In this entry, I’d like to discuss how I see the difference between the foreign Anti-Americans versus the American Anti-Americans. Because there IS a difference the way I see it.
Most of you are familiar with how I define Anti-Americanism and American Anti-Americanism in my glossary section. I’d like to elaborate on that here.
Foreign Anti-Americanism (aka Americanophobia) has nothing to do with critiquing our government or even protesting against it for that matter. Those whom are thoughtful enough to distinguish our government from the average man on the street are *NOT* Anti-American. Those who are mindful enough to know that America is no more a Democracy, and that Americans have no more control over their government than any other developed country are *NOT* Anti-American. Simply put, another word for Foreign Anti-Americanism is B-I-G-O-T-R-Y.
What about the Americans, themselves? It’s a similar concept. Criticizing the government, again, is not Anti-American. However, it IS when Americans take it to another level.
- The Anti-American Americans are the same people who keyed the cars of innocent civilians in the streets of San Francisco during a massive and violent demonstration against the war.
- The Anti-American Americans spread false rumors and exaggerated truths about the Americans and America to foreigners.
- The Anti-American Americans are the same people who spat on our soldiers when they came back home from Vietnam.
- The Anti-American Americans are those that say 9-11 was an “inside job”.
- The Anti-American Americans hate this blog as they say that Foreign xenophobic attitudes toward Americans are justified.
- The Anti-American Americans cannot see anything good about America or anything good that America has done.
- The Anti-American Americans do not pay attention to any news or any historical facts that prove injustices happen under other regimes other than the United States and believe that the only “true victims” are only those victims at the hands of Americans.
- The Anti-American Americans are against all American military and against all wars that America has ever participated in.
Or like I mentioned here…
Q: What is an Anti-American American?
A: We have plenty of these – perhaps more over here in the US of A – more than you can imagine. These people do nothing but whine, whine, and whine while sitting on their collective rear-ends without lifting a finger to make a change. They play “woe-victim” and blame all of their shortcomings on America. Some of them are spoiled rotten and never had to work for anything, and don’t know the value of a dollar. They are terrorist sympathizers. They also fabricate and modify American news and then share it with the Anti-Americans living abroad as their cheerleader. They appreciate nothing and hate all-things-American while they enjoy their trip to Las Vegas and milk the goody out of what they can get from living in the US. Additionally, they condone international Anti-Americanism saying that “we deserve it” while not even knowing what Anti-Americanism is and while not even realizing that the FOREIGN Anti-Americans are stereotyping them too lol. Yes, the American Anti-Americans are lumped together with the rest of America and are EQUALLY LOATHED. With that said, Anti-American Americans are as mindless as the rest of them.
—>Anti-American Americans typically don’t know what the 1st Amendment means. They are constantly saying that our speech is silenced here when it is not.
—>Anti-American Americans appease the foreign Anti-Americans in any way that they can. For example, they call themselves “Unitedstatesians” and use the British spelling of words instead of what they learned in the US.
Unlike Conservatives, I can handle the Anti-American Americans BETTER than the Foreign Anti-Americans because at least I know that if I run into one of my own people in the street that they won’t automatically call me names until they find out about where I stand politically – unlike the Foreign Anti-Americans who just see an American and automatically SEE a nationalistic, paranoid, arrogant, fat, lazy, greedy, racist, spoiled-rich, slutty, ignorant, stupid, humorless, loud, obnoxious, gum-chewing, carbon-emitting, gun-toting, bible-thumbing, baby-killing, flag-waving and self-centered Neanderthal American — from their place of birth ALONE!
See the difference?
Too many people confuse Anti-Americanism with being critical of the US government. And that frustrates me to no end!!
Jean-Francois Revel said it best:
“There is a BIG DIFFERENCE between being anti-American and being critical of the United States….critiques are appropriate and necessary, provided that they rest on facts and address real abuses, real errors and real excesses–without deliberately losing sight of America’s wise decisions, beneficent interventions and salutary policies. But critiques of this kind–balanced, fair and well-rounded–are hard to find, except in America herself…”
Dec 6, 2007
Sage Marie Lippur
250-443-5015
One would not expect such disregard for the dignity and human rights of a child in North America today as was experienced by an elementary school student in Christina Lake, BC recently. Canada has thus far built a reputation of being a champion of Human Rights for all, without exception due to disability, national origin, creed , colour or religion. Yet a small boy with a mild degree of Sensory Integration Disorder (SID) experienced horrible discrimination, sanctioned and abetted by those supposedly responsible adults in an educational setting here.
This child endured cruel disregard and complete failure of the system to protect his human rights at Christina Lake Elementary School. The first couple of months at the school, the child made many, many friends in his Kindergarten class. He was excited about what he was learning and so happy with his Kindergarten peers that often he would be the last one to leave the playground after school, playing with anyone and everyone until the last child had gone home. He even helped a couple of his classmates whom were struggling with issues and problems in their families to come out of their shells and open up in school. These children looked up to him and always ran to meet him in the hall during breaks, even after he had been moved up out of the Kindergarten class.
This was all forcibly and abruptly halted upon his unexpected and sudden removal from this class.
The child began attending Christina Lake Elementary at age 7 in 2006. Although his SID is managed solely by physical activity intermittently throughout the day, he required no special assistance or attention academically and was quickly moved out of Kindergarten and into grade 1-2 within a couple months. The Kindergarten teacher , Mrs. Clemens, assured the mother during his Review that in the structure of the classroom he had flourished and she was greatly pleased at how quickly he had adjusted and settled in. She stated found he required no special behavioral or learning assistance in the classroom and was doing well and was ready to skip up to the Grade 1-2 room.
