ASD: on being a special-needs single parent

I have had one of the most exhausting days so far – which is saying a great deal, considering the amount of strife generated in addition to an already unfortunate (to say the least) situation.

I have been chastising myself, since the dust of the ‘screwdriver threat’ fuss settled, for not asking what actually happened. Therefore, this morning, when Carolan arrived, I asked her. ”I’ll show you.”she said; she took out her mobile ‘phone and scrolled through to a video. When she pressed ‘Play’ there was my son, on the big settee in the living room, holding out a screwdriver,perfectly still. This was being filmed from a few yards away, outside the living room doorway. “Put it down” said Carolann’s voice three times. He put it down. The video ended.

I said to Carolan, “I don’t condone pointing things at people; but that isn’t threatening; that’s fear. Could you send me a copy of this, please?”

“I can’t send you a copy,” she said, “Sophie took the video on her ‘phone.” This was news to me. “I believe that, as his mother, I have a legal right to a copy of that video; that is footage of my child.”

“No,” she said, “Sophie took the video; you must ask Sophie.”

I said, “Sophie filmed my child without my consent, and shared it with you without my consent, without having sought my permission in the first place and without telling me that this had been done.”

“Don’t take that tone with me,” she replied, “That is evidence, for Sophie and my protection.” I began to sense a lack of proportion, and I said to her, “I am not one of your pupils, so there is no need to speak to me that way. That is footage of my child, which was taken without my consent or knowledge, and you are refusing to give me a copy.”

At this point Jessica, the babysitter, arrived and I let her in. Carolan came into the hallway with her bag and put her coat on. “I am not going to stay here,” she said and, to me, “You have been very rude to me; talking about lawyers and all sorts.” I had not, I said; I had made clear that I have a legal right, as the parent of the child in the footage, to a copy of that footage. I added, “One of my jobs as a mother is to ensure that my son gets the right help, and this may be helpful to show to professionals whose job it is to support him.”

“You have a most unpleasant tone,” said Carolan; to which I replied that there was very little difference between Carolan’s tone and mine, and that Carolan was using hypocrisy.”

“You’ve twisted things,” said Carolan. At this point, Daniel, uncomfortable with the atmosphere said, “Stop rowing! Mummy, be quiet!”

“Thank you, Daniel,” interjected Carolan, “He is the only sensible one in the situation. Whereas you have made me feel very uncomfortable by being so rude.”

“I can’t make you feel any way,” I said, “How you choose to feel is your prerogative. What I am, however, is polite; I have not raised my voice, I haven’t sworn; I am simply articulating my upset.”

“You’ve twisted it all around,” said Carolan; “It is evidence, for Sophie and I’s protection. There is no need to have been so rude.”

“In that case,” I said, “As I will be requesting a different tutor, I dare say that you will be as relieved as I am not to have you in this house again.”

She left. I walked upstairs because I had begun to cry, and sat on my desk chair in the spare room. Daniel came upstairs and said, “It’s alright.” He gave me a cuddle and then, uncomfortable with the tears, returned downstairs. I tried to ‘phone Mum, but it went through to the answering message, so I left a garbled tearful statement about tutors and rudeness. After a while, I felt able to go downstairs.

I apologised to Jessica, and told her what had happened. She was very surprised and didn’t judge. I went to the gym because I had a personal training session with Olivia, who I know understands (and she did).

When I told her, and Mum, about Carolan refusing to send me a copy of the video of my own child, they both said, “Oh, for fuck’s sake!” About Carolan’s attitude.

I am not simply distraught; I am livid. Whatever possessed the Local Authority to send a mainstream tutor to a child on the autism spectrum? Winchmore’s web site states that they are providers of mainstream tuition and, when I spoke to Natalie, at their office, I asked whether the tutor they were sending had any experience with children on the autism spectrum. She replied that the Local Authority don’t tell them very much, but that Carolan “has a successful record with all of the children she has taught.”

I suspected at the time that this was the sort of answer one receives from a politician, but I kept an open mind. I wa very upset when Carolan first arrived, because Daniel was so traumatised; but I liked her – she seemed ballsy. But I now feel that she and Sophie have colluded in something of a stitch-up on Daniel. I am utterly shocked that Sophie should have taken the footage, not simply without my consent and without telling me that she had, but that she said, as I came down the stairs on Monday, “Daniel’s been threatening us with a screwdriver.” In the shock that followed from that statement (see previous post) I was additionally stressed, and this is why I overlooked the question, at the time, of what had actually happened.

I feel that a mainstream tutor, with no experience of children on the autism spectrum and with no compassion to boot, has made a discriminatory statement and taken advantage of my son’s wiring in order to adopt an accusatory stance and make, quite frankly, a mountain out of a molehill.