Labour want teachers to supervise kids brushing their teeth ARGH.

[noblegiraffe]

People can't get dentists for their children.

Children's teeth are one of the top reasons for child hospital admission, with 9 out of 10 extractions in 0-5 year olds being due to preventable decay.

This is clearly an area that needs addressing urgently.

BUT schools are in crisis, if they're not literally falling apart they are running out of teachers or unable to hire teaching assistants. Primary schools are increasingly unable to meet the needs of children with SEN and disabilities, where numbers are going through the roof. Where is the time to supervise teeth-brushing going to come from? Who has the capacity to implement this? It seems that Labour are willing to accept that there is a crisis in dentistry, but pushing extra workload onto schools to solve it is just failing to recognise the crisis in schools in terms of ability to take on extra responsibilities.

There is an increasing trend to see a problem in society and expect schools to do something about it. There's also an increasing trend whereby underfunded support services for children reduce the offer of those services, and schools are just expected to pick up the slack. An example would be NHS Southwest deciding to stop accepting referrals for autism diagnosis except in cases of extreme need, saying that schools could just deal with these children not having a diagnosis. CAMHS collapsing under the weight of mental health issues in children was met with the policy that schools should have a member of staff given a bit of training to try to replace expert services. Special schools are saying that some children are too needy for their specialist setting, so those children with extreme needs are left in mainstream schools who are just expected to get on with it.

Why is Labour's go-to that teachers should supervise teeth brushing and not that parents should supervise teeth brushing and be supported in this?

What do people want the purpose of schools to be? If it is to educate children, then the rest of this stuff needs to be farmed elsewhere.

If it is to be that schools should be a one-stop-shop for all issues relating to children, then we need funding, staffing and infrastructure that acknowledges this new role.

ATTENDANCE is almost never FAMILY RELATED in my experience, it is SCHOOL RELATED due to UNMET NEED.

Sorry for the capitals, but I really want to drum this into people's heads. It is SCHOOL which is the issue.

They already do this in areas of Wales. It focuses on teaching children the way to brush their teeth in case parents haven’t and is also part of the teaching around healthy food but with an oral hygiene focus. The teachers are given resources and seem to do it in normal lesson time here. The children also get a fluoride varnish on their teeth for extra protection. I’m not sure why it’s an issue? It’s a sensible approach to helping the children whose parents haven’t taken the responsibility to look after their teeth. It’s not done for hours a day, it’s usually a very quick thing involving the whole class being shown how to do it themselves to a song and reminded to practice at home. The children bring home toothpaste and toothbrushes. It’s bloody sad it’s at that level and parents aren’t doing it enough across the board, but I don’t think it’s terrible for teachers. Ours do it well and it’s just planned out as part of the school day.

I haven't read the thread but first thought is can you have the whole school of say 100 pupils all storing their toothbrushes and spitting into the same sinks - sounds a recipe for infection spread.

Anyone who thinks attendance is all family related shouldn't be working with children.

There are cases of both. Many children with parents with addiction issues or other serious problems are not brought to school. Yes, unmet need is a huge issue, but don’t write off the children whose home lives are the reason they don’t attend. The situation is unlikely to improve for either of those groups while the Tories are in power, though they both need the same level of support. (We’ve had school refusal with my sons adhd, I managed to get him in, but I won’t be able to when he’s bigger if he says no. I know of a number in each group and some who fit both.)

Just like with tooth brushing - some children struggle because of sensory issues, but those are not the children being targeted here. They also need support but this approach is for those who are able to be taught to brush their teeth and haven’t been because in some cases parents don’t brush their teeth. This kind of low level neglect is often something where the parent experienced the same. The group with sensory needs or similar also need support, but this approach isn’t tackling that.

I had an idea last night about schools. I’m aware this would cost a shit ton of money and require the whole system to be redesigned, before anyone says that.

But how about we make the school day 8.30 - 5.30. Breakfast, (teeth brushing?!) a run around, school, (including a run around) then after school gardening, cooking, another run around and a snack.

Might that help with mental health for kids (exercise, food, gardening etc) and level the playing fiend a bit with underprivileged kids? Plus reduce childcare bills?

Unless we ban phones or do forced sterilisation of certain sections of society we aren’t going to solve the problem of some kids home lives. So how about the state DOES take over, in the hope it improves prospects for some of the children?

