Skip to main content

re: Pauline Hanson's comment about autistic children

The differences between mild and severe autism are so great it seems largely useless to lump them all under the one term. 

That may explain why so many people are upset with Pauline Hanson's statement about removing autistic children from classrooms. 

No-one would deny a child a place in a classroom if they are not disruptive, are capable of following the class, and want to be there. 

I expect Hanson would agree. 

Any disruptive child is clearly being poorly managed and needs to be listened to and placed in an environment which is pleasing to them, where they can function well and thrive, not somewhere they despise, which causes them to rebel and upset the ability of fellow students to learn.

Classes need to be allocated by student interests, ability and prior knowledge, not age range.

Lumping students in together solely based on the year they were born seems idiotic to me.

I understand teachers are taught to organise classes to suit students of differing abilities and interests but it would be easier to let students choose their classes based on their interests and abilities rather than throw them all in together with a teacher without specialist knowledge, who has to manage too many students, many of whom may have no interest in the subject at hand. 

This just make an unpleasant situation for all, not least the teacher who has to deal with disruptive students who don't want to be there.


Popular posts from this blog

The only meaningful science on vaccines...

Is missing.

What is that science?
Comparing children who receive various regimes of vaccines against those who receive none at all, for a wide variety of health outcomes, over the next 15-20 years of their life, and beyond.
Such studies are not done because they are deemed unethical.

Why unethical? 

Because it is assumed that childhood vaccines do more good than harm, and that the current childhood vaccine schedule is fine, and to deny children vaccines when they are presumed safe and effective would be an act of criminal negligence.
None, because it would be "unethical" to complete the studies that would prove this.

Catch-22, anyone?
Therefore, we don't know if these assumptions about safety and effectiveness are true or not.
And we never will, unless such comparative studies are done. 

And such studies would only be meaningful if conducted by someone without a dog in the fight- that is, not aligned with promoting or resisting community vaccine uptake.

And, as anyone…

A critical analysis of the flu vaccine - CHRIS KIRCKOF

It's flu season!

According to all official health reports, we are now fully in flu season. I remember being taught the seasons, why did my teachers keep the secret 5th season known as the flu a secret from me? It is that time of year when public health officials, physicians pediatricians and pharmacists warn that everyone over 6 months of age should protect themselves and get vaccinated. Most Americans, believing the government’s propaganda about the safety and benefits of the flu vaccine, are joining the inoculation lines without pausing to consider the accuracy and legitimacy of health officials’ and pediatrician claims.

A CBS Investigative Report, published in October 2012, exemplifies the unreliable and perhaps intentionally deceptive misinformation campaign steered by the US government health agencies every flu season. After the CDC refused to honor CBS’s Freedom of Information request to receive flu infection data by individual state, the network undertook an independent in…

Conflict is best avoided

Interpersonal conflict wastes valuable time and energy that could be better devoted to other, more fulfilling things.

Our energies are best spent creating a fulfilling life for ourselves and those we care about, not attempting to destroy another person, group or idea.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but the opinions of others are irrelevant in terms of how we wish to live our lives, and how we wish to interpret reality.

That is, we are under no obligation to listen to others or respond to them in any way.
Our lives are our own to create, and no one else's!

If we share a physical space with others, or trade goods and services with them, we will need to come to agreements, but otherwise our life is our own to create, in any way we see fit.

If others don't share our views or support our choices there is no need to fight them on it.
Instead, we must discover what works best for us and practice it, while allowing others the same freedom.