Upon being placed in the Grade 1-2 room, he was being faced with exclusion from the already settled students. Peers would bring in treats for each other and refuse to share when he asked if he could have some. The teacher did not correct the situation, and when he once took a cookie from a tray that the rest of the students were eating he was accused of “stealing”, and sent to the Principal’s office. His new teacher, Mrs. Stacey did not allow him to greet and play with his former classmates any longer, even to the point of not letting them high five each other in the halls at breaks.
The Kindergarten teacher, Mrs. Clemens, began making his friends come in early at lunch recess, so they would not be available to play with him. When he still managed to smile and say hello to his friends during breaks in the hall, the only time that was left to see them anymore, they were instructed not to talk to him for fear of punishment. These students told him that they “would get in trouble” if they spoke to him anymore, and thus he lost his entire base of social solidarity. At recess, his classmates refused to let him participate in their games, and although the CLES website declares that they pride themselves in ensuring inclusion, staff repeatedly ignored his exclusion, and in fact, when the boy brought it to their attention they actually shrugged off his concerns, and walked away.
In this neglectful atmosphere, other students began to take advantage and began teasing and taunting him regularly. On one occasion, several students attacked him on the playground, throwing gravel in his face and down his shirt. A teenage student from grade 7 was allowed to mercilessly chase down and kick him, month after month. The mother sent numerous letters, and made numerous calls to the Principal, requesting that the school please try and be sure he was included in his peers play, but they allowed his peers to continue to exclude him, and several times instead placed him in games with students 5-6 years older than him, further alienating him from his own age group.
The school was well aware of his need for structure and physical activity, yet allowed this to be neglected severely during breaks and recesses, despite repeated concerns of his mother. This prolonged and repeated emotional and physical neglect by his peers and staff caused his rapid emotional and behavioural deterioration, adversely affect him as well as others. The simple solutions of inclusion (structure) on the playground, were neglected, and thus, he did not receive the physical release granted the other students whom by their exclusion forced him to sit idly alone during his much needed recesses. As evidenced by his good progress in the classroom, he did not require any extra personnel or learning aids to accommodate him. Thus he did not require any extra funding.
The simple duties of the playground monitors to assure inclusion for all students, including him, would not have been a burden on the school financially, as they later would attempt to claim in an effort to excuse their eventual rejection and dismissal of him as a student. One woman in particular, Amy Fehr stirred up much animosity toward him with other parents by slander, and on several occasions verbally abused the child. On one occasion, she physically and bodily forced him to the Principal’s office when he bumped into her while running from a teenage student who was chasing him to beat him up.
In addition to not wishing to be bothered by accomodating this child during recesses, prejudice was displayed toward him regarding his country of national origin. Certain staff relayed to the Principal and the boy’s mother that they felt offended when he did not display the proper “respect” they demanded from him, especially because he was from the States. The Principal several times informed the mother that because her child “was not a citizen of Canada he had to perform better than expected of the other students, for if he did not, it would “Jeopordize” his being “allowed” to continue to be a student at CLES.
Although the mother repeatedly asked that the child be included in playtime with his peers, the child was not only denied this simple request, but deliberately refused it. This was a clear discrimination of the child and failure to accommodate, even though that small accomodation would have cost the school no hardship financial or otherwise. In actuality, the accomodation requested was merely that the child be treated fairly with human dignity, outside of the class as well as within.
The staff displayed offense at any suggestion to accommodate him in any manner, not due to any hardship placed on the school, but due solely to their opinion they should not have to “accommodate” this non Canadian child. Period. Though he came home in tears the majority of the time, he struggled hard to overcome this treatment with the support of his family alone. After school recessed for the summer, it took a lot of reassurance and support on his family’s part to convince him to look forward to returning , yet by fall, he was once again ready and looking forward to returning to school and learning., and again seeing the few friends he managed to keep in that otherwise adverse atmosphere.
The family paid this public school 600.00 last year to attend, although there is no charge to any of the other students.. This figure was calculated by the school board based on the average annual property tax of the area. (and double the property tax that the family pays for their own home) This child was merely a 1st Grade Student,and this school was the closest available option to his home. In similar cases such as in some towns in Alaska, as well as other places along the BC/US border, students attend Primary schools cross border at no extra fee
Other Americans have attended school in SD51 in Grand Forks/Midway for example. In this student’s case, the mother physically brought him and picked him up daily, provided all of his meals and snacks, and the only cost to the school out of her 600.00 was the cost of a couple of Grade 1 workbooks. In 2007, in a display of the unwelcoming and unfriendly attitude toward children coming from the states, the yearly rate of private pay was increased 600% from 600.00 per year to 6,000.00 per year for an Elementary School student from Washington state! When the mother received the letter stating this from SD51, she called and left a message with the Superintendent, whom returned her call, leaving her a message that her child “Would be grandfathered in at the rate of 600.00” and could return for that rate. This was re-iterated in a letter from him as well.
In September of 2007, upon returning from traveling by plane to Seattle for an expedited passport in time for school, and spending much money on the list of school supplies and clothing he would need, spending money on hotel charges for this trip, as well as rental car charges, the little boy received the final and most brutal insult of all.
