Advice needed

[LisaGuadalupe]

So sorry for my first post being non Disney related. I've poked around on this site here and there when going on Disney trips and I saw this excellent disability portion. So when I had this issue come up this was a Place I thought of for advice.

My name is Lisa and I'm writing about an issue with work. My work situation is a little unusual. I work in a church's childcare area, but I am the only one there that is paid. Basically my job is to supervise the people who volunteer to watch kids who are mostly middle school and high schoolers. My supervisor though is a lady who is also a volunteer and is older and very old fashioned. The church is very large and the childcare center is open 5 days a week, 5 hours each day.

There are several children who come in that have special needs. One girl in particular is 7 and she has downs syndrome and ADHD. Honestly she can be very hard to handle because she is really wild, doesn't listen, melts down etc. The middle schoolers don't know how to handle her at all, so I end up with her a lot, which I don't mind at all. I am a senior in elementary Education so I'm the most trained to work with her anyway. Well my boss started to get fed up with that and told the girls dad he needed to pay one of the volunteers $10 per hour to watch his child specially (childcare is free usually). I thought this was wrong, but I kept my mouth shut because the dad didn't really seem to have a problem with it. Then months later she told him that his daughter needs to be in the 2 year old room since she "fits in better with those kids." again I thought this was wrong, and the dad came to me upset so I told him not to worry about it and just keep dropping her off in the correct room. Well a couple weeks passed and my boss came to me about 2 weeks ago and told me we are basically declaring war on all children with special needs. She told me anyone who comes in with a child who has special needs I need to tell them they can't stay and show them the door. We are talking about 6 or 7 children here. Also, there is a 3 year old child who is very shy and doesn't talk much. My boss told me she thinks the girl has autism because she doesn't talk much and she wants me to ask the girls mother if her daughter has a disability, and if so show them the door and tell them not to come back!

Clearly I find this troubling and basically I've ignored her. But it's been weeks and my boss is asking me why children with special needs are still coming in. My question is, are these children legally entitled to be here? Or is it a situation where because it's a church they dont have to allow anyone to come in? I'd love to be able to tell my boss it's illegal. Otherwise I'm probably gOing to lose my job because I refuse to do this. Thanks so much.

Lisa

And sorry for the sloppy typing, I'm on my phone.

 

[livndisney]

So sorry for my first post being non Disney related. I've poked around on this site here and there when going on Disney trips and I saw this excellent disability portion. So when I had this issue come up this was a Place I thought of for advice.

My name is Lisa and I'm writing about an issue with work. My work situation is a little unusual. I work in a church's childcare area, but I am the only one there that is paid. Basically my job is to supervise the people who volunteer to watch kids who are mostly middle school and high schoolers. My supervisor though is a lady who is also a volunteer and is older and very old fashioned. The church is very large and the childcare center is open 5 days a week, 5 hours each day.

There are several children who come in that have special needs. One girl in particular is 7 and she has downs syndrome and ADHD. Honestly she can be very hard to handle because she is really wild, doesn't listen, melts down etc. The middle schoolers don't know how to handle her at all, so I end up with her a lot, which I don't mind at all. I am a senior in elementary Education so I'm the most trained to work with her anyway. Well my boss started to get fed up with that and told the girls dad he needed to pay one of the volunteers $10 per hour to watch his child specially (childcare is free usually). I thought this was wrong, but I kept my mouth shut because the dad didn't really seem to have a problem with it. Then months later she told him that his daughter needs to be in the 2 year old room since she "fits in better with those kids." again I thought this was wrong, and the dad came to me upset so I told him not to worry about it and just keep dropping her off in the correct room. Well a couple weeks passed and my boss came to me about 2 weeks ago and told me we are basically declaring war on all children with special needs. She told me anyone who comes in with a child who has special needs I need to tell them they can't stay and show them the door. We are talking about 6 or 7 children here. Also, there is a 3 year old child who is very shy and doesn't talk much. My boss told me she thinks the girl has autism because she doesn't talk much and she wants me to ask the girls mother if her daughter has a disability, and if so show them the door and tell them not to come back!

