dbd33

Mixed. I always found it hard to tell how much the siblings were using "he called my sister a retard" as an excuse for fights they were in for other reasons. I've no reason to think the reaction of children in general is different from the UK, I expect it's greatly influenced by the extent to which their parents see children with disabilities as a drain on the system or an impediment to their children's success.

What I will say is that the public at large in Canada and in the US have no problem with disabilities, "is that autism? My cousin's son has that" was a very common opening line in conversation. In over twenty years of visiting restaurants, bars and amusements, often by public transit, with an obviously disabled person I can recall only one really unpleasant incident (and, no, it wasn't me who burned down the uninsured, and still gutted, Seventh Wave on Queen Street, I just rejoiced).

Aviator

So much depends on the individuals and community. With more disabled kids going into regular classrooms there seems to be more acceptance and tolerance. City schools may be different, our experience has been with rural schools.

MUA

Hey,

We were going to be fare on the other kids and not send them to the same school. I want to do whats right for the 3 of them...

Thanks again.

dbd33

Being fair to the others is the tricky bit. Assuming a child who will always need care, emigrating from a country where the state ultimately assumes responsibility for that care to a country where the family is expected to, increases the duty on the other children. It limits their option to, for example, move to a third country and it limits their choice of career. If their lives do work out in such a way as to take them away, or if they simply choose not to devote their lives to the support of the disabled person, then what are the parents to do? One answer is to move back to Europe, that works but then one wonders about the merits of the emigration.

Aviator

That may not be your choice. They have to go where there are places if you are opting for out of catchment.

Tough as it is dbd33 is pretty much spot on.

ExKiwilass

have to agree with The Aviator on this one. It does depend on the school district, but getting 3 kids into a school out of catchment may be tricky. I know people who are still waiting to hear if their child's sibling has got into the same school as their older children, due to their being out of catchment.

triumphguy

I have a child with down syndrome. His first 3 years he was integrated in the classroom at regular schools but the schools increasingly found themselves unable to deal with his behaviour and so he was put in a "special needs" programme in yet another school.

There were five kids with autism in his classroom, and my son is "active", curious, loud, physical, very touchy feely and emotional. It was not a good mix.

My wife and I found a "special needs" school in Calgary and he is lot happier there.

I've no experience of the UK in this regard, but you have to be the advocate for your kids - and you've got to be totally selfish in forcing any change necessary for your child.

ExKiwilass

According to my friends with SN children BC is not very good in this regard.

Aviator

It used to be 15-20 years ago, budget cuts have made it harder for parents and kids. They do still have the budget for teacher retirement parties at $10k a pop though.

chan_konabe

Although I believe that you'll find a quality education for your daughter in the public education system, you can also look at the independent (aka private) schools in your area. The BC government a couple of years ago allocated full-funding for special needs students who choose to attend independent schools instead of public ones. Previously, such students were only given partial-funding. Your daughter will be designated a certain category upon assessment of her needs by various professionals. This category will determine how many dollars of funding she is entitled to receive. She will receive this amount of money regardless of which school she attends, public or independent.

The Aviator - Sorry to be picky and I definitely don't mean to argue in favour of the event, but that wasn't necessarily a "teacher retirement party", but a school district employees one. There are so many other jobs inside of a school district - from administration, clerical, custodians, teacher assistants, speech and language pathologists, school psychologists, bus drivers and maintenance staff. Teachers may be on the frontline, but there are many others hidden behind the scenes. All of these other employees would have also attended that event.

dthomas

From my experience SN pupil support is weak in the Ont, BC and Quebec public school system. The clear culprit for the lack of SN services has been the integration of SN children into the regular classroom (i.e. the dissolution of the special needs class). Integration is the product of school board cost cutting practices made in the late 80's and early 90's. Integration creates an unfair situation for ill equipped, funded and trained teachers (and support staff). SN pupils are caught in the middle - inevitably they suffer and are give short shrift. Dedicated SN classrooms and teachers are the only solution, but not possible under the current educational economic and political atmosphere.

Your comment re teacher retirement parties is clichéd.

debbiem

Um. Ok. There are SN children that thrive in an inclusive mainstream environment, but to try and shoehorn an inclusion discussion into a thread on BC support is unnecessary. Equally, there are of course, SN children who clearly do not thrive in a mainstream environment for a number of reasons. Inclusion should always be an option, as should a more specialist setting. To use the term 'inevitably' is, I believe, unwise.

dthomas

-debbiem:

n.b. My post was in response to that of TheAviatar.

I'm curious as to how and what qualities you give to the term thrive as applied to SN children? How would you define SN children? One of problems we all face is the lack of public discussion re integration/inclusion and the realities thereof.

Overall, the SN kids I have taught (var. physical needs, autism spectrum disorder, visual impairment, PDD, SDD, acute Leukemias, ARND, emotional disturbance, NVLD, Down syndrome, CD, etc.) have not been given the support they deserved. This lack of support is because of integration/inclusion policy. A typical integration/inclusion policy is illusory in that its main objective is to curtail costs (i.e. trifling specialised teacher training, no small classes, few teachers, and esp. very few highly trained SN teachers), the child's support is cursory at best, bent upon moving the child to the next level within the academic structure without considering actual achievements, and typically creates sympathetic/understanding classmates who go on in life with positive memories of their SN colleagues. Public school integration/inclusion, in light of a child's 12 years of schooling, fails to provide and adapt to their specific requirements. Plopping a kid with very particular needs into an average classroom, with a typically average teacher, is a complete disgrace considering the distribution, availability and use of current education resources. Furthermore, the constant increase of class size in relation to the number of SN kids integrated is complete insanity (e.g. 33 kids - 7 coded - 3 with high needs - effin' bad joke!). This sounds most cynical and pessimistic, but having worked in pre-integration/inclusion schools and witnessed the negligence wreaked upon individuals, I see integration/inclusion as a very troubled reality.

In the reality of the public system, making the kids (and parents) feel good is part of the charade of success. Low coded SN kids may be successful (ADHD, HI, VI, mild BD, etc.), but I shamefully partake and witness the glossing over of so many who deserve better .

debbiem

I'm not disagreeing with any of that, and know many many children who have been let down badly as far as education is concerned. My concern was only towards the blanket approach to segregation of SN children, whereas there are some SN children that will do better in a mainstream setting. The problem is of course the same worldwide - it's not the inclusion/ integration policy that is causing the problem - no support is cheaper than individualised support, whatever the setting. It's always a funding decision, and of course in an ideal world, it shouldn't be. Mainstream with no support is always cheapest. Mainstream with good quality support can be a better solution than special schooling for some children.

Of course, most of my knowledge is based on the UK system (but I suspect that the mainstream/ special argument is no different here) and a small group of children and youth across both types of setting. I don't claim to have any specialist knowledge, but know enough children and parents to realise that a special school/ unit setting would in some cases not be the best solution for the child. There are of course many more children whose needs are not being met in mainstream schools, and who would benefit enormously from a special setting, which is not available.

So, we are arguing the same point, really.

I'm loving the 'charade' of happy parents, though... not met many of those!

triumphguy

The turning point for me in moving my child from an integrated setting to a spcial needs school was when I asked the princple what she thought my son brought to the school. She answered that he gave the other kids the chance to learn about kids who are different.

IOW She saw him as a learning opportunity for his peers, not as a person in his own right.

So I basically said "F@@@ you very much" and moved him to somewhere he was happy.