Pedro Antonio Hernández González and María del Carmen Oliva Jaraiz reside in the Buen Paso neighbourhood, in Icod de los Vinos. However, their children, Antonio and Guillermo, who are eight-year-old twins diagnosed with Autistic Spectrum Disorder (ASD), attend CEIP Ángel Guimerá in San Juan de la Rambla.
Upon enrolling them in school, they selected this institution because it was smaller and more intimate, featuring its own dining facilities, believing it would be the best environment for their children. Antonio, besides having ASD, also has a diagnosis of severe conduct disorder and possesses a recognised disability of 40%.
Both children are presently in the fourth year of Primary education in a standard classroom. They faced no issues for seven years, but this academic year, the absence of an educational assistant – despite requests made by his mother during the registration with the Department of Education of the Government of the Canary Islands – has led to complications for Antonio, who has already been suspended from the dining facility three times.
Furthermore, he has not attended class since the 14th of November and is not expected back until the 20th due to Article 64, point 1 section b) of Decree 114/2011 of 11 May, which regulates cohabitation in educational establishments. This article states that certain behaviours that endanger the harmony of the educational setting warrant such actions, as evidenced in the suspension documentation that this publication has obtained, where his diagnosis is overlooked.
Section c) of the same article discusses additional behaviours that can severely disrupt the environment in educational centres. Specifically noted is “the humiliation of any member of the educational community with implications related to gender, sexual orientation, race or xenophobia, or actions aimed at more vulnerable students due to their individual, social or educational circumstances.”
This, according to the family, is precisely what has transpired with Antonio, who experiences heightened anxiety when nervous. “At school, they initiated guidelines with consequences and punishments that proved ineffective. They isolated him from the dining hall to eat alone or seated him with younger children instead of his peers,” remarks Maricarmen.
Since the school year commenced, the couple has convened with the educational team, “to work collaboratively, and supportively,” as they promised. Simultaneously, Maricarmen received phone calls “almost daily,” often with the child screaming on the line, informing her, “look at the crisis he’s having.” On some occasions, she felt compelled to collect him and take him home.
One such call occurred last Monday while attending a meeting of Visión Azul Autismo, an association advocating for Autism Spectrum awareness. Feeling overwhelmed, Mamen – as she is known to her friends – activated the hands-free function on her mobile so that family members could witness the child’s distress while the teacher remarked: “Look at how your son is.”
At that moment, they “realised the gravity” of the situation and insisted that she could not allow this to continue. Until then, she had believed the school was supportive. “They convinced me that everything was progressing positively for my child, but they were exploiting me; every time my child screamed or became upset, I had to collect him because they couldn’t manage him at school. They have led me to believe that my son is a monster, instilling hatred towards him with everything they told me he did, all suggesting that I am a woeful mother,” she says, her voice breaking.
Irene Zalba, president of Visión Azul Autismo, a mother of two autistic children and a family counselling psychologist, was present. “What she was experiencing felt normal to her as these calls have been frequent since September. However, she noticed we did not share the same perspective and realised clarifying action was necessary,” she explains.
The association promptly took action, first offering emotional support “since she felt guilty about the ongoing situation and was fearful that the school management would retaliate against her child.” “They made her feel monstrous, as though everything her son did was intentional, and that it was her fault for having such a difficult child.” Additionally, the case has been made public across the entity’s social platforms.
According to her account, the centre “pressured me, instructing me to transport him from one location to another, despite knowing Antonio is undergoing therapy and that I even searched high and low to ensure his well-being. A child with autism is challenging and cannot improve in a day; it takes significant effort,” explains the mother.
On Wednesday, as both attended the Parliament of the Canary Islands alongside other mothers from Visión Azul for a meeting with the Minister of Education, Vocational Training, Physical Activity and Sports, Poli Suárez, Maricarmen’s husband phoned to inform her that the school had initiated the emergency protocol. “Two police officers escorted the boy out of the classroom, treating him like a criminal, in front of his brother and other classmates, expelling him for five days,” she states indignantly.