Clearly I find this troubling and basically I've ignored her. But it's been weeks and my boss is asking me why children with special needs are still coming in. My question is, are these children legally entitled to be here? Or is it a situation where because it's a church they dont have to allow anyone to come in? I'd love to be able to tell my boss it's illegal. Otherwise I'm probably gOing to lose my job because I refuse to do this. Thanks so much.

Lisa

And sorry for the sloppy typing, I'm on my phone.

These might help you-

http://www.ada.gov/chcaflyr.htm




http://www.ada.gov/childq&a.htm

What are the basic requirements of title III?
A: The ADA requires that child care providers not discriminate against persons with disabilities on the basis of disability, that is, that they provide children and parents with disabilities with an equal opportunity to participate in the child care center's programs and services. Specifically:

Centers cannot exclude children with disabilities from their programs unless their presence would pose a direct threat to the health or safety of others or require a fundamental alteration of the program.


Centers have to make reasonable modifications to their policies and practices to integrate children, parents, and guardians with disabilities into their programs unless doing so would constitute a fundamental alteration.


Centers must provide appropriate auxiliary aids and services needed for effective communication with children or adults with disabilities, when doing so would not constitute an undue burden.


Centers must generally make their facilities accessible to persons with disabilities. Existing facilities are subject to the readily achievable standard for barrier removal, while newly constructed facilities and any altered portions of existing facilities must be fully accessible.


and:

Is it legal to charged extra for the costs of caring for a child with disabilities?
No. The ADA is very clear that child care programs may not charge families with children with disabilities more that other families are charged to cover any increased costs the program incurs in making accommodations. To help defray any additional cost, child care programs are allowed to spread the cost to all families in the program.

from-
http://www.mdchildcare.org/mdcfc/for_providers/ada.html

 

[cmwade77]

Ok, to me there are two issues here:

1. What the ADA requires - I believe the poster above does a good job at addressing this.
2. The fact that this is through a church, which I will address below.

Ok, first off, the church that I go to does not provide child care, so it seems a bit odd to me that a church would provide such services, but that being said, here are my thoughts:

• Turning anyone away does not meld with any religious teachings that I know of (especially Christian churches, but really most religions teach this.)
• Charging one group of people and not another is not appropriate under any circumstances.

I definitely think that you should confront your boss, they might not realize that they are committing what most people would consider to be a sin, according to virtually every religion out there, turning those in need away when you can help them is a sin. If they continue to say that you should turn away those with disabilities, then it would be appropriate to talk with your Pastor/Minister/Bishop/Etc. and tell them, if it were me and it continued, I would begin looking for a new job and quitting, as you would have done all you could and I would not want to support what I would consider to be a sin. That being said, you should not judge, but when asked why you are leaving, simply state that you cannot support this behavior as it would effect you in the long run.

Yes, we all mess up, which is why I say give those involved a chance to change, but do not support behavior that you do not agree with.

Hopefully that all made sense.

 

[LisaGuadalupe]

Thanks for the advice so far. Is a church legally bound to ADA? It's not a full state licensed childcare center. It's an odd situation, it is like regular church nursery services only beefed up. They are a very, very large church. They have services 5 days per week and with meetings and groups and stuff it's practically an all day affair and they provide childcare for all of it. Thats where I'm thinking a gray area comes in, because they aren't officially licensed and not bound to a lot of the stringent rules other centers are.

