Education and socialization of mentally challenged people. Similarities and differences.
Education is more than just writing papers, getting assignment help, or paying someone to do my assignments. In actuality, education encompasses a wide range of activities, including socialization. In essence, “psychic socialization” takes place during elementary school, which is considered the second childhood. Prior to this, the child’s focus was on asymmetrical relationships with adults and was disconnected from the modes of our adult sociality, at least in terms of its democratic and cooperative aspects. Teenagers then separate themselves from group affiliations and individualize.
Particularities of the issue affecting kids with disabilities
This can only be a significant issue for kids with disabilities, especially those who have the most obvious or severe disabilities. Supporting these kids in their neighborhood and among kids their age is absolutely not enough for them to gain from this parity-shaping experience. It is systematically surrounded by asymmetrical relations, far from benefiting from the structuring experience of reciprocal relations. Since he is always in need of assistance that he can never repay, save in rare circumstances, the help that one brings him is frequently devastating. The ability to envision potential reciprocities is a function of adults’ illusions or dreams. It is also important to emphasize that adults frequently have a natural tendency to favor this lack of reciprocity; after all, this tendency is inherent in both the reality of the handicap itself and the etymology of the word used to describe it.
This observation leads to the conclusion that a disabled child enrolled in a regular classroom is not socialized in the truest sense of the word, and does not gain from the socialization and psychic development brought on by actual parity. For a child who has experienced severe academic failure, the same is somewhat true.
These children’s parents felt the need to unite on a global scale, so they planned annual international gatherings for both themselves and their kids. They probably needed it for themselves in part. It was also, obviously, necessary for these kids, who discovered there the rare, liberating opportunity to live once as “normal,” “like the others.” These groupings or their evocation served as the only scenes in the movie where we could see these kids and teenagers smile or laugh.
A prerequisite for maturation is the social experience of successfully integrating a child into their peer group. The relative release of oedipal issues, which denotes the beginning of the second childhood, was previously a prerequisite. It is this experience that suggests using the term “parity experience” for simplicity’s sake.
This calls into question the prerequisites for such a parity experience and, in turn, the prerequisites for receiving its maturing advantages. We concentrate almost solely on the precise identity of the ages due to the current socialization circumstances of children of this age. Apart from cultural effects, this strict homogeneity seems unimportant and even harmful. This kind of homogeneity is never seen in other social structures. Children’s age groups in tribal or rural societies, or even in illiterate urban areas, tend to be quite erratic.
Even when they attend the same class, not all of the kids in the groups of children constitute actual peer groups. The difference between boys and girls is the one that is the clearest, most consistent, and most resilient to environmental changes. This is the clearest indication of a second childhood peer group trait, which is a strong propensity for intolerance toward difference. The same is true of all other modes of differentiation, including social differences, racial differences, academic achievement differences, and differences in dominant poles of interest, even though it is obviously to a lesser extent and in a less consistent manner. It seems as though child group identification could only be successful at the expense of group homogeneity. This serves as the testing ground for the competitive spirit and the “sports spirit” that are so characteristic of second childhood and systematize sex and level differences.
I believe that the lack of parity experience brought on by immersion in the regular school environment is more detrimental to the future sociability of children with disabilities than their traditional exclusion from regular school circuits. The development of their future sociability’s intrapsychic foundations is weakened or rendered impossible as a result. There is no way to develop their inner capacity to engage in regular social interactions.
Thus, in clear terms, contrary to the current official guidelines, children with disabilities need, in order to socialize psychically, moments of grouping and life between children with similar handicaps.