A voice mail left on the family answering machine from the Principal, Bob Chapman, stating that “We decided not to have him come back to school, as some of the other parents and students have had “conflicts” with his presence, and that it just would be easier for them if he was not there this year.” He also added the backup excuse of: “We didn’t know you were planning on having him return this year, but when we became aware of it we had a discussion and made this decision. “
In essence, the pressure tactics described within this document of excluding and failing him as a student did not succeed at making him or his family give up, so the tactic of using the guise of stating the child had Special Needs that required extra funding. Never mind that they never during his Student Reviews mentioned any such thing, never mind that his teacher telling him in front of his mother on the last day of school “See you in Grade 2!”
So this is how they decided to deal with his exclusion and the apparent inability and unwillingness of the staff to adequately perform their duties to this child. It was much easier to dismiss him, and please the few influential persons whom discriminated against him. In retrospect, this horrifying treatment of the boy seems as though it were intended to force him to withdraw from the school, and the raised rates to discourage the family from returning. When these tactics failed, they created the excuse that he had “Special Needs“ which they could not accommodate without extra money.
A Certified letter from the family requesting an Appeal Hearing was flatly refused by the Superintendent. Although the heartbroken mother sent several requests that somebody explain why she never informed
her son had “Special Needs” throughout the school year, or at any of his Reviews, she received no response and was ignored. Although she sent several requests to be told EVEN NOW, what those special needs were, again, this child, so cruelly rejected and alone, and family were not even given the dignity of a reply, and to this day, are still awaiting a response in vain. .
The child’s Special Need didn’t require extra staff, learning assistance or external devices to accommodate. The excuse the School has used is that it would require “extra funding” to ensure the child is included with activities on the playground. This is not true. It does not require extra funding to teach children to be an inclusive society and to ensure that playground monitors do their job during recess. The BC Education Statutes School Act states the right to appeal, yet this was denied because of the student’s national origin. The BC Human Rights Code guarantees the right to not be discriminated against regardless of National Origin, Disability. Denial of Services due to a disability or national origin is also unlawful under the code.
The International Charter of Human Rights, and the BC Human Rights Code guarantees that all children be treated equally and not discriminated against due to National Origin or Disability, yet School District 51 have in total disregard for these rights, and the laws set out to enforce them, used the label of “Special Needs” to deny the child access to their educational environment.
The family is seeking a hearing with the Human Rights Tribunal and possibly representation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Sage M. Lippur
250-443-5015
Xmeowz@yahoo.com
This is a narrative outlining the general complaint regarding Human Rights violations and CLES role in such re: former student H. Michael Lippur.
Days before H. Michael was to enter Second Grade at CLES, we received a voicemail from Principal, Bob Chapman informing us he would not allow his return due to his having “Special Needs.” Our calls and emails to school officials were ignored for days.
This made getting the child into class before it was too late impossible. The District would not even enter into civil discussion with us. We sent a Certified letter to the Superintendent requesting an Appeal by the Board and he denied us this as well.
After exhausting all reasonable attempts at resolving this matter through SD 51, we decided to bring this situation to the attention of the BCHRT. The Respondent, CLES has had the ongoing benefit of Vancouver based law firm, Guild and Yule , to assist them in myriad ways to fashion a response to our injury. Please take into consideration the family has had no such advantage. At this point we have not retained Counsel or involved any other Agency to take action on our behalf, although the Inter-American Agency on Human Rights is aware of the case and is awaiting the outcome of the BCHRT response before determining whether they will need to become involved are It is our hope and expectation that the BCHRT will competently handle the matter at hand as it has demonstrated in the past in similar situations of school related Special Needs cases.
Christina Lake Elementary staff and other individuals affiliated with the school participated in and allowed a discriminatory school environment. This was demonstrated by their condoning of an exclusionary and intolerant environment toward the student, and by their denial of accommodation for this 8-year-old Special Needs student. They discriminated against him by not affording him equal treatment in the school setting. They denied him reasonable accommodation for his needs in not allowing him to complete his grade progression normally, allowing repeated and hurtful exclusion of him by other students, and finally refusing him services completely.
CLES denied the child equal treatment by allowing other students to repeatedly exclude him from games and play, despite staff being informed on multiple occasions of this exclusion. They denied him equal treatment in punishing him for getting into verbal disputes over his exclusion by singling him out and punishing him for speaking out, and letting the excluding parties remain on the playground as he was routinely forced to sit in the hall during recesses.
“The absolute worst thing a School can do for the child with Sensory Integration Dysfunction is deny him Recess, this is an absolute NO in all studies of SID afflicted children.” Jean Ayres Phd Sensory Integration Dysfunction and The Child
Rather than embrace the child in an atmosphere of acceptance and inclusion, CLES chose to placate those intolerant and judgmental individuals, by repeatedly forcing him to spend his recesses sitting on a hard bench in the hallway, and finally by denying him services completely. Indeed, Principal Bob Chapman himself had informed the mother that some parents were having disagreements regarding whether her child should be allowed inclusion or not. He stated that he did not have “time” to deal with these issues. As if inclusion was not a priority since the child was an American and as Principal Bob Chapman stated himself, if “The child has any Special Needs” we cannot accommodate him. The jest of his attitude was merely: “Would you please just take your child away?”
CLES treated the child with bias and disrespect in their refusal to work with the family in clarifying his needs, which were by no means cost or time prohibitive.
“It may help to delay sending the child to kindergarten until he is one year older than his classmates and better able to cope with school.” Jean Ayres PhD Author: Sensory Integration and The Child.