I honestly don't think bringing up the fact that it's a sin will bother them, they are okay with a lot of things I consider sinning. I also do not go to church there, it's just where I work. So I'm not sure if going to the pastor will do me any good. My boss is very old fashioned and stubborn, she's asked me several times why I'm bothering with college, saying instead I should be putting all my energy into getting a husband lol. I honestly think the only way that they will listen to me is if there is a legal obligation. I do plan on speaking to my boss again even if there isnt a legal obligation, but I really don't think it'll help my case. I want to try everything I can before I end up quitting over this issue. I just refuse to show all children with special needs the door just because one little girl is a handful. After all, we have plenty of kids who are a handful and they are allowed to stay because they don't have a disability!

 

[cmwade77]

Churches are indeed bound to the ADA as are all organizations. They can require all employees to be members of their church in good standing. In most other situations, this would not be allowed as it would be religious discrimination. That being said, they cannot discriminate on any other basis (aside from safety issues), including against those with disabilities (parents, children or employees).

In most states they must be licensed under either of the following circumstances:

• Even one person is being charged any fee.
• They are watching 5 or more children that are not their own children.

You could always check the licensing laws in your state and report them as an unlicensed child care facility.

Can you tell that I don't take kindly to discriminating against those with disabilities? Sorry, but this one really bugs me a lot the more I think about it.

You could also report them to the DOJ, which is now charged with enforcing ADA laws through lawsuits when necessary.

 

[bookwormde]

As others have said what your bosses are asking you to do an have asked of the father are illegal discriminations.

Ask your bosses next time they bring it up for written guidance "since you do not want to violate any laws". Often this is enough to put an end to these situations.

Here is the number you can call to find out direct information.

http://www.ada.gov/infoline.htm

bookwormde

 

[LisaGuadalupe]

Thanks for the advice, I'll definitely do some more digging and bring up what I find to my boss. This issue really bugs me too, I've been losing sleep over it for weeks. I'm not about to be some monster who shuts the door in people's faces and tells them not to come back on the sole basis that they have a child with special needs.

 

[livndisney]

I am not going to get into the "christian" view of this since it not allowed on this board.

I will however speak to the law. When I posted last night I was not aware this was a church run daycare. I thought it was a daycare held in a church. It matters not if other people churches run programs or not. The law is this:


2. Q: Which child care centers are covered by title III?
A: Almost all child care providers, regardless of size or number of employees, must comply with title III of the ADA. Even small, home-based centers that may not have to follow some State laws are covered by title III.

The exception is child care centers that are actually run by religious entities such as churches, mosques, or synagogues. Activities controlled by religious organizations are not covered by title III.
Private child care centers that are operating on the premises of a religious organization, however, are generally not exempt from title III. Where such areas are leased by a child care program not controlled or operated by the religious organization, title III applies to the child care program but not the religious organization. For example, if a private child care program is operated out of a church, pays rent to the church, and has no other connection to the church, the program has to comply with title III but the church does not.

http://www.ada.gov/childq&a.htm

 

[minkydog]

As the mother of a disabled child i would be completely offended by this policy and you'd probably hear about it from here to next week. I think if the boss is insistent in turning away "the least of these", you need to go above her. I'm sure the pastor would just LOVE to hear about this so-called policy.

That said, is there any way you could start a new class for special needs kids? You'd need to recruit and train volunteers, but if you've got 6-7 special needs kids it might be something their parents would like. I know I would.

Our son was able to mainstream into the preschool classes until he was about 9. By then he was just too big to go in with the 4 year olds and he wasn't able to cope with the elementary age classes due to his limited attention span.(Christian actually operates as a 12-18 month old.) Our church really tried, but was unable to meet our needs, so we had to stop attending for a long time. We tried a couple other churches but they were also unable to manage him.Very few churches can manage lower functioning kids.

Thank you for being concerned about this. Your boss is so far off base she's not even in the same state. If you can't get the higher ups to change things, you probably need to seperate from this organization. You sound like a woman of character.

 

[LisaGuadalupe]

I am not going to get into the "christian" view of this since it not allowed on this board.

