To be furious that a male nursery worker took DD to the toilet today

[heyhoplaydough]

I have always felt that it is inappropriate for male members of staff to change babies nappies or take young children to the toilet without a female chaperone. As a paediatric nurse I know that it is common policy for male doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals to have a female chaperone present when examining or carrying out treatments on children, if their parents are not present. Adult female patients are also given female chaperones during examinations where they are undressed. This is to protect their dignity and to spare embarrassment on both sides.

Why are these basic measures not in place in childcare settings?

On joining this specific nursery, I was assured that only female members of staff change nappies or take children to the toilet. I explicitly wrote in my DD's file, that she is only to be changed or taken to the toilet by female members of staff. Each time she has moved up to a new room within the nursery I have explicitly told her key carers the same.

I regularly ask my DD whether she went to the toilet and who took her, along with other questions about her day, like who she played with, what activities she did, what she had for lunch etc. Today she told me that the only male member nursery nurse took her to the toilet, without any other staff. She also said that she wiped herself and pulled her own knickers up, and does not seem at all upset, so I am confident that nothing untoward happened. However, I feel this was entirely inappropriate, and there were several female members of staff available to take DD to the toilet instead. I am absolutely furious that my wishes as her parent were not followed. Am I being unreasonable?

Oh feck off.

YawnTiggaxx

accused and convicted are two very different things crapola!!

Hey ho

Where to begin?

"As an adult you are always offered a chaperone for certain procedures, you can request a female doctor etc, why cant I request a female to take my DD to the toilet." Because she's a child so it doesn't matter.

"I wouldn't send her into a male public loo when she's older." Of course you wouldn't. Because she'll be older. And independent. So using the appropriate toilet.

"I can see that I'm clearly more concerned/ paranoid about paedophiles than most of you that have responded." paranoid yes; concerned, no. But more to the point, the problem is that you are assuming that an unknown man is automatically more likely to be a paedophile than an unknown woman. WHY?

"However, my daughter is not missing out on anything by not having male staff take her to the toilet." Except keeping bladder and bowel continence and having her arse wiped if there's no woman available.

"Other male relatives have never needed to, but I'm sure they'd prefer I or another female relative took them if we were all available." I'm a man and I can't speak for your family, but in my own I would say, no, you are totally wrong. Why should I want my wife to take my daughter to the toilet rather than me? Does having a vagina of her own make her more gifted at holding a child under the armpits or wiping arses?

"If staff don't read her file, they do not cater to her individual needs. " What "needs"? It's not even YOUR need. It's just mad shit that you've made up.

The other day ~I was on a thread where the very existance of a cohabiting father, the role of which, was called into question....do we really need them? They are more likely to abuse but now here we're talking about someone not wanting her dd being taken to the toilet by a male and she's accused of prejudice. Given that the nursery is teeming with females why should a male take a little girl? Little boys have sticky out bits and bottoms, girls do not. I would feel uncomfortable too.

crapola I see you are well named since you seem to spout a lot of it.

The bloke just in the news....accused, a couple of months and he'll be convicted, I'm willing to take the chance that he's guilty before the trial.

"But more to the point, the problem is that you are assuming that an unknown man is automatically more likely to be a paedophile than an unknown woman. WHY?"

Because an unknown man is more likely to be an abuser than a woman.

"I realise the fact you can leave your children in day orphanages day after day probably means it don't matter that much to you who you leave them with."

That's right, mine are being raised by wolves. I am nevertheless comforted in the knowledge that at least my children are nowhere near anyone like you.

Sticky out bits too?

Ha! at " It's just mad shit you've made up!"

Couldn't agree more.
You know, I think you are paranoid and neurotic and I feel genuinely sad that your DD is being raised in a home with such restrictive views.

crapola why does it make a difefernce what 'bits' a child has. a child needs to pee. an available member of staff takes them. why on earth should a whole nursery of staff have to shuffle around to suit the sexist requests of an parent?

"WannBe" a comedian? You should practice more.

"Little boys have sticky out bits and bottoms, girls do not. I would feel uncomfortable too." How do you manage to be so fucking twee and yet still spout offensive, hateful shite so effectively?

I work in a school and took a reception boy to the toilet today. I also have sons and probably compromised their dignity by changing their nappies.

Either I'm a perv or the OP is a fuckwit.

I feel the same, can't explain why but I do. Men are more likely to abuse, men in positions of trust are more likely to abuse, men in 'caring' professions although much smaller in number are more likely to abuse. So why are nurseries allowing anyone to put themselves at risk? Why are any staff allowed to be with small children alone in a state of undress?

I'm shocked and disgusted Alistron1.
I hope the mother has been in to see the Head, contacted the governors and written to their MP.

Why is it offensive?

Crapola where are you getting all these 'statistics' from? Is your sphincter accidentally connected to your mouth?