What is the goal of integrating mentally retarded people in normal schools?

S

Saven

Registered Member
At the school district in the town I work in, a mentally retarded kid has been frightening normal children because of his wild behavior and his aggressiveness. He is also somewhat deformed and that scares many kids. Because of this event, and some other things, the school board is trying get the superintendent's contract bought out so they can get a new one who will stop integrating mentally retarded people into normal schools.

I have to say, I'm in agreement with that school board. What good can possibly come of "mainstreaming" people who are inherently NOT mainstream? It is as though the parents of these kids hope that by mixing the mentally retarded kids with normal kids, the kids will somehow be less retarded?

What is the purpose of this integration, and what is the disadvantage of not sending these kids to special schools where they can learn from others with similar conditions as them?
 
"Metally retarded"? "Normal" children"?. "Deformed"? Normal schools"? "Less retarded"?
 
i agree with you emmz, sounds like just another bigot. Thank god for laws like the commonwealth's Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) 1992 and the related state antidescrimination and equal opotunity legislation in Australia
 
Saven said:
What is the purpose of this integration, and what is the disadvantage of not sending these kids to special schools where they can learn from others with similar conditions as them?
Click to expand...
It's the "No Child Left Behind" phenomenon. What it works out to be in real life is "No Child Moved Forward." It's your helpful government at work again, spending your tax dollars as effectively as possible.

"Retarded" is out of vogue now, except when describing the demise of American culture in the past thirty years as the "Religious Redneck Retard Revival." The new term for those kids is "developmentally disabled."

I suspect that the real purpose of mainstreaming these children, as it's called, is to get the other kids used to being around them and perhaps even assisting them in simple ways. In the case you describe, I suppose getting used to them would mitigate the fright reaction. You can't help feeling sorry for these kids and it only makes it worse for them if the people they meet react in shock and fear.

I used to work for a company whose mail room was staffed by people with low IQs. (I will now pause while you all make clever jokes about the U.S. Postal Service.;)) Although I suppose the kids you are describing are even lower on the IQ scale, it was quite an experience having those folks in the building as co-workers. We all got used to it. One lady had a pet goldfish that she really loved. It was kind of nice to see that they were able to get some simple joys out of life.

It would be an okay world if everyone could find happiness in simple pleasures. Maybe that's the lesson your school district wants the rest of the kids to learn.
 
Saven said:
At the school district in the town I work in, a mentally retarded kid has been frightening normal children because of his wild behavior and his aggressiveness. He is also somewhat deformed and that scares many kids. Because of this event, and some other things, the school board is trying get the superintendent's contract bought out so they can get a new one who will stop integrating mentally retarded people into normal schools.

I have to say, I'm in agreement with that school board. What good can possibly come of "mainstreaming" people who are inherently NOT mainstream? It is as though the parents of these kids hope that by mixing the mentally retarded kids with normal kids, the kids will somehow be less retarded?

What is the purpose of this integration, and what is the disadvantage of not sending these kids to special schools where they can learn from others with similar conditions as them?
Click to expand...

Well first of all you assume that the family thinks this will fix the disability and I doubt that, the child may be there because there is no other place for them to go. I mean the child must still be able to learn for it to be in a normal classroom setting right? Children who are deemed slow or are unable to keep up are usually placed in a classroom with less students who also have problems learning so they can have more individual tutoring as opposed to keeping the whole classroom back. What exactly is the disability do you know? I don't think one child should be a distraction for an entire class. Kids who constantly disturb an entire class are often removed and put into classrooms that deal with the behaviour problems in little thugs. If the child can learn but has a physical problems and some slight behavioural problems then these issues can be dealt with without taking them out of the class. If the child cannot keep up and is simply a disruption then the child should be removed and placed with kids with special needs.

I know a woman who adopted a Cambodian child who turned out to have a lot of problems, learning disability in terms of memory, reading and writing, in addition to severe ADD. It was concluded that the mother had probably used drugs and alcohol and damaged the fetus. These signs didn't show up of course until the child was a little older (she's now 4 or 5). She was unable to attend school until they had dealt with the behaviour problems so they put her on medication, it worked and she is calm now and displays normal behaviour for her age but she still wasn't ready for school. They kept her home and have a private tutor who uses less than traditional means of teaching her to read and write etc, it worked. Now surprisingly she is ready for school.
 
EmmZ said:
"Metally retarded"? "Normal" children"?. "Deformed"? Normal schools"? "Less retarded"?
Click to expand...


What about these terms don't you understand?

Mentally retarded: retarded, mentally. It's derived from the infinitive: to retard. Synonym: to slow. Would "mentally slow" be easier for you? Not sure how else we can describe this -- unless you're one of those nutjobs who consider retardation to be "a gift."

Normal children: children who are not sufferers of the above disability.

Deformed: Seriously, you don't know this one? Physically shaped so as to appear unseemly perhaps even repulsive to others.

Normal schools: mainstream schools that house mostly normal children (defined above).

Less retarded: suffering less severely from the condition defined above.

----

I know, it's hard.
 
Saven said:
At the school district in the town I work in, a mentally retarded kid has been frightening normal children because of his wild behavior and his aggressiveness. He is also somewhat deformed and that scares many kids. Because of this event, and some other things, the school board is trying get the superintendent's contract bought out so they can get a new one who will stop integrating mentally retarded people into normal schools.

I have to say, I'm in agreement with that school board. What good can possibly come of "mainstreaming" people who are inherently NOT mainstream? It is as though the parents of these kids hope that by mixing the mentally retarded kids with normal kids, the kids will somehow be less retarded?