I will however speak to the law. When I posted last night I was not aware this was a church run daycare. I thought it was a daycare held in a church. It matters not if other people churches run programs or not. The law is this:


2. Q: Which child care centers are covered by title III?
A: Almost all child care providers, regardless of size or number of employees, must comply with title III of the ADA. Even small, home-based centers that may not have to follow some State laws are covered by title III.

The exception is child care centers that are actually run by religious entities such as churches, mosques, or synagogues. Activities controlled by religious organizations are not covered by title III.
Private child care centers that are operating on the premises of a religious organization, however, are generally not exempt from title III. Where such areas are leased by a child care program not controlled or operated by the religious organization, title III applies to the child care program but not the religious organization. For example, if a private child care program is operated out of a church, pays rent to the church, and has no other connection to the church, the program has to comply with title III but the church does not.

So, the church isn't legally bound? I thought that might be the case. They really do seem to not be legally bound to a lot of things just because they are a church who doesn't run a full childcare center.

As the mother of a disabled child i would be completely offended by this policy and you'd probably hear about it from here to next week. I think if the boss is insistent in turning away "the least of these", you need to go above her. I'm sure the pastor would just LOVE to hear about this so-called policy.

That said, is there any way you could start a new class for special needs kids? You'd need to recruit and train volunteers, but if you've got 6-7 special needs kids it might be something their parents would like. I know I would.

Our son was able to mainstream into the preschool classes until he was about 9. By then he was just too big to go in with the 4 year olds and he wasn't able to cope with the elementary age classes due to his limited attention span.(Christian actually operates as a 12-18 month old.) Our church really tried, but was unable to meet our needs, so we had to stop attending for a long time. We tried a couple other churches but they were also unable to manage him.Very few churches can manage lower functioning kids.

Thank you for being concerned about this. Your boss is so far off base she's not even in the same state. If you can't get the higher ups to change things, you probably need to seperate from this organization. You sound like a woman of character.

Thanks for the suggestion but I don't think I'd be able to start a special class. Not all children show up every day. Sometimes we'd have no attendees, or just one or two children. Plus I don't really have the authority to do that, and my boss would be really upset because clearly she has some sort of vendetta against children with special needs.

That's great your son was able to mainstream at first and I'm sorry to hear it ultimately hasn't worked out for him. I should mention that this girl isn't even low functioning. She's maybe a year or two behind cognitively, but she's able to speak coherently, can plainly communicate her wants/needs, etc. She is just starting to learn to read. Her main problem is behavior. She does not listen to the word "no", doesn't follow directions, doesn't understand sharing or placing nicely, and will hit/throw things/spit, etc. when she doesn't get her way. This is what confused me about my director wanting her to switch rooms to be with the two year olds. She is more than capable of being with children her own age and honestly it's a lot safer for everyone involved for her to be with older children. She is twice the size of a two year old and if she hits or throws something at one of them she could really hurt them. I seriously don't know what my boss's reasoning was for her being with children so much younger. So when her father rightfully complained about that "ruling" I told him to ignore it haha. It is much better for her to be around children her own age. My boss is just tired of dealing with her behavior problems, which honestly get a lot worse at church because she is placed in the care of 12-16 year old girls who just don't know what to do with her. They really just yell at her and that makes things so much worse. But no one listens to me when I offer up other ways . Can you tell I've had a lot of issues here????

Thanks so much for your compliments, that really means a lot to me. I feel like I'm really working hard here to try to work something out. This has been really stressing me for a long time. I can only imagine how the girl and her father feel.

Also, this is really random and off subject, and I hope you don't take any offense about it, I'm genuinely curious. In my elementary education program they really stress using "people first" language, as in saying "a child with a disability" rather than "a disabled child". I was told that saying "a disabled child" was highly offensive and as a teacher is not an appropriate thing to do. But I noticed you did not use people first language( "a disabled child", "special needs kids", "lower functioning kids"). So I'm just wondering if it's really true or not that saying "a disabled child" is offensive. Not trying to be rude, you would certainly know what is or isn't offensive to you as a mother of a child with special needs better than I would. And It wouldn't be the first time my university harped on something that really didn't matter much haha.