The govt have discussed extending the school day with compulsory extra curricular stuff after school but the idea stalled probably because of the cost, the staffing (teachers wouldn’t do it!) and the idea that some parents want their kids home from school earlier.

It was one of the recommendations for the children’s covid catch-up programme recommended by Sir Kevan Collins. The govt refused to pay money for supporting kids in recovering from the pandemic and he quit as adviser. I wonder if schools would be in quite the state they are now with mental health issues and SEN if his recommendations had been followed.

I don't see it's a terrible idea but it should be funded.

The other thing is neglect of children and their teeth. Likewise, washing, dirty clothes, lack of food, basic toileting. Teachers have to address it but why them.

All of this should be referred onto social services (and yes they need funding). Child neglect is a real thing, it can be a sign of abuse. Those children should be helped. Just putting more duties on teachers is not going to help,

If their homes are so terrible that you want them in school as long as possible then school is an inappropriate intervention as it is only open 190 days a year. That’s only 52%! What about the other half of the year?

such a sad thread thinking how bad home life must be

i think every school child should have a NHS dentist place regardless but i very much doubt the child would be taken if the parent cant be bothered to make sure they brush

That's the bit where we learn the things that are normal. They must be, as the adults we spend over half the year with are apparently not paid enough to tell us otherwise.

Yes, lives could be better outside the gates. But the fact is that for many children, they are not and it was ever thus. It's the reason why Free School Meals were introduced. It's the reason why there used to be a Nit Nurse. It's the reason why vaccinations take place in schools. It's the reason why DSLs exist and schools facilitate counselling, assessments, Social Workers in Schools and provide breakfasts, toiletries, washing facilities, government funded period items and everything else that is being argued to be Not Teachers' Problems. It would be nice to acknowledge that a lot of the time, it's not a teacher's problem, it's something that's being done by Support Staff, but that's by the bye

Schools have almost always been a safe haven for thousands of children. Is a message 'It's not our job and we need to be paid more as a result' really what the message should be? It's what it comes across as to the layperson. And to some Support Staff, who are the ones actually handling a lot of it for no payrises or progression.

Can you find the info on this more funding?

They were talking about how the overhaul of schools would be ensuring they are better equipped.

I've looked at the webchat with Bridget Phillipson and she talks about money for teacher recruitment but can't promise any pay rises for teachers. She wants to 'raise the status of teachers' which is about as useless a statement as you can get

Yes obviously more funding is much more important, but trying to instil in Joe Public the actual value of a teacher is obviously a good thing and definitely a better message than is being sent by our current government and its media outlets, which is, your don't deserve better, you don't deserve respect, that filters down into the beliefs of the public I.e parents , especially after years and years of it. It stinks of this is an acceptable way to treat teachers and people wonder why parents have that attitude.

Funding for mental health is a trained mental health professional in each school, which the Tories already tried and they can't recruit them and a whole load quit because it was too stressful. So 🤷‍♀️

Sorry, no they are talking about funding in youth mental health outside of school and mentioned having local hubs of youth mental Health, Investing in the NHS youth mental health services which concentrates on bringing down waiting times on mental health and SEN diagnosis wait times. Recruiting more specialised staff to help with this.

She talks about tough economic times and not having any money. The cavalry it ain't

I, and most I know, don't agree with everything, believe we need more and certainly are not naive enough to believe it to be "the cavalry" but we are looking at it as a recognition of change is needed, an attempt to make change. It will not be an instant fix from the years and years of the current governments underfunding, it will take time to change the mindset of others that have been ingrained into them by our current government that we are nothing and raise school staff back up again to be a job that is to respected.

It's the reason why Free School Meals were introduced. It's the reason why there used to be a Nit Nurse. It's the reason why vaccinations take place in schools. It's the reason why DSLs exist and schools facilitate counselling, assessments, Social Workers in Schools and provide breakfasts, toiletries, washing facilities, government funded period items and everything else that is being argued to be Not Teachers' Problems.

And as I said in my OP, if schools are to be one-stop-shops for everything that is increasingly being put upon them, then that needs to be openly acknowledged and properly funded and resourced. You know that the breakfasts and toiletries and washing facilities and so on are not. The use of schools for vaccinations during covid was incredibly problematic, and the directions for school staff to conduct covid tests crossed even more boundaries. These are not straightforward decisions.

