Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

What is your opinion (dealing with mentally disabled?)

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:05 AM
link   
I recently came across this (evidently old) video that shows a scene in McDonalds. For those that cannot watch, there is an adult man chatting on the phone in line, standing behind an adult woman (I assume his mother or sister)

A small toddler appears in the right of the camera, and goes up to the counter, away from the man on the phone, about 10 feet away I'd say. Suddenly the man on the phone turns around, lunges at the small child, and kicks him in either the groin or legs (it's unclear with the low quality video) Apparently he didn't kick him very hard (although it looked as though he did) because the child doesn't move at all, and just appears confused.

The boy's father immediately comes into the camera and strikes the man, knocking him to the floor. The woman who was present seems to be trying to intervene and the video stops.

www.keepbusy.net...

From what I was able to gather from reading around online, the man that kicked the small child has downs or some similar mental disability. I was unable to find any information about any legal repercussions resulting from this, or any other info other than what I could find on video comment sections.

As one would expect in the comments section of a video site, there were quite a few differing opinions. Some people were overtly racist (the child and father appeared to be black and the kicker and woman appeared to be white) and were against the father for that reason. Some people found the video humorous somehow and didn't really comment on the situation at all. Some were just some sad people who talked about hating disabled people.

But the other two groups, one being people who understood and supported the fathers actions, the other thinking having downs is an excuse to get away with striking a child and were against the father's actions, are the two groups I'd like to talk about in this thread. I figured social issues would be a good section seeing as the attitudes and actions of the pubic when dealing with the disabled would definitely be considered a social issue.

So what's ATS's opinion? Do you think the father was in the right for punching his son's attacker? Do you think the father was a bad guy for punching a disabled person? Feel free to elaborate on your opinion, as it's a complicated matter with many considerations.

For me personally, I understand the father's actions, and feel he was justified. He just saw his very small son get kicked by an adult sized man, the split instant instinct is to defend your child and eliminate the threat. I don't believe this man was aware that his son's attacker was mentally disabled, and likely only became aware after the man was on the ground, and the woman began talking to him. It seems he didn't hit the disabled man at all after the initial punch, which might indicate once he realized the man was disabled he realized what happened.

But that raises another question, even IF you did know the man was disabled, should that be any reason to treat him differently? First off I don't accept that this man didn't know right from wrong. He was out in public, standing with a fairly normal posture, chatting on a cell phone. He wasn't doubled over rocking his head in a wheel chair. I've personally known several people with downs and they had a very strong idea of right/wrong and of the most basic concept that you do NOT attack people. So it seems to me this was a choice made by the man, not an innocent mistake because he honestly didn't know any better.

Even if he didn't know any better, why should that matter? When a child hits or kicks another child, you punish the child. I'm not suggesting strangers try to punish misbehaving disabled people, but what I'm saying is that if you have a child's mind inside a man's body, that's a real danger to other people. Why should other people risk their own safety, or the safety of their children on behalf of this disabled man? If he is so mentally gone he doesn't realize he shouldn't be kicking small children, doesn't that indicate that he is very unstable and unpredictable, and again with the body of an adult man that makes him a dangerous threat that NEEDS to be dealt with immediately for the safety of the child?

edit on 6-11-2013 by James1982 because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:08 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


People with mental disabilities need a full time carer or guardian. At best, a supervisor to oversee where they are and what they are doing. In the above instance, I would call that a failing on behalf of the medical proffesionals.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:15 AM
link   
I say no harm no foul.

The man protecting/defending his son reacted immediately-
-no malice aforethought.

As it also seems the down-syndrome child did as well.

The responsibility lies with the down-syndrome child's caretaker.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:15 AM
link   
I didn't watch the video, but from your description.. I applaud the father of the child.. I have 2 children myself and god help the man who lays hands in them..

I don't think that the mans affliction was downs.. I'm saying this because my ex had an uncle who had downs(he's passed) and I've been around quite a few others.. They are in my opinion the sweetest, gentle, most loving souls I've ever encountered..

If someone has a mental disorder and are prone to violent outbursts.. Then they should be supervised.. I don't think that a mental illness is a get out of jail free card...



