More Active Posts
Front Page
Autistic teen banned from church
 |
 23 Comments |
A Minnesota Catholic priest has filed a restraining order against a local family in an effort to stop the parents from bringing their “extremely disruptive and dangerous” autistic son to church. According to Rev. Daniel Walz of the Church of St. Joseph, 13-year-old Adam Race once struck a child during mass, nearly knocks elderly parishioners over when he hastily exits the church, spits and sometimes urinates in church and fights when he is being restrained. Walz said the church “explored and offered many options for accommodations that would assist the family while protecting the safety of parishioners. The family refused those offers of accommodation.”
Despite the restraining order, the family of seven has continued attending services, which led to a citation against Adam’s mom, Carol. Brad Trahan, the founder of the RT Autism Awareness Foundation in Rochester, has asked the bishop of St. Cloud to rescind the restraining order: “It’s unfathomable and concerns me that we’ve taken a situation with special needs and we’re making it into the criminal matter.”
Carol Race just hopes the ugly back-and-forth doesn’t tarnish the image of the church.
“The church isn’t bad,” she said. “But it’s what some individuals do within the church.”
Thoughts?
 |
Topic: WorldMagBlog |  |
Email a friend |
 |
Keywords: |  |
RSS 2.0 |
 |
Both comments and pings are currently closed. |  |
Share this: |
Reporters? choice
Why were the “many options for accommodations that would assist the family while protecting the safety of parishioners” refused?
This would be a tough dilemma to comment about presuming all parties wanted the best for all (both the church and the family and Adam).
But I happened to hear Adam’s mom on the radio and she was just too inconsiderate of the church’s concerns for me to be sympathetic to her complaints about them. She did not seem very willing to do her part to keep her child under control for the safety concerns of others or for the good of the whole. I still don’t claim to grasp the whole case enough to resolve it, but the mom’s own words turned my sympathies toward the church.
What were the other options offered?
The actions of this parish priest is absolutely horrible. We have autistic children in our church. In fact, one of our pastors adopted two Romanian brothers. One of the boys was autistic.
You know things had to bad in order for the church to go so far as to get a restraining order.
They could only be so accommodating to the desires of one person before they had to move to act in the best interest of others.
I don’t know if it is impossible to restrain the child, but the church had to do something since it sounds like the parents would not.
It would be easy to turn this into a ‘hate for the handicapped’ thing. But, it really sounds more like a ‘take personal responsibility’ thing.
Joe B, it sounds like in this regard you have a wonderful church and pastor. Excellent. But I still think the family in this case has a part to play to meet the concerns of the church half-way. I did not hear all the facts when I listened to the mom being interviewed on the radio, but I heard enough to suspect she was not willing to meet the church half-way to make this work. She seemed demanding. Just my take, with the information I have so far. More facts could change my mind.
JOE B., Are you saying that all autistic kids are the same? Because you have autistic kids in your church, other churches should be able to handle it with a DIFFERENT autistic kid?
What if a kid had Tourrettes and swore through the whole service. If a priest took similar actions, would it still be “horrible?”
I suppose the church could continue to allow this and watch attendence slowly decline. The family of this child would still be able to worship like they want to. The other parishioners could just start attending another church in another parish. Didn’t someone once say, your rights end where mine begin or some such thing?
My wife works with Autistic children all the time. In regard to the children in our church. The members each take turns ministering to the child and the family. Autistic children do not function well when their routines are disturbed and often become agitated because they cannot communicate to other people.
When one of the children become agitated, someone in the church family will graciously take the child into the narthex or the community hall and walk with them until they settle down. In our family, this is a small sacrifice to make so the parents of the autistic child have the opportunity to worship.
This is a tough one. Here’s another article on the story.
http://tinyurl.com/6bphfe
From the article;The Rev. Daniel Walz, who did not return calls left at the Church of St. Joseph parish office, wrote in court documents that Adam’s behavior was “extremely disruptive and dangerous.” He alleged that Adam, who is more than 6 feet tall and weighs over 225 pounds, spits and urinates in church and has nearly injured children and elderly people.
In an affidavit, Walz wrote: “The parish members and I have been very patient and understanding. I have made repeated efforts through Catholic Education Ministries, Caritas Family Services, and most recently, sought to try and mediate the matter with the family to ask them to voluntarily not bring Adam to church, but it has been to no avail.” The Diocese of St. Cloud said in a statement that the restraining order, issued May 9, was “a last resort.”
Seems like the church made an effort to do the right thing.
Joe B., you make the point.
Apparently the priest proposed options such as the one that you write about. If the parents will not acccept the accomodations offered, why should the church tolerate the problems described in the post?
