However, his son was not happy about that and claimed he did not want Jason to feel left out– especially because his son was Jason’s first and really only friend.
Despite that, he opted to still tell his son no since he did not think he would be able to take proper care of Jason. At the same time, he didn’t think it was right or appropriate for that responsibility to fall on his son, either.
His son really did not understand his perspective, though. And according to him, this pushed his son to start having a pretty bad attitude. That’s why, in the end, he decided to just cancel the entire sleepover. But, after he filled his wife in on what had happened, he was accused of being the problem.
More specifically, his wife claimed that he was an ableist by declining to invite Jason just because of the little boy’s disability. His wife also pointed out how he should have just contacted Jason’s mother. That way, they could have learned how to best accommodate Jason in order to make him feel included at the sleepover.
So, even though he thought he was doing the right thing in the beginning, he’s now been left wondering whether refusing to allow his son to invite Jason to the sleepover made him a real jerk.
Do you think it was his job to decide whether he was able to properly care for Jason without having any information about the little boy’s condition? Or should he have just reached out to Jason’s parents to find out about accommodations? Did his son have a right to be upset in this situation?
You can read the original post on Reddit here.
If true crime defines your free time, this is for you: join Chip Chick’s True Crime Tribe