Originally Posted by beenmum
I have a background in child development and Crisis intervention and work with kids deemed at risk. All of which this child is and yet everything is being down played by this mother.
I said I was right, b/c she immedicately treid to make me sound like I was blinded by irrationality and bias. I said that he had probably seen something and was told that I was just jumping on her back...but then flat out said that she "knew" that he had probably seen something inappropriate....but still insists she has no idea WHY he does the things he does.
All that suggests to me is that it hadn't occurred to her that simply seeing something like that on tv would be enough to put the idea in his head (this is re: the Barbie incident, which this thread actually isn't about, anyway).
Put all of her posts together and there is a level of denial. A level of dissasocation between her concerns and then her ability to rationalizise them.
A pedi office that laughs at a child who has a dog sexually masturbate him, exclaims intrest in having the dog excrete on him/fart on him etc... should be shut down. I have never ever heard of ANY of those behaviours being waved off as "typical" boy behaviour.
Seriously? It sounded pretty normal to me. Three-year old boys, ime, are frequently very, very interested in both their penises and farts/poop/etc. That whole monologue actually made me kind of smile at how goofy little kids are about this kind of stuff. I told dh about the OP, and he laughed, and said, "sounds like a boy".
And I really cant buy into the notion that this is exactly what this pedi office did.
Well, if you think the OP is lying, then why bother responding at all? She could just as easily have made up the whole post.
I have worked with probably 500 children. And none of them displayed those behaviours as "typical" boy development.
How many of those children were at risk, and how many weren't? Quite honestly, I find that people who work with children with a lot of issues are quite often not the experts on "normal", typical behaviour that they think they are, for various reasons. Working with a lot of at risk children does have an impact on one's perceptions of children who aren't at risk, as well.
And any profesional that does....makes me concerned about his professionality.
And having that discussion with the secretary instead of the ped doesnt make a l;ick of sense. She would have been fired instantly for doling out prosfessional opinion when she is not a registaered ped, nor is liscenced to make those assumptions.
So, it's not okay for the secretary (and was it a secretary, or a nurse?) to say "you'll last the weekend, mom" and inquire if this is OP's first boy, and she should be fired. But, it's okay for you to assume that you have a better handle on this than any of the team of professionals who have been working with OP and her ds? How does that work, exactly?
I am not blindly ganging up on this women. I am recognizing that this is seriously disturbing behaviour.
The dog thing? Not so much. It's totally inappropriate, and it needs to be stopped, for various reasons (just thinking about what would happen if the dog nipped makes me feel ill, and that's not even the most important one, just the most immediate). But, it's not "seriously disturbing" to me. It's a little boy who has discovered something that feels really good, and also has trouble figuring out social boundaries.
Oh - and you also mentioned "porn" again. OP has clarified that she wasn't talking about porn. That really sounded like you're determined to paint OP in the worst possible light.