Mom & Autistic child kicked out of Chicago Aladdin- Page 3

[Broadway Joe]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 1:58am

Boy this thread really derailed. We still don't even know how loud this kid actually was. 

[uncageg]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 2:46am

I will just say that a parent should know their child.. Period.

 

With that I will say that I attended a performance of Peter and the Starcatcher and an autistic child was in attendance. He made noises throughout the show (And honestly, borderline distraction from the show,) but when we got to the part when they talked about flying, he had been silent for a while, and in a quiet pause, at the point of the show he softly said out loud "I want to fly". The theater and actors were immediately reduced to tears. He was silent for the rest of the show.

I have been to performances where parents with autistic children have voluntarily left.They took a chance on a show that they thought their child could enjoy. But they knew their child and so did the people at my performance.

[dramamama611]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 4:13am

And we never will.

 

The rights of any individual only go so far.  Once they infringe upon the rights of another, they cease to exist. It's a parents responsibility to make sure their child, ANY child, isn't disrupting others.

 

[yankeefan7]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 10:23am

"You're still trying to draw an exact parallel between race and disability and they are not always the same in terms of equality. Allowing African-Americans to sit in the orchestra disrupted nobody except racists and only because the latter chose to be bothered. Anybody (autistic or not) who is screaming or making loud and random noises during a show is inherently disruptive and not because of the bias of the majority. It's the disruption that qualifies the screamer for expulsion, not the category of person into which the screamer might be placed.

In my first post in this thread, I applauded the mother in question for at least trying to see if her child could sit quietly through a full-length show. (Others, who are specialists in this area say the mother should have known her child better; but I don't claim to be qualified to debate the matter.)

Nobody is saying autistics should be banned everywhere, just that those responsible for them shouldn't let the more severe cases destroy the experience of everyone in attendance. "

 

Very well said and I agree totally.

[Dane F]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 10:36am

Exactly.

The people who are saying things like "Shame on this theater for kicking the mom and child out!" are completely missing the point.

So, say you're watching a play, and an autistic child is screaming at the top of his lungs, so much so that the actors can't focus on stage, and it's a visible distraction.

Should we just all go "Oh, well, we can't discriminate, let the child stay, even if he's screaming and being a visual and auditory distraction." No, you would need to (politely of course) escort the party out in order to calm everything down.

[JAS]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 11:04am

Wow, this article/video sure elicits a knee-jerk reaction.

First of all, Thomas is simply adorable. But even taking into consideration the unfamiliarity with the surroundings and the emotion situation, Thomas cannot stand still.

There seem to be some gaps in the reporting: what was the nature of the disturbance? I would guess that if the CAST was distracted, it went beyond simple yelling or not sitting still.

Children with special needs have good days and bad days. The mother was either unaware that perhaps Thomas was having a bad day, or chose to ignore it.

i have worked with children for twenty-eight years, and I know when a child is having a bad experience. Sometimes there are warning signs, and sometimes it comes swiftly, out of left field. Thomas' mother is visibly upset, and I completely understand: the company did NOT seem to handle this well. But she fails to acknowledge that theater is not a solitary experience, but a communal one. Not everyone is going to be sympathetic, nor are they required to be. (Though I hope they WOULD be!) Going to the theater is an expensive thing, and no one wants less than the perfect experience.  

People need to stop saying, "Well, what about the cell phone users?" and so on. Of COURSE this needs to be dealt with. But not here. People who use cell phones or eat chips or talk are choosing to do so. Thomas and his mother were not.

I hope that the producers out there see this as an opportunity to become the truly all encompassing event theater should be. 

[VintageSnarker]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 2:20pm

GavestonPS said: "I got lost at the intersection of "differently abled" and "financially privileged". I'm not denying the existence of either, I just don't see what one has to do with the other in this conversation.
 

If that was directed at me, I was just using the terminology, and responding to, posters upthread. 

 

[BenjaminNicholas2]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 3:11pm

If you know your child might be problematic, leave them at home.

You don't sacrifice the whole audience to satisfy your own child.  That's bull****.

[Back Row]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 3:49pm

BenjaminNicholas2 said: "If you know your child might be problematic, leave them at home.

You don't sacrifice the whole audience to satisfy your own child.  That's bull****.

 

The problem in situations like this is not the child. It is the parent. The child does not choose to act up or be a distraction, but the parent chooses to inflict that distraction on those around them. Most parents of developmentally disabled children are well versed in all the preparations you have to make when taking the disabled child to a public event: sitting near the back near an exit, having an escape plan in case the child acts up, seeking the assistance of the house manager before you even buy tickets, etc. Every venture into the public is a series of challenges where they have to balance the responsibilities to their child with their social responsibilities to those sharing that public space. It is not easy, and it's heartbreaking at times, but it is absolutely a balance that must be maintained. There is however, a segment of the community of parents of the disabled who attach their own sense of entitlement to their child's disability, and frankly, their actions (or lack of action) rarely result in any good for anyone, including the child.

