To be livid with independent pre-prep school for excluding my 3 year old DS1

[mumoftwolilboys]

...for wetting his pants?

It's the whole way it's been done. We had no warning that he was going to be excluded and suddenly out of the blue, a phone call came one evening just after half term stating that he's had a few accidents that week and therefore he will not be allowed in the next day. No procedures followed. I was suddenly out of childcare and had to take emergency time off work.

I know the school policy states that he cannot be in nappies, but he isn't in nappies. DS1 has been potty training since 19 months and went through terrible regression after the birth of DS2 9 months ago, who had very bad feeding problems till he was nearly 6 months so we weren't able to give DS1 all the attention that a toddler craved. We TOLD the school about his regresion (in 3 separate documents and discussions), but as DS1 was starting to do so well and was dry with us all the time, and not doing badly at nursery, we did not even worry about this issue. Unfortunately, DS1 had a very bad start upon starting pre-reception in Sept, and was immediately stigmatised as the one with potty training problem. This didn't help as the negative attention given to him just flared the problem. The school did not do anything positive to help, apart from the token gestures and pretense in trying to get DS1 to not have accidents (mostly involving pressure against us as parents and making us pass the pressure to DS1). What makes me even more livid is the fact that before the 2 week half term we have just had, DS1 was actually doing very well and only had couple of wet accidents per week. He hardly ever has accidents with us (apart from tiny patches) because we never ever pressure him or remind him to go to the toilet when with us. DS1 normally marches himself into the toilet at home and does it all himself.

We have been very forceful in writing letter, getting policy documents, meeting up (all of which WE had to take initiative, not the school), and finally got DS1 back into school today with the condition that he would need to be withdrawn by next Wednesday if he had more than 1 accident in a week. I was allowed to come in for a couple of hours towards the end of the day(though the manager had thoroughly fought against that) to observe why DS1 keeps wetting his pants in school. I spoke to the manager and deputy manager, asking how they do certain things and why, and giving feedback on what I thought they did that wasn't working. I smiled and made light hearted comments, staying professional all throughout. When I got home, I was shocked to hear a voice message left on our phone from the headteacher stating that I was rude to the manager and deputy manager, including criticising them and resulted in one being in tears (WTF?!). I do not have a clue what they are talking about, apart from the fact that it's probably a means for them to say that I can no longer go in to observe my DS1. They once again said that it's best if DS1 was withdrawn from school. Hope it's not cynical of me to feel the only crime we have actually committed against the school is not being the rich parent that they want us to be. But why admit us in the first place?!

I have called OFSTED, ISI, LEA. They have all said that the school can do whatever they like as they do not report to any of them. I have gone through in detail with each of them, challenging DDA law and framework but apparently they are not breaking any rules. Also, they can choose to follow EYFS but they don't have to because it is a private school and toileting is a very wishy washy area. Department of Education has agreed to look at my letter if I complain to them, but why do I have this sinking feeling that nothing will come of it?

Our poor DS1 has been traumatised since the phone conversation, which came during the DC's dinner time. It seems like they are making it a habit to call us during the DC's dinner time, completely disrupting our lives.

Regretting choosing a private pre-prep to begin with, one that claimed to be inclusive. We thought it was going to save us a little money compared to nursery but oh boy, now it's costing us thousands more. Just an indication of how much we've lost, the smalles cost we will be losing is in the uniform that we've spent over £400 and he has only been wearing them for 7 weeks!!

Am I allowed to name the school in this thread? Am I even posting in the right section? Please let me know if I'm not.

Just thought i'd add that childminders have to follow the EYFS too. So you have quite a few options x

hmm , I could imagine it being an issue at dd's pre-prep - it isn't though as the coats doesn't cost £80 ! You could probably resell via the PA secondhand sale. A school, even a private one, has to be Ofsted approved and doing EYFS to qualify for the govt funding for 3 - 5 year olds but they may not accept non-trained children without a statement and that in itself could exclude them.

The DDA is a bit of a minefield - I remember looking into it.