According to the aforementioned documentation, on Monday, 11 November, Antonio hit several classmates during playtime. Additionally, “he informed his educational assistant that he was feeling distressed as he did not wish to attend maths or physical education.” This statement is the first falsehood, according to his mother, as this role has not been assigned this year. “They have fabricated everything,” she defends her son. Reports suggest he “threatened the teacher” stating “I am going to kill you,” and attempted to enter other classrooms to attack students. It is also noted that the tutor contacted the parents to alert them to the situation and requested they collect him due to the challenges in managing his behaviour, as these incidents “threaten the physical safety of his peers and other students in the school.”
Maricarmen arrived at the school and offered to remain outside during physical education class should any issues arise. After class, Antonio was composed, yet upon reaching the dining hall, “the head teacher informed him he would not be permitted to enter.” She reiterated her offer, but they rejected her, criticising her as “ungrateful,” reprimanding her for “everything they had done” for them, and from that moment on, “they turned their backs on me.”
Two days later, on Wednesday the 13th, they accused Antonio of attempting to harm several classmates and continuing to issue threats “saying he would kill” the teacher, whom he allegedly “cornered in the classroom and assaulted,” alongside the head teacher, who responded to the tutor’s call.
They charged him with entering other classrooms and “causing chaos, slamming doors and opening and closing windows.” As a result of these incidents, the school management enacted the protocol by contacting emergency services.
Maricarmen points out that her son does not have violent outbursts unless triggered by specific circumstances. In this instance, she argues, “it was incited by the teacher, who had been boasting about new virtual reality glasses she purchased and distributed to the class, while intentionally excluding Antonio knowing his fondness for technology.”
“When
You have perused the expulsion report, and it appears my son is regarded as worse than Jack The Ripper. “It states that an 8-year-old child cornered his teacher, who towered over him by two heads, and he is also a remarkably slender boy.”
Maricarmen is unable to work. She receives dependency benefits and cares for her two children, a situation that has inflicted significant harm. Guillermo is reluctant to attend school as “he fears the police will take him away,” and he ponders “what his classmates and his teacher will think about him, who supposedly ‘two years ago was teaching in a special needs classroom,’ and Antonio ‘has lost it.’ They are shattered in every way.”
Since he began school, the educational team at the centre is aware of his son’s diagnosis. “If we can manage him in the office where I occasionally take him, why can they not do the same in a school that has support teachers for students with specific educational needs (NEAE)?” Maricarmen and Pedro question themselves. They conclude: “They want him to be expelled as he is a burden to them.”
The management at CEIP Ángel Guimerá has opted not to comment on this matter at present “due to an ongoing judicial process,” as they informed this newspaper.
According to the Educational Inspection, the student’s situation “has become overwhelming at the start of the academic year,” and they report that “the centre has endeavoured to normalise the situation and mitigate aggressive behaviour, but none of the measures have shown any results.” Furthermore, incidents involving other children in his class and across groups have escalated.
Moreover, they assert that the actions taken on Wednesday to call 112 “were proportional” to the incident, and the centre’s decision to impose a five-day exclusion from classes has also been deemed “appropriate.” They confirm that 112 is contacted “in the most extreme situations where there is a risk, and if not, the coexistence decree is enforced.”
Maricarmen insists that during all her meetings with the centre’s authorities, her children’s teacher, who is also the head of studies, the counsellor, and the director were present. “I was never able to meet with the inspector; he always met with them and I was never in front of them, and they conveyed whatever they wished,” she claims.
“At Visión Azul, we are uniting further to expose these cases”
Irene Zalba confirms that it is the first instance she has encountered a situation like this at Vision Azul Autismo, “where management calls the police while the child already has a diagnosis, and the educational centre has a special needs classroom and can take action.” “If they feel the need to involve someone, I would prefer they call a doctor, a psychiatrist, or a clinical psychologist who can assist in calming these children, if there is no one at the school with the skills to do so,” she emphasises. The president has no doubt that “they are attempting to remove the child from school, but by engaging as an association, the family is no longer isolated; there are more individuals who are backing and supporting them. We are going to unite like never before, and we are going to bring these cases to public attention and report them, as surely this is not the only instance.”