 

[WheeledTraveler]

I'm not a parent of a kid with disabilities, but I can tell as a person with disabilities I see the language issue two ways:

1) I hands down don't like the term 'special needs' because my needs aren't special, they aren't even different, but it's how I achieve those needs that's different. As well, to me 'handicapped' sounds outdated.

2) I flip back and forth on 'person with disabilities' and 'disabled person', but more in reference to who I'm talking to. In the US we say 'person with a disability' (often shorthanded as PWD) because the 'disability' is whatever condition/impairment the person has. In the UK, however, the disability is considered to be the societal limitations (for example someone is disabled if they use a wheelchair and a building has stairs) and 'impairment' for the medical condition/medically-based limitations. So in the UK they say 'disabled person' because it's how they signify that it's the person being limited by society.

Personally, I think what you were taught in the classroom is more correct, but language is rather personal.

As a note, I'll admit that I often come up against parents on language things especially on the term 'special needs'. It tends to sound to me like a cutesy term and I really feel like the longer it is used for any people with disabilities (even if it's children and not adults it's being used about), the more it subconsciously perpetuates an infantilizing of all people with disabilities by the larger culture.

 

[cmwade77]

As to if they are legally bound or not, I don't really care, it's what's the right thing to do on a basic human level. I think anyone with a conscience would agree with me that all should be included.

As for people first, I would say that the correct term should be children with special needs. Using the word disability often has a stigma that there are things they can't do or that they are dumb when neither one is generally true, they might need assistance with some things, but overall are very capable and very smart in many cases. Yes, there are some exceptions, but really I think children with special needs is a far nicer term. That being said, I think we all mess up sometimes and use the wrong terms, I know I do.

Edit: The PP posted while I was typing this, as you can tell, one particular term will not please everyone, but I do think it may vary by location as well. Here person with disability or disabled person tends to get looked down on as I stated earlier. Which is why I think with special needs is a nicer term. In some cases these needs are simple as providing a shady place or air conditioning, other times these needs can be a lot more difficult.

 

[kirstenb1]

So, the church isn't legally bound? I thought that might be the case. They really do seem to not be legally bound to a lot of things just because they are a church who doesn't run a full childcare center.




Thanks for the suggestion but I don't think I'd be able to start a special class. Not all children show up every day. Sometimes we'd have no attendees, or just one or two children. Plus I don't really have the authority to do that, and my boss would be really upset because clearly she has some sort of vendetta against children with special needs.

That's great your son was able to mainstream at first and I'm sorry to hear it ultimately hasn't worked out for him. I should mention that this girl isn't even low functioning. She's maybe a year or two behind cognitively, but she's able to speak coherently, can plainly communicate her wants/needs, etc. She is just starting to learn to read. Her main problem is behavior. She does not listen to the word "no", doesn't follow directions, doesn't understand sharing or placing nicely, and will hit/throw things/spit, etc. when she doesn't get her way. This is what confused me about my director wanting her to switch rooms to be with the two year olds. She is more than capable of being with children her own age and honestly it's a lot safer for everyone involved for her to be with older children. She is twice the size of a two year old and if she hits or throws something at one of them she could really hurt them. I seriously don't know what my boss's reasoning was for her being with children so much younger. So when her father rightfully complained about that "ruling" I told him to ignore it haha. It is much better for her to be around children her own age. My boss is just tired of dealing with her behavior problems, which honestly get a lot worse at church because she is placed in the care of 12-16 year old girls who just don't know what to do with her. They really just yell at her and that makes things so much worse. But no one listens to me when I offer up other ways . Can you tell I've had a lot of issues here????

Thanks so much for your compliments, that really means a lot to me. I feel like I'm really working hard here to try to work something out. This has been really stressing me for a long time. I can only imagine how the girl and her father feel.

