What is ransomware and how do I protect my PC from Petya?
........ for autistic son to be set free from care.
21st July 2010
" A father has launched a petition to bring his autistic son home from being 'incarcerated' in care and has already gained the support of 2,500 backers.
Mark Neary, 51, of Penrith Close Uxbridge, is fighting to bring his 20-year-old son Steven home from a positive behavioural unit in Colham Road, Yiewsley.
Mr Neary, a counsellor in Uxbridge, had been hoping to bring Steven home this month, but has recently been told by Hillingdon Council, who run the care home, that his wish would not be granted. "
What next Hillingdon Council, put unmarried mothers into institutions for 10 to 30 years ?
This is barbaric. Whoever made this decision has clearly no understanding what so ever of Autism.
Steven has been ‘stolen’ from his home when his Dad was ill. He needs familiar faces, surroundings & to go back to his routine ASAP. This could make him regress to a point of no return.
Makes you wonder how many more cases like this there are around the UK ?
Life with a child with autism is always a constant battle with the authorities.
We can only hope a few thousand Hillingdon Council ratepayers march on the council house and demand Steven’s freedom.
'Steven has been ‘stolen’ from his home when his Dad was ill'...how terrible of the nasty, evil people to look after him when his father was unable to. Ever considered that he might actually like it in the home that he is being treated in rather than being cooped up with a rather odd father?
a few thousand Hillingdon Council ratepayers march on the council house and demand Steven’s freedom."
Excuse me - since when did a thousand Hillingdon ratepayers know better than the (presumably specially trained) people who run the Positive Behavioural unit?
And what's all this about "Steven has been ‘stolen’ from his home when his Dad was ill."
How do you know what happened - were you privy to the case notes when made your sweeping "This is barbaric. Whoever made this decision has clearly no understanding what so ever of Autism." statement?
I'm always astonished by the way some people seem to think that just because a couple of thousand people sign a petition it means they must be right, and the people they disagree with must be wrong. Hillingdon Council have taken this action because Steven can be aggressive towards other people, children, and animals. His father acknowledges his tendency towards aggression, but says he is less likely to behave that way if he's at home. The council isn't prepared to take the risk, it says that apart from the risk to other people and animals Steven might be the subject of reprisal attacks if he's out and about unsupervised and behaves aggressively, and it says that in addition he could end up with a criminal record. The council's job is to consider the welfare of the public at large, as well as that of Steven. His father's wishes are not of paramount importance.
It all seems to make some sense to me.
"There, but for the grace of God ..... "
will reply to your comments in order :-
wiz – king
“ Oh the joys of being a social worker - damned if you do, damned if you don't ”
The problem is many of them don't listen to the people who know the young man or even communicate with him !
Yes his son's violent episodes will and probably do occur. These will occur at home at times, it's all part of autism
“ The father's decision to try and recruit an army of knee-jerk hysterics to his cause is the wrong way to deal with this “ Ask anyone with a child with autism, it's a constant sometimes lonely battle with authorities every step of the way, he needs all the help and moral support he can get.
He simply needed some respite care for his son for three days, that's over 7 months ago !
“ cooped up with a rather odd father ? “ HOW INSULTING ! Many carers are over 50 and if it were not for the likes of people like him the rest of us would be paying well over the odds for care of those with special needs. When he gets to retirement age, and if Steven is still with him, he will continue to care for him as long as possible.
“ cooped up “ Now who's jumping to conclusions ?
“ It all seems to make some sense to me. “
Now why does that not surprise me ? With all due respect I suggest you stick to what you know.
You appear to be painting a picture of some kind of uncontrollable animal, is that how you see people with autism ? No wonder the National Autistic Society have a hard time with you attitude !
On the one hand you are saying the council say he is unable to control his actions ( and therefore not responsible ) but on the other he may get a criminal record ?
Why did the council wait until Mark Neary was ill until they took this action ?
Is this detailed on his special needs statement ?
