Treatment of my disabled son and our family at the garrison

[daveh]

I think for all the people who have commented on this you need to put yourselves in their shoes and consider their feelings, obviously things are difficult for them and they are trying to give their son every chance in the world and not being able to go see a film with him is in my opinion unfair.

 

Of course, they should try to give their child every chance in the world and this should be the case whether the child has any difficulties or not. However, that doesn't mean driving a coach and horses through what is seen as normally accepted behaviour and actions. Nobody here has suggested that the child should be discriminated against but they have suggested that the performance was not appropriate for a child of that age, full stop. If you can't accept that then you are, in my opinion, a bit blinkered towards the interests of others.

If the child was, say, 10 years older and asked to leave because he was making a noise and disturbing all the other paying patrons then that is another matter which could be debated again.

[Bluemire]

In reply to Daveh. Nobody mentioned anything about driving a coach and horses through anything. If a family wants to take their children to see a film no matter what anybody else thinks it is that families decision. Under no circumstances what so ever am i "blinkered" towards others, i always put other perople first and i think because i can sympathise with their situation i have my right just as much as everybody else to comment on this forum and to voice my opinions!

[EM]

I have lived with a brother with special needs

i understand they want him to be treated the exact same because we are like that with my brother.

These statements are fundamentally irreconcilable. Something can not be both special and at the same time exactly the same. The old maxim popularised by Rockefeller is also apropos:

I believe that every right implies a responsibility

My best wishes are with both the OPs and yourself, but I feel it is impossible to succeed in the wearing of two such contradictory hats at the same time.

 

... and he will be excepted,

At the risk of incurring the typical response from the anti-pedant contingent, can I presume that you meant to write accepted? Important to clarify as the meanings are completely opposite.

[unlinkedstudent]

A Harry Potter film is, IMHO, definitely unsuitable for a child of 3, let alone one with special needs. The guidance for 12A is as follows:-

 

"The ‘12A’ category exists only for cinema films. No one younger than 12 may see a ‘12A’ film in a cinema unless accompanied by an adult, and films classified ‘12A’ are not recommended for a child below 12. An adult may take a younger child if, in their judgement, the film is suitable for that particular child. In such circumstances, responsibility for allowing a child under 12 to view lies with the accompanying adult."

 

Now Harry Potter isn't exactly Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (Although I hasten to add that the children being kidnapped scenario left me with nightmares as a child for years) and don't whatever you do get me onto Dr Who and the Daleks ... children are very impressionable and whilst not appearing scared to death at the time, their memories of a film can remain deep within their tiny little heads for a long time. Granted, I'm guilty of letting my own son watch Gremlins at the age of 11 when it was rated 15 (Remember the kitchen scene and Snow White) but there is a huge gap between a 3 year old and an 11 year old watching a 15 rated film.

 

Oh heck, the cinema scene - Snow White. You know you want to (apologies for poor quality):

 

[trowie246]

There is the possibility that it was a Harry Potter film the child was taken to see but Cars 2 (rated U) was also advertised for that weekend. Since the person who started the thread hasn't said what film it was we don't know.

[EM]

... Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (Although I hasten to add that the children being kidnapped scenario left me with nightmares as a child for years)

Spot on with that observation! It, together with the gaping eye sockets scene from Hitchcock's The Birds, regularly figure at the top of films people cite to me which traumatised them as children.

[xoni]

I get where you're coming from because my youngest child, she's 3 as well has autism, down here in Aberdeen the cinemas have days set aside for autistic children and those with special needs where they can make as much noise as they like and get up and wander around if they choose. I understand it might not be so easy for something as small as the Garrison to organise this though.

[daveh]

i have my right just as much as everybody else to comment on this forum and to voice my opinions!

 

Of course you do.

[peerie t]

There is the possibility that it was a Harry Potter film the child was taken to see but Cars 2 (rated U) was also advertised for that weekend. Since the person who started the thread hasn't said what film it was we don't know.

 

That is a different kettle of fish then.

I was just guessing it was HP from what a Previous post said, I haven't been to a film in the garrison for years, so I had no idea what was showing...

 

[Pleepsie]

The U rating is listed as 'All ages admitted, there is nothing unsuitable for children over 4.'

 

I am wondering why any parent would think that a trip to the cinema to watch a film would be considered suitable for a 3 year old.

Sitting in a darkened room looking at a screen for 112 mins (Cars 2) is not the best way to make a small child 'feel involved and empowered'.

[Piddly]

There is the possibility that it was a Harry Potter film the child was taken to see but Cars 2 (rated U) was also advertised for that weekend. Since the person who started the thread hasn't said what film it was we don't know.

 

It was the Harry Potter film, as you know, Shetland is a small place, everyone pretty much knows everyone

[nautim]

The local Autism Support Group (who normally meet in the Bruce Hostel on the last Thursday of the month - see the Shetland Times for details) have arranged to have a special showing of films as a Christmas treat. We didn't go because my children weren't interested in the film. The sort of things which get changed to accommodate needs are lower volume, more background lighting in the auditorium and an acceptance from the rest of the audience that you may have people making noises or getting up and moving around.

 

We waited a long time before we bothered trying to go to a film. When we finally did (we think it was the Simpson's Movie) we sat at the end of a row, next to the exit, with plenty of sweeties. Plan A was to sit and watch the film, Plan B was to keep her quiet with lots of sweets, Plan C was a hasty exit... We managed to stay through the whole film, she did eat lots of sweets, but that was out of choice rather than silencing!

 

Although we try to give my younger daughter as many opportunities in life as possible there will always be some things that aren't suitable for her to go to. That can be disappointing sometimes, but we work round it, and I love her just the way she is.

[peerie t]

It was the Harry Potter film, as you know, Shetland is a small place, everyone pretty much knows everyone

 

Then in fact, the only thing the Garrison really are guilty of is not advising about film suitability. Hardly a discrimination case if you ask me.

 

But of course, by all means, all people should be valued and treated the same as you wish to be treated yourselves, and quite pleased to see the mods have edited the name off this, as I am sure that the "naming and shaming" attempted here could also be seen as discrimination...

 

Each to their own though.

[piggywiggie]

Can people that take noisy food into a cinema be kicked out then? That REALLY annoys me!

[BrianGriffin1]

Took my son, who is 4 and a half and being tested for Autism, to the Garrison to watch Cars2. He sat for an hour before starting to become irritating. Then we left.

 

I always go by my own cues when taking my son anywhere... Be impartial and ask yourself "Would I be annoyed by this?", and if you say "yes", then leave.

 

Not everyone is aware of child's needs and cannot easily tell the difference between bad behaviour and a need. You have to learn to deal with it, as will your child.