To not care how important your job is, if your child has impetigo

[Normalisavariantofcrazy]

You keep them off school! More so if the sores are still active!

Got a bit of morning run rage going on at the moment

But what do people do?couthy already said if you loose your job you don't get benefits for 6 MONTHS.

Did dusty make that so? No she didn't.
All anyone is trying to do is keep their jobs or keep children healthy. Why are you fighting when your both victims of the SAME government. Blame then not eachother.

Exactly Giles. If you lose your job for many it is not cutting back on luxuries is the issue, it is being made homeless and struggling to eat at all

I have and I would keep my children off but I have a job where we work different shifts and cover for each other so it is comparatively easy for me to do so.

It is really wrong that so many parents are pushed to work without the safety net needed to let them be around if their child cannot attend school. We shouldn't attack other parents for their (stark) choices, our anger needs to be towards the lawmakers who seem to have ignored/overlooked the situation.

I see it from both sides I really do. God the bitching and did belief that goes on where I work if someone dares call in sick.

If you can't find cover you have to go in. People work whilst puking in bins as no one can do it. Not to mention the forms and "back to work" meetings.

I'm lucky im part time now but I feel sorry fir the others.

Dd got imperteigo several times. Probably because others couldn't keep their kid off. Of course I was annoyed but I do understand. I really do.

Disbelief

It's okay to say that you would struggle if your children are sick and that it would be a difficult decision to keep them at home because you might get penalised at work or even dismissed from your job.
It's not okay to say that I care about my kids and fuck other kids who might end up in ICU, in fact I won't even give them a seconds thought because I have a job to keep and other people's kids are not my problem.

I suppose if dusty's children had D&V and needed to be close to a toilet as they were shitting 30 times a day she would find a way to be at home with them. So there is a way that it would be made possible. It's just that she doesn't give a shit about the sickness of any body else's kids.

I have had an immuno compromised child, but I think you are being unfair on dusty. She is saying what I believe many others may think and at least has the guts to say it.

I don't send my DS in when he is ill, and he is ill more than many but I am lucky that that is a choice I can afford to make and I have others I can call on. In that respect I am lucky. Don't blame her, blame the politicians for forcing people to make choices they don't want to make. Make sure there is a safety net and then everyone can be safer not just those who can afford it. Blaming individuals is not helpful.

tbf I think Dusty hasn't made herself exactly sympathetic... Other people have siad they would keep thier children school without basically saying "fuck the really sick kids"

Hospitals are far more germ ridden than schools, there are a lot of sick people in doctors surgeries and hospitals and they will be spreading far more than a few sick children at a school

I can't believe for one moment that Dusty literally doesn't care about risking the lives of other children, but in a way I think it's a good thing she has put it that way because it's given a jolt to me (and probably others too) to make me think just how crap it is that some people are in the position where they have to make these decisions even with the implications.

Hence why I don't take DS to the GP.

Incidentally, his ward is sparkling clean and children are isolated as soon as they show signs of a contagious infection.

Immunosuppressed people are kept separate in hospitals, usually in side rooms Esther than on wards and people with infectious conditions are usually kept in isolation. GP's make home visits to people in the at risk category.
Schools don't have such isolation policies / units, so it isn't a worthy comparison.

I can understand people's concerns about losing their jobs and I can also understand people having sent their children into school with minor but infectious conditions when they haven't considered the consequences. But I would like to think that most people would think better of doing so once it has been pointed out to them that for other children (or adults) there might be more serious complications. To not even contemplate that your actions are unreasonable when aware of the serious consequences to others is just selfish.

You can't afford to care, so you send your child to school with a contagious illness that will be passed on to another child and their parent has to bear the brunt of it. Never mind about their rent, eh? I understand that children will catch anything and everything going but with parents not even trying to limit it, it's hardly surprising!

I doubt dusty doesn't give a shit either. Just that her immediate situation is more important than a senario which is pretty unlikely.

It's shit of course it is but it's no fun for those on either side. Do you really think anyone wants to be responsible for making someone else sick? No, they don't. And I very much doubt anyone wants to