Church ban of teen with autism fuels new debate
July 2nd, 2008From the Minneapolis Star Tribune, USA Today:
A recent court ruling that a rural Minnesota church may bar a teen with autism has stirred new debate about the proper role in society for people with disabilities. The judge found that behavior by thirteen-year-old Adam Race constituted “repeated harassment” under the law.
Shelly Christensen, who works with Minnesota synagogues and is author of the “Jewish Community Guide to Inclusion of People With Disabilities,” said the debate over Adam “indicates to me that there’s a huge problem in terms of the faith communities and acceptance of people with disabilities.
… “Every behavior has a purpose, and someone who doesn’t have the verbal means to communicate uses those behaviors,” she said.
Said the Rev. Linda Koelman of North United Methodist Church in Minneapolis:
“Hopefully churches will begin to get the training and develop the support systems they need because, if you’re going to be a welcoming church, you can’t kick people out and get restraining orders.”
Our RSS Feed
July 4th, 2008 at 10:13 am
This isn’t just a kid making a few noises in church.
According to a previous AP story, “Adam struck a child during mass, nearly knocks elderly parishioners over, spits and sometimes urinates in church, and fights when he is being restrained. He also assaulted a girl by pulling her onto his lap and started up two cars in the parking lot. There were people who could have been injured or killed.” His own parents cannot physically control him.
The priest has, in fact, offered the family home Masses and use of the church library with closed-circuit TV. Carol Race refuses both.
Carol Race’s response in the Star Tribune is most telling: “I totally understand that the church environment in this case has to be safe. But the bottom line is one out of 150 births includes an autistic child and as a society we have to deal with it. We have to be able to go out to church and restaurants and events as one family.”
So Ms. Race, an activist, self-proclaimed “Moses” of families with autistic children, admits that her out-of-control son poses a safety risk to others. But everyone else still has to conform to her politically correct views of inclusion.
The judge sensibly put public safety first: your rights to accommodation end where others’ rights to public safety begin.