6 in 10 think toilet training isn't necessary?

[dontcomeatme]

https://www.netmums.com/child/education/primary-schools/parents-say-potty-training-and-table-manners-not-essential-before-starting-school

"Commissioned by The Department for Education the poll, which included 2,000 parents with children aged under five, found that six in ten parents said toilet training isn’t essential before starting Reception."

I have known for years the number of children entering school still in nappies has risen, many of the schools around here have had to install changing tables and nappy bins etc. But this number has still shocked me! We're in the middle of potty training our 2.5YO and it's not easy at all, but definitely essential!
What's your view on this? If you have DC at what age did you potty train? Or not as the article suggests?

This doesn't include ND or SEN children. Nor is it a goady thread calling parents lazy. Just genuinely curious, I was really shocked reading the article. Although I suppose its good the NHS have made a "get prepared for school" guide for parents.

Does it say anywhere what the question actually asked was?
Mine were both potty trained by 2 and a half but if you asked me ‘is it essential for school’ I would probably respond no because it’s a fact isn’t it that state schools can’t discriminate on the basis of potty training and have to take the kids regardless? There might be a genuine medical or SEN reason, or yeah could be lazy parents, but either way the kids are allowed to go to school because they have a right to an education…

I would have thought that ( disabilities excluded) a right to education would include a right be to be taught how to go to the toilet and that school should be teaching things beyond what we can expect from a parent

I found potty training pretty easy, no big deal at all but you hear a lot of excuses about needing time off work and stuff. We were out and about with both of mine the day after we started training- both done at 2.

It's lazy but I do wonder if the stats include night nappies which are a bit different. I don't remember any kids in nappies in my son's reception class but speaking to parents a lot were in night nappies still.

I didn't mean "your kid can't come to school if they aren't toilet trained". The article discusses basic life skills, and asked parents what life skill they think their children needed before reception. I would have thought potty training before age 4 would be a basic life skill. Again, excluding SEN.

We have so many children start nursery and reception still in nappies and I don’t understand why parents aren’t doing more to potty train their children just for the cost alone! I couldn’t wait to get mine into pants and stop buying nappies and he was day dry by 2 1/2, night dry by 3. Current guidance states that even SEN children should be encouraged to use the potty because, for the vast majority, even if it may take longer, toilet training is achievable. It is not a school’s job to potty train children, that is a parent’s role. One of the reasons that schools are struggling is too many parents seem to think that they can abdicate responsibility to schools because they don’t want to take on the burden. If this gets me flamed, quite frankly, I couldn’t give a shit.

Has this topic not been done to death recently? Do we really need another thread about it?

Well yes that’s my point. Of course it’s a basic life skill that all parents should be teaching their child (ex SEN or medical needs of course) well before age 4. But that’s not what the poll asked. They asked is it essential for starting reception and the truth is no it’s not because it’s not actually a requirement for school entry. If polled then depending on what the question actually was then I potentially would have responded with the 60%.
I’m saying that I think the poll is possibly flawed because surely 60% of people do not think they shouldn’t potty train their own kid… That would actually be insane.

What? Are you serious?

I think it’s diabolical that parents of children with no additional needs think it’s perfectly fine to send their child to school in nappies.

I’ve seen people say that they were waiting until the child showed signs they were ready or wanted to go on the toilet.
its ridiculous, the 1st thing on a baby after its born is a nappy. A child is conditioned to toilet in a nappy, you have to teach them and help them rewire their brain to no longer do that.

that requires active parenting and effort, not passive ‘oh we’re completely child lead’.

edited to add.
oh and I potted trained two children at 2yrs 1mth, they both pretty had it down in a week. Yes we had time off which made it easier but that was pre existing.

would highly recommend reading the Oh Crap Potty Training method before they’re 2 and have a plan.

@Bitzee
I would have thought opposite to you, if I was asked "do you think it's a necessary life skill before a child started reception" I would have said yes. If asked "should schools exclude children dependant on potty training" I would have said no.

I agree it depends on the wording of the question because it clearly isn't essential. Desirable yes, but not essential because that would be discriminatory.

