JTA for a "violent" child?

[Angel Ariel]

My question is whether the parents of the kid actually agree that he is "violent" and "aims to hurt" or just a kid who plays rough and gets a bit carried away at times (or in other words, a pretty normal 5 year old boy).

Perhaps bucking the trend on this thread but let's also put things in perspective here...the light sabers aren't real, parents would be right there etc.

I haven't seen the new show, but in the old show the parents aren't "right there"...as in, they aren't on stage with the child while it is happening. Has that changed with the new show? There are posts in this thread about friends of the characters not being able to continue shows later in the day because of being injured during the show for various reasons - including younglings not following the directions. It doesn't always take a lot of force to get injured. Sometimes a minimal amount of force at just the right angle, or in just the right place can do a number on someone, even juist accidentally.

 

[AliceinMaryland]

Maybe the kid needs less Star Wars and more Mickey Mouse Clubhouse right now....

 

[hiroMYhero]

My question is whether the parents of the kid actually agree that he is "violent" and "aims to hurt" or just a kid who plays rough and gets a bit carried away at times (or in other words, a pretty normal 5 year old boy).

Perhaps bucking the trend on this thread but let's also put things in perspective here...the light sabers aren't real, parents would be right there etc.

I think your perspective is a little off. Parents are a few yards away from their kids and during the show, the kids are under the supervision of the Padawans.

The Padawans that I know have been speared and whacked in the face by lightsabers and it wasn't by "accident." The Padawans have also had certain parts of their body patted by male Younglings because the boys think it's "funny." The ethnic Padawans have had racial slurs directed at them because the Younglings believe that it is correct and normal behavior to use slurs. I wonder where they learn this?

The Padawans deal with more than enough disrespectful Younglings. They shouldn't have to oversee one who is described as being "violent."

 

[lovethattink]

I haven't seen the new show, but in the old show the parents aren't "right there"...as in, they aren't on stage with the child while it is happening. Has that changed with the new show? There are posts in this thread about friends of the characters not being able to continue shows later in the day because of being injured during the show for various reasons - including younglings not following the directions. It doesn't always take a lot of force to get injured. Sometimes a minimal amount of force at just the right angle, or in just the right place can do a number on someone, even juist accidentally.

Same set up with parents. Different dismissal. Instead of being dismissed where the ropes are to the parents directly, they are dismissed through the same pathway they entered. Nobody oversees the kids getting to the right parent. My husband made a made dash for him because even though my son is 11, he had special needs and wanted to make sure he could find us.

 

[mshanson3121]

It also sounds like an aunt who maybe isn't around kids enough to know that a 50-pound kid who knows he can't really hurt an adult might "attack" adults for fun. It isn't that big a deal and it doesn't make him a psychopath who is going to turn and start beating the other kids on stage. Jeez.

No, it sounds like an aunt who has been around her nephew enough to know that he DOES purposely attack an adult or child with the intent to hurt them when they're perceived as the bad guy, because he doesn't have the ability to differentiate between real and pretend, and that there's a very real possibility (or probability) that he is going to lose control up there and hurt someone. And a 50 lb kid most definitely has the ability to hurt an adult with a light saber. The fact that YOU think a 50 lb kid who often has intent to hurt someone, at any time, even if during play, "isn't a big deal", is disturbing. I'm not saying it makes him a psychopath, but the behavior is not even remotely okay, and he definitely should not be allowed on JTA.

 

[eeyoreandtink]

Actually, the OP clarified...

"He does aim to hurt the bad guy. He would not go after the other kids or the good guys. Its Darth I am worried about. He is very into superheroes and star wars and other violent characters. Evil must be destroyed type genre. He is not allowed to watch television so the destructive knowledge is solely from his books. Kid has a very good imagination! When playing with him in a physical way he often has to be reminded to be gentle or to calm down, if he has assigned you the role of a bad guy. Its like he doesn't remember that you are you and not the joker or shredder or a sith or whatever bad guy."

The child likely does not have "intent to hurt people". He simply gets overexcited and plays rough, like many normal 5yos. He's almost certainly not a psychopath/sadist/whatever else you consider "NOT normal".

