to not follow the 48 hour D&V rule, because no one cares?

(55 Posts)

Okay so I have been brainwashed advised by countless MN threads that it's incredibly selfish to take your DC to school or other things without waiting 48 hours after D&V.

I thought this would be universal advice, but now I find myself living in a place where people seem a lot less worried about it.

Last week DS had some mild D&V -- he threw up a few times and had some diarrhea but was not really sick otherwise, was still happy and bouncing around.

My DH thought he should still go to the childminder on the second day, when he didn't throw up at all, but I said no because it hadn't been 48 hours. She also looks after a baby and a little girl who seems to get ill a lot so I thought that was fair enough.

Except, then DH had to take DS to the doctor to get a sick note (so DH could take off work) and the doctor said no, there's no 48 hour rule. And it turns out our childminder would have been fine with having him.

So in future, AIBU to not follow the 48 hour rule, because it's not actually a rule here?

(I'm in France btw)

takataka Thu 13-Dec-12 10:58:37

i think it is a 'rule' impossed/not impossed by the child care setting

really interesting that you dont have it in France

(i tend to think its a bit bollocks, but follow it anyway)

EdithWeston Thu 13-Dec-12 10:58:52

If the CM has a 48 hour rule, then the rule is there.

GPs only provide sick notes for illnesses over one week; so that's a bit of a red herring. You self-certify for periods shorter than at, whatever the cause.

I saw a report today saying that this years norovirus outbreak is the worst for many years, and public health officials are saying that the 48 hours are vital in slowing the spread.

flowerytaleofNewYork Thu 13-Dec-12 11:01:59

How would your doctor know what rules your childminder has? confused If her terms are that she won't take children who've had D&V within 48 hours, then that's the rule, surely?

MarthasHarbour Thu 13-Dec-12 11:03:21

Follow the CM's rule. Our nursery say 24 hours after the last episode of vomiting. If your CM is happy with 24 hours then so be it.

But then i would also always respect another CM/nursery/schools rule if they say 48 hours. Its not worth it otherwise, how would you feel if you LO was constantly ill because other parents didnt respect the rule.

I am sitting on the fence here, as we always go for 24 hours as that is the nursery guide.

manicinsomniac Thu 13-Dec-12 11:05:02

It's usually 24 round here, 48 seems a little excessive

MarthasHarbour Thu 13-Dec-12 11:05:20

and i am speaking as a mama on day 3 of DS's vomiting bug, he still hasnt eaten and is still just sipping water, he is not well, so if other LOs are more vulnerable then - well i would say 48 hours. I think edithwestons advice about stopping the spread is spot on

Ephiny Thu 13-Dec-12 11:06:32

If the doctor says it's fine, and the CM is OK with it, then it doesn't sound like there is any 'rule' confused.

Maybe you could have phoned the CM to check?

Whatistodaysname Thu 13-Dec-12 11:07:52

I kept DS off - but then he hates school anyway and I love having him home!

School has a published policy of 48 hours.

GhoulWithADragonTattoo Thu 13-Dec-12 11:12:06

My DS's nursery has a 48 hour rule. But DD's school has only a 24 hour rule. It's difficult to know what to do for the best so I'd just follow the rule of your CM. My DC's were in a creche in France while we were on holiday and they had a 24 hour rule (I know as my DS got sick while we were there).

Well, this is my dilemma really -- I do see that waiting 48 hours is a good idea to keep bugs from spreading, but if DS doesn't really seem sick at all, is it overkill? Should I still follow the rule if I don't have to?

To be clear, I wouldn't send DS if he were still obviously sick, but he was totally fine.

Edith -- we're not in the UK so the sick leave rules are different

Ephiny -- agree we would normally have checked with the CM but for various long and boring reasons we had to decide what to do when she wasn't reachable

Goldmandra Thu 13-Dec-12 11:12:38

The childcare setting generally follow the advice published by the Health Protection Agency which is probably the most reliable advice available as to how to reduce transmission of these horrible bugs.

I always follow the 49 hour rule and will also follow the 2 week swimming rule now I know about it.

I should add, I'm glad to hear some places just have 24 hour rules, I didn't know that.

GhoulWithADragonTattoo Thu 13-Dec-12 11:16:29

I think it does depend how sick they were as well. My DD vomited once in bed last week and I kept her off school one day only as she was fine afterwards. She almost certainly didn't have a virus. If she'd had ongoing D and V I'd be more likely to err on the side of 48 hours, even though rule is 24.

hazeyjane Thu 13-Dec-12 11:18:56

It was a 48 hour rule when I was in hospital and there was a d+v bug going around the wards. So I always assumed it was advised by the nhs.

Is it different in France because it is standard to vaccinate against rotavirus?

bradywasmyfavouritewiseman Thu 13-Dec-12 11:20:20

Its not a law. Its a rule that CMS, nurseries and schools have. But not all.

Its the rule at our school as is the current medical advice (dd has had norovirus this winter) so I follow it.

If the rule isn't there at your cm don't follow it.

Goldmandra Thu 13-Dec-12 11:35:58

It's not just about whether the child will be sick again. It's also about the bugs remaining in their system being transmitted to others, especially in Early Years settings because children are not good at hand washing.

ToffeeCaramel Thu 13-Dec-12 11:54:22

The 48 hour rule is advised by the UK NHS. It's on their website. Are there no guidelines in France at all?

goldenlula Thu 13-Dec-12 12:00:05

Our school it is 24 hours from the last bout of sickness/ diarrhoea.

I don't know whether there's a national guideline for France (no NHS equivalent) -- I admit, my experience here is totally anecdotal.

It can be a lot more difficult to take off work here when your child is sick, so perhaps that's why they are more flexible about it?

Most people these days are hired on short-term contracts which often give you no provision for leave in case of child illness. You have to rely on your employer's goodwill (unless you are a single parent, in which case legally they have to give you leave).

zzzzz Thu 13-Dec-12 12:09:53

My dd is epileptic, the consequences for us of D&V bugs are that she doesn't absorb her meds. If she has seizures unmedicated the consequences can be death, brain damage, injury, this can lead to prolonged stays in hospital, which makes life very difficult for her siblings. sad

Obviously we can't live in a bubble, but the 48 hr rule does reduce the number of D&V bugs.

MrsKeithRichards Thu 13-Dec-12 12:14:14

I think you need to use a bit of common sense, one spew isn't a bug, 24 hours as a precaution is ample.

zzzzz, it's stories like yours that have me wondering whether I should do 48 hours even if I don't 'have' to.

As I said, I feel like the other two mindees are a bit vulnerable to bugs.

On the other hand, our childminder has been doing this for ages and is great, I don't think she would say it isn't a problem if she thought it could be.

Agreed, Mrskeith -- in this case, DS was sick one night, then twice the next day, and had a bit of diarrhea; then he was fine for two days, then he threw up again. So definitely had something or other.

It was tricky mostly because he was completely unbothered by it, except for not eating very much he was his usual happy self.

We felt a bit silly the second day he was off because he was obviously not sick at all, it was just precautionary.

bigbadbarry Thu 13-Dec-12 12:20:44

Our school imposes a 24 hour rule not 48, so i assume it is discretionary not set in stone.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now