My brother is slightly autistic. While he is not violent, some autistic children are a danger to themselves and others. So, I can perfectly understand a Pastor of a congregation wanting to protect his congregants from an autistic child. This is never good to do and I do not know what happened behind the scene, but the parents and the ministers should have worked out a solution to this situation.
You are right Decrease. The church should never go to the courts to handle matters with in the church. The Apostle Paul chastised the church at Corinth for doing just similar activities.
Joe B.:
When one of the children become agitated, someone in the church family will graciously take the child into the narthex or the community hall and walk with them until they settle down. In our family, this is a small sacrifice to make so the parents of the autistic child have the opportunity to worship.
Me: I completely agree that this is a great way to help a family with an autistic child. However, a 13 year old young man who is over six feet tall and weighs 225 pounds may prove to be a different story.
I also agree that the Church should, in general, handle matters in the Church. There may be extreme instances, though, when the situation goes beyond what a pastor is able to handle.
Just maybe the parents should take turns staying home with their 6′,225 pound autistic child.
I don’t think there should even be a question if the church is out of line. I certainly wouldn’t keep attending a church where this type of thing went on every week.
I am a special ed teacher who works with autistic children, as well as a worship leader at my church. I think this is a very interesting case because both sides have valid points. There has to be some compromise. The child should be allowed in the service, but at the same time, if he is disruptive, there should be a place where the parents can take him. As far as it being taken to court, isnt there seperation of church and state? (joke) It does not seem by the artical that the parent is being unreasonable, but that is just from what the artical says.
There may be extreme instances, though, when the situation goes beyond what a pastor is able to handle.
And it does sound like the church tried to take action and explored other options. Probably this moves beyond what Paul was talking about into the jurisdiction of the courts, since there is the very real possibility this teen could hurt someone badly.
Brad Trahan, the founder of the RT Autism Awareness Foundation in Rochester, has asked the bishop of St. Cloud to rescind the restraining order: “It’s unfathomable and concerns me that we’ve taken a situation with special needs and we’re making it into the criminal matter.”
I’m guessing the church did make many offers of accommodation in the spirit of Christian good faith and when the family was not willing to compromise in any way by accepting one of those offered there was no other choice or option open to the church. The family made it a legal matter not the church.
There is no reason for the church to have the order rescinded unless the family accepts one of the accommodation offers. If they refuse, and still attend with this disruptive child, then they should be banned from attending by being tossed out of the congregation.
You can’t fix stupid whe3n it won’t be accomodated.
Like it or not, the size of this child makes him a danger if he is out of control. It is the churches responsiblity to keep their services as safe as possible. If someone else is hurt and the church allowed this situation to go on and on, no doubt they would be sued. The parents must face facts, as difficult as they are. It seems the church tried to work things out.
My daughter is a daycare teacher and is requesting a child be removed. She has tried over and over to work with this child. There have been many conferences with parents etc. In the meantime, she, and others, have been spit at, hit, and scratched. This is a small child with no apparent mental health issues. His parents seem concerned also. How to work with them, not hurt the child and yet assure that my daughter’s health and safety is not compromised? The answers are not always so easy. Do we appoint body guards for the teachers and/or parishners?
I work in a public library, and when an autistic teenager came in swearing and yelling, we had to confront her and tell her to behave or she couldn’t stay. She became very cooperative every time she was in the library, and yet I saw her misbehave in the grocery store, etc., especially when she was with her mother.
I did see Adam’s mother interviewed on local television, and she seems to indulge him. I think she has put the church in a terrible position by not being willing to take a firm hand with Adam in church.
Granted, I don’t have an autistic child, and I have no clue what’s it’s like to be in her shoes. but she seems to be trying to be ‘right’ or prove a point, or to ‘be accommodated’, rather than thinking about the others in her congregation.
This a situation that shows that the church and christians are expected to be pushovers by the world–but Jesus was no so.
Perhaps Adam needs to be assigned a ’staff person’ who is larger than he is, and who could attend church with him? I bet the pastor would be perfectly satisfied with such a solution.
I heard this story on my local news. The mother seems to be unreasonable. The offers of accommodation included having a video feed of the mass in a separate room, holding mass at his home, and one other that I cannot remember. All were refused. VS - his parents won’t stay home with him, since church attendance is mandatory for Catholics. That wouldn’t do. This is a HUGE kid, who towers over his mom. And, he seems profoundly autistic, not borderline. I think the church did what they had to do. This is a small church, without tons of space and unlimited resources. They tried to work something out. The mother seems to think they aren’t trying hard enough and aren’t being very understanding of autism. I think others’ safety needs to come first.
I know alot of Catholics who don’t attend church every week.
And I bet this particular church would be willing to make an exception to their “rules”.
VS - I know lots of Catholics who don’t attend church, too, but this mother specifically said her religion mandates church attendance every week. So, she must follow the church requirement. Or, at least for the sake of this argument she does!