(Though, personally, as someone who enjoys vacationing without children in a place most people think is "for the kids", I think "normal" is highly overrated. )

Acually, the clarification say he aims to hurt whoever is playing the bad guy. He starts out with the intent to hurt. NOT NORMAL.

 

[Dallas_Lady]

In this thread - folks who are awfully quick to label a little boy as disturbed/needing professional assessment and accuse his parents of poor parenting decisions, based on their interpretation of a couple of lines of text!

But that's what we do on the DISBoards. We jump to conclusions and judge people based on as little information as possible.

 

[JimmyV]

I suppose given the subject matter of the original post it was inevitable, but this has now become nothing more than a "good/bad parenting" thread and those typically are not allowed here. The OP has received the opinions (and then some) that were solicited, so it is probably best that this thread be closed. Moderators? What say you?

 

[Dismama2boys]

LOL at all of the people who think they can diagnose a child based on two posts on a message board by an aunt. Why do we need professionals then?

 

[wilkeliza]

LOL at all of the people who think they can diagnose a child based on two posts on a message board by an aunt. Why do we need professionals then?

That is sadly what our world has become though. Everyone has some sort of issue if they don't instantly become amazing little kids with little to no direction or discipline.

 

[Baklava]

Whether he is "disturbed" or "violent" or "badly behaved" ultimately doesn't matter for this purpose. His known behavior poses a threat of physical injury to another person and he should not be put in a position to do that. It's not okay to decide it might be good for him as a learning experience or that it's no big deal. The CM who is in danger of being hurt should not be at risk because of a kid who is known to behave like this in similar situations. No diagnosis, no judgement of the kid, just simple respect to the other human being involved.

 

[mshanson3121]

That is sadly what our world has become though. Everyone has some sort of issue if they don't instantly become amazing little kids with little to no direction or discipline.

This isn't what's going on at all. What IS happening is that kids are legitimately being diagnosed with REAL issues at a much greater rate because of a) better diagnostics but b) because the rates of disorders are growing. Now you can debate it being due to environmental, immunizations, our food, what have you, but facts are facts.

That said, I find people who have very little knowledge of real disorders, yes, do jump on the "better have him checked out" bandwagon if a child presents with just one stereotypical symptom. There's a very big difference though between a bunch of people on a message board or Facebook saying "You better have him checked out", giving their opinion that something is wrong, and the very real and intense diagnostics procedures children have to go through to be diagnosed with a legitimate disorder. Both attitudes: the "disorder pushing bandwagon" and the "it's all just a bunch of malarky" attitudes are equally damaging and just plain wrong.

I agree with others, the behavior of this nephew is not normal, and it definitely needs to be worked on by the parents. But I also wouldn't say he has a "disorder" or needs to be evaluated, either. "Normal" kids can have "abnormal" behaviors, that just need a little extra work.

 

[Magpie]

Acually, the clarification say he aims to hurt whoever is playing the bad guy. He starts out with the intent to hurt. NOT NORMAL.

Do you work with children? Because if you do, I feel rather sorry for all the kids you're labeling "NOT NORMAL".

 

[mshanson3121]

Do you work with children? Because if you do, I feel rather sorry for all the kids you're labeling "NOT NORMAL".

If I read it right, she was taking about the behavior being not normal, not the child itself.

 

[Magpie]

This isn't what's going on at all. What IS happening is that kids are legitimately being diagnosed with REAL issues at a much greater rate because of a) better diagnostics but b) because the rates of disorders are growing. Now you can debate it being due to environmental, immunizations, our food, what have you, but facts are facts.

That said, I find people who have very little knowledge of real disorders, yes, do jump on the "better have him checked out" bandwagon if a child presents with just one stereotypical symptom. There's a very big difference though between a bunch of people on a message board or Facebook saying "You better have him checked out", giving their opinion that something is wrong, and the very real and intense diagnostics procedures children have to go through to be diagnosed with a legitimate disorder. Both attitudes: the "disorder pushing bandwagon" and the "it's all just a bunch of malarky" attitudes are equally damaging and just plain wrong.

I agree with others, the behavior of this nephew is not normal, and it definitely needs to be worked on by the parents. But I also wouldn't say he has a "disorder" or needs to be evaluated, either. "Normal" kids can have "abnormal" behaviors, that just need a little extra work.

