create an environment where they CAN succeed. Where they DO have the resources, where they have caregivers who have full and proper training, where everything is in place to give them the best chance at success as it's possible to give them.



I never said that that particular boy (or your son) had the mental capacity of a 1, 2, or 3 year old. What I said, if you would stop focusing on snippets, was that there are children who are mentally disabled who do have the mental capacity of a 1, 2 or 3 yr old.

Some exceed the limits that doctors place on them. Absolutely. But there ARE people out there who's mental abilities never mature beyond the stage of a very young child.



To be quite honest, YOU don't understand how severely disabled people function either. You may have a closer look at what happens on the outside, because of your son. But you are not inside his brain, you do not know what or how he thinks. No one truly KNOWS what another is capable of. And I would go as far as saying that no one truly KNOWS what they, themselves are capable of.



You seem like an over protective mother responding to a perceived threat towards your child. I can understand that. Even though my kids are *typical*, I'm still protective and have those mama bear instincts. It may be best if you take a break and come back to this thread another day when you're a bit calmer. Then perhaps you'll be able to realize that I am not AGAINST you, your child, or those with severe special needs.

Perhaps you'll really be able to read what I'm actually saying.

That there need to be MORE resources specially tailored to those with severe special needs.

That the public schools are currently set up for them to fail. That the public schools are setting up TYPICAL children to fail later in life.

That a NEW environment, where special needs kids who are UNABLE to FUNCTION in a typical school environment, should be able and encouraged to go.

That this new environment should offer them all the resources that are currently available; medically, teaching, learning, etc.

That instead of failing to reach their full potential in a school system not DESIGNED to cope with special needs kids, that there be somewhere that IS designed to help them learn and grow and reach that full potential.

That environment may include some incorporation with typical children. I don't know. I don't know or understand enough about exactly what would or wouldn't benefit a special needs child. I DO know that what is going on NOW is NOT working to their best advantage.

Cherish - posted on 08/23/2012

727

72

180

Denikka-I am not twisting your words..The original post was that douche bag said we need to stop paying to educate those kids period...It said nothing about where.A special school cost WAY more money than public school,so I am SURE he would be extremely against special schools.I NEVER said that EVERY child w/special needs belongs in their "home school"



MY son IS the "child" you are talking about.Trust me I am WELL aware of the behaviors,the self injury,running away,head banging,screaming,biting,pinching...etc

But just because he has the behaviors and just because he can not talk,does NOT mean he "cannot comprehend. Who are at a mental age of 1, 2 , 3 years old. Who are barely able to function or who are unable to follow directions or to accomplish simple tasks"....



Don't you see,you are saying things about that kid,about the "severely disabled" kids,but you do not know..You have no clue what they are capable of,you do not know that the boy in your school had every support he needed...You have no clue.So you talked to his aide,and she filled your mind with inaccurate information..and then what?

And you "SAW"(in that boy) what most people "see" about my son,and honestly it pisses me off.



Since you do not understand how "severely disabled" people really function,you do not understand why they should be around typical peers.Every child has a RIGHT to be around typical peers in the least restrictive environment to the maximum extent that is APPROPRIATE.

I don't care how "severe" they are,they DO learn.

Tell me how does anyone KNOW what "level" a child is at,if they can not speak?

And for some reason you seem to think there is some sort of perfect school for ever kid that will help them...You seem to think that there is a TON of programs for kids w/special needs.



And again I will say the OP was that Mark Ewing said it is time to stop educating kids with special needs PERIOD...The OP was not about WHERE they are placed,it was just about not educating them at all



The school's DO send kids to special school's if they can not handle them.And the "special schools" are more like "day treatment" and honestly they do not teach the kids anything.

I do NOT want my son at a glorified baby sitter all day,I do not want him to ride the bus a hour each way to school and back everyday.

I do not want him at a "special school" where they are MORE overwhelmed then they are his home school,where he would get much less support.