I think that being private of itself doesn't excuse a school from following the DDA. The application of the DDA to continence goes as follows as I remember: as a child with disabilities may also have continence problems, children with continence problems or being late to potty train cannot be excluded from 'normal' pre-school or school settings, because it is an indirect form of discrimination (if you exclude children who are not potty trained, you also exclude those whose disability causes that problem - ergo, pre-schools or school with a blanket staement about being potty trained can be deemed to be breaking the DDA).,

However, private schools are selective (even if only by ability to pay - but many also select only children without disabilities) and I presume that there must be some form of words in the DDA which says that it is OK for selective schools to discriminate against children who don't meet their selection criteria (otherwise all grammar schools, let alone selective private schools, would be breaking the DDA).

I am struggling to believe everything the OP is saying.

It sounds as if her DS isn't really ready for school. It can take some children a while to settle.

Perhaps she has been rude - I can't imagine why a headteacher would make a point of calling to tell her this if there wasn't a grain of truth in it. It's a bit much to think that the head is calling deliberately at an inconvenient time. Perhaps this is the end of her school day and she is calling when she knows parents will be home. Equally, she could call when she gets home and them deliberately disturb your bath and story time. She can't win.

As a teacher in an independent school, I would say that the single worst thing is unreasonable parents who treat school staff like servants and think their child is a little king/princess. They can't accept that their child's best is not good enough and try to blame the school rather than their own genes/parenting. It is usually parents who can only just manage fees who are the worst.

I can only say that at my school, our nursery and reception are prepared to change nappies (we start at 2), and know that young children have accidents (usually because they are having too much fun and are concentrating hard on their activities). But it is not the fault of the school that the child has accidents - it's just where the child is at in their development.

I'm going to wade into this discussion as a mum who has had her kid in a private school for the past 2 years and it has been an enormous nightmare. The school suffers from cultural and academic issues and the best the teachers can do is hide under the rocks and blame the kid. If you want to contact me directly to exchange the name of the school, please post here and I will post my email address. I agree - if its not working out early on, pull out early - its worth the investment in a uniform unlike us who by year 3 have invested more than 12K to be have our kid be bullied, insulted, excluded and ignored..

Well we had faith that things would change; a new headteacher came and seemed to understand our plight but now the school has closed ranks and its reverted to being awful. We are now looking to move him by January but need to find space!

MindtheGappp- I am incredulous at you suggesting "parents who can only just manage the fees who are the worst". What on earth is that supposed to mean?

I'm glad you're not my child's teacher with that attitude. Luckily my son goes to a state primary where the teachers don't make judgments about the parents' income.

Spider - I can sympathise - we were having problems with ds, and had mentally given one last term to see if things improved in the new year - if they hadn't we would have moved him, despite the upheaval and angst that would have caused. I'm glad its not been necessary - next thing is trying to find out from his current teacher what magic she has woven to completely turn his school life around. Mind you, his nursery teacher had the same knack too...

OP

Government states that 'All maintained/independent schools or registered early years providers in the private, voluntary and independent sectors caring for children from birth to five must use the EYFS' EYFS on directgov so they DO have to follow EYFS.

And EYFS states that not until 40-60 months will child ' Dress and undress
independently and manage their own personal hygiene' eyfs page 38 and also says on page 101 that 30-50 month olds: ' Show awareness of own needs with regard to eating, sleeping and hygiene. Often need adult support to meet those needs' so eyfs says they will need help with toiletting at age 3

so YANBU

Fight them! They are in the wrong.

Yes they're wrong and yes you could technically win on this issue. But how long would it take to win? At what cost to the mental health of all involved? And how long before they make your life hell, or find another reason?

I'd remove your ds which it sounds like what you're going to do and then complain. Contact ofsted, quote early years, etc. But don't let them have your ds. If they're not following early years on this then what else are they not following?

Or use this knowledge and threaten them with a view to getting money back.

