What’s Wrong With a Special Dance?

My local news presented a story with the following facts:  A young boy with autism went to his middle school dance where the dress code required a button-down shirt.  He arrived in sweatpants, collarless shirt, and hoodie; he was turned away for failing to meet the dress requirements of the dance.  He was taken to the office where his parents were called to bring him a change of clothes so he could attend.   He is comfortable in the sweat outfit, not comfortable in the required attire, so rather than change he went home in tears.  His mother posted the story on Facebook, and soon there was a call for the community to support the student by wearing his favorite color one day.  Then a do-good group and the parents hosted an alternate school dance where he could wear the sweatpants outfit and the other students came to celebrate him.  The school has apologized, called it a miscommunication, and vows to work with the parent in the future. 

The story was presented sympathetically to the student, with the underlying message that the school was somehow uncaring or wrong.  The newsreader who presented the story was all choked up with sympathy for the boy and for the wonderful people who made the alternate prom happen and the community that came together to support the child.  This was clearly supposed to be a feel-good story.

So, what’s wrong with this you say – a student gets to have his own dance and wear what he wants where it is all about him.  Well, here’s one thing that is wrong:  we are sending the message that if you don’t like the rules then that’s OK, you don’t have to follow them and indeed you will be rewarded for not doing so, for being upset about being told you must.  We are sending the message that when something happens that one doesn’t like all they need is to post on social media and they will be loved.  The parents are sending the message that the child, because of his autism - because of who he is - is some sort of victim.  And, the school, with its apology, suggests that its rules are really meaningless and that it’s OK to violate them. 

What should have happened? First, the school, rather than apologize for a reasonable rule, should have simply reaffirmed this reasonable dress code and that students who want to come to the dance must indeed dress as required.  They are sorry if some don’t like it, but that’s the way it is. If not in place, they might create some procedure for requesting an exemption.   In reacting this way, the school would be teaching students that life is filled with choices and those choices come with consequences.  Here, there was a dress code.  The student had the choice to comply and go to the dance or not comply and miss the dance.  When he was not dressed appropriately he had the opportunity to change and attend the dance.  Students would begin to learn that life is filled with rules and obligations, and that while one is free to follow or not follow those rules, each course of action results in its own consequences.  That is, the school could teach the lesson that we don’t always get to have everything our way and do everything we want.  And not having things our way, choosing not to follow reasonable rules, does not make one a victim.

And, the parents might also have taken a different approach.  Since the student was in middle school his parents were likely (or should have been) still quite involved in his plans for the dance.  They would have known the dress code and should have told their son what he was required to wear.  If he regularly has trouble wearing clothes other than those he is comfortable in, then they should have taken extra steps to understand if any dress code was in force and if it would allow him to wear his choice of clothes.  If they thought the dress code was unreasonable, here was a wonderful opportunity to teach their son how one can have a dialog with a rule-maker and advocate for a change to a rule (and also an opportunity to perhaps teach that while there are ways to challenge rules, one does not always win that challenge).   What they should not have done was wait until their son was turned away and then make their child into some sort of victim on social media while they participated in attracting media attention to him as they sought to make him somehow so special that even reasonable rules should not get in the way of anything to which he (or they) feels entitled.

Once aware of the requirement for a button-down shirt, and, if unable to get it changed or an exemption for their son, if the parents thought their son would be too uncomfortable or if he was unwilling to comply with the code, then they should have gently explained to him that those were the rules and if he could not follow them then he would not be able to go to the dance.   If they wanted to have a party on their own with whatever dress code they liked that is fine, but it should not be billed as an alternate prom, presented in order to excuse the student’s failure to comply with the rules, and certainly should not be funded or sponsored by people who are in essence supporting the idea that rules are not important and if you are not comfortable with them you needn’t follow them and may also be rewarded for not doing so.

Of course it is easy to sympathize with the student and his parents.  He is autistic; the mother wants him to fit in but he has difficulty doing so.  As would any mother, she wants him to be happy.  But a parent’s job is far more than just providing immediate happiness or gratification for one’s child. Aren’t there times when even an autistic child will need to follow a simple dress code?  And, if the child cannot do so, then isn’t it important that he understand that because of who he is he will not always be able to participate in some things?  (And no, this is not cruel and not biased against the autistic.  It is realistic.  We all have things we can and cannot do and we need to learn that in life our abilities will to some extent guide our choices and that with our choices come consequences.  Hence, if we choose not to meet a particular requirement because it is uncomfortable for us or because we just don’t want to, then we need to understand that there will be consequences of not meeting that requirement.  And those consequences should not include a production of an activity replicating the one that our choice to not meet the requirements caused us to miss).

Sadly, what this story really underscores is that today we seem to be teaching not responsibility, understanding, and cooperation,  but selfishness, victim-hood, and entitlement.  A selfishness that includes support for violating rules and condemning those who imposed the rules in the first place.  These were not unreasonable rules; many schools have dress codes for their dances and proms and a button-down shirt is certainly not out of the mainstream of such requirements.   Here was an opportunity to teach how one can go about getting rules changed; here was an opportunity to teach how to deal with life’s difficult situations without playing the victim.  Do we really want to teach our children that they can always do whatever they want, ignore whatever rules they want and yet still have that for which the rules were a prerequisite?  That approach to life, that focus on immediate happiness, gratification, and entitlement is more suited to a toddler than to an adult.  Unfortunately, we already see this sort of mindset in many adults, and many more who continue to foster it.  Parents, schools, and society at large need to find the backbone to teach and demand a less selfish and more mature way of interacting with the world.