Mom:
I am reaching out to follow up on the recent behavior incident and write up that occurred yesterday, 5/13/25. I understand that T inappropriately physically engaged with a staff member, Mrs Anna, and was unable to be redirected. I do believe that a write up is an appropriate response to this behavior.
My concern that I would like to address is that when I picked T up I was told, "I can't find the other write up but I know there is a fourth one" so T will be suspended. This feels unprofessional and biased. In fact, the last time that T was written up, the third offense, Mr Nick ripped up the document and did not submit it. That is why it is not in the notebook. Because it was thrown away. Yesterday's write up was the third time I have signed documentation of inappropriate behavior, not the fourth. Additionally, there was a threat of expulsion for the rest of the year should T have a behavioral issue again. Being T's mom, and not new to this process, I know that there is, in fact a process, and that it is not one suspension - expulsion.
I feel that Nick is annoyed with T on most days and would prefer to have a before and after school program free of any children with exceptional needs, creating a bias, either blatant or implicit, that has sought to remove all children from the program that have exceptional needs and problematic behaviors.
When I have asked about the behavior plan that was created specifically for the YMCA I am met with perceived annoyance, and an attitude that communicates that it's too much to have to provide extra care. This leads me to believe that it is not being followed or enforced by Nick. I am curious to know how it was followed in response to the incident that happened yesterday? What specific tenets of the behavior plan were implemented prior to contacting classroom teachers as an intervention?
Please communicate, in writing, how to move forward for the remainder of the school year in an equitable manner that provides T with what he needs to be successful at the YMCA Before and After Care at MC and how his behavior plan will be followed with fidelity. It is my intention that T will return on Monday and will complete the school year in your program.
On my end, T has received an appropriate consequence at home and I have contacted his medical staff to try another medication adjustment -- he was allergic to the last medicine and we've been recovering from that waiting to try something new to assist in managing behavior.
----------------
Me:
Thank you for your email. I appreciate detailed explanations of perspectives, and am happy to share mine as well.
I certainly forgot about ripping up the 4th (3rd) write-up. The suspensions happen after the 3rd one, so I apologize for any clunky phrasing there or confusion. It's not meant to be a "threat" by informing of the 4th write-up consequences, and certainly apologize if it was perceived that way. That's Y rules, and Katie asked me to relay that in event of physical inappropriateness.
When it comes to addressing the needs of children with elevated needs, I can only speak from my experience in the room, after taking feedback from staff, and the conversations over months I've had with colleagues and leadership. I know the Y, myself included, strives to be an inclusive environment. To the extent we have the staff, training, and capacity to accommodate, we certainly do, often even in direct threat to the other children in the room. Recall, T wasn't just pulling on Anna's shoulders, but pulled another participant's hair.
My concern is for the safety and stability of every single child in the room. When staff are in fear, monopolized, or expressing exhaustion and frustration that they aren't doing enough in spite of the above-and-beyond efforts they engage in, we come up hard against our limits and difficult conversations need to occur. Any perception of my being "annoyed" is often with the inability to discuss honestly the consequences of being unable to meaningfully engage the children or find an effective persistent resolution when the behaviors become acute.
Anna attempted to redirect T and clearly communicate at what point we were in the day. There's a point in an exchange with any child who is acting out where, plan or not, it's not working, so I think it wise to seek out the professionals who often have some intervention throughout the day that worked in a way the plan might not. None of the Y staff are trained to do anything beyond basic levels of intervention and accommodation. When those fail, what more would you ask than deferring to those who can do better?
As you've clearly communicated to us several times during medication shifts or tests for new things, there are days where it's not a Y staff member's failing patience or competence that's going to meaningfully inform the effectiveness of any intervention. If this was again one of those times, usually we are given a head's up and attempt to plan accordingly.
I gathered that the staff I reached out to were particularly annoyed in this instance, and I've forwarded my concerns and asks for how/whether we're actually going to be partners in meaningfully accounting for needs or how/when we should relay concerns to Ms. Nichols. The last few days, every single day, one of his teachers has asked me how T is doing in the program. I took that to mean they would be appreciative that I was timely in roping them in when the story was less than ideal.
One last note on my personal experience of bias or annoyance. There are a great many things related to the Y that I could explicate my feelings about, but doing something actionable and reasonable to ensure the children can enjoy the program are not it. Every child that has been expelled or suspended from the program has been physically aggressive or hurt other children, with enough regularity that even in grading on extreme curves and doing things like ripping up write-ups, they still manage to remain unresolvable. I don't have a good answer as to why it's The Y's, any individual staff member's, or any given child's responsibility to navigate physical aggression from another participant. My answer is, they shouldn't have to.
-------------
Mom:
Additionally. I do not have the expectation that anyone should tolerate T being physically aggressive. I am not upset about him having a consequence for this, being written up, or even being suspended.
