Poll: Autistic child asked to leave movie theater- do you agree?

[Sean Hollyman]

I was reading an article about an autistic child who was being disruptive and asked to leave. It got me thinking so I thought I'd ask you guys thoughts on the matter.

Personally I agree that if they are being disruptive to paying customers, they should be asked to leave. Yes it's unfortunate that they have the problem, but the parents should at least be aware of the distress it could cause others around them.

What do you think?

 

[Thaluikhain]

Not enough information.

Was the kid actually being disruptive? Could the parents have, say, gotten them to settle down instead?

 

[tippy2k2]

Ho boy I'm setting myself up for a crucifixion if I'm wrong here but...

I can't see very many people saying that it's not OK for the kid to be removed from the theater. There are some settings where being disruptive is not OK and the movie theater should be one of them. It's terribly unfortunate that this kid can't/won't stay quiet due to their disability but that's something that an adult caretaker should have known going in. You put the kid you're supposed to be caring for in a horrible position to fail.

However, with that said, it DOES somewhat depend on what they're seeing and when. The theaters by my house have special "Small Children" movie screenings where the entire point is that people with small children (a loud and disruptive group) can go see a movie without fear of getting dirty looks when their kid gets fussy.

Note: thaluikhain brings it up right above me but I am posting this with the assumption that the kid was being disruptive in a clear way since we don't technically know what he/she was actually doing.

 

[Sean Hollyman]

Not enough information.

Was the kid actually being disruptive? Could the parents have, say, gotten them to settle down instead?

Being very loud and noisy. Making it difficult to hear the film for those around him.

 

[StriderShinryu]

Ho boy I'm setting myself up for a crucifixion if I'm wrong here but...

I can't see very many people saying that it's not OK for the kid to be removed from the theater. There are some settings where being disruptive is not OK and the movie theater should be one of them. It's terribly unfortunate that this kid can't/won't stay quiet due to their disability but that's something that an adult caretaker should have known going in. You put the kid you're supposed to be caring for in a horrible position to fail.

However, with that said, it DOES somewhat depend on what they're seeing and when. The theaters by my house have special "Small Children" movie screenings where the entire point is that people with small children (a loud and disruptive group) can go see a movie without fear of getting dirty looks when their kid gets fussy.

Note: thaluikhain brings it up right above me but I am posting this with the assumption that the kid was being disruptive in a clear way since we don't technically know what he/she was actually doing.

That's pretty much my thought as well, and my local theatres also offer special matinee childrens showings where disturbances are not only allowed but to be expected. I feel for the child and their parent/guardian but that doesn't mean they shouldn't have to be respectful of others.

 

[DefunctTheory]

Can you provide the article? All I can find on google are people discussing the article itself.

 

[JoJo]

On the information given, it seems fairly reasonable to me. Disabilities should be accommodated for as much as is reasonably possible but it simply isn't fair on the many other customers to ruin their experience to accommodate for this one disruptive child.

 

[Eamar]

Yeah, it's perfectly justified to ask them to leave. In fact, I would probably be pissed off if any excessively disruptive person (small child, autistic, drunk, whatever) wasn't removed. While it obviously sucks for the kid and I'm honestly not trying to demonise them or anything, everyone else in the cinema has paid good money to see the film with the expectation that everyone else would abide by the relevant social conventions , one person doesn't get to disrupt their experience, even if they do have a disability or condition.

I've had a handful of experiences where I've been in a cinema and a person with some sort of handicap (not necessarily autism) has become very loud and distracting, and it was always a massive relief when their carers/parents decided to remove them, whether permanently or just long enough to calm them down. It's never got to a stage where management's had to get involved, thankfully.

All that said, I do think these people should be catered to if it all possible. Someone's already mentioned special kids' screenings, but at least here in the UK there are also dedicated "autism friendly" showings, where in addition to it being ok for people to make noise/move around, the lights are a bit less dimmed and the sound is less loud. Seems like a good way of dealing with the issue without excluding people.

 

[shootthebandit]

All that said, I do think these people should be catered to if it all possible. Someone's already mentioned special kids' screenings, but at least here in the UK there are also dedicated "autism friendly" showings, where in addition to it being ok for people to make noise/move around, the lights are a bit less dimmed and the sound is less loud. Seems like a good way of dealing with the issue without excluding people.