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:20 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


I believe the father was justified in what he did. I've spent a lot of time around mentally challenged people and from what I've seen the violent ones will be violent, there's not much you can do about it. Civilized society is no place for violent people, no matter how much their mom or dad loves them, its just not. Violent people should be locked away, no matter if all their neurons are firing off or not. Some may call me heartless but what about when one of these people goes full retard and actually hurts someone, like what could have happened with this kid on the video? 3 strikes and 'lights out' seems fair for violent people IMHO.

MOTF!



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Im not sure the father behaved in the correct manner, people with metal disabilities tend to suffer anxiety when dealing with the outside world, the fathers actions wouldn't have helped with that. Many mentally disabled people seem to behave and probably feel much younger than they actually are, if this had been two lads of a similar age stood in a queue, then took a dislike to each other it wouldn't be considered too abnormal if one then behaved as this adult did.

On the other hand, I am not sure if I would have behaved any differently, our instinctive responses tend to kick in before our logical thoughts when we see our children threatened.

For me the question is not what would be the correct way to deal with this situation as the parent, the big question is, this will not be an isolated incident, the disabled guy will have done it before, so someone somewhere will be aware of the fact this guy is living some type of normal life, without the personal skills to ensure the safety of others and himself.

Although I feel very strongly about keeping people with mental deficiencies and or mental health problems within the community if at all possible, those who do not have the necessary self control to ensure their own safety along with the safety of others, should have some type of care and or support.

If a different type of father had experienced this, the mentally challenged guy would have had a knife in his belly, the young child and everyone else around would have witnessed it leading to trauma and mental health problems in those genetically primed to struggle.

Society in the western world is failing not only those with mental health difficulties, it is failing itself by not doing what it can to keep deficient people safe from themselves and more together people safe from the actions of the deficient. A very sad state of affairs when you consider the amount of money wasted and donated by all governments



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


Can't watch the video now, from the description hard to say. If it were me I would be stepping in between the dude and kid, if there was another aggressive move made then I would put that threat on the floor. It sounds like there wasn't any harm done to the kid, maybe he was just playing around. Who knows.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:40 AM
link   

rival
I say no harm no foul.

The man protecting/defending his son reacted immediately-
-no malice aforethought.

As it also seems the down-syndrome child did as well.

The responsibility lies with the down-syndrome child's caretaker.


That's basically what I took away from the whole thing- father was just trying to protect his son, disabled man obviously has issues. It seems to come out "even" in the end if you know what I mean. I just hope there was no legal action take by either side, as there really is no real "boogeyman" in this situation.

I was just so shocked to see the comments on the video, and discussions on forums where people posted it. There were so many who instantly slammed the father for punching the disabled man and made it seem like he was a bully for defending his own son. While it's understandable that being mentally disabled does change the situation a bit compared to if it were just a "normal" guy, I can't understand how anyone thinks it's right to expect people to risk their safety and the safety of their children by not taking action immediately.

Could the father have relaxed and done a calm assessment of the situation, and tried to communicate with the woman or the disabled man to figure out there was no real threat? Sure. But in the time it takes to do that the disabled man could go in for a second kick or hit that's not so soft this time. Would he do that? Who knows! He already kicked him once for no reason, it's not unreasonable to think there is a high chance of him kicking your son again, which means the disabled man needs to be immediately taken down as a threat.

I'm really curious about the mentality of the people who think the father was totally wrong, but it seems everyone here pretty much agrees with the father's actions. I'm curious how they would address the issues I raised in the previous paragraphs.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:41 AM
link   
ETA: Now that other folks have amplified my knowledge of the situation. I'd have to say that the guy with Down Syndrome is going to the padded room. And the fast-fisted dad ... well ... the guy with Down Syndrome is quite lucky the guy used a fist instead of a Glock.

Thanks to everyone for providing a more complete description of the event.
edit on 6112013 by Snarl because: Always helps to know the full story before you spout off on ATS



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:46 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


striking him was right, downs doesn't make a person unable to act properly or know whats right or wrong, it only makes the person less intelligent than others and slower to develop. i've known a few as a kid as i was in special education back then for most of my classes and they were hard working, honest and quite well behaved, they would never attack anyone like that, there is no excuse for that kind of behavior, disability or not.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Snarl
 


The kid didn't deserve it. He was acting like any kid acts in Anytown, USA. It appeared that the guy got spooked by a happy kid (excess movement) and lashed out, which makes me think that something of this nature has happened with this guy before.

MOTF!