The article discusses that but is it what the original survey asked? Because as the first pp said we know it's not essential in practice even though most people will be on it.

Another couple of years of nappies are expensive, that, if anything convinced me to do it early. I remember the reception teacher asking for a charger of clothes, I said he’d not had an accident for months, she insisted, fair enough, I took them home, unused, at the end of reception. But there are a lot of people not suited to parenting.

This is used in headlines a lot but it's misleading, the survey question is ambiguous, sounding like finishing off potty training to the last bit ie reducing accidents, and it also asks parents to choose the top priorities. Most people when starting school are thinking about other things than potty training because that was completed long before.

I can get the actual wording (and what the other options were) but later, DS is on my computer.

I am shocked by this. My DC are now early teens and were trained as soon as they turned two but even at thay time parents were leaving it later and later to train. Most I knew were waiting until past 3. I'm not so surprised that parents are finding it tricky to do. You really need a few days to devote to it which is hard when most parents work. What I am shocked by is the idea that so many parents don't consider it important. I'm also surprised that people are happy to keep spending money on nappies for so long.

As a primary teacher of course we have children who are unable to be toilet trained before starting school and continue to need to wear nappies for some time due to developmental reasons. That's why schools can't say kids aren't allowed to come in without being toilet trained. However there are only a tiny minority that this applies to. Being ND doesn't always mean children cant be toilet trained, it depends on the individual child. Both my DC are autistic but were able to be toilet trained young.

It's the 2023 version of this if anyone wants to look for the info. It's a pain to navigate on a phone since you have to download the excel chart.

https://kindredsquared.org.uk/school-readiness-survey/

My son is autistic. We had him toilet trained just before he started school, he definitely took longer to be clean but that was a fear of sitting on the loo no matter how many lovely tiny toilet seats we bought him. He just preferred a nappy.

His nursery were brilliant taking him to the loo when other kids had been to show him poo in a toilet etc. The encouragement to get poo in the loo “like your friend Harvey” made a big difference.

While he could have started school in nappies we just cracked it a few weeks prior much to my relief.

Night time took until 14 but no wet beds after that.

We definitely had to work at it

I wouldn't have read that and equated the words essential life skill with requirement.

My understanding, when reading the article, was the poll asked parents if potty training was an essential life skill before starting reception. Rather than "should children be required to be potty trained for starting reception". If that makes sense? That's how my brain interpreted it anyway.
Yes the question mentions starting school, but I think it's more centred on what parents think are essential life skills before age 4, school age.

Apologies if it has, I didn't notice. The article was only written a few days ago so I thought it was still fresh.

The Netmums article doesn't actually report what the question is from the survey.

I find the thought of children in nappies at school unthinkable - presuming that’s at rising 5. Mine are 30 & 32 and were both trained by the time they started pre-school at 3. Because that’s the reasonable thing to do, as I would not have expected someone else to have wipe poo from my child’s bum. Accidents permitting of course, which I can’t recall at all.
Staff are there to educate your child, not teach life-enabling skills.

To be fair here, lots of kids are very well potty trained but still have accidents when they first start school. It’s a big change for them and the toilets can seem scary.

@childofthe607080s am I reading this incorrectly, or are you actually suggesting that parents shouldn’t be expected to toilet train their own kids?

You’re inferring the ‘life skill’ part. Unhelpfully the article linked doesn’t state the specific survey question but it says six in ten parents said toilet training isn’t essential before starting reception. Nowhere does it say life skill, you’ve just added that in yourself. I totally get why because it is a life skill of course but if that wasn’t what was actually asked then it could explain the answers. Because factually speaking it isn’t a requirement and children are allowed to start state school in nappies. It’s also very normal for reception age kids to have occasional accidents so that could have impacted responses.

Otherwise it makes no sense because yes you get SEN kids, medical needs and sadly also some lazy parents but no way does that equal 60%. But 60% makes a grabby clickbait headline…

@Bitzee I 100% agree with you, but the article does mention life skills a few times, which is why my brain must have clung to the wording!