978-1572305441

158 A MIND APART
in class. That would ensure that Ernest looked forward to coming into
class and was in a good mood at the start of the day. Difficult activities
were interspersed with more fun activities, even if this meant that
Ernest was on a different schedule than the other children in the classroom.
If needed, when those nonverbal signals of frustration began to
escalate, Ernest could have some quiet time, outside the classroom, for
short periods of time, but then a quick return to classroom activities
would ensure that he would not learn how to avoid schoolwork. No
punishments were administered, and the criteria for suspensions were
clearly spelled out. But once these initiatives were in place, there was
never any need for suspension.
I saw Ernest some time later, and it was clear that he had taken to
the picture symbols readily. When he wanted to go outside, he simply
retrieved the picture for outside and showed it to his parents or teacher.
If going outside was impossible, Ernest was shown the appropriate sign,
a simple “Stop” sign that he would have seen all the time with his parents
driving to the bridge. He seemed to understand the meaning of
”no” perfectly well if it was presented to him in a visual format rather
than in a verbal way. The teachers learned that he was not being stubborn
when he did not respond to verbal requests but only that he was
having trouble processing verbal instructions. The frequency of disruptive
and more serious aggressive behavior decreased dramatically, and as
a result, Ernest made much more rapid progress in that one year with a
specific program for him than he did the years before, when suspension
was a common occurrence. He started using the picture system at home
as well; he started asking his parents for help more often; and he engaged
in more social play with his younger sister, playing tag and hide
and seek.
Sometimes it is much more difficult to discern the reasons for disruptive
behavior. Thought experiments that imagine the world from the
perspective of the child with ASD are not always initially successful and
may require diligent effort on everybody’s part. Even with the best of intentions,
the mind of the child or adolescent with ASD can remain
opaque, with troubling consequences, but to respond to disruptive
behavior with suspension and “zero tolerance” is to completely misunderstand
the meaning of having special needs, the responsibility we all
share to preserve diversity. It is to exclude the child from a therapeutic
setting, to expel the most vulnerable members of a community. It is to
see “evil” where none exists, to be punitive where kindness and grace
are required instead. To suspend diminishes both the child and the in-