In this incident, it is quite possible that the cast did not complain at all, and the person who told the mother to leave was simply using that excuse to justify a decision that was made independently. We don't know how severe the disturbance was either. As others have said, some context is needed here in order to determine exactly what occurred. 
 

 

Updated On: 5/13/17 at 03:49 PM

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 6:31pm

^^ "...sitting near the back near an exit, having an escape plan..."

 

If anyone is an expert on this subject, it is the poster named Back Row

[LJD123]

Posted: 5/13/17 at 7:04pm

yankeefan7 said: ""You're still trying to draw an exact parallel between race and disability and they are not always the same in terms of equality. Allowing African-Americans to sit in the orchestra disrupted nobody except racists and only because the latter chose to be bothered. Anybody (autistic or not) who is screaming or making loud and random noises during a show is inherently disruptive and not because of the bias of the majority. It's the disruption that qualifies the screamer for expulsion, not the category of person into which the screamer might be placed.

In my first post in this thread, I applauded the mother in question for at least trying to see if her child could sit quietly through a full-length show. (Others, who are specialists in this area say the mother should have known her child better; but I don't claim to be qualified to debate the matter.)

Nobody is saying autistics should be banned everywhere, just that those responsible for them shouldn't let the more severe cases destroy the experience of everyone in attendance. "

 

Very well said and I agree totally.

 

EXACTLY - and what Drama Mama said also.

ANY disruptive children should be taken out by their patents, period.

 

"

 

[Lot666]

Posted: 5/14/17 at 4:16pm

dramamama611 said: "The rights of any individual only go so far.  Once they infringe upon the rights of another, they cease to exist."

^ This.

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/14/17 at 4:54pm

"The rights of any individual only go so far.  Once they infringe upon the rights of another, they cease to exist."

Hmm but who decides if your rights have been infringed upon? 

[JennH]

Posted: 5/14/17 at 5:19pm

I think like in anything life...there's a balance to be had. OF COURSE I want everyone to be able to come to the theater and experience it. But there does come a point with those who have "special needs" do get disruptive and it needs to be taken into account. Minor things here and there I think any human with a heart can deal with, but there are instances in which shows have had to be stopped completely because it got TOO disruptive. Not only are the other audience members not able to take in the show at that point, but then the cast can't do their job properly either. Not all people with autism (or any need) will respond the same as we all know, depending on what their specific issue is and where they are on the spectrum. Some are on the spectrum but are almost "normal". But others are severely autistic and heaven knows how they'll react when taken to a live show. I guess my takeaway is once it infringes on the cast on stage having to do their job, because then the show might have to be paused, then it's an issue and needs to be addressed. Kindly and tactfully of of course, but addressed nonetheless. But I'm also perfectly aware that's where I'd PERSONALLY draw the line. Life is all cast in hues of grey y'all, nothing is black and white.

Updated On: 5/14/17 at 05:19 PM

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/14/17 at 7:00pm

Jane2 said: "Hmm but who decides if your rights have been infringed upon? "

The front of house staff, in at least one instance. 

[Jane2]

Posted: 5/14/17 at 8:41pm

^ true, I'd go as far as to say that would usually be the case.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 5/15/17 at 12:55am

Broadway Joe said: "Boy this thread really derailed. We still don't even know how loud this kid actually was. 

 

"

We don't know exact decibels, but the original story said the noise was disturbing the actors ON STAGE. So most of us are assuming for purposes of discussion that it was pretty extreme.

[djoko84]

Posted: 5/15/17 at 6:46am

Obviously, the kid was loud enough to cause a disruption and be taken out of the theatre. I'm sure they don't revel in having to kick a kid out. They also have other people in the theatre they have to think about. Since when did we become so PC that we have to put up with major disruptions while trying to enjoy a show we paid good money for. If this was during your performance of Hamilton or Hello Dolly! you'd be livid. You all need to get real!

[GiantsInTheSky2]

Posted: 5/15/17 at 9:52am

djoko84 said: " If this was during your performance of Hamilton or Hello Dolly! you'd be livid. You all need to get real!"

This isn't Hello Dolly or Hamilton, though. This is a kid's show.

[trpguyy]

Posted: 5/15/17 at 10:03am

trpguyy said: "What is the criteria for something being a "children's show?" I understand that Aladdin is a stage adaptation of a Disney cartoon, but it's a two and a half hour musical. Not exactly Sesame Street Live...
Maybe the demographic is different in Chicago, but night after night I see the crowds streaming out of the New Am, and there are definitely more adults without children than with."

I'll also add, that I don't believe the age of the distruptor, nor the average age of the audience are relevant.

Updated On: 5/15/17 at 10:03 AM

[Rainah]

Posted: 5/15/17 at 10:31am

Something I haven't seen enough discussion of with this issue...

What about the child? If the kid is so overloaded/distressed/ect that they are causing a large disturbance, then they certainly don't benefit from being forced to sit in the theatre either! When the child starts getting upset, taken them outside and let them calm down. If they are able, then rejoin the show. If not, take them home. 

But every time I picture this disruption going on my heart goes out not to the people being disrupted but to the poor kid who was clearly in distress and should have been removed for his own benefit as well.