My concern is the perception that Nick lacks the patience, empathy, and wherewithal to manage multiple levels of needs and is being intentional to remove all problems to have the program that he "wants".
Several times I have observed facial expressions of annoyance, irritation, and displeasure towards T. T in turn picks up on this energy and it further complicates an already complicated situation.
His teachers are asking how he's doing because they are also under the impression that T is not wanted in this program and there is a target to run him out. His behavior therapist who is there Wednesday and Friday has also picked up on this and commented to me about this. It is just not my perception.
This is why I'm bringing these concerns. Honestly, I feel like Nick has just been waiting for this to happen and is eagerly anticipating being able to expel him.
That feels unfair, unprofessional, and inappropriate.
-----------
Me:
What I cannot do is argue/debate perception. I have no control over how I'm perceived, but have lived long enough to know people are often very comfortable speaking about me more than to me, and diagnosing my thoughts or feelings. I don't take it personally, but I also don't think it lends itself to constructive means for navigating scenarios like this.
If you truly do not think anyone should tolerate T being physical with people, how do you account for him not being expelled months ago? He's been physical at least a dozen times to varying degrees. The not-quite-implied response I often got from Y leadership was lines about inclusivity and accommodation. I've literally ripped up a write-up. I don't know how that reality squares with the idea that I have a particular agenda against T or have some nefarious plot to exclude him. In fact, I've deliberately stayed out of his altercations until, inevitably, one of the women on my staff have called me over because their redirect attempts and plan-indicated steps weren't working. I've said since day 1 that it's absurd that I should ever have to occupy the space of implied power (as in strength) to trigger something in him to stop what he's doing. I have zero inclination or desire to physically intimidate children, and yet I've been invited to, too often, from women looking to be "saved."
I "want" the kind of program that at least operates at a basic level of common sense and decency. I've written maybe 20 write-ups for kids who've acted out aggressively. Not a single one has come back with notes about how I should work overtime to justify their behavior and let it go. I also don't make decisions in a vacuum, hence my regular discussions with school staff, my supervisor, colleagues, and you to try and come up with a means of not having my staff feel under threat. It's a Kafka trap. I either have to be the "bad guy" holding people accountable and then painted as targeting, or I let it all go crazy, and sheepishly explain to my staff and parents how safe and coherent we are as some magnificent gaslighting effort.
It's not about being "not wanted." I don't have feelings about any child one way or another. I'm not wired that way. I want a safe space where we can conduct activities and teach skills in a consistent and accountable way. By definition, through no fault of his own, if T has a level of need that high-school students, para-professionals, and otherwise regular explicitly not trained but merely encouraged staff cannot meet, the program might not be a good fit. If The Y was willing to hire someone certified to occupy him and allow the rest of staff to stay in ratio and attend to the other obligations of the space, there wouldn't be an issue. The Y seems unwilling to do that. I don't know why, I suspect they have money.
I've got a thousand deeper concerns in my life before I conjure some soured spirit to wish ill and expulsion of a child. Like, points for being that dark and cold before ever finding the curiosity behind my thought processes or experience in navigating Y policy, plans, and directives. Even entertaining this lurid desire I could have, why did I wait until the end of the year to carry out the plan? Why didn't I push every incident just as obviously unacceptable as the latest from the past? I consider myself decently intelligent. Surely, I could have orchestrated something without routinely asking for help and leaving email paper trails with every other adult in his life.
It's my understanding that Sanders made a point of targeting T. I'm not Sanders. Your son has physically intimidated and scared staff. He's pushed, pulled, and grabbed at them, as well as other children. He's done it A LOT. He's done it for reasons I don't blame him for, but need to be real about the effect they've had. You've stated explicitly he has the kind of condition that makes it a struggle to control impulses. You've explained the regular complications that affect his mood when there are medication shifts or a lack of sleep. I've watched school staff get this hardened pride and face about how "we don't' put up with that" as they lament what I assume is their increasingly frustrated perception of our leniency when I asked them for help.
If you're concerned about T picking up on my "energy," I've deliberately kept out of being the one to intervene with any/all of the children that have required plans to be followed or special attention paid. I'm aware of my competencies and weaknesses. I have zero desire to make something worse. If you're upset, it's because the people like Anna who are the most forgiving, most patient, and who, almost every day, ritually whip themselves asking "What more could I have done?!" while I have to reassure them that they followed the plan and sometimes things don't work. It's not me barreling into his life picking a fight or losing my patience.
It felt unfair, unprofessional, and inappropriate to have to downplay how the program operated before I got there. I'm the 4th or 5th person to take the roll in the last year or two? Because accommodation graduated to negligence. I'm literally formerly DCS. I have a thing about what constitutes safety and security. I'm comfortable saying the quiet parts out loud.
No comments:
Post a Comment