What is the purpose of this integration, and what is the disadvantage of not sending these kids to special schools where they can learn from others with similar conditions as them?
Click to expand...
The purpose and benefit of "mainstreaming" mentally retarded children is that it better prepares them to function in society rather than living lives confined to some institution. Like any other idea, it can be taken too far. If this particular child is aggressive and disruptive perhaps he is not ready for such inclusion. But many are.

One of my four children has Down's Syndrome. He is quite high functioning and interacts with his brothers and sister pretty much like any normal chlld. We've held him back in school so that this year he was in second grade rather than forth grade. By doing this, he was able to keep up with the class with minimal help. Many children in his class do not even realize he is mentally retarded.
 
Saven said:
What about these terms don't you understand?

Mentally retarded: retarded, mentally. It's derived from the infinitive: to retard. Synonym: to slow. Would "mentally slow" be easier for you? Not sure how else we can describe this -- unless you're one of those nutjobs who consider retardation to be "a gift."

Normal children: children who are not sufferers of the above disability.

Deformed: Seriously, you don't know this one? Physically shaped so as to appear unseemly perhaps even repulsive to others.

Normal schools: mainstream schools that house mostly normal children (defined above).

Less retarded: suffering less severely from the condition defined above.

----

I know, it's hard.
Click to expand...

She's thought policing you is all. Retarded is somewhat antiquated term and so she takes umbrage. You know how the thought police think they can dictate and control sentiment by replacing one word with another when it means exactly the same thing.

If you look up the word 'retarded' it is listed as meaning:

*mentally retarded: people collectively who are mentally retarded; "he started a school for the retarded"

*relatively slow in mental or emotional or physical development; "providing a secure and sometimes happy life for the retarded"

*cause to move more slowly or operate at a slower rate; "This drug will retard your heart rate"

* be delayed

* slow the growth or development of; "The brain damage will retard the child's language development"

In short exactly as you meant, retarded.
 
Last edited:
Saven said:
What about these terms don't you understand?

Mentally retarded: retarded, mentally. It's derived from the infinitive: to retard. Synonym: to slow. Would "mentally slow" be easier for you? Not sure how else we can describe this -- unless you're one of those nutjobs who consider retardation to be "a gift."

Normal children: children who are not sufferers of the above disability.

Deformed: Seriously, you don't know this one? Physically shaped so as to appear unseemly perhaps even repulsive to others.

Normal schools: mainstream schools that house mostly normal children (defined above).

Less retarded: suffering less severely from the condition defined above.

----

I know, it's hard.
Click to expand...

I have no issues with what you're proposing.The language was perhaps taken as a value judgement and not calling a spade a spade. I apologise is it came across as flippant, I genuinely sought the context of the words you used. But that's an aside to the topic at hand. Again, I apologise if I seemed to be judging you, I wasn't I just wanted to know. Saying "that's not normal" can be taken in two very different ways. If a scientist observing a Petri dish says "That's not normal" it's perfectly ok, but using the same sentence as a value judgement has a different meaning altogether. It's difficult to ascertain context over the internet.
 
EmmZ said:
I was? I know it's difficult not to take everything said in this place as petulance.
Click to expand...

Yes questioning ""Metally retarded"? "Normal" children"?. "Deformed"? Normal schools"? "Less retarded"?"

It was obvious you thought he was being somehow disrespectful and challenged him on what is 'correct' and since you have said you thought, something the rest of us did not read into his post, that he was making a value judgement, yes its a form of thought policing.
 
Lucysnow, EmmZ forget the specific wording and reread his post. How could you NOT assume hes making value judgements. Of course he is, his whole post smacks of a superiority complex rather than a simple case of using old terminology

"He is also somewhat deformed and that scares many kids" so isnt this a problem with the specific school and the PARENTS?

"Because of this event, and some other things, the school board is trying get the superintendent's contract bought out so they can get a new one who will stop integrating mentally retarded people into normal schools.

I have to say, I'm in agreement with that school board"

shouldnt that be up to that childs parents to decide not HIM?

"What good can possibly come of "mainstreaming" people who are inherently NOT mainstream?"

wow and i thought the way mental health was treated was bad

"What is the purpose of this integration, and what is the disadvantage of not sending these kids to special schools where they can learn from others with similar conditions as them? "

notice he says what are the DISADVANTAGES of segrigation rather than what are the advantages of intergration
 
Last edited:
I apologise if you thought that Lucy. I didn't think I was thought policing, whatever that means, I thought the question marks meant it was a question. I wasn't speculating one way or another, I just sought clarity. I think perhaps you're reading into something that just wasn't there. Seems strange you should take umbrage to thought policing but feel it's appropriate to call someone a dictator of and controller of sentiment, while I was only asking, you were assuming. And you know what assuming does? Anyway, this has gone way off topic.
 
First he uses the term disadvantage because in this case integrating a child who is distracting is a 'disadvantage'. So in terms of integrating and mainstreaming it would be a disadvantage would it not? Most here who have responded seem to know exactly what he was talking about. Integrating a child who cannot read into a classroom of children who can is not an advantage even if the policy is aimed towards mainstreaming and integration of special needs kids.

I don't think he was oozing a superior complex at all. Just look at how people responded, I mean those who chose to deal with the issue.

Oh shut up Emmz. Deal with the topic and get off of your passive aggressive soap box, its bloody irritating.
 
yep, them blacks dont need to learn to read, them should be kept with there own kind:rolleyes:

Thank god i live in australia
 
Asguard said:
BTW, change "deformed" to "black" and see how that sentance reads
Click to expand...

But he didn't speak of integration as a social policy across the board did he? And he didn't speak about Blacks he's speaking about the retarded, mentally disabled in a classroom setting. Why you are freaking out is beyond me. Stop being so hypersensitive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top