If NTs are so good at noticing and reacting to social cues...

[Misty Avich]

I don't think my friend is a Karen. She just wants what's best for her son. It's quite natural for a parent to become defensive when it comes to their children especially if the children haven't done anything bad or wrong.
Karen parents are those who stir up a controversy because a children's show is too silly or not silly enough or something like that.

 

[Mary Terry]

I don't think my friend is a Karen. She just wants what's best for her son. It's quite natural for a parent to become defensive when it comes to their children especially if the children haven't done anything bad or wrong.
Karen parents are those who stir up a controversy because a children's show is too silly or not silly enough or something like that.

Misty - I've raised three children, all NT, and all have different personalities and quirks. All of them had bad days at school, and all of them cried at some point during school for a variety of reasons. Kids do that. They learn from that. That's life.

If your friend's child really has a significant psychological professional diagnosis, then she needs to relay that information to the school. Let the school figure out what to do about handling the child's psychiatric problems without adversely affecting every other student in the classroom. Those other children deserve having their teacher's attention and help to learn the curriculum. Were those other children abandoned alone in the classroom while the teacher had to chase down the runaway child? Please give some thought to the OTHER children in that classroom and the teacher's responsibility to those children.

 

[Misty Avich]

OK, I get it.
Maybe using a teacher and student was a bad example lol.

 

[tree]

@Misty Avich

If NTs are so good at noticing and reacting to social cues...​

That's a big "if."

 

[1ForAll]

NTs may be better than many with Autism at reading social cues, but there are other factors involved too. NTs can be just as neglectful, abusive, self centered, judgemental, righteous, moody, manipulative, impatient, and with biases, or preferring to put the group or system before any one individual. They can assume things, and have no desire to go beyond what they were only trained to do. They can react and do improper things under stress or want to shift the blame.

Look at all the NT parents and even professionals who miss the abuses that could be occuring against their own children when their children are at day care, camp, school, in church setting, on sports teams, having medical checkups, in the film and advertising industry, and so forth. Lots of those cases the parent must have seen their child's behavioral changes but just assumed things, or just did not care or lacked proper communication or motivation to intervene or figure things out.That is what is wrong with society.

We cannot follow our children around everywhere, I agree, but when we have children we must be vigilant, and we must hold authorities in power responsible for wrongs they do, as you bet they will never admit wrongs. Not all things they do are wrong, but there are cases where a desire for the truth and lack of assumptions and categorizing could have made a huge positive difference for these kids. Whereas some children's behaviors will need some disciplinary action by the school, there must be other cases where the school did very improper things, and where certain factors should have been considered and where we should not have lumped all cases together for negative judgement and punishment. Lots of factors can be involved. Schools are partial parties, and hide bullying and their wrongs often. Of course they rather blame students. The truth is often somewhere in the middle.

 

[AspieChris]

My colleague is also my friend and she told me about this, while clearly worrying about her child, who has just started at secondary school (high school). In secondary school you have several teachers and usually a diagnosis a child may have doesn't get revealed to all the teachers by the admin or whoever, so it wasn't the fault on the parents.
The boy is prone to panic attacks but is otherwise not a disruptive child at all in class. This is why they abolished the cane from UK schools - because too many innocent children were getting unfairly punished with pain, simply because the teachers missed the differences between naughty kids and kids with struggles who were otherwise well-behaved.

Something similar happened to me when I first started secondary school. I found the science classes difficult, and doing science experiments was all new to me, being so we didn't do things like that in primary (elementary) school. I was quiet and nervous, and was trying my best to keep up during a science experiment, but the teacher kept shouting at me the same way she would shout at obnoxious kids screwing around. Surely she could see, by my worried facial expressions and my intent to get the experiment done, that I wasn't doing anything to deserve being yelled at? I was even shaking with nerves. But the teacher seemed oblivious to all the obvious signs and just treated me like I was a naughty kid by showing me up. Then she sent a report to my form tutor (home room teacher?) saying I "failed to co-operate in class" and that I "deserved a detention". I was like "what??" Was she blind? I was trying my best and was not fooling around like a group of kids were doing (who also got the same report I did).

Funny (or not exactly funny), my mother treated me exactly like your science teacher. I would be trying my hardest to be a good kid, shaking with fear, and getting berated as if I was a criminal.