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Snarl
 


The child was not behaving badly. He did nothing (that can be seen on the video, anyway) to cause this reaction.

The video isn't terribly clear, but the guy with Down's appears to act and look "normal" so I assume that the child's father didn't immediately identify him as "challenged". It appears that the child's father reacted on instinct, rather than out of malice.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 07:57 AM
link   
I would say that not only did the father act approriately, he probably did the man a favor.

Imagine if it had been a politician with his child at the McDonald's for a photo-op. The protection detail would have been all over the guy. If it had been an armed cop with his child, the man would have been lucky to have a short stay in the hospital. If it had been a gang-banger there with his child, the man might be dead.

Mental incapacity or not, a little pain can instill the idea, "Maybe I did something wrong, and I shouldn't repeat that behavior in the future."

I remember a story many years back about a mentally challenged homeless man. He had a very small dog on a leash and was just ranting and punting the dog into the air. I'm a bit of a dog lover, and if I had been there, that guy would have had a very bad day. I'm sure I would have overreacted, but that guy would never kick another dog as long as he lived. I can only imagine how someone would feel if they saw someone kick their child.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:03 AM
link   


OP Video




thats not the way this country works ..people with mental disabilities get a free pass & must be accommodated at all times


edit on 6-11-2013 by Blowback because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:10 AM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


I do not agree with father´s behaviour. It was impulsive and unjustified behaviour. He was trying to defend his son, although he could have just have acted as an adult, gone between and try to talk it out, rather than going for violent solution. This would solved the issue. Instead he chose the violent way, which could have possibly killed the man with Down Syndrome. The man with Down Syndrome was lucky that the father was not some trigger-happy lunatic.

It seems as if the woman in the line is the guardian of the one with Down Syndrome. Based on body languge I would say so. She was paying and when somebody called him, she lost him for a second. She reacted fast though when the one with Down Syndrome hit the kid. She made a mistake, but the person whom she was looking after got attacked.

People with Down Syndrome have quite distinct looks and body language. Considering the father also saw the man with Down Syndrome kick the kid lightly, he should have recognised autism based on looks, that the guy was not "normal". I do not justify the behaviour of the man with Down Syndrome, although it has to be recognised that it was not his "fault". He needs treatment and support (from guardians and also other members of society) to overcome the issues he has.

When dealing with mentally disabled people, it is important to understand that they can not understand what is right and what is wrong. They can not control themselves. Should they be punished or attacked because of that? That is something many people can not understand. If you have not had any issues yourself, it is very hard to be emphatic and understand how the person sees the world, but that is an issue that requires significant attention in the society, whether we are talking about autism, psychological disorders or other syndromes with psychological/physical symptoms.

You can not simply say a person with ADHD who can not concentrate is lazy and does not want to.
You can not simply say a person with thyroid issues is gaining weight because of laziness.
You can not simply say a person with adrenal gland problems (exhaustion from doing nothing is common symptom) is lazy or does not want to do something.
You can not simply say a person with Aspergers (social communication problems) is a weirdo.

I just listed some or more common problems, although there are thousands of diseases having symptoms which are out of control of a person and that is something that should be understood by other members of the society, not attacking the people because they are different or do not want to be "normal". You can not hold someone responsible for something they have no control over. It is the same as I would blame you for the bad weather or hurricane that destroyed the city. Whether it is mental or some other disease, the symptoms are out of control of the people who have these issues and their problems should be recognised and understood.

It is easy to make assumptions based on your own, although often these are wrong, as everyone is not you.

edit on 6-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:12 AM
link   

Snarl
Understand that I can't watch the video from Korea. I'll have to go off your description.

#1. Did the kid deserve a beat down?
#2. Was the guy with Down Syndrome simply reacting to a bad kid?
#3. Has the guy with Down Syndrome ever demonstrated 'he' has no business in public?

Gotta know these things, otherwise supposition and opinion trump.

A LOT of kids haven't been trained well enough by their parents to be unleashed on the public. A lot of handicapped folks shouldn't be out in public.

If it was my world ... based on your description ... the guy punching the dude with Down Syndrome is going to jail and he's going to stay in jail until I know he knows better than to punch people. The guy with Down Syndrome is going into a padded cell for the rest of his natural life. The kid's going to be taken away from the parents and is going to be raised to become a productive member of society.


