Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that the no-Calpol rule at nurseries is ridiculous

110 replies

chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 14:05

Apparently the government has passed a regulation saying that nurseries aren't permitted to give Calpol to children. The nursery DD attends thinks it is probably justified because sick babies shouldn't be at nursery.

My feelings is that while really sick babies (or babies with lingering D&V or something) shouldn't be at nursery, sometimes they can just be slightly sick (eg: with teething pain or a mild cold) and it is ok for them to be there. And it would be quite nice for them to have Calpol to relieve the symptoms.

Background is that I had to rush in to nursery yesterday to give my DD Calpol because she had a temperature of 37.8. Nursery said I had to come in immediately as it was urgent that they got her fever down. DD was a bit quiet but otherwise not showing any symptoms. It takes me about 30-40mins to get there so decided that by the time I get there, give her Calpol, and get back to work, I figured I might us well just not go back to work and take her home. Ended up keeping her home today because it was going to be too difficult to get in to nursery to give her Calpol each time her temperature went up. She has a mild cold (as do the nursery staff!) and is fine once the Calpol kicks in. Once I got her home yesterday she was bouncing off the walls having a grand old time.

I have so far missed 1.5 days of work, which I really can't afford at the moment. This has happened before too when she was teething - I decided to keep her home rather than have her in pain, Calpol-free at nursery all day.

So, does anyone have any up-sides to this new policy?

OP posts:
chegggersplayspop · 09/09/2010 14:45

I've not heard of a change, I will ask my nursery if they have changed the policy. In the past if ds has a slight temp they would phone me to advise and ask me to give permission to administer calpol and how much I wanted him to have. Once I arrived to pick him up I would have to sign to say I approved it. The nursery would never give any without me being aware of it.

I do agree sick children shouldn't go to nursery, but if ds comes down with something while he is there it's good to give him something until I got there.

Fel1x · 09/09/2010 14:45

When ds was small and at nursery they used to give calpol. Very good job too!
Ds had febrile convulsions due to rapid increase in temperature. If he had suddenly got a temp at nursery (and it was sudden) then if they had waited til I turned up to administer the meds he would have had many more convulsions and hospital stays than he did!

Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 14:46

That is exactly my view, Emster30 - sometimes you can be unwell but not unwell enough to stay home and the medication just helps to make the day more pleasant!

OP posts:
Bramshott · 09/09/2010 14:47

Is 37.8 really a "high temperature"?!

PosieParker · 09/09/2010 14:48

If your child needs Calpol, they shouldn't be at nursery they should be at home....you never know who they are passing a bug onto..

some people are soooooo selfish.

DandyDan · 09/09/2010 14:51

If your child needed paracetamol mixture for toothache, you shouldn't have to keep her off school, but unless you can get in at lunchtime, this is the result. It makes things very difficult but it is best to follow this. Otherwise someone else is making a judgement call on whether your child really needs it/is uncomfortable enough etc. Re paracetamol at secondary school, it's annoying but the danger of someone being stupid with them on school property or giving them to a friend who turns out to be allergic to them, etc etc, is not worth the risk. Pupils shouldn't have any medication on them other than prescribed inhalers and epipens or similar.

Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 14:55

I don't think it is fair to call me selfish "PosieParker*. She developed the illness at nursery. AND her carer has had a streaming cold for days and is still working.

Would you stay home from work if you had a mild cold?

OP posts:
QS · 09/09/2010 14:59

More convenient for you Chaya, or more pleasant for the child? I think most pleasant for the child would be to stay at home, if it was so ill the child needed calpol.

For teething pain my sons nursery was recommending calgel, or other teething gels, which they were happy to administer.

DanceInTheDark · 09/09/2010 15:03

It's not comparable to an adult having a cold. We HAVE to get on with it and carry on as best we can. A child/baby doesn't have any responsibilities and relies on an adult for everything.

Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 15:04

QS - my daughter is currently running around the house, jumping on a couch cushions, and generally having a grand old time after the Calpol kicked in. And it is a lovely, small nursery where she is very happy so not exactly an awful place to be during the day.

The nursery won't administer teething gels either but that is a whole other thread.

Let me guess QS you are a judgmental stay at home mother who thinks that working mother are selfish and think only of their own "convenience"? Just a guess though.

OP posts:
QS · 09/09/2010 15:05

Chaya, it is not graceful to make assumptions about other posters. I find that very tactless.

Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 15:06

Yes, but the adult she relies upon doesn't necessarily have to be her parents every moment.