H. Michael Lippur began Kindergarten at age seven in Sept 06 at Christina Lake Elementary.
The mother had explained at length and in detail the particular needs he had for extra physical activity, and his sensitivity and insecurity around older children. She stressed how Kindergarten entry would be essential to his development, rather than push him into a higher grade without this preparation. As the family expected, Kindergarten for him was a perfect fit.
In his work, his neural difficulties with fine motor skills was obvious, in that he had great difficulty colouring within lines and in printing.
He greatly needed and was excited about the printing practice he and his peers were about to begin. As with his overall excitement about Kindergarten, he was looking forward to learning to write letters with happy anticipation. In the Kindergarten class he was flourishing, his self-confidence and motivation to learn were high. He mentored the younger students, protecting several of the shyer or more troubled ones in his own way, by drawing them in and standing up for them when there were problems.. His young classmates accepted, even admired him, not noticing his age or delayed areas of progress. Then, on the very day before the printing lessons were to start, after only a few months, he was torn away from his accepting peers and pushed into the Grade 1 and 2 room. Without any developmental assessment to back the decision, no testing, no concern for his readiness for this move. Most kids get a full year, he , whom needed it the most, got a few months.
“Children with certain types of sensory integrative dysfunction always find writing difficult. Some children find it especially hard to hear words and then write them down; they cannot integrate the sound sensations with the sensations from their hands and fingers. The child may say: “I know what you want, but I can’t write it down.”
Jean Ayres-Author: What is Sensory Integrative Dysfunction?
The basis for the denial of a full and equal Kindergarten experience was his numerical age. CLES did not consider the detailed history his family provided of the importance of his social growth above all other issues in ensuring his successful progress. The academic abilities he was not given a chance to acquire such as learning to print, were not even considered.
His socio-emotional, and fundamental academic development strongly required the full experience of Kindergarten. There, he was receiving the basis desperately needed to prepare him for the next grade, and building the confidence he still was significantly lacking. The denial of an equal and full Kindergarten experience would prove a serious detriment to his future success at CLES.
He was not afforded fundamentals granted his peers of being able to practice writing each letter of the alphabet and numbers before the demand was set upon him to write. He was suddenly forcibly torn from his safe and nurturing Kindergarten environment, his friends with whom he had grown trusting and fond of, and the foundational basis which he needed so much. He was placed in a two higher grades room, a new class with unfamiliar students whom had established hierarchy and friendships already in place, who were academically and socially better prepared than he was. Whom lived in the same neighbourhood. All of them with a full year of Kindergarten and some, 1st grade as well already fully completed.
The decision to move him up was not based on sound academic or developmental criteria, but on pure prejudice due to his age and stereotypical assumptions of where he was “supposed to be”, rather than where he actually stood on a developmental basis.
In their refusal to continue to accommodate him, CLES forced him beyond his capabilities, then repeatedly punished him for his resultant difficulties and struggle with their preconceived expectations
The children in the higher grades were immediately aware of his being “different” due to his age and his obvious quick entry and exit from Kindergarten to Grade 1 and 2. This was the starting point of his isolation, the taunting, the exclusion. His exposure to the harsh realities of this treatment, and the lack of intervention on his behalf from the school led to a steady and significant social stigmatization, isolation and exclusion in the school environment. The ongoing exclusion and ostracisation by other students were both ignored and thus encouraged by the staff of the school. He was punished for his social and physical deficits, rather than given support.
He was repeatedly excluded from his peers games and activities. He was excluded from recess. Students were allowed to bring treats to class and exclude him from partaking in them. When a disagreement was had with another student, which often occurred due to his standing up for himself regarding exclusion, he would be punished for his part, and the resident student not. Being in a small and clique-y community, the school found it more convenient to permit a few judgmental and prejudicial parents free reign to allow their own children’s exclusion and taunting of him, which occurred daily, to go unaddressed rather than reverse the harm their actions were causing.
When this unspeakable treatment failed to cause him or his family to voluntarily withdraw, the school then completely denied him services mere days before he was to begin 2nd grade.
So naturally, it was a heartbreaking shock in those few days before he was to return after Summer Recess when the family received a voicemail from CLES Principal Bob Chapman rejecting him. We had to listen to this heartbreaking rejection in the midst of a mountain of new school supplies and an excited little boy looking forward to school starting, .
Principal Bob Chapman followed up with a letter stating they were denying his re-entry to school due to the child’s having “Special Needs” which they could not accommodate because he was not a Canadian Citizen,
The simple, cost free nature of meeting these needs are demonstrated in the enclosed letter from his Therapist whom has outlined the basic accommodations required for his neural/physical deficits. Those needs merely focus on the importance of inclusion and physical activity to his condition. Using Special Needs as an excuse to deny the child services served only to endorse an unjust decision and politically appease a few prejudicial and intolerant community members by his ejection.
“Children with certain types of sensory integrative dysfunction always find writing difficult. Some children find it especially hard to hear words and then write them down; they cannot integrate the sound sensations with the sensations from their hands and fingers. The child may say: “I know what you want, but I can’t write it down.”
Jean Ayres-Author: What is Sensory Integrative Dysfunction?
Had he been allowed to finish Kindergarten, as all other children are, he would now be entering Grade 2, perhaps now better prepared to skip to Grade 3 or 4, once that social foundation had been set.
Had he not been refused entry to grade 2 last year he would certainly be entering grade 3, but it was taken from him, and resultantly at this point, his education was effectively cut off at Grade 1.