YOU do not understand so please for the love of God stop acting like you do



Here are some link to kids that YOU probably would assume "can't understand" if you saw them on the street



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=34xoYwLNp...





http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1wsiVYCq...



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qm1AZf23k...

Denikka - posted on 08/23/2012

2,160

5

749

Cherish, at this point, I honestly think that you are LOOKING for a reason to be offended. You pick apart what I write and seem to twist my words.



There ARE special needs children who are not much beyond a vegetative state, who are physically *awake* but only just conscious beyond basic bodily functions such as breathing etc.. Whose reality is extremely different from what normal people view as reality. Who perceive their environment in a way that we, as normal people, cannot comprehend. Who are at a mental age of 1, 2 , 3 years old. Who are barely able to function or who are unable to follow directions or to accomplish simple tasks. I don't see anything offensive about that. It's no different than saying that there are people who are born without arms, or legs, or fingers, or who are born with white skin, or brown skin, or any other physical or mental difference.



I never specified what this boy was capable of. I don't know what went on in his brain, I don't know what he COULD have done had he had every bit of support that he needed and everyone had done everything correctly. I know what I SAW. I know what his aide told me.



Regular school is not for teaching life skills such as grooming or things of that nature. School is there to teach you to read, write, do math. School is there to prepare you for future jobs and careers. Yes, as a bonus, school environments CAN teach socialization skills. But that's not their main purpose.

Yes, I think it's a waste of tax payer money to attempt and FAIL to meet the needs of severely special needs kids. in a public school I think that money could be MUCH better spent on an environment that is specially designed to meet their needs and ensure all the success that they can accomplish.

In my mind, an aide is someone who gives minimal help and lots of encouragement to allow the person to accomplish tasks on their own. An aide would perhaps remind someone how to tie their shoes, or supply a word when a child has problems sounding it out. That is an aide in my mind.

People who are severely special needs don't need that. They need explicit one on one attention. They need someone who is constantly working to keep them focused and constantly keeping them active in different activities. They need someone who has the training to deal with a problem before it reaches melt down status. They need someone trained in how to deal with those melt downs, including medicating the person if the situation comes to that point.

That is NOT a school teacher! That is also not an aide who is trained to deal with problems like ADHD or things similar.



Tell me. If you are walking beside a normal child, and they just decide to run off, how are you going to stop them? If you are walking beside your husband, and he decides to run off, how can you stop him? Especially if his intent is to injure a child who is 10 ft away?

A humans reaction time is NOT quick enough to prevent someone, who is taller, bigger, and stronger that you, who is intent on a single purpose, from closing that 10ft distance and at least doing a minimum of harm to another person. It is not possible.

Obviously, if you have normal children, they have never been in trouble. Because you should be able to prevent them before they do things.

The children I am talking about go WAY beyond having *behavioural and communication issues*.

What do you do about the child who is so severely schizophrenic that he can't hear you over the invisible cats telling him to hurt anybody wearing baby blue? What do you do about the child who is so autistic that he does not respond to anyone talking to him, prefers to smack his head into the wall until he's bloody and gets excessively violent, to the point of severely hurting himself and other people, whenever he's touched?

How does the average school deal with children in those situations? How does a single aide, trained to deal with physical disabilities and MINOR mental disabilities such as ADHD, deal with a child like that? Yes, those are extreme examples. But THOSE are the children I'm talking about.

If they are not capable of FUNCTIONING inside a public school, they should not be there. If they are DANGEROUS to the other students in a public school, they should not be there. They should be somewhere they CAN function, with personnel who have the proper training to HELP them.

A normal kid who brings a knife or a gun to school has the potential to be talked down. A severely disabled child who has a knife, who doesn't understand the danger to themselves or to others, who thinks it's a game or that it's funny doesn't have that potential, especially when they lack communication skills.



I'm having trouble understanding why you are so adamantly FOR putting a special needs child into a system that is not designed to help them. That is ill equipped, if equipped at all, do help them succeed. A system that is essentially designed for them to fail. And a system that shows them every single day rubs in their face how different they are and how much they are not capable of doing.