Are these exclusively for autistic people or just autism freindly. These seem ideal for me. I hate being sat for ages without being able to move around. I hate the darkness in the cinema because it burns my retinas when I go out into the sunlight and the cinema is far too noisey. I can see why they would be distruptive

the cinema near me is an old fashioned picture house with an organist at the interval. Its a much nicer atmosphere than your average faceless odean/cineworld and its a lot cheaper. The interval is great because you can get up and exercise at half-time so your arse doesnt go numb

 

[RJ 17]

That's fine to make them leave. The rules should apply to everyone, regardless of autism, etc, or not.
It's not fair on everyone else.
The parent should be able to handle them properly.

That's what I was going to say: "rules are rules". If some drunk was in there causing a disturbance, they'd be asked to leave. If some jackass is talking on their cellphone every 5 minutes, they'd be asked to leave. If you had a screaming baby with you, you'd be asked to leave.

The key to remember is that the family was asked to leave because the kid was being disruptive, not because the kid was autistic. Having a disability doesn't give you free-reign to break the rules.

 

[Jacco]

I'm impressed, Escapist. The responses in this thread are surprisingly moderate and level headed. I came in here expecting people to be calling for the manager's head, as is often the case in these types of threads. What a nice surprise.

OT: I agree with pretty much everyone here. Just because he's autistic doesn't mean we can't remove him. After all, the other people there paid money that was just as good to be there. It's not fair to them to ruin the experience.

 

[Happiness Assassin]

If a baby cries in the theater, do the parents have to leave then? If someone is unable to enjoy a film without being disruptive, the theater has every right to remove them.

 

[Worgen]

Anyone who is being disruptive during a movie in a theater should be removed. The Alamo draft-house doesn't put up with shit from its patrons and I agree.

 

[Phrozenflame500]

I'm impressed, Escapist. The responses in this thread are surprisingly moderate and level headed. I came in here expecting people to be calling for the manager's head, as is often the case in these types of threads. What a nice surprise.

Eh, whenever I see this type of thread in particular most people tend to side against the disabled person.

Of course it depends on the context, but in this case it sounds like he was being disruptive to other paying customers in which case it's the theatre's right (and I'd argue responsibility) to remove him.

 

[moggett88]

I work in a care home for autistic adults, and I say I definitely agree with this.

The most common complaint the guys I work with have is that they are treated differently from everyone else due to the nature of their autism. If I was making a lot of noise in a cinema, I'd expect to be kicked out, so it's absolutely fair I think.

That said, my local cinema now has "autism friendly" screenings of most films, so there are provisions for people who aren't able to watch films quietly.

 

[K12]

I agree with the decision although I hope it was done gently and ejecting him/her wasn't the first resort.

No disability should give you carte blanche to act in any way in any context.

I actually think that being too resistant to eject a disruptive person because they have learning difficulties or some disability is detrimental to both them and society as a whole. Autistic children need to be taught boundaries where possible and having to put up with a very big disruption because "they can't help it" may damage the way that Autistic people are viewed in general (because people generalise).

Be patient and understanding but allowing your experience to be ruined doesn't help anybody.

 

[Zombie_Fish]

Are these exclusively for autistic people or just autism freindly. These seem ideal for me. I hate being sat for ages without being able to move around. I hate the darkness in the cinema because it burns my retinas when I go out into the sunlight and the cinema is far too noisey. I can see why they would be distruptive

They're not exclusively for autistic people; sometimes they will be advertised as 'sensory friendly' to be more general. More information on them is available here [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_friendly#Movie_cinema].

 

[Orks da best]

I'm impressed, Escapist. The responses in this thread are surprisingly moderate and level headed. I came in here expecting people to be calling for the manager's head, as is often the case in these types of threads. What a nice surprise.

OT: I agree with pretty much everyone here. Just because he's autistic doesn't mean we can't remove him. After all, the other people there paid money that was just as good to be there. It's not fair to them to ruin the experience.

If it was something related to EA, Valve, gaming, etc. it would be what you expected. This is more or less a case that is black and white and less likely to push some buttons.