“The hurrier I go, the behinder I get”
Prior to his premature removal from Kindergarten, which was a direct contributing factor to the subsequent inter-personal conflicts that manifested with the older students, the child’s “Special Needs” were effectively managed simply by his being allowed to progress at his own pace in Kindergarten. Diagnosis of SID was made by the Medical Community secondary to CLES informing the family after refusing services due to Special Needs of which they were aware for many months but never informed the family or accommodated. Instead they allowed the child to deteriorate in an environment devoid of support for those needs.
On his report card, and in his Parent/Teacher reviews, his performance was described at normal levels for his age and grade, and the only difficulty noted was with his penmanship, It was stated to the family verbally as well as on his progress reports that the child had no issues in the classroom setting that affected his social interaction or learning abilities there. He did not require specialised assistance, funding or supports academically. But the school simply was not accommodating his social/developmental needs of which they indeed, were certainly aware.
Because he would often come home in tears from the treatment allowed him by other students, and not being allowed to play with his Kindergarten friends anymore, his mother queried deeper regarding his social skills, His teacher, Mrs. Stacey said his only trouble was when he made a new friend he became very clingy and attached, following them everywhere. (As with Bryce Peterson) This was further evidence of the fear he faced daily of rejection and exclusion by the majority on the playground, which would ultimately lead to his difficulties in having to deal with these abuses.
No mentions were made of his rejection by other students or the fact that he spent the majority of his recesses not being allowed to play with his Kindergarten friends. They were not allowed to talk or play with him after he entered 1st grade. Under the watchful eye of 3 Playground Monitors, in a school of less than 97 pupils, he was regularly forced to sit alone and watch his classmates involved in games from which he was excluded. And when he asked them again and again why he couldn’t play, they were allowed to laugh at, taunt and ignore him.
When he asked the Playground Monitors, they did nothing to facilitate inclusion by his peers. He had boundless energy for the playground and desperately needed and sought to become involved with the many activities/games the other children had going each day, but was repeatedly refused. Some of the children said that he was “retarded” because of his starting Kindergarten later than they, and his apparent social and physical awkwardness..
“A poorly organized body percept interferes with writing, coloring and drawing. It also makes the child clumsy and confused on the playground. Other children may laugh at him and refuse to play with him. This often results in feelings of ineptness and powerlessness that carry over into the classroom.” Jane Ayre uthor: Sensory Integration and The Child
“A woman named Amy Fer, a regular presence at the school in the role of “classroom assistant” was often seen giving unauthorized (and often harmful) advice to students and parents based on her uneducated and prejudicial opinions. She spread hateful and harmful lies about H. Michael to the parents of his few friends, effectively cutting off his few supportive friendships. Lies that he was a “bad influence” (at 7 years old?) , “played too rough” and the like.
The school continued to allow her this freedom of influence indefinitely, by providing her direct physical access almost daily to these parents and children.
A vestibular disorder may interfere with social relationships. The person has a hard time knowing how close to stand to other people and often offends by standing too close. He may have trouble judging where people are, especially in a crowd. He cannot tell how much room he needs to go around people, and often bumps into them. Without the space perception that comes from sensations of the body and gravity, it is difficult to visualize space.” Jean Ayres-Author: Sensory Integration and the Child
He was even punished for his physical inability to judge and gauge distances properly.
In one instance, H. Michael had been terrified, running on the playground from a teenage bully (well over 2-3 feet taller than himself) who frequently tormented him, and made the terrible mistake of bumping into Amy Fer as he made a desperate attempt to escape his tormentor. ( the school never intervened on his behalf when being bullied, he was left to fend for himself, ALWAYS. )
Rather than offer protection, and stop the bully, she further added to the child’s hurt and fear by punishing him for being the victim! The school allowed her to physically force him by hand to the Principal’s office, where the Principal verbally berated him, and forced him to spend this recess sitting humiliatingly in the hall for all to see. All for the crime of poor body percept and fleeing from the imminent harm of more bullying.
CLES also took no action when this woman, was found to be calling other parents on the phone and asking them to exclude H. Michael from activities. If they refused, she threatened them.with their own social exclusion. She actually called the parents who coached the after school Soccer games and threatened to withdraw her and her friends children from the games if they would not agree to exclude H. Michael. They refused to exclude him and she followed through on her threats. Her prejudicial influence shut down the soccer games. She got half the team’s children to quit and succeeded at denying the child even the small joy of this bit of physical release and self-validation.
Although CLES Principal, Bob Chapman, was informed of this incident by several parents, he did nothing to address it or prevent the escalating stigma this caused the child.within the school. And he did nothing to protect the child from the fast fallout of exclusion and taunting occurring on the playground at recess after this emboldened them to escalate their discriminatory treatment. His excuse of the day for his lack of action was that he was busy getting ready to go on Summer Field trips.
Instead, he chose to appease those not accepting of the child by agreeing to not allow the child back the next year. The woman most happy with the removal of the child with the “Special Needs”, Amy Fer repaid the favor by further using her influence to raise 5,000.00 for a new playground the following year, the year H. Michael was rejected!
Christina Lake’ Elementary’s failure to recognise and address the discriminatory attitudes and destructive influence of those unaccepting of an innocent child led to their own prejudicial discrimination and ultimate rejection and isolation of the child via their refusal to address and accommodate his needs.
Incredibly, this child maintained an optimistic attitude despite these humiliating and hurtful actions.