I agree with you that labeling a child with a specific disorder based on a post on the Dis is wrong, and I'd go even further and encourage people to avoid the "abnormal" label as well, given how little info we have.

"Abnormal" is a label best applied when the child's behaviour is significantly interfering with his daily functioning. We don't know if this little boy is reasonably well behaved in school, has friends, or anything at all about how he functions in his regular daily life. All we know is that his aunt perceives his behaviour as aggressive when she *engages* him in combat oriented play, herself voluntarily taking on the role of the "bad guy".

This is like saying that a child who runs around screaming, whenever you yourself are running around screaming with them, is behaving "abnormally" and cannot therefore be trusted in any situation wherein running around screaming would be inappropriate behaviour.

It is also not at all "abnormal" for a perfectly normal (developmentally speaking) five year old to not be ready for an experience like the JTA. Different children develop those executive functioning skills at different rates.

 

[wilkeliza]

This isn't what's going on at all. What IS happening is that kids are legitimately being diagnosed with REAL issues at a much greater rate because of a) better diagnostics but b) because the rates of disorders are growing. Now you can debate it being due to environmental, immunizations, our food, what have you, but facts are facts.

That said, I find people who have very little knowledge of real disorders, yes, do jump on the "better have him checked out" bandwagon if a child presents with just one stereotypical symptom. There's a very big difference though between a bunch of people on a message board or Facebook saying "You better have him checked out", giving their opinion that something is wrong, and the very real and intense diagnostics procedures children have to go through to be diagnosed with a legitimate disorder. Both attitudes: the "disorder pushing bandwagon" and the "it's all just a bunch of malarky" attitudes are equally damaging and just plain wrong.

I agree with others, the behavior of this nephew is not normal, and it definitely needs to be worked on by the parents. But I also wouldn't say he has a "disorder" or needs to be evaluated, either. "Normal" kids can have "abnormal" behaviors, that just need a little extra work.

I do agree that there seems to be a higher rate of actual diagnosis but based on the interactions I've had with some kids what was just "abnormal" is not a disorder. Not for every kid of course but I am in a subset of the country that is full of families where if their kids aren't in the 1% of excellent they need a reason why. They can't accept that their kids may not be smart or may just be quirky.

I don't think everything is a bunch of malarky but I don't think that everyone should be jumping straight to you might want to get him/her tested he probably has x,y,z. I think a parent, their child's pediatrician, and possibly teachers should be the ones making the judgement on if someone should be tested not the parent who sees your kid at the playground.

 

[Magpie]

If I read it right, she was taking about the behavior being not normal, not the child itself.

Fair point, I read it as saying the child was not normal (because, after all, our behaviours do define us).

 

[cruisingtwins]

The OP has babies. When my kids were babies I though a 2 year old was a giant and a 5 yo was practically an adult BUT he is still very much a little kid is very important not to assign adult emotions/intents to a little kid. Personally it sounds like a normal 5 yo to me and if they allow 5 yos on the show I'm sure the CMs are capable of handling a range in behaviors in 5 year olds.

 

[mshanson3121]

I do agree that there seems to be a higher rate of actual diagnosis but based on the interactions I've had with some kids what was just "abnormal" is not a disorder. Not for every kid of course but I am in a subset of the country that is full of families where if their kids aren't in the 1% of excellent they need a reason why. They can't accept that their kids may not be smart or may just be quirky.

I don't think everything is a bunch of malarky but I don't think that everyone should be jumping straight to you might want to get him/her tested he probably has x,y,z. I think a parent, their child's pediatrician, and possibly teachers should be the ones making the judgement on if someone should be tested not the parent who sees your kid at the playground.

I agree that people should not jump right to "you might want to get him checked out".

But I will also tell you that there is a huge, INSANELY huge difference between "having some interactions" with kids and actually living with them day in and day out, seeing the intricacies of how their diagnosis affects their family. What is invisible to you, is painfully obvious to the people that actually have to deal with it every single day.

 

[lovethattink]

I suppose given the subject matter of the original post it was inevitable, but this has now become nothing more than a "good/bad parenting" thread and those typically are not allowed here. The OP has received the opinions (and then some) that were solicited, so it is probably best that this thread be closed. Moderators? What say you?

I agree, it's time to close the thread.