Jump to content

Is This An Effective Punishment?


MIApac

Recommended Posts

Two months ago, my oldest nephew moved in with my parents, who is not that familiar with (Background info, his father, my older brother and his mother got divorced when he was 3 years old). He is 11 years old and on the autism spectrum. In the two months that he has lived with my parents, my nephew has struggled to adjust to his new surroundings. He struggles to complete his homework, does not like to socialize with other children his age and rarely ever goes out anywhere. One of the few things that he has enjoyed doing is playing with my parents two dogs and taking them out for walks.

 

Over the weekend, my nephew tried to call his mother early in the morning and was upset when she told him that she couldn't speak to him and would call him back later in the day. When my father was ready to leave to go to the store, my nephew said that he changed his mind and didn't want to go. As a response to this, my father decided to punish him by not allowing him to go near the dogs permanently. Despite, pleas from my mother and other family members, my father is refusing to budge. He insists that my nephew needs to learn to manners and to respect others. Would you say that this punishment is justified? What should be done?

Link to comment
  • Replies 56
  • Created
  • Last Reply

i think this is too simplistic and too b/w to be a legitimate question.

i would say the #1 thing that should've been done was to ask the nephew whey he had a change of heart and doesn't want to go. Becaus the WHAT is never important.. the WHY is always the most important.

 

Depending on what that answer is - adjust accordingly.

Link to comment
I'd say "Sadly he does not seem to understand children" Period!

I do not know much about autism so i can't comment about that.

however, why do you say this? I disagree that the father doesn't understand how to teach kids correctly. Except for the autism part which i don't know and can't comment on, with a "normal" child that was basically the ONLY thing (if the kid was being rude and inappropriate) had to work with to teach a lesson.

Link to comment
I do not know much about autism so i can't comment about that.

however, why do you say this? I disagree that the father doesn't understand how to teach kids correctly. Except for the autism part which i don't know and can't comment on, with a "normal" child that was basically the ONLY thing (if the kid was being rude and inappropriate) had to work with to teach a lesson.

 

Where did you read that the child was being rude and inappropriate? The punishment was for not wanting to go to the store now. He acted up "was upset" only when his mother couldn't talk to him when he wanted to talk to her which is a separate issue.

 

A child (with autism or not) does not have to be punished because they changed their mind about going to a store. This man is a control freak, clearly and to take away PERMANENTLY the only thing the child can get pleasure from (currently) for changing his mind about a non-issue like going to a store is ludicrous at best and emotionally abusive at worst.

Link to comment

Depending on how severe his ASD is will determine what he will understand.

 

The best suggestion I have is to make sure his grandfather takes him to his appointments, gets involved in school and spends time when the child's therapists are working with them.

 

He is over his head at the moment and needs guidance not condemnation. I spend a great deal of time with the disabled and there are rules and punishment but it is tailored to the individual.

 

He has taken in his grandson from the boys parents so he probably didn't have the best conditions with them.

 

The dogs should be used as a reward, not punishment. It is not easy being a care giver to someone with ASD and they do make mistakes like we all have with our own children.

 

See if you can help educate not just grandpa but the whole family on ASD, what works, what doesn't, how to deal with a meltdown and on and on.

 

This journey is taken not just by the child but by the whole family over many years...

 

Lost

Link to comment
Why is he living with his grandparents now instead of with one of his parents? Maybe I missed that?

 

It's a long and complicated story. His maternal grandfather was very sick and his mother decided to send him to live with my parents. My older brother is not as involved and lives in a one bedroom apartment building with his new girlfriend and 1 year old son. He is only living with my parents until July, when he will either go back to living with his mother or have to move in with my older brother. If it seems a little sketchy, it is, as I am just as confused about the circumstances. Personally, I think the mother is just trying to dump the kid off on someone.