Steven is no 7st weakling so how are they controlling his claimed aggressive behaviour … drugs, physical intervention, restraints or all three ?
“ It all seems to make some sense to me. “ not to Steven it will not, nor anyone else with the condition or who cares for someone who has autism.
I stand by my comment " This is barbaric. Whoever made this decision has clearly no understanding what so ever of Autism. "
I suggest you read and digest this :-
Ten Things Every Child with Autism Wishes You Knew
“ It all seems to make some sense to me. “
Now why does that not surprise me ?
I have no idea why it doesn't surprise you - enlighten us if you will.
"With all due respect I suggest you stick to what you know.You appear to be painting a picture of some kind of uncontrollable animal, is that how you see people with autism ?"
You know what? It's a really good idea not to make sweeping assumptions about others, especially when you lace them with rudeness. I made no references to "some kind of uncontrollable animal" at all, your obvious sense of drama has invented that. I actually said that "Steven can be aggressive towards other people, children, and animals. His father acknowledges his tendency towards aggression.....". which is exactly what the Local authority said, I merely repeated it. I'm not 'paining a picture' at all.
A close neighbour and friend of mine has an 18 year old with Autism. I have a reasonable understanding of his condition,as I've known him well since he was four. I don't need to 'read and digest' anything thank you.
With all due respect it's you who should be sticking to what you know, rather than making wild statements about barbarism and the people who made the decision about this person; you have no more knowledge about this specific case than anyone else.
I expressed opinions, as have others - you appear to think that you have some special insight into the case, and that's obviously not so. You may well have some experience of Autism, but that doesn't qualify you to assert that the local authority "...has clearly no understanding what so ever of Autism." How can you possibly know what level of understanding it has? I imagine that this isn't the first case the authority has had to deal with by a long chalk, and quite possibly (difficult as it might be for you to accept) the people there have a good deal more knowledge and experience than you.
I know very little about this case (the link being broken isn't helping) but I have had the misfortune to have past through the clutches of the 'Community Autism Team'.
Our daughter at age 3 was struggling with her language development and so we went on the round of hearing specialists, doctors, etc all very positive. We also attended a meeting with our local Community Autism Team who in a twenty minute chat with my wife and I (there was no analysis undertaken of our daughter) decided that 'she probably had autism and they would start a programme of treatment'. I put my foot down and complained about the sheer lack of professionalism we were witnessing. extracting ourselves from the machinery of the 'community autism team' took 6 months and we were only really successful thanks to a quite brilliant educational psychologist who agreed to undertake a full and proper analysis of our daughter. That took her 6 months of work at the end of which she was able to diagnose our daughter was not autistic, she had some language development issues which would be dealt with by extra language development classes, that was it. Our daughter is now nearly, and is just a normal wee girl, shutting her up is now the big problem. I dread to think where we would have got to. I know what people are saying regarding social workers and damned both ways, but my experience of the 'autism' machine is far from positive.
That should be 'our daughter is now nearly 9 and just a normal wee girl'
.... from 1st hand experience.
Yes FE you have expressed opinions based only on your very limited experience as you have, with respect done on past subjects. Yes you are fully entitled to do so.
"Steven can be aggressive towards other people, children, and animals. His father acknowledges his tendency towards aggression." If you knew about autism why did you make this statement as most of those with autism have 'meltdowns' every so often ? They get overloaded with the world around them. New sights, smells, faces, places sounds, colours ... the list goes on and on.
Did it even occur to you the authority may be wrong or that it can’t admit its own mistake?
Rick'scafe I am VERY sorry to hear about your experience ... but your experience I am sorry to say is far from isolated.
" You know what? It's a really good idea not to make sweeping assumptions about others, especially when you lace them with rudeness " When ?
Also look on Google Groups
Parents Of Autism UK
Thanks for the refreshed link dragon_heart. I can imagine I would show 'challenging behaviour' if I was detained in a care home. There needs to be a process of quick judicial review for cases such as this.
This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.