Another example was when his best friend from Kindergarten was told not to speak with him, and for fear of getting into trouble one day, as the two little boys chatted, a teacher walked by and his best friend blurted out in fear: “He’s talking to me!” (During Recess, nonetheless!) Can you imagine how this would make a 7-year-old feel? “Kids can get into trouble for even speaking with me at recess, what kind of monster am I? What is wrong with me?“
Here was a 7-year-old boy watching all his friends being redirected away from him one by one, simultaneously trying to cope with the rejection and hostility of his new older peers. Why did the staff contribute to this exclusion by disallowing his relationships to continue with his friends from Kindergarten? Why weren’t these actions explained to the family? Why wasn’t inclusion and acceptance enforced?
Another example of this endorsement of his exclusion was the time a child related to one of CLES staff from his Grade 1-2 room brought in a tray of cookies to share with the other students, but meanly excluded him. (The teacher conveniently overlooked this) When they were finished with the cookies, he went over to scrape up some of the crumbs left behind. This girl (Addy) hystrionically accused him of “stealing her cookies!” The teacher’s unbelievable reaction was to punish him by sending him again to the hard bench outside the Principal’s office, rather than have a little talk about sharing and inclusion instead! Again, he had to pay for daring to challenge being excluded. The teacher failed in her position in the first place by allowing the exclusion at all! This same girl, whose mother incidentally happens to be closely associated with Amy Fer, was allowed freedom to daily berate and call him names like: “Stupid” “Baby” and “Sissy”.
The staff responsible for these students during these incidents never bothered to clarify facts, and repeatedly punished H. Michael without question. Explanations and discussions involving both parties were avoided completely in these incidents. It was as though only H. Michael could be wrong, but never one of their own. The school also never sought to repair, rectify, confirm or mediate these situations; they simply punished H. Michael, and let his emotional and social wounds fester. Each time she (Amy, school volunteer) had knowledge of his being punished for some minor infraction, she would seek him out and berate him further with comments such as, “You really did it this time!” “When are you going to learn?!”
During soccer practice once I witnessed one of this woman’s friends kids push H. Michael. Amy and the other parents did nothing, taking no action. They sat watching, smiles on their faces, until H. Michael turned and playfully pushed the kid who pushed him back. The other child obviously was not interested in playing and angrily pushed him again, in a display of obvious contempt.
The second time H. Michael returned the push in kind, and the child threw himself on the ground in a show of dramatics, at which point the Coach ( a neutral party in this otherwise adverse environment) told them both to sit down awhile and settle down) Amy, unaware of my presence, then arose from her position on her lawn chair marched all the way across the field; She walked, right up to the instigating child’s mother and chided: “Did you see what H. Michael just did to your child?” She did not mention it was her own child who initiated the pushing.
On another occasion, during a break at Soccer, as soon as H. Michael turned to go to the bathroom, this woman approached his friend and soccer partner, Logan B., took him by the hand pulling him toward another child saying: “Come on Logan, this is your new partner!” Logan loudly protested, saying that H. Michael was his partner. She told the child, “NO, he’ll get another partner when he comes back!“ (which wasn’t true, he had to play alone upon returning) Logan stood his ground and stated that: “H. Michael is just using the bathroom, and now when he comes back he will not have a partner!” She told him: “Don’t worry about that” and proceeded to leave H. Michael without a partner for the duration of the game.
I had faith the school would eventually recognise what was occurring and put a stop to it, but to my shock and dismay, just the opposite occurred. In fact, as stated in Bob Chapman’s letter refusing return after Summer, he chose to blame the child for the discord this woman, Amy had intentionally created between the boy, other students and their parents with her relentless campaign to convince others he was abnormal and undeserving of friends or attention. At one point in an attempt to insult me personally, she heartlessly proclaimed, “I know your child has” ISSUES “ (speaking of his deficits) in a judgmental and insulting manner, to justify her own abuse of him.
And although she was not a paid member of the staff the school ‘s allowing her continued presense and influence contributed to the emotional harm done H. Michael. The school not only allowed, but also contributed to this prevailing discrimination, exclusion and isolation. The school’s poor judgment in their prejudicial treatment of this child initialized a period of extreme emotional, and psychological neglect, social exclusion, ostracization and emotional and physical deprivation to a little boy in the school environment. Day after day, he would meet me after school, his face red and welling up with tears, begging not to go back. Night after night, we convinced him anew, that his education was the most important thing, to ignore the ill and unfair treatment, and be strong and return, if only for the chance to learn.
Despite numerous communications to the Principal and teacher amid concerns regarding his exclusion and the need for better and closer examination of what was occurring on a social level to him, these fell on deaf ears and the only responses were one sided justifications of his exclusion, as if the child somehow deserved this sort of treatment. Never were the bullies confronted, to explain why they were throwing gravel down his shirt and at his face, or chasing him down, or making fun of him. It was always H. Michael who was wrong for reacting, but those he was reacting to were never addressed! Kids taunted him because he believed Spiderman was real. Kids called him names because he could not throw or catch a ball just like them.
At CLES kids day after day, month after month refused to include him in their games, flat out telling him “NO” despite almost daily person-to-person pleadings directly from him to be included. I myself came several times to remove him from this hostile environment and take him out for lunch as a respite for him. While there, I witnessed these children brazenly turn their backs on him during play. None of these kids was held accountable for their own behaviour, none of these kids was sent to the Principal’s office for their name calling, exclusion and taunting: EVER.