Also, this is really random and off subject, and I hope you don't take any offense about it, I'm genuinely curious. In my elementary education program they really stress using "people first" language, as in saying "a child with a disability" rather than "a disabled child". I was told that saying "a disabled child" was highly offensive and as a teacher is not an appropriate thing to do. But I noticed you did not use people first language( "a disabled child", "special needs kids", "lower functioning kids"). So I'm just wondering if it's really true or not that saying "a disabled child" is offensive. Not trying to be rude, you would certainly know what is or isn't offensive to you as a mother of a child with special needs better than I would. And It wouldn't be the first time my university harped on something that really didn't matter much haha.

OP, our younger dd has autism. Personally, the language used to address her condition is not really on my radar. I'll be the first to be politically incorrect in describing her to close friends/family. I love her with all my heart, just sometimes I get weary of the political correctness. I have a friend in his sixties. His thirty year old dd has Down Syndrome. Her caseworker described her as cognitively challenged. He corrected her, and said, Sara's mentally retarded. Her caseworker was pretty distressed. But that is the language he was used to, when she was diagnosed thirty years ago. And he has known her and loved her and fought for her all her life.

However, I think your classroom teaching is correct. Always address the child in the most dignified fashion. If the parents feel differently, they can always tell you. But it's impossible to go from too casual to more appropriate language without a big apology, kwim? Maybe like my husband, being French Canadian, can make stupid Frenchmen jokes. But coming from someone else, it would be offensive. You always want to be on the dignified side.

Oh, and your efforts in placing children in the highest functioning classroom is deeply appreciated!!! You are right on!!! I know that Dad really appreciates your diligence. Sometimes as the parent of a special needs kid, we just get worn down. It's really cool when someone else takes up for your child.

 

[LisaGuadalupe]

Thanks for the advice everyone! Everyone is different haha, I'll just stick with people first. It's already a habit anyway.

I shall let you know if anything happens with this whole situation.

 

[minkydog]

Also, this is really random and off subject, and I hope you don't take any offense about it, I'm genuinely curious. In my elementary education program they really stress using "people first" language, as in saying "a child with a disability" rather than "a disabled child". I was told that saying "a disabled child" was highly offensive and as a teacher is not an appropriate thing to do. But I noticed you did not use people first language( "a disabled child", "special needs kids", "lower functioning kids"). So I'm just wondering if it's really true or not that saying "a disabled child" is offensive. Not trying to be rude, you would certainly know what is or isn't offensive to you as a mother of a child with special needs better than I would. And It wouldn't be the first time my university harped on something that really didn't matter much haha.

No offense taken. About the only word that really ruffles my feathers is "REEtard." A lot of the words that we used in previous times are no longer in fashion. It's only been in my generation that we have stopped using such language as "idiot", "moron", "feeble-minded", and "exceptional" to describe persons with developmental disabilities (you can look them up, they each have a specific meaning) I find the "new" language to be bulky and not very descriptive. For instance, if I tell you that my son is mentally retarded, you get an immediate idea of what his disability might be. If I tell you that he is cognitively delayed, well, that's just not much of a description, is it? A lot of people have no idea what "cognitive" is, even.

I personally do not get offended over the use of words. On occasion, I might correct someone--I was at a dance convention where the 55+ age instructor repeatedly referred to some of her students as "mongoloids." I realized that she wasn't trying to be inflammatory and she really did NOT know any better. After the class, I gently corrected her and gave her some other terms. She was grateful and a bit embarrassed--she never meant to hurt anyone.

So you will hear me describe my son on occasion as "retarded",rather than "developmentally delayed" (implying that he will eventually catch up? I think not) or "low-functioning autistic", rather than "person with autism whose delays render him the capability of a toddler"(hmm, yeah, no...) I'm sure some would beg to differ with me, but that's my take on it. YMMV