Link to comment

Autism aside, your fathers behavior is abusive, controlling, and highly concerning. First of all, a child not wanting to go to the store with him doesn't warrant punishment. At 11 years old, it's reasonable for him to exert enough personal space to decline an outing such as this and it would be equally expected for the adult to actually allow that unless there are extenuating reasons why he just absolutely had to go. This is not a situation where the child pitched a fit when the whole family was going to some event. The punishment of not allowing him to play/walk the dogs ever again is quite frankly cruel, abusive, and malicious for ANY child, let alone one with autism. There is something very very wrong with your father. Has he always been like this?

Link to comment

When my father was ready to leave to go to the store, my nephew said that he changed his mind and didn't want to go. As a response to this, my father decided to punish him by not allowing him to go near the dogs permanently. Despite, pleas from my mother and other family members, my father is refusing to budge. He insists that my nephew needs to learn to manners and to respect others. Would you say that this punishment is justified? What should be done?

 

It is okay to punish him by telling him if he stays home, then he cannot stay home to play with the dogs while he does so. The dogs will be in their crates. A privilege is taken away. He is not attached to an iPad or going to parties so the grandfather has no leverage with that. Instead of starting a war with Grandpa, maybe since he is frustrated that he cannot reach this kid, you volunteer to babysit/do something with the kid once in awhile to alleviate the grandparents for a few hours.

 

There could be slightly more to the story ------ he could have had a melt down over mom not being able to talk to him and could have been doing more than simply not wanting to go to the store and Grandpa might have been at wit's end so that's what came out of his mouth. If the only thing that he will respond to is the dogs and he won't pay attention to the grandparents, maybe they are feeling they are doing what is best. Forever is not the right thing of course, but they are probably in over their heads

 

Parenting an autistic kid is tough -- and it is probably tougher when you are dealing with him reacting to parents who let him down

Link to comment
It's a long and complicated story. His maternal grandfather was very sick and his mother decided to send him to live with my parents. My older brother is not as involved and lives in a one bedroom apartment building with his new girlfriend and 1 year old son. He is only living with my parents until July, when he will either go back to living with his mother or have to move in with my older brother. If it seems a little sketchy, it is, as I am just as confused about the circumstances. Personally, I think the mother is just trying to dump the kid off on someone.

What? Like you brother has done to him you mean?

Link to comment

I will also add this - using the bond between a child and an animal is NEVER an appropriate punishment under any circumstances whatsoever. Again, this is regardless of autism.

 

I'd maybe be less harsh if your father had told the child that he may not play with the dogs for the next two hours, still completely inappropriate, but less malicious. Prohibiting that child from interacting with the dogs permanently is flat out and out malicious, vindictive abuse. Sorry, OP, but I'm truly appalled and wonder just what you grew up with that you yourself aren't sure if this is or isn't appropriate. It.is.not.appropriate.at.all.ever.

Link to comment

@ThatWasThen

 

Over the weekend, my nephew tried to call his mother early in the morning and was upset when she told him that she couldn't speak to him and would call him back later in the day?

He insists the nephew needs to learn to manners and to respect others

 

We can disagree on my assessment (and your assessment) but this is what I was reacting to. The child was upset earlier that day over a simple phone call. I imagined that carried out in his decision to "not go" suddenly and was inter-related. That I could reasonably see as to why the grandpa felt the child needed to be disciplined to "have manners and learn to respect others". i don't know much about autism so as i've already said, i can't speak to that part. so my comments are related more to "i can see the way Grandpa connected the dots as to why discipline was necessary.

 

Once discipline is decided upon, the only way to effectively discipline is to remove somethign of value that the disciplinee cares about or values. The OP made it clear that the ONLY thing this child seems to value is time with the dogs. So there is ONLY 1 thing that would constitute effective discpline in this case - removing time with the dogs. Given that was the grandpa's only option given what the child showed - how does that make him a "control freak". There is no point to INEFFECTIVE discpline - that's a waste of everybody's time.

 

As to the "permanent" threat, any adult knows that during discipline (effective discipline) - that's just what a guardian has to frame it as to get the message across. ALL OF US KNOW the child and dogs would be re-acquainted soon enough once the lesson was learned. (This is an assumption on my part - but i'm PRETTY SURE we ALL would agree Grandpa never truly intended to separate the dogs and his grandson forever.