1. IMHO, absolutely not, at least based on what is seen in the video. I cannot stand annoying children and wish more parents would spank their little monsters, but this isn't one of those instances (again, only based on what we see in the vid)

2. The "disabled" man was in the left line, about 10 feet or so away from the counter, facing away from the counter. The kid was kind of bouncing around a bit when he walked up to the counter, but he went up to the right line, facing the counter, and was right up against the counter. From the video it appears as if there was absolutely no interaction or provocation between the two, as they were facing opposite directions and a distance away from each other.

Once the kid already settled standing at the counter, the "disabled" man turned around, kind of half-ran over to the boy, swung his leg out as if he was going to kick the kid extremely hard, and then kicked the boy in the groin or leg. I'm not sure if he "disabled' man was maybe trying to fake kick the boy or what, because he looked like he was going to kick him really hard, then just barely taps him.

3. Really no way to tell. He doesn't appear disabled at first glance. A bit goofy maybe, but he seems to stand and move fine, answers and chats on a cell phone from his pocked just fine. Although if he randomly kicks small children at a McDonalds I think it's a safe bet that he has had other instances of acting inappropriately.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:33 AM
link   
First, it is understandable and forgivable for a father to punch someone whom has kicked his child, so long as it is instantaneous like an instinctual reaction. But it ain't exactly right - down's or no down's it could escalate into something worse. And how do you think someone with limited intelligence is going to understand that violence is wrong when they're getting hit?? I take care of my sister-in-law and meet many other Down's folks as well, and they generally have a hard time with contradictions and if-then logic that seems easy to the rest of us. Generally, they learn by example and not by lecture; even when repeating after you like they get it they often don't get it, at all. They observe others carefully, and learn much better this way. To tell them one thing and do another can be totally confusing and frustrating to them. Not sure what exactly happened in the video, but I hope everyone didn't come away more ignorant than they went in.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:42 AM
link   

Cabin
reply to post by James1982
 


I do not agree with father´s behaviour. It was impulsive and unjustified behaviour. He was trying to defend his son, although he could have just have acted as an adult, gone between and try to talk it out, rather than going for violent solution. This would solved the issue. Instead he chose the violent way, which could have possibly killed the man with Down Syndrome. The man with Down Syndrome was lucky that the father was not some trigger-happy lunatic.

It seems as if the woman in the line is the guardian of the one with Down Syndrome. Based on body languge I would say so. She was paying and when somebody called him, she lost him for a second. She reacted fast though when the one with Down Syndrome hit the kid. She made a mistake, but the person whom she was looking after got attacked.

People with Down Syndrome have quite distinct looks and body language. Considering the father also saw the man with Down Syndrome kick the kid lightly, he should have recognised autism based on looks, that the guy was not "normal". I do not justify the behaviour of the man with Down Syndrome, although it has to be recognised that it was not his "fault". He needs treatment and support (from guardians and also other members of society) to overcome the issues he has.

When dealing with mentally disabled people, it is important to understand that they can not understand what is right and what is wrong. They can not control themselves. Should they be punished or attacked because of that? That is something many people can not understand. If you have not had any issues yourself, it is very hard to be emphatic and understand how the person sees the world, but that is an issue that requires significant attention in the society, whether we are talking about autism, psychological disorders or other syndromes with psychological/physical symptoms.

You can not simply say a person with ADHD who can not concentrate is lazy and does not want to.
You can not simply say a person with thyroid issues is gaining weight because of laziness.
You can not simply say a person with adrenal gland problems (exhaustion from doing nothing is common symptom) is lazy or does not want to do something.
You can not simply say a person with Aspergers (social communication problems) is a weirdo.

I just listed some or more common problems, although there are thousands of diseases having symptoms which are out of control of a person and that is something that should be understood by other members of the society, not attacking the people because they are different or do not want to be "normal". You can not hold someone responsible for something they have no control over. It is the same as I would blame you for the bad weather or hurricane that destroyed the city. Whether it is mental or some other disease, the symptoms are out of control of the people who have these issues and their problems should be recognised and understood.

It is easy to make assumptions based on your own, although often these are wrong, as everyone is not you.

edit on 6-11-2013 by Cabin because: (no reason given)


Thanks for replying, I was hoping someone with your viewpoint would comment.