Why are you against placing them in a specialized environment that is designed specifically to allow them to succeed to the best of their abilities? An environment built around the things that they CAN do, the skills that they can build on?





One more time, if they are CAPABLE of being in a public school environment, then they should absolutely be there. If they can socialize, do at least some of the work, with or without help, then absolutely.

If they are NOT capable of doing the work, if they cannot and do not socialize, if they cannot follow basic directions, if their mental age is deemed to be below that of a school aged child, then they should be in a separate environment tailored to meet their specific needs.

Cherish - posted on 08/23/2012

727

72

180

Denikka-I hear what you are saying,what I am saying is the things you said like ""those who are not much beyond a vegetative state, those who are so distant from reality that the real world may as well not exist for them. When a child is BARELY aware of the real world, cannot comprehend or follow the simplest directions, are unable to function" -and -"I do not think that those who are profoundly disabled, such as the boy I knew, get anything positive out of being in a regular school setting. I DO think that it is a waste of tax payers money to have them there."-and-"When a child has the mental capacity of a 1 or a 2 yr old, what benefit will they get from going to an environment that is designed for children 5 years old and above? "....among other things...What I am trying to say is you have NO idea what he was capable of. And for you to say "I say that it would fall more under the medical side of things because of the training that would be required of the teachers. These students don't need aides"...That is silly,it is NOT a medical issue!!!It is called LIFE SKILLS and you do not need to be in a medical environment to learn LIFE SKILLS.What I am saying is you CLEARLY do not understand period...

I said I agree that all kids need to be safe in school...but removing the kids w/special needs is not going to guarantee that.What about inner city kids that take weapons to school?



And FYI if the school can not handle the behavioral needs of a student then they DO send them to a special school.

And kids like him DO need aides,aides are there to help them be successful in there environment.The schools have LIFE SKILLS class,they do work on LIFE SKILLS.That is mostly what they do in there severe needs class,they work on life skills!!!



Kathy-I did not say that no matter how violent they should be at there neighborhood school..

I get that you feel the need to protect your kids from him...But I do not understand why his parents are not doing that,or why you can not tell your kids to get away from him when he starts to get upset?

It is not naive to think a aide can prevent another child from being injured...







What I am saying,Denikka and Kathy is you CAN protect people from the behavior,AND that if the school can not handle the behavioral needs of the kid then they send them to a separate school..But having behavior issues and being non-verbal does not mean that they can not learn and it does not mean that they don't know what is going on.



I NEVER said they ALL belong in their neighborhood school...But they have as much of a right to be there with the supports they need...Every human deserves to be in the least restrictive environment for the maximum amount of time..regardless of a disability or not.If the home school is not the LRE,fine go to a "special school",but we can not assume they will not do well in a regular school,until we see how the do with the supports they need.

Denikka - posted on 08/23/2012

2,160

5

749

I don't KNOW how well he was capable of functioning. I was not inside his brain. Neither was anyone else. NO ONE can truly know what another was capable of.

What I DO know is what I saw and what I talked to his aide about. And yes, I talked to his aide fairly frequently because I WANTED to understand.

He was there for 4 of the 7 years I was in elementary school.

Yes, he was removed from reality. He had next to no interaction with the real world. He was in extensive therapy over many years. He was non verbal, non communicative in any way. He could not or would not follow any directions. If you spoke to him, he did not respond in any way over 90% of the time. When he did, you could never be sure if he was actually responding to your voice, or having one of his many tics.

He could not feed himself, dress himself, bath himself. He could not catch or roll a ball or hold a pencil.

Even with one on one, full supervision with his aide, there was NO way to guarantee other children's safety. What do you do after someone has just broken your arm? What do you do when someone is significantly stronger than you, doesn't care if they're injured, just solely focused on getting away and will do anything to accomplish that?



He had no contact with the other students anyways. Unless one got too close during a fit and, thankfully, that was a rare occurrence.