Any chance my mom taught science at your school???

 

[vergil96]

You would be surprised how many 11 year old can cry without there being anything wrong with them. Kids CAN manipulate very well. Especially kids who do it at home all the time. Which is becoming an increasing problem.

I really hate the direction in which this is going. Why assume that someone is manipulating and lying? Come on. You would go out of your way to harm a child by punishing them just because they are potentially manipulative but might not be? That stinks and that's abusive.

 

[Rodafina]

I really hate the direction in which this is going. Why assume that someone is manipulating and lying? Come on. You would go out of your way to harm a child by punishing them just because they are potentially manipulative but might not be? That stinks and that's abusive.

I agree, and children are “manipulative” in much different ways than adults are. Children crying and using strategies to get that what they want is actually an indicator of some unmet need that they are trying to meet.

As children, our needs are met by adults and caretakers in our lives. It’s a reasonable survival strategy to figure out how to get these needs met by getting the adults to do what you need them to do.

A good example of this is the child who has become accustomed to negative attention because they rarely receive positive or neutral attention. When children are neglected, often times they can learn that if they act out or act in ways that will demand attention of caregivers, that is better than being ignored.

As adults most of us learn to and are expected to meet our own needs, and therefore manipulating others becomes an entirely different thing.

My opinion is that the word manipulate should be saved for extremely rare situations with children. They are just trying to get their needs met in a world that is very much out of their control.

 

[vergil96]

I'm an adult and I still cry and have panic attacks. It's normal, human and expected to be overwhelmed by emotions in some situations. Hence - what the actual heck?

 

[kenaij]

I really hate the direction in which this is going. Why assume that someone is manipulating and lying? Come on. You would go out of your way to harm a child by punishing them just because they are potentially manipulative but might not be? That stinks and that's abusive.

Where did I state that we should punish every child because they might potentially be manipulative?
I did not. But working with over 500 children aged 11-18 I wanted to get the idioligy that every crying child is in distress out of this world. Because that simply is not true. There are a lot of children that use this behaviour to get what they want. Because they were 'taught' this behaviour.
We should not assume someone is manipulating or lying. But we must always keep our minds open to the chances of it happening.
I always want to know where behaviour is coming from. Sadly sometimes it is simply a child mimicking a (bad) rolemodel.

 

[AspieChris]

Where did I state that we should punish every child because they might potentially be manipulative?
I did not. But working with over 500 children aged 11-18 I wanted to get the idioligy that every crying child is in distress out of this world. Because that simply is not true. There are a lot of children that use this behaviour to get what they want. Because they were 'taught' this behaviour.
We should not assume someone is manipulating or lying. But we must always keep our minds open to the chances of it happening.
I always want to know where behaviour is coming from. Sadly sometimes it is simply a child mimicking a (bad) rolemodel.

I agree. Each person is an individual, capable of both beautiful and disturbing behavior. Child or adult…. doesn’t matter.

But I definitely have known children who are incredibly manipulative. Crying, vomiting, lying, etc. Sometimes you just meet that kid who is willing to do absolutely anything to get what they want. Charles Manson was a child once. Right?

 

[MildredHubble]

Just assuming a child is being manipulative because they are crying is abuse in my opinion. No one can read minds. In case you think you can, let me repeat, YOU, CAN'T, READ, MINDS. If you think you can, the James Randi Foundation would like to hear from you, they have $1,000,000 to give you.

I will only expect a meager 2% fee for referring you to them. Not bad really, just think, you will be a millionaire in a couple of weeks for demonstration of your superior mental abilities. The interest alone will more than cover my share.

If a kid is being manipulative, this is probably a sign something is wrong somewhere. And if you are a teacher, you have a duty to make an effort to find out what. Just as Rodafina said in her post, when kids use these tactics, it's likely some needs are not being met. This is not the kid's fault. They still deserve every opportunity and effort to help them develop better ways to manage and communicate their needs.

Throwing kids on the scrap heap based on silly little intuitions is a disgrace.