I too assumed the woman to be the man's caregiver based on the interaction between her and the other people. When the disabled man starts walking towards the little boy, the woman instantly takes notice and starts to feign intervention. To me it just looked like she was trying to make it LOOK like she was trying to stop the man from interacting with the the child, but was putting in very little effort. To me this suggest she knows the man is likely to physically harass strangers.

While I agree that it's usually fairly easy to spot people with downs, I don't know if the father would have been able to notice in the time before striking him. Unfortunately because of the narrow angle of the camera we don't see the father until almost the last second, but it's very quick after the kick that the father punches the disabled man. After seeing his child get kicked by an adult man, I could easily see him overlooking the signs of mental disability in the other man in the short time before he strikes him.

But, again I maintain it doesn't matter if the father knew the man was disabled or not. The man presented a threat to his son's safety, and the father responded to eliminate that threat. You bring up that the disabled man didn't know right from wrong, and didn't know what he was doing, therefore can't be held responsible for his actions. Well, if he truly doesn't know the difference between right and wrong, then legally speaking he cannot be held responsible for his actions.

But we are not discussing whether or not to prosecute the disabled man for kicking the child, we are discussing whether or not it was justified for the father to react the way he did. The disabled man presented a threat, it doesn't matter if he knows better or not.

I think your disapproval of the father's actions stems from you viewing his actions as a thought out punishment against the disabled man. If the disabled man truly didn't know right from wrong, then it's not right to punish him for his actions, I agree. But there is a difference between punishing someone for their actions, and responding to their actions as needed. The father wasn't punishing him for misbehaving, he was neutralizing a threat to the safety of his child.

Let's look at a different scenario. Imagine the disabled man had a gun, and was pointing it at the child. The disabled man doesn't know what he is doing, and has no concept of right or wrong. Does that change the fact that he is pointing it at the child, and that needs to be taken care of?

I realize the threat level there is drastically different than the situation here, but it's the underlying concept that I'm driving at: a threat is still a threat, whether or not it's willfully being a threat. A person, who doesn't know right from wrong, making threatening moves or physically attacking someone is still a danger.

It's unfortunate that situations come about such as these, but when you frame it as a father responding to a threat against his child, I cannot understand how you can disapprove of the father's actions.

You could argue the kick was very gentle and the child wasn't in any real danger, but the father might not have been able to tell it was only a gentle kick from the angle he was at, or just due to the short time involved. And even if the father could tell it was a gentle kick, that does not mean the man doesn't pose a threat. If an adult stranger kicks a small child, even gently, that sends up red flags to any sane man that the person is likely to be a threat and should be dealt with accordingly.

Thanks again for your post, please don't take my reply as arguing or attacking your viewpoint. I'm just attempting to get you to see it from my side as it were.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:43 AM
link   
This guy isn't a mental health professional and there is about no chance he knew the kicker was mentally disabled. Responding with violence instead of calling for help is a personal choice but anyone whose child is struck by a strange adult is going to react. I would be worried if they didn't.



posted on Nov, 6 2013 @ 08:46 AM
link   

chericher
First, it is understandable and forgivable for a father to punch someone whom has kicked his child, so long as it is instantaneous like an instinctual reaction. But it ain't exactly right - down's or no down's it could escalate into something worse. And how do you think someone with limited intelligence is going to understand that violence is wrong when they're getting hit?? I take care of my sister-in-law and meet many other Down's folks as well, and they generally have a hard time with contradictions and if-then logic that seems easy to the rest of us. Generally, they learn by example and not by lecture; even when repeating after you like they get it they often don't get it, at all. They observe others carefully, and learn much better this way. To tell them one thing and do another can be totally confusing and frustrating to them. Not sure what exactly happened in the video, but I hope everyone didn't come away more ignorant than they went in.


I understand the point you are making, but when evaluating the father's actions, none of that matters. The further success in society of his sons attacker isn't of any importance, whether the attacker knows what he is doing is wrong isn't of any importance. When your child is being attacked, the ONLY thing of importance is defending your child and neutralizing the threat.

I can empathize with the disabled man and don't think he deserves to be punished for kicking the child, but that's about where my empathy stops. He was the one who took an action, the father was only responding. It isn't fair to ask for understanding on behalf of the disabled man, yet fail to provide understanding for the father's actions as well. That's not aimed at you, just to the situation in general if you get what I mean.






top topics



 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join