to think that there ought to be provision to clean children in school

[EvilVampireFrog]

if they have an accident?

I've been informed that all that can be done is to stand outside the cubicle and pass wipes/ clean clothes.

My child is not capable of cleaning himself. He's 6. Because of this, he has ended up sat with poo on his skin for the rest of the day, leading to soreness and discomfort.

I know teachers/ assistants are not there to wipe bums - but surely it is more abusive to leave a child filthy than it is to clean them?

I have asked to be called in if it happens again, and am just fervently hoping it doesn't happen on a work day when I'm 2 hours away!

So as not to drip feed - DS1 has HFA, but is not statemented as it is mild. He wasn't toilet trained until he was nearly 5, and was in night nappies until 2 months ago. Accidents can and do still happen. The class staff have been asked to tell him to go to the toilet, but (understandably) that doesn't always happen.

YANBU, accidents can happen with primary aged children and although teachers will say they are not there to wipe bums etc, it kind of comes with the territory

Poor little lad. YANBU.

No unfortunately there can't be provision to clean children as the risk to staff is too high (ironically). If your child came home having been cleaned up and said "such and such touched me here" you would rightly feel you had to investigate it which could lead to a perfectly innocent teacher having his or her name smeared for nothing. In special schools there are provisions for children who need toileting. In the special school I worked at, each classroom had its own large toilet and anyone being changed had to have two people present at all times, which usually meant leaving the door open as one person changed and the other person supervised while teaching the class (the child in the toilet was out of the view of other children of course). In mainstream schools a set up like that is not usually feasible. Their only recourse would be to contact you or try to get him to clean himself which is what they did.

By the way, as a teacher I would have happily wiped any child's bum before seeing him sit in his own dirt, but I wouldn't be allowed to do it.

Our primary school had a shower put in - supposedly so teachers could stay over in the bad weather when it snowed but really it was kids could have a shower if they were messy. The teachers still have to stand outside the shower and instruct from a distance but makes the process a bit easier.

It's a sad state of affairs. We either trust people to care for our children or we don't. I know it isn't a teachers job but its sad we are in a society where we are so fearful the rules have become like this.

I'm a TA primarily assigned to an Autistic 8 yr old with severe toileting issues. I wipe him clean regularly. There are other children who've had accidents that I'll help get clean to whatever degree they're comfortable with me doing.

I come from an Early Years background so it really doesn't bother me. I couldn't work in a care home and do this with elderly people though...

Not allowed to clean them up I'm afraid.

I had a small reception girl who'd had an poo accident. I had to pass her a carrier bag for her dirty undies, pass her clean ones under the door, talk her through the whole process. I would have been more than happy to have been a bit more 'hands on' in the whole thing and check the poor little thing was ok. It's what I'd have wanted for my DCs, but it was a strictly no touching school.

What CailinDana said is true. If your child came home having been cleaned up and said "such and such touched me here" you would rightly feel you had to investigate it which could lead to a perfectly innocent teacher having his or her name smeared for nothing. Parents can't have it all ways.

There's not much difference tbh pinkcanary

If the single teacher in a class is cleaning a child, who is teaching the class?

Would it make a difference if the teacher was male? (Just to throw a different light on this, and on why teachers may be worried).

One teacher very close to me was accused of hitting a child. It took a couple of months to sort the issue out, during which time he was suspended. It was proved, without doubt, to have been false, but the intervening time was a nightmare and nearly led to a nervous breakdown. He took early retirement soon after which was a shame as he was a bloody good teacher. How much worse would it have been if he had been cleaning a small child whose parents decided they didn't like it? What if he'd taken her to the loo because he'd seen she was dirty and had no witnesses? Or should he and the TA both leave the classroom (and the remaining children) to protect him from this?

I'm not saying it's right, but you can see why teachers are scared to do it.

Wouldnt make a difference to me if a teacher / assistant was male or female.

I would assume they had been vetted appropriately and that a level of trust is necessary and would be happy for them to clean my child if necessary and greatful for them for doing so

But I totally understand why a teacher / assistant wouldnt want to do this and that they actually cannot do this under the current rules

I just think it is incredibly sad that this is the level of fear and mistrust we are at in society

this is so sad. OP i'm so sorry your son had to sit like that for the rest of the day. i wold be gutted if it was my child. i understand teh teachers and TAs have to protect themselves against accusation and i'm not sure what the solution is but there must be something that can be done to rpevent children sitting in faeces all day. this is the 21st century in an civilised contry. nobody should have to. no child and no adult. it's wrong.

This falls under the school's duty of care. Schools are legally required to act as a reasonably prudent parent would.