 

So we can agree to disagree. This is how I ready it, what i reacted to, and why i felt it was the only card Grandpa could play if he felt discipline was necessary.

Link to comment
@ThatWasThen

 

 

 

 

We can disagree on my assessment (and your assessment) but this is what I was reacting to. The child was upset earlier that day over a simple phone call. I imagined that carried out in his decision to "not go" suddenly and was inter-related. That I could reasonably see as to why the grandpa felt the child needed to be disciplined to "have manners and learn to respect others". i don't know much about autism so as i've already said, i can't speak to that part. so my comments are related more to "i can see the way Grandpa connected the dots as to why discipline was necessary.

 

Once discipline is decided upon, the only way to effectively discipline is to remove somethign of value that the disciplinee cares about or values. The OP made it clear that the ONLY thing this child seems to value is time with the dogs. So there is ONLY 1 thing that would constitute effective discpline in this case - removing time with the dogs. Given that was the grandpa's only option given what the child showed - how does that make him a "control freak". There is no point to INEFFECTIVE discpline - that's a waste of everybody's time.

 

As to the "permanent" threat, any adult knows that during discipline (effective discipline) - that's just what a guardian has to frame it as to get the message across. ALL OF US KNOW the child and dogs would be re-acquainted soon enough once the lesson was learned. (This is an assumption on my part - but i'm PRETTY SURE we ALL would agree Grandpa never truly intended to separate the dogs and his grandson forever.

 

So we can agree to disagree. This is how I ready it, what i reacted to, and why i felt it was the only card Grandpa could play if he felt discipline was necessary.

 

I agree with you. The problem with disciplining me as a child is i LOVED being alone in my room, so it was NOT punishment. My parents could not use it.

Link to comment
I agree with you. The problem with disciplining me as a child is i LOVED being alone in my room, so it was NOT punishment. My parents could not use it.

 

Right. A lot of parents think they're disciplining their kids but they're not because they are acting upon what THEY THINK would discipline them- what makes sense to THEM. They FAIL to think of what matters to the kid and will get the message across to the kid! Your example is perfect. You liked being alone in your room - so what good and how effective of disciplin is it to send you to your room? ZERO!

 

So.. as to whether the decision that the child should be discplined - that can obviously be debated and where we can all agree to disagree. I know what i reacted to and what dots i put together but i can respect that other people saw it differently - no problem.

But if we are to allow that maybe the discipline was necessary or IF it was - then i don't think we can get on Grandpa for how he decided to discipline the kid. that was the ONLY card he could play given what the child values or finds value in at their house. Anythign else would not have been effective (sending him to his room, no plaing outside, no tv, whatever... child didn't care about any of that and none of those things were of any value to him).

Link to comment
But punishing a child because they were upset they couldn’t talk to their mom and they changed their mind about the store is ridiculous .

 

We don't know what else happened. Being upset is okay, but if the child took it out on others/copped an attitude which made them disrespectful to their grandparents over it, broke house rules, was disrespectful and the whole day snowballed after that - and the child asked to go to the store before (the grandparent was going at the childs request) or needed to go (could not be left home alone, were buying clothes for the child, etc, grandparent was limited on when they could because of the child), etc., the grandparent is entitled to take away priveleges if they saw fit.

Link to comment
We don't know what else happened.
Then why 'guess' at what happened and lets just wait and see what the Op has to say about those who are speculating that he acted out. Its pointless to be giving opinions on what wasn't shared.

 

The kid was "upset" because he couldn't talk to his mother. The Op DID NOT say that he carried that over to disrespect his grandfather... only that he changed his mind to go to the store.

 

But punishing a child because they were upset they couldn’t talk to their mom and they changed their mind about the store is ridiculous .
Based on what was shared in the opening post, yes it was it was ridiculous, it was cruel and it was emotionally abusive. Even if he did act out to the grandfather then taking away his time with the pets permanently is absurd.
Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...