 

[kenaij]

It is just silly to think it is implied to throw kids on scrap heaps. And neither does anyone claim to be a mind reader. But based on actions, behaviour and a lot of other factors you can very safely state a child is manipulating you without being able to read his/her mind.
The cause of this manipulative behaviour can be a great number of things. It can simply be mental. Some people are naturally manipulative. It could be that he/she found they can get a great number of things at home by manipulating their parents. Maybe this is learned from either of the parents. Or friends. It is very important to find the reason behind the behaviour. But manipulative behaviour in children is very real. And it is the job of adults to teach the child this manipulative behaviour is unwanted and that displaying this behaviour has consequences.

Let me ask a question. We have 2 people who steal. One has a lot of money and just likes the thrill, the other does not have money and does it to eat. Now. Let's say the consequence for stealing is spending 7 days in jail. That is written somewhere. That is the rule/law. Now does the person with money get the consequence and the person without doesn`t? Or do they both get the consequence because they both broke the rules? The answer is quite simple to me. How we help these two people afterwards is completely different. We will show the person with money other ways to get their thrill. And we help the person without money to get a job, teach him about finances or whatever so he no longer has to steal. But they both get the consequence for their action.

To put this back into the case of a child. If the child throws a tantrum in the class and thus disrupts the class there is a consequence. Let us say it is one hour of detention. A child that throws the tantrum because of distress, and the child that throws the tantrum because he dislikes the way the teacher talks to him both disrupt the class. So they both go to detention. Because that is the consequence of an action which is laid down by the school. Now the difference comes with the approach to prevent a future disruption. One child needs to be taught he does not make the rules and throwing a tantrum will not change the rules. The child in distress needs to be taught to avoid getting back into this distressed state. This he/she can either do themselves or maybe it is something the teacher can do. Or it is caused by another child which the teacher should watch. So the factor that has caused it needs to be adressed.
If either of the children then cannot conform to these rules and guidelines the school is not a good match for them and they might be better of at a school that is more specialised in the care either of these kids need.

Failing to teach children that actions have laid down consequences that are written down in school rules or by law will actually make for very very poor young adults. Do we beat them with a stick walk away and expect them to change on their own? Ofcourse not. We help them to avoid having to deal with the consequences in the future.

 

[AspieChris]

It is just silly to think it is implied to throw kids on scrap heaps. And neither does anyone claim to be a mind reader. But based on actions, behaviour and a lot of other factors you can very safely state a child is manipulating you without being able to read his/her mind.
The cause of this manipulative behaviour can be a great number of things. It can simply be mental. Some people are naturally manipulative. It could be that he/she found they can get a great number of things at home by manipulating their parents. Maybe this is learned from either of the parents. Or friends. It is very important to find the reason behind the behaviour. But manipulative behaviour in children is very real. And it is the job of adults to teach the child this manipulative behaviour is unwanted and that displaying this behaviour has consequences.

Let me ask a question. We have 2 people who steal. One has a lot of money and just likes the thrill, the other does not have money and does it to eat. Now. Let's say the consequence for stealing is spending 7 days in jail. That is written somewhere. That is the rule/law. Now does the person with money get the consequence and the person without doesn`t? Or do they both get the consequence because they both broke the rules? The answer is quite simple to me. How we help these two people afterwards is completely different. We will show the person with money other ways to get their thrill. And we help the person without money to get a job, teach him about finances or whatever so he no longer has to steal. But they both get the consequence for their action.

To put this back into the case of a child. If the child throws a tantrum in the class and thus disrupts the class there is a consequence. Let us say it is one hour of detention. A child that throws the tantrum because of distress, and the child that throws the tantrum because he dislikes the way the teacher talks to him both disrupt the class. So they both go to detention. Because that is the consequence of an action which is laid down by the school. Now the difference comes with the approach to prevent a future disruption. One child needs to be taught he does not make the rules and throwing a tantrum will not change the rules. The child in distress needs to be taught to avoid getting back into this distressed state. This he/she can either do themselves or maybe it is something the teacher can do. Or it is caused by another child which the teacher should watch. So the factor that has caused it needs to be adressed.
If either of the children then cannot conform to these rules and guidelines the school is not a good match for them and they might be better of at a school that is more specialised in the care either of these kids need.

Failing to teach children that actions have laid down consequences that are written down in school rules or by law will actually make for very very poor young adults. Do we beat them with a stick walk away and expect them to change on their own? Ofcourse not. We help them to avoid having to deal with the consequences in the future.

Very well said.