Teachers cannot be compelled to change children after toileting accidents; but support staff can. If the teacher notices that the child has had an accident, they must inform a member of support staff who must change them. However, if a teacher notices that the child has had an accident and does nothing, then they are deemed to be negligent having failed in their duty of care. This would also apply if the child is left with excrement on him.

Although the legislation is complicated, the upshot is that a child should never be left to sit in his own excrement. The school need taking to task on this as they have a legal responsibility, whatever their policy states.

Just out of interest, did you or the school apply for a statement and were refused or have you not applied?

Teachers are allowed to clean children- they just cannot be required to do so.

School policy may state that staff shouldn't; but this is bad policy, IMO. If there is a fear of accusation, then two staff should be made available in the event of such an incident.

Th TA's and teachers at my kids school clean up kids. There's a very high proprtion of chidrennwith SN there so they just get on with it. They are all crb'ed etc.

YANBU but I don't think that it's a teacher's job to change soiled kids. It's a TA's. I say this as a TA who is currently working with two autistic kids and changes them every day. They're not yet toilet trained.

If OP's son had additional needs that required one-to-one support I suspect that this would be addressed. He obviously doesn't require this so has been left. Take it up with the school. Insist that a member of staff is assigned to sort him out if required.

i am really sorry to hear this OP. I am a teacher and I agree with you. We generally instruct children so that they can clean themselves but if they are in a pickle then we help, for goodness sake, they are little children in an upsetting situation. We then tell the parents exactly what happened and what we did. In 15 years we have never had a problem.

changeymcchangealot in the situation I described, I got one of children to do flashcards with the whole class on the carpet because it had happened at story time - so fortunately at the end of the day. It was a couple of years ago now, so I can't remember why I didn't have a TA with me, but there were no other staff available either - school trip or something. I don't recall but I was on my own with the children.

tethersend I agree. The school I referred to make it clear that helping would not have been acceptable and that I did the right thing.

Folkgirl, the school is wrong if the actions they required from you result in you/the school being negligent in its duty of care.

Leaving a child sat in excrement is undoubtedly a breach of that duty of care; no matter what school policy is; legally, they are wrong as their policy potentially contravenes the law.

My DCs have been at 2 primary schools, both of which have cleaned up children.How come they are allowed to break this mysterious rule? .And how come nursery staff who have children up to 5 can clean them up and yet the same aged child in school can't be helped?
is it a rule , advice from their union, or what?

The only rule is that qualified teachers cannot be expected or compelled to change a child. Other staff can be.

Teachers can voluntarily change a child. If they do not, or do not instruct another member of staff to do so, they/the school can be seen as negligent in their duty of care.

From the NUT:

All schools need to be prepared to deal with pupils who have wet or soiled themselves. Many young children will have an occasional ?accident?, perhaps because over-excitement has meant that they have left it too late. Other may be late-developers or there may be an underlying physical for psychological cause for the wetting or soiling. Schools may find that these types of issues become more acute because of the extension of Early Years provision due to both the increase in the number of hours children may attend nursery and the trend towards early admittance to Reception

It is not the role of schools to toilet train children entering nursery. It is reasonable to expect that this process should have begun by the time the child is admitted, even if in most cases the child may not be fully toilet trained. Under the terms of the Equality Act 2010, however, schools must not refuse admission to a child who is not toilet-trained because of a disability.

All schools should have a continence policy setting out how wetting or soiling incidents will be dealt with. The policy should also set out how vomiting incidents will be dealt with.

The most important issue to cover is that it is not part of a teacher?s professional duties to clean up children. Such a responsibility cannot, therefore, be added to a teacher?s job description. Quite apart from the fact that such a task is not making good use of a teacher?s skills and time, there are practical issues too. Teachers cannot simply abandon their class to attend to a child who needs this kind of assistance. Members of the support staff are better placed to undertake this role and some may have such responsibilities included in their job description.

Although the vast majority of teachers would assist in an emergency situation, as no child should be left in wet or soiled clothing, it is important that there is no expectation that routine and predictable incidents are dealt with by teachers.

Well that's what the NUT say, but then they would, wouldn't they?
Does it form part of a teacher's contract is more to the point!

Why 'would' the NUT say that, then spiderpig8?

The most important issue to cover is that it is not part of a teacher?s professional duties to clean up children. Such a responsibility cannot, therefore, be added to a teacher?s job description.

It's in the Burgundy Book, ergo it is part of teachers' pay and conditions. It cannot form part of a teacher's contract, even in a special school.

However, schools must make provision to clean children who have had an accident; the OP's school has made inadequate provision.