Schools have almost always been a safe haven for thousands of children. Is a message 'It's not our job and we need to be paid more as a result' really what the message should be?

I didn't say 'we should be paid more as a result'. I said it isn't our job to supervise toothbrushing and the question of whether it should be our job to supervise toothbrushing is actually a reasonable one. "Won't somebody think of the children" is merely an effort to avoid the discussion.

Is it appropriate to have schools as the 'safe haven' for thousands of children, to wash, clean, feed, and potentially to ensure the dental hygiene of when children are not there for nearly half the year? Is that the best level of care that those children can hope for?

If schools are to become children's centres, then that question needs to be tackled. And the washing, cleaning, feeding and teeth-brushing of neglected children needs to be managed properly.

It's not a good thing for children for the government to decide schools 'can just' handle every aspect of a child's needs. For the obvious reason that they can't - not because teachers aren't paid enough but because it's not physically possible for school staff to do parenting, counselling, therapy, medical care etc alongside delivering the curriculum that they're trained and qualified to teach in a vacuum of any other services. Saying 'schools can take it on' means that children are going to lose out on something else they're supposed to get from school. There aren't enough staff, there isn't enough time, it tries to put a sticking plaster over the gaping holes where other services should be and the result is that children lose. Not because teachers can't be bothered or don't care, but because it is not possible for schools to do everything. Not without a massive overhaul and enormous changes to what schools are - which would require more funding, facilities and trained staff and for more time.

If schools are to become safe havens for children to wash, clean teeth, feed and change nappies for, with no extra staff or money, then the government and parents will have to accept that less teaching and learning will be going on. This is so far from the case though-with Ofsted expectation being that every child learns all the time and if they’re looking out if the window, it’s because you’re not engaging them properly.

Are the learning expectations/monitoring/standards/curriculum also going to change? Or are teachers supposed to ensure their class are clean,
changed, fed and washed but still do exactly the same as they were expected to before, with no TA whilst being watched by someone IMPORTANT with a clipboard writing down that you seem a bit stressed, you’ve just raised your voice at a child, you haven’t written the date in the board yet and Johnny still has toothpaste all down his jumper (the parents might complain)?

Parents are being made to go back to work when children are still babies, it isn't a surprise that a lot of stuff that used to be taught by parents isn't happening so consistently now. We have babies being dropped off at 7am and not being picked up until 6.30pm. That is a lot of time outside of parental care and parents are generally exhausted from working and night wakings.

We need to bring back a lot of child support services and remove the expectation that parents work with children under five - unless that is their choice rather than necessity. It still amazes me how far things have changed since I had my first child. A single parent could be on income support until their youngest child was 12yo. Now you're expected to start looking when a child is only a year old.

Absolutely spot on. I do wish that the politicians/parents/whoever comes up with these ideas and schemes, actually spend a good deal of time in a school and see what school staff are actually up against.
Unless a shit load of money is going to be thrown at schools to provide extra staff/resources etc then it's just pissing in the wind.

I'm sorry but I work. My children know basic hygiene. They brush their teeth. I am a single parent.

The idea that employment is a blocker to being a good parent is just a excuse. What we are talking above is a failure to do basic parenting. You can certainly work and do both.

Or you can work and be neglectful. This is about a failure in parenting, not employment.

Just saw this thread and it sounds like some of those who think that 'teacher can just easily slot it into their routine' should have a read https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4916814-if-you-work-in-a-school-does-this-sound-familiar

Ha, I can assure you many schools have virtually no support staff left so, no, it's not support staff getting these extra tasks. Very often it is class teachers who are already trying to do their own job AND that of a TA or of several TAs. We don't have a single general TA. Not one.

Regarding the lack of middays mentioned by a PP, it is impossible to recruit. Just look at job adverts for any county - it's almost not worth advertising because there ate literally dozens of unfilled vacancies. Who wants to work for an hour slap bang in the middle of the day for minimum wage?

I would love to see schools become children’s centres.
A little toiletries bag on a peg or in your tray, and communal teeth brushing every day. No need to even mention those with sensory issues - because it’s a children’s centre - they’re already understood and expertly supported.
It would be marvellous!
Breakfast for those who need it, personal care supported, a safe space to play after school, access to sports, reading, crafts…

But absolutely none of that delivered by the teachers. Cos they’d have their own role. You know - teaching.