A PHYSICAL PROBLEM
“The first step is to realize that the child’s problem is a physical one. It involves the action of electrical impulses and chemicals in his brain. A learning disorder or behavior problem resulting from brain dysfunction is just as much a physical problem as a broken leg or the measles. Jean Ayres PHD Author: Sensory Integration and The Child
(Would it be acceptable to punish stroke victims for loss of their faculties due to lack of oxygen to brain? Would this mean a formerly intelligent person is a retard after a stroke?)
H. Michael has weak control of his eliminatory functions, yet was frequently denied needed trips to the restroom. His teacher even embarrassed him in front of class once by saying: “If you have to go to the bathroom so much, you need to see a doctor!” Yet, there is no cure for the symptoms of SID, only modifications, such as allowing a child to eliminate when he needs to!
“A neurological disorder is handicap enough, but on top of that disorder the child usually has the additional handicap of a negative self-image! The way in which the nervous system is functioning, the feelings of frustration and inadequacy that arise when the child cannot do things well, and other people’s negative reactions to what the child does. Parents can do a great deal to counteract the negative reactions of other people, and they can do quite a bit to reduce the feelings of frustration and inadequacy.” Jean Ayres
I repeatedly made efforts to get Bob Chapman to work with me to accommodate H. Michael. However, instead of offering answers or assistance he only attempted to get me to agree not to re-enroll H.Michael the following year. He kept allowing playground monitors to exclude him from recesses, to the point of making recess unavailable to the child toward the end of the school year. These actions were to appease anyone whom could not or would not include and accept him on the playground, and knee jerk reactions to his occasional argumentativeness resulting from his devastating isolation and exclusion.
Canada means a lot to our family, we love the country and had traced some of our ancestry to it. We love the place, and I hope for my son to go to college there one day, having chosen the college shortly after his beginning Primary School. My own father was an immigrant to America, back in 1949, and he has brothers whom are in Toronto.
We decided to return after summer, and H. Michael, being a child, had already forgiven and forgotten the hurts of the previous year and was ready to start anew, hoping to make new friends this year. Then we got the heartless message of rejection on the answering machine. Denying equal treatment and punishing a young child for a handicap sends a seriously flawed message to the children, their parents and community. It reflects poorly on the school, the parents of these children, The Ministry of Education and poorly on Canada’s reputation for equality and tolerance.
To allow CLES actions in not protecting this child’s most basic human rights of dignity go unaddressed would set a insidiously dangerous example for a significant number of future adults, and the community as a whole. A message that it is okay to mistreat someone who has a disability. That it’s okay to exclude certain people from their society, even deny them education. Friendship. Compassion. Hope. What kind of message does this send the child about himself? The rejection of CLES spilled over into H. Michael’s personal life in a wave of mini-suicides, giving up swimming, soccer, even bicycling. Activities that although he may not have been good at, he at least previously tried to do.
Since the loss of the remainder of his friends resulting from the political posturing surrounding his expulsion, he has developed depression and gained weight, his outlook on real life deteriorated from riding his bicycle happily all summer and visiting friends to playing imaginary shooting games by himself. Where prior he was always the one to approach and initiate play with others, now he reverts to playing alone, even when given the chance with new friends. Now he must spend precious time we need for him to be learning, in couselling to try and undo the damage of his experiences at CLES. He suffers from a profound sense of failure and self-loathing that those who knew him before CLES could never have imagined in him.
It makes one wonder what similar experiences teenage kids whom go on school shooting sprees may have had that were never addressed before the rejection and hurt took tragic hold of their personas. Even worse, it has spilled over into his out of school environment wherever these kids may be. At the pool in Grand Forks when he attempted to play with his former Grade 1 classmates, they rejected him and called him fat. One of them smacked him over the head with a basketball. His few former friends are quick to run from him when they see each other in public, leaving him asking, “Mommy, why did he run from me, he used to be my friend?”
His good friends whose parents ran the Soccer Camp at the school, have bowed to the pressure of the school and Amy Fer , at first would only let him play behind the closed doors of their home, and now will not even let him talk to his only and dearest friends in the first grade, a trio of girls, known as the “Triplets”. Once when they were all out on a nature walk and H. Michael joined them unexpectedly, the girls, happy to see him, let him come along, then the mother took a back way home with them, so as not to be seen with him for fear of the pressure described herein. After paying to go on a horseback ride at a nearby ranch, he was delighted to see 2 children from the school living at the ranch and asked to play, they invited him in the house and beat him up, throwing mats at his face, hitting him with plastic guns and punching him in the eye. This is the end result of the neglect of CLES to hold accountable their own staff and children for allowing an atmosphere of prejudice and intolerance of a child.
CLES is repeating their destructive pattern even still, allowing students to harass and intimidate his friends at the school after rejecting him, simply for having been his friends. Instead, when some of these boys were dancing and singing that he “got kicked out of schoo-ooo-lllll” to one of the little ones he used to be a big buddy to in Kindergarten, the boy (Adrian Ellington) fought back with words. In an exact duplication of what they did to H. Michael, they sent this 6 year old boy to the Principal’s Office, rather than address the taunters.
Little H. Michael has been deprived of his former Canadian friendships, education and basic human dignity and suffered psychological, social and academic regression due to the unchecked actions of this mentality.