Oh yes, I don't mean fight for your place, I meant fight for getting some money back... :)

All very well in theory but by the sounds of it the school have already taken a dislike, whether well founded or not, to op. She could potentially have another 10 years of her ds at the same school and it's not going to be plain sailing, having got off to such a negative start, and may be hard to re-establish their goodwill to make it work. OP may be better off cutting her losses now than making a fight of it and having to concede further down the line anyway.

I'd agree there are also parents at dc school who have an entitled attitude and it won't go down well in the staffroom.

ah see what you mean now . They might waiver fees in lieu of notice ...

LIZS, I totally agree.

Child needs to be cared for first and foremost. If they aren't being cared for, over basic things like this, I wold not want them educating my child either.

It sounds like you've had a bad experience.

But not all pre-preps are like that.

My middle dc is currently in the nursery class at a pre-prep (is 3) and wears a uniform - well a polo shirt, jumper and trousers and had to be toilet trained prior to starting.

However it is lovely and any accidents are dealt with very kindly by the staff.

Hopefully you'll find another pre-school/nursery that suits you all better.

Yes, honestly, op, I think you should find somewhere or someone else who will be more supportive and understanding of your son. He may like the school, but he's young and will soon settle in somewhere else and have just as much fun there. It may be worth fighting to get most of the fees back, as they have excluded him without a good reason.

Dd1 had a nasty teacher in her nursery year who was unsupportive with her toileting issues and her whole attitude caused us no end of stress. We only kept her in because she loved going and I wouldn't have been able to get her in somewhere else, I can't drive and tbh most preschools where I live tend to have a pretty hard line attitude to toileting accidents. I even heard of a nursery where a wee boy had an accident on his first day and they told his mum to keep him off for awhile term.

MtG, having toileting accidents doesn't mean a child isn't ready for school Schools say this because they don't want the other if dealing with accidents. I don't think the op is BU in wanting a school to treat her ds with understanding, any school should be doing this, fee paying or not.

SleeplessinSeatle: it's not as clear cut as that - the adult help specified in the effective practice section talks about hand washing and healthy eating. There is nothing which says that teachers must take children to the loo or clean them up.

I wouldn't send my DCs to a school like this.

But OP does say that they expected children to be out of nappies - which I (and am sure many) take to mean reliable during the day. From OP, it is clear that he was not fully trained - he was still wetting frequently at nursery, and leaking at home. The school have stated that they don't do potty training, and were clear on toilet competence requirements that they wanted.

Now, we can all deplore this.

But OP sent a child who did not fulfil their criteria, and has discovered the hard way that the school meant what they said. They can cope with the odd accident (maybe once a week) but see themselves as a school, not a nursery or daycare provider; and they do not potty train even a child who is wet every day. It's a short-coming, but one they've been totally upfront about. From their point of view, you have a child who is untrained, and is only "out of nappies" because the items have been taken off, not because of effective training. They've given it half a term, and have seen no progress. I'm not surprised they want to bring this to a head. They did give notice of expected dryness standards, and the poor thing can't meet them.

It does sound as if he is not ready for school. I hope this won't set him back to much, but your choices now are to train him until he really is reliably dry all day and anywhere (and convince the school he really is trained) and get him back there. Or find a new setting, and try the school (or elsewhere) later.

But I suppose the underlying point is that if a place says it can only cope with children out of nappies, they mean it, and it will end badly if you send a wetting child there.

What exactly is the definition of being "fully trained"? The OP's son isn't in nappies because he does use the toilet, he rarely has accidents at home, but sometimes has accidents at school. The school doesn't seem interested in helping him, by reminding him to go to the toilet etc. Plenty of children this age do need reminding sometimes and will have accidents even though they have been trained to use the toilet.

I really don't understand why anyone woukd think that having accidents means a child isn't ready for school?

I agree, and there is no settled definition. That's why I think it would be unwise to go into battle on this.