My husband and I have to get on with it too (hence why she is in nursery). We don't have the luxury of staying at home. Of course we will if she is truly is but watching her jump all over the sofa as I write makes me question it...

OP posts:
StealthPolarBear · 09/09/2010 15:06

PosieParker, DS developed a fever at nursery. I dropped everything to get him, of course, but because they gave him calpol immediately it helped control his fever, rather than waiting the 45 mins for me to get him & get home

pumperspumpkin · 09/09/2010 15:06

DS (14 months) is teething and had a temperature of 38.5. Nursery phoned me on Tuesday afternoon for permission to give Calpol and by the time I collected him at 5.30pm it was down to 37.

Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 15:08

QS - you made those very assumptions about me - presuming I was simply concerned with my own "convenience" rather than my DD. That sort of attitude I have never heard from a working mother. Sorry if I was mistaken about you.

OP posts:
QS · 09/09/2010 15:10

Before my sons nursery decided they were no longer administering medication, there was a terrible mishap. No dire consequences though, but inconvenient. Ds needed antibiotics, and when he was well enough to return to nursery, on a friday, I brought the bottle with me in with instructions for the nursery staff.

There was another child ill on a different antibiotics at the time. And one on calpol.

Not only had my son been given the wrong medicine, I got a bottle of calpol home, and not the antbiotics he still needed to take for the weekend. Friday night was spent in the out of hours clinic, to get a new prescription.

Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 15:11

That sounds like a problem with the systems at your nursery rather than giving Calpol per se.

OP posts:
chegggersplayspop · 09/09/2010 15:14

I agree, the bottles are labelled as soon as they are taken in, at our nursery. They are handed back to you before you leave, not stuffed in a bag, so it would be pretty obvious if they were mixed up. With medicines their systems and controls should be very tight.

ShowOfHands · 09/09/2010 15:16

Please don't turn this into a SAHM vs WOHM debate. Utterly, utterly irrelevant. And quite rude you were to QS.

I think there is some little argument to suggest that a child who needs Calpol should be at home.

But then I don't think a mild temperature needs Calpol anyway.

Bonkerz · 09/09/2010 15:22

Our nursery is similar to thers here. we have a policy whereby parents are asked to provide teething gel and calpol. A form is signed by the parent stating the required dosage when and if needed. If a child show signs of teething or illness we do temerature checks over the course of 30 mins and may strip clothes etc to see if this helps. If after 1/2 hour of monitoring there has been no change we will ring parent and request permission to administer calpol. For 30 mins after we also do regular temp checks. If still a temp after 30 mins parent is rang to collect. If child has improved we just monitor that child closely. when parent collects child they are asked to sign the form to acknowledge time and dose of calpol given.

Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 15:23

I agree, ShowofHands and I shouldn't turn it in to that. But it did upset me to read that comments that suggest I was being selfish. I would do anything for my DD but find it so hard to balance career and motherhood and this anti-Calpol rule just seems to make it even harder. My profession is already dubious about the ability of women to manage both their job and being a mother and having to walk out of a client meeting to administer Calpol didn't help things. Of course, I would drop everything if she were seriously ill but sitting here as she has a jolly time in the living room is a bit frustrating.

OP posts:
Original poster
chaya5738 · 09/09/2010 15:24

Maybe a mild temperature doesn't need Calpol but I was called and told I had to come in urgently to get it down from 37.8 to 37.

OP posts:
Wanderingsheep · 09/09/2010 15:30

I used to CM and I wasn't allowed to give Calpol or meds unless in dire need and with the parents signature.

I often think that some people are far to quick to give Calpol anyway (I'm not suggesting you are one) but I don't see why teething powders or gels can't be used instead. In fact, I was speaking to my friend before and she said you can't buy Calpol if they are under 6 anymore. You need a prescription. Is that true? I wouldn't know as I haven't used it for DD for ages.

Bramshott · 09/09/2010 15:34

In think the problem Chaya is not that "the no calpol rule is ridiculous" but that your DD's nursery overreacted to a fairly small raised temperature and demanded that you get there immediately.

Sidge · 09/09/2010 15:36

YABU.

Nursery staff shouldn't be able to administer medication without it having been prescribed.

If a child needs Calpol they are either unwell and need to go home, or unwell and need to be assessed by a health professional.

Can you imagine if a child spiked a temperature, the nursery staff just gave Calpol and the child was actually very ill? A temperature can be an early indicator of a more serious illness and the nursery staff cannot and should not be placed in a position of assessing whether that is the case or not.