Previously, he was outgoing and playful, with a list of friends made in a very short time despite a very hostile environment. Previously, he only had his Sensory Integration Disorder to contend with, which would have been easy, had the school took the time to properly assess him and accommodate him. But since their refusal to do just that he has regressed to the point of being unable to attend school at all!
He now suffers from the stigmatism he experienced so deeply that it has caused social and behavioral deficits that significantly impact his ability to function in the normal activities of daily living. He no longer has any friends, where prior to CLES rejection he had: Adrian, Ellana, Elizabeth, Alexandra, Victoria, Logan E, Logan B, Myla, Angelina, Bryce, Colby. These children could be brought to testify if necessary to the loving and playful nature of H. Michael and how they adored him. The pressures put on their parents by the intolerant were allowed to prevail and he no longer can call his first friends his friends anymore, as their families all are afraid to be seen with “The American Kid” whom got “Kicked out of school!“ This is OUTRAGEOUS!
H. Michael’s Therapist haD enclosed several lists of examples of how to implement therapy within a typical school day and it requires much less time and involvement than writing notes to parents or sending a child to the Principal’s Office. It requires no extra staffing. In fact, the therapy the child needs can actually be of great help to the school, saving teachers time and money by having him provide errands that require heavy physical activity such as cleaning, hauling books and trash, cleaning the playground and or bathrooms, sweeping and or mopping floors. These activities will both benefit and calm the Sensory impaired child, as well as instill a sense of pride and purpose within him, thus further developing his self-esteem and thus better interactions with others.
Sadly, the last paragraph no longer will apply. H. Michael is just now beginning counseling for the psychological damage from the ostracization, isolation, rejection and loneliness he experienced. It is no longer in his best interest to return, he fears and loathes the very thought of returning to what he has experienced as the most hostile, demeaning and lonely venture of his life, being at CLES. We are all afraid of what might be said to him by hurtful students when out of earshot of staff. He cannot take anymore. We will have to combine home schooling, tutoring and counseling to repair the hurts and work overtime to catch up.
We can only ask that CLES somehow make an effort to publicly acknowledge their mistake in their treatment of him, and encourage his former playmates families to come forward and not be afraid to embrace and invite him back into their lives. This small gesture might help to bring him back around to trusting others again, an important step in the healing process he must undergo. He needs to know that those whom excluded him are sorry, and those who were his friends are still his friends to help rebuild his shattered self-confidence and motivation to learn and interact. A school assembly based on inclusion and tolerance might be in order, with H. Michael arriving after the speech with a public apology from the Principal delivered to him before the school. The family will need assistance with expenses incurred such as special tutoring, transportation costs to counseling appointments and tutoring sessions.
The family needs assistance to cover the costs of paying for social and sporting activities that would normally be offered in a school environment, for which they now have to travel to and from and pay for out of pocket such as gymnasium type social development activities, and field trips. The family needs assistance with school materials costs so they may offer him the tools needed to have a chance to learn in his home environment, as he is no longer prepared to meet the demands of a public school environment as described above,
“”Upon this impotent, insecure, bewildered child, adults often impose themselves, usually with good intentions. Adults gear their demands to the child’s intelligence level, rather than to his motor planning ability. When they see him do a few splinter skills or centrally programmed movements well, they demand that he do other things just as well. Ignoring the fragility of his emotions, they expect him to cope with more stress and confusion than his nervous system can handle. The dyspraxic child is not neurologically equipped to buffer threats to his selfhood. When the slightest problem, such as breaking a pencil, may lead to a catastrophic reaction. If he musters up the courage to try a task and experiences any difficulty at all, he may never try that task again. The child’s feelings of insecurity increase whenever he notices that other children are successful with some task at which he fails. It is no wonder that dyspraxic children often become negative, resistive and manipulative. This child needs parental support and reassurance for more years than most children. He needs adults to see his world the way he sees it. Often the best approach with dyspraxic children is to avoid exposing them to external pressure or failure. Let the child’s own inner drive give direction as long as this is in some way constructive. Let him develop at his own pace, since he cannot develop at someone else’s pace. Let him avoid tasks that threaten him. Give him understanding, protection and opportunity at his own level. But, above all, give him sensory integrative therapy to help his brain function more efficiently.” Jean Ayres PHD Author: Sensory Integration and The Child
In closing, I would like to offer my thanks to the BCHRT for being the sole ray of hope for the future of this child in representing the truest and most fundamental freedoms of Canada, and a voice for all so that no power ever overshadows the voice of those whom are the smallest.
I have been unable to find even one Canadian attorney to help me in this matter. The School District has Big Gun Vancouver Attorneys already dragging a small child’s disabiity throught the mud by portraying his deficits as horribly bad behaviour that he should be punished by exclusion and discrimination for. If anyone can please help me contact an attorney that can help me defend my child and obtain the justice we need, please contact me. The BCHRT has accepted the case, but the BC Human Rights Coalition would not step up to the plate to help as they are supposed to, claiming that they were “understaffed and unable to assist us in offering the free legal advice they freely provide Canadians with. We have experienced such dreadful prejudice that in a year and a half of trying, still are unable to get even one person with legal abilities to help us in Canada. By the way, we are not rich. I am a severely disabled woman living on 1000.00 a month, with a mildly disabled son to care for. It was our dream to one day become Canadian Citizens, as we love the country, the outdoors and quietness. So we moved 3 miles from BC and paid the Public School the same amount of taxes that all the residents of the city we schooled in for the schooling. Yet we were still treated like filth. Help if you can, please, we still hold hope in Canada.
Thank You, Sage