The school in question has been clear about what it means and the DC cannot yet meet that standard. It's not an occasional accident, it's nigh on daily wetting. Whether one would choose a setting that is clear it doesn't toilet train is up to the parents. It's not something I would have done (none of my children were sufficiently reliable until they were well over 3). But what seems to have happened here is that the OP has found out the hard way that this one meant what they said - at the outset and through more than half a term.

I cannot see a way of getting them to change their stance in a timely manner. The choices seem to be train, or move elsewhere.

EdithWeston, wow, do you work for the school? You seem to know so much about this from their point of view? If not, would you like to work the school as I'm sure they'd love to have you on board. Did I say he had high daily wetting??? I said he had a bad start, which then went down to odd accidents from the 3rd week of school (around two a week). He then came back from 2 weeks half term (very long break in my opinion for a child trying to settle into new childcare) and within 3 days they've decided that he had 4 accidents and not to come back the following day, completely ignoring how he DID manage to settle down before half term.

I'm not sure why I'm even beginning to argue about frequency and technicality. End of the day, I expect a 3 year old environment to be able to handle a short period of regression, and if not to handle it properly by not giving us less than 24 hours, causing a faff at DC's dinner/bedtime (a few times!), and accussing me of all sorts. Just to update, DH had a meeting with them about this and all the manager's points apparently just fell flat. So it's apparent either the nursery manager is over sensitive, or it's just a means of 'getting rid of me' as I'm the one who had initially insisted that DS1 is happy there and therefore should stay, DH isn't bothered about him staying. So they've basically got rid of the parent who had wanted DS1 to remain in the school, mission accomplished. It might not be as awful as I'm making it sound, but somehow I'm sure a lot of people, you know those "horrible ones who can just about afford the fees with their little prince/princesses", as an independent teacher kindly pointed out in a thread above , would probably not be at all surprised with this. Only stating this because after this has emerged, I've been inundated with bad personal independent school experiences from colleagues, relatives, acquaintances.. biased I know but what I mean to say is that it does happen.

I completely agree that having accidents doesn't mean a child isn't ready for school, having witnessed it myself with my child being so ready for formal type learning and yet is having potty training regression in school. However, I also completely agree that another childcare setting would suit us all much better after this bitter experience. I am just horrified that in this day and age there are still childcare environment for under 5s that are allowed to do this, and the way they have treated us is appalling. I'm guessing we're just another statistic to them? (oh, got rid of another rift raft), but they forget that it's a 3 year old in the middle of it all and that they should have done it sensitively, even if it just means following procedures and doing things in writing and giving warnings.. Brings me back to why they bothered admitting us in the first place, as we had been very upfront about it all. Hoping this is rant over for me.

Overall this thread had been very supportive and useful, knowing that I am definitely not being completely unreasonable, and if this enables me to move on quickly(initially had slight doubt with wanting him to stay, but I'm now desperate for DS1 to go somewhere more supportive), then hopefully it will also help my DS1 move on very quickly if his parents aren't all upset and bothered about this.

No, I don't work for any school.

But I am the mother of children who were late to train, and there's no way I'd have put any in a school that had stated clearly they had toileting expectations beyond that which my DCs could achieve.

And your posts did mention a lot of wetting, at nursery, at the school and frequent leakage at home. They probably are trying to get rid of you; they cannot (or will not) deal with the level of wetting they are experiencing.

They can't accept that their child's best is not good enough What a disgusting thing for a teacher to say! All a child can ever do is their best. How terrible to be teaching children that their best will never be good enough, inspires such self-confidence I'm sure! I'm very glad you teach at an independent school as that means my DCs are incredibly unlikely to ever be taught by you!

OP, take a step back. Look at the detail and angst in your OP. All over a 3yo wetting his pants a couple of times.

This fancy-pants private pre-prep is clearly not the right environment for your DS, and if you've sent him there hoping to further his learning and start his education earlier blah de blah de blah but already you have got more problems than benefits... it's not working.

I'm ALL for private education but this one sounds like a load of tosh to be frank. Find a decent private nursery where children can be children, free to have little accidents occasionally.

That's it, really.