I don't BLAME him for his behaviours. I realize that they were not intentionally destructive. I realize that he is not at fault. But that doesn't matter and has nothing to do with anything I have talked about.

He was DANGEROUS to have in an environment where he couldn't be controlled. He was dangerous to other students, to staff, to property and to HIMSELF.



You say that I don't understand, that I'm ignorant of special needs. I can agree with that. I don't know nearly as much as I could. But it seems to me that you have focused on one part of what I'm saying, and pushed out the rest.

I DON'T think those with special needs should be shut away from normal society.

I DON'T think that those with special needs should not have the right to learn.



The part that you seem to be missing is that I believe they should be in an environment where they are CAPABLE.

A public school is not equipped to deal with someone like this boy. Regular teachers don't have the training to be able to cope with those kind of violent outbursts (whether from a *typical* child or from a special needs child). They don't have the ability to sedate someone who has just gone apeshit crazy and has the potential to unknowingly KILL or seriously injure someone. They don't have the training to deal with the after effects of the TERRIFIED students.

You can't teach or train the students to avoid behaviours that may set off a violent special needs person. How do you tell a 5yr old child in Kindergarten that they can't wear or use a specific colour because that colour will trigger a rage response in another student?

The school itself is not able to deal with an out of control person. It is an unsafe environment when a person, who cannot understand the danger, can slip away from their aide and go running across the highway that runs in front of the school. Or into the forested area (in which had been sighted bears, cougars and moose to just name a few).

You don't put a child into an environment where they are going to fail. You would not put a toddler into grade 1 and expect them to succeed. You would not let an 8yr old drive. You don't expect a 10yr old to manage a business. Why? Because it is beyond their capabilities. They CAN'T. You are setting them up for failure.

You should set up children for success. And for some, that may mean being able to put their own socks on. Or being able to brush their teeth. Or being able to hold a crayon and scribble. And for special needs children, their entire environment needs to be set up so that they CAN have that success.



I say that it would fall more under the medical side of things because of the training that would be required of the teachers. These students don't need aides. An aide is a person who helps another do things for themselves. A child in a wheelchair may need an aide. A child who is mildly disabled may need an aide. These children need one on one, dedicated teachers. Teachers who have the specialized training to deal with severe special needs. Who have speech therapy/language therapy training. Who have the training to teach basic skills-grooming, feeding themselves, dressing themselves-to special needs children. Who have the training to deal with violent outbursts in a productive manner to avoid damage to property and to people.

The building itself should be a safe environment for the students, which a public school is NOT. They should not be able to run out of the school and out onto the highway. An entire system needs to be in place for severely special needs children that the public school system is just not CAPABLE of.

It's not fair to take money and resources away from average children to attempt (and not succeed) to fund these things, and it's not fair to the special needs child to take resources away from THEM because the school has other expenses. The school system is already taxed and stretched thin enough. Even if a special needs school would not fall under medical costs, it should also not fall under typical school funding. They need so much more than the typical child does, and that costs more. Honestly, I would rather it fall into it's own category all together and be completely separately funded. A special needs school just couldn't function on a typical schools budget.



I'm not entirely sure why you are so up in arms against me Cherish. If you truly look at what I'm saying, it boils down to this:

Severely special needs children are exactly that. They have special needs that an average school is not equipped to meet. An average school in unable to bring out their full potential. They should instead be in an environment where that potential can be realized, where they can succeed and where they can learn as much as they are capable of learning instead of in a school system that is failing to help even the normal child meet their potential.

Kathy - posted on 08/23/2012

0

0

3

Cherish….



Are you arguing that all kids, no matter how violent, should be integrated into their neighbourhood local school?



I cannot agree.



Some kids really are too violent and too disruptive for a local school. They are unsafe for other kids to be around and disrupt learning significantly. I also doubt very sincerely that their needs are best served at a local school.



I will tell a true story about my severely autistic nephew. My sister, my daughter, my nephew and I were all on an outing. My nephew decided he wanted a toy my daughter had, grabbed it and bashed her over the head with it. They were both about 8. It was our last outing with them. I still go near my nephew, but I protect my children from him :( There were 2 adults present when this happened. Some children move fast, and an aide cannot keep violence from happening. They can do their part, but it is naive to think they can prevent all of it. Everyone in my family has been bit, head banged or had their arm gouged by my nephew.



All kids have a right to an appropriate and safe education. All kids do not have the right to go to your local public school. If you hurt people and seriously disrupt things, you should not go there. They are not equipped to handle it, all the aides in the world are not going to change it. Kids with severe violence and disruptive issues should go to a school that can accommodate them.

Cherish - posted on 08/23/2012

727

72

180

Denikka-

So is the boy you are talking about one of the people you think are "those who are not much beyond a vegetative state, those who are so distant from reality that the real world may as well not exist for them. When a child is BARELY aware of the real world, cannot comprehend or follow the simplest directions, are unable to function"

HOW do you KNOW what he was capable of learning??

I am assuming from what you say that he probably had classic autism,and people w/that are often non-verbal.It is up to the school to help them communicate.Just because he could not talk does not mean he did not understand!!!

I am assuming he had the behaviors he did out of frustration and that was the only way he knew how to handle his emotions.You said you never saw anything but anger but I bet you did not spend that much time around him.

I can guarantee he knew ALOT more than you think he did.Why can't you see that it is not his fault that NOBODY taught him how to communicate?You think he WANTED to be frustrated?Try not talking for a day,let me know how frustrated you get.



As far as safety goes I completely agree that schools need to keep all children safe.And if there is a kid w/special needs that has a history of violent out bursts then they need to have a 1:1 para with them.They also need to be w/in arms reach of the student to intervene if there is a need.





The thing is when you take kids like the boy you talked about and put him somewhere where there is no exposure to typical kids,they pick up behaviors from each other.

You also said "I would personally think that a specially run school for extremely disabled children would fall more under medical care than educational care." WHY do you say this?

That makes no sense to me at all...



The things you say,CLEARLY show me that you are in fact ignorant about special needs in general.

You have so many opinions on how well they can and can not function,but the fact is,you really have no idea..You do not understand,and for that I am sad for you

Isobel - posted on 08/23/2012

9,849

0

286

my son has an information processing disorder. He understood math at almost a grade 7 level in grade 3, when given a test verbally he scored in the 97th percentile but when asked to write it scores in the 7th. Exactly how long do you think he should be left behind because he will probably never be able to spell at grade level.

Denikka - posted on 08/22/2012

2,160

5

749

Cherish

Like Kathy said, it was not about *sheltering* the *normal* kids from this boy. It was a SAFETY concern along with being a severe learning disruption.

In a single school year, he broke his aides arm, ran out of school grounds into a forested area 4 times, had meltdowns at LEAST once a week and frequently more often. He broke windows, left holes in walls and doors, busted a door off it's hinges, ran into classrooms on multiple occasions and caused havoc by pushing papers and supplies off of desks, pulling papers out of cubbies, generally disrupting the class and causing chaos, then throwing face down kicking, screaming, hitting, biting tantrums when he was told/forced to leave. He hit, bit, kicked or otherwise injured people, mostly teachers/administrative staff/aides on numerous occasions, but occasionally another child got in his way. On one occasion he ran off from his aide and injured another boy who was playing on the tire swings. He wanted to play with the boy (I guess) and wanted to push the swing. He pushed the swing so hard that the other boy hit his head on the support beam and got a concussion. His screaming/yelling/banging on doors was an every day occurrence, multiple times a day.

This all occurred in a single school year. And was the norm for every school year that he attended that school.

I never saw him have any kind of emotional response to anything, except his violent outbursts (no happy/positive responces-no laughing, smiling etc). He was never inside a classroom, never able to focus long enough to do any activity. His aide frequently attempted to get him involved in different activities, but he was just not there enough to participate in any way.



Now, I have nothing against having disabled people in public schools. When THEY can benefit from it. We had a deaf girl in my elementary school and I think that it did great things for her AND for the other students. There were sign language classes and many of the students learned how to communicate with her in her own language. We had numerous physically disabled children, some using crutches, others in wheel chairs. We had a couple of amputees, one boy specifically who spoke at safety assemblies often, who had lost his foot in a lawn mower accident. There were also a number of mentally disabled kids that I went to school with, who were unable to follow the regular curriculum, but were still able to function at different levels within the school, doing lower level reading, writing, math, etc activities, some in regular classrooms (especially in elementary school) others in special ed classrooms (more so in high school)

I am more than okay with those people being in the school system. The learn, they benefit. They can go on and function. Maybe not to the extent that a normal person can, probably not. But they CAN function, they can be involved, they benefit from learning experiences.

What I am NOT okay with is those children who are UNABLE to function in a school setting. Those who are dangerous (this applies to disabled and normal children), those who are not much beyond a vegetative state, those who are so distant from reality that the real world may as well not exist for them. When a child is BARELY aware of the real world, cannot comprehend or follow the simplest directions, are unable to function, what is the point in them being in a school setting?

I am not trying to be rude. I don't mean to disregard anyone's circumstances at all. But when a child is functioning at a level below that of a school aged child, why are they at school? When a child has the mental capacity of a 1 or a 2 yr old, what benefit will they get from going to an environment that is designed for children 5 years old and above? I see it as no different, and just as pointless, as actually sending a child who is 1, 2, 3 yrs old to a public school (NOT daycare, nursery, preschool, etc-a regular K and up school) and expecting them to fit in, benefit, and not disrupt the other students. It's ridiculous in my mind.

Once again, I am all for a SPECIAL environment, suited to these children's needs, where they have 1 on 1 attention and can learn, whatever that may be to them, to the best of their abilities. I am all for ANY child growing as much as they can mentally. But NOT in the public school systems. There's no point.

Kathy - posted on 08/22/2012

0

0

3

"I suppose it is better to shelter "typical" kids from boy like the one you talked about,that way the world can be happily ignorant about people with special needs,and not have to see how society in general fail them everyday." Cherish.







The boy Dennika talked about was (among other things) violent, slipped away from his aides, banged on doors, yelled, and the school needed to go in lockdown several times because of his behaviour.



He was a danger to the other students - and probably interrupted learning in a significant way. It has little to do with sheltering typical kids so they can be happily ignorant - it is about keeping them safe. Children who are violent and extremely disruptive should be in separate, publicly funded, schools.



I do think all children deserve an education - no matter the severity of their disability. I do beleive some kids are so disabled they will learn very little at any school -and I know of which I speak. My nephew is severely disable - he is 9, has no speech, is in diapers, etc :( His school functions as little more than a daycare for him. Despite this, I do think all kids are entitled to an education - they are people, they are part of our community, and the idea of some judge or school board playing god and deciding who is worthy of an education and who is not does not sit well with me. It is a slippery slope. There is a quote that goes:



"A society is measured by how well it treats its weakest members."

Cherish - posted on 08/22/2012

727

72

180

@Denikka-



After reading what you said,I am thinking you may mean well,but are obviously ignorant about what that person in your school could or could not do...

If he was "incapable of doing anything but wandering the halls" then OBVIOUSLY the school was NOT meeting his needs.(school's severe needs programs NEED MORE funding and better qualified educators,not that boys fault,how the hell can he learn to act differently if they were not capable of teaching him?)

It honestly makes me a little sad to know that there are still people in this day and age,that look at that boy,a child like mine and think such things...

It honestly blows my mind that people actually feel like people like him have no place in the school system..

I suppose it is better to shelter "typical" kids from boy like the one you talked about,that way the world can be happily ignorant about people with special needs,and not have to see how society in general fail them everyday.

Lady Heather - posted on 08/21/2012

2,448

17

91

Holy shitballs. I would looooove to forward this address and statement to my husband's aunt. She adopted a little boy with Emmanuel's Syndrome (chromosomal deletion). It was not known if he would ever walk or talk or anything. He goes to school and hell yes does he benefit. He can't talk yet but he can pull words out of a pile and construct sentences. He took his first steps this year a few months before he turned 10. He is a little superstar. But I guess he'd probably be better off locked up in some institution. *eye roll*

Fuck this asshole.

Denikka - posted on 08/21/2012

2,160

5

749

I would personally think that a specially run school for extremely disabled children would fall more under medical care than educational care. Just because a normal teacher, even with the assistance of specially trained aides, would not be able to meet those children's needs. They would need one on one attention with specially trained people, who would have to have at least a minimum of medical training.
So, I still agree. The extremely disabled have no place in the school system.
In the medical system where they are ALSO offered learning opportunities along with medical care, then absolutely.

Momma (MeMe) - posted on 08/21/2012

76

0

1

Yep, I do agree with you, Denikka, for the most part. However, this guy did not mention anything about it being secluded to a Public School environment. He made a statement, that comes across as, any disabled child should NOT get a publicly funded education. It is wasting dollars. There are many children in wheelchairs, that cannot make their wheelchair move BUT are fully apt, to learn. There are many children that cannot think the same as you or I but do grasp many concepts and do walk away with something.

Even though, I agree, some severely disabled children, need to be within a separate setting than a Public School one, I still feel, it should be publicly funded.

Janice - posted on 08/21/2012

1,890

18

63

Dennika I understand what you are saying, but even if main stream school wasnt the right environment that boy still deserved an education.

Johnny - posted on 08/21/2012

8,686

26

322

I would agree that a mainstream public school is likely not the best environment for those with extreme mental disabiliities. The kids in my schools growing up were always able to function fine within the confines of the school, sometimes with extra assistance, and it can work well. I went up to grade 11 with a boy who was a quadrapelegic on a breathing machine who could not speak. He had two assistants, but managed to do fairly well in school, he had friends, he attended dances, and went on outings. He definitely couldn't push his own wheelchair, but having him there was in no way a problem, quite the opposite. I find the very suggestion ridiculous.

We also had a program for kids with developmental and mental disabilities. Down's Syndrome and FAS most commonly. Some of them were capable of regular classes, some were capable of a few classes like sewing or gym, and some were just in the special ed program. They attended dances, were in extra-curricular clubs, and it never caused problems. In fact, I think the biggest benefits were to the typical needs kids who learned the most.

There are a couple public school programs in my city for kids whose mental disabiliities make them unable to attend a regular school, either because of their functioning level or because they are dangerous. There are also non-profits which provide other programs for those whom regular schooling is not appropriate for. But they all get educated in the way most appropriate for their needs. No human is expendable and this kind of thinking is very disgusting.

Momma (MeMe) - posted on 08/21/2012

76

0

1

Nope, this guy is an idiot! All human beings have a RIGHT to an education. I am not saying they should ALL be in a public school. Those with extreme disabilities still have a RIGHT to learn and deserve for it to be within a promising and safe environment, as do our kids without extreme disabilities. These environments, do not necessarily need to co-exist (and probably should not) BUT each one of the individuals hold the RIGHT to learn!

I am appalled and disgusted, that anyone, let alone a politician, would ever make such a ridiculous statement. He deserves to be bonked upside the head!

Johnny - posted on 08/21/2012

8,686

26

322

Let me guess... he's also pro-life and anti-birth control. We need to make sure all babies are born no matter once but as soon as the birth has occured we should forget about providing any care and support or helping to make their lives worth living. I'm with Janice, total douchebag!

Janice - posted on 08/21/2012

1,890

18

63

Wow! What a douchbag! How do the dumbest fuckheads get into office?
Personally I'm quite thankful that all children get an education. It teaches compassion to be around those less able bodied or minded and many do contribute to society. They bag my groceries every week which is tough for me to do when wrangling my 2 kids. And a person in a wheel chair can learn just like anyone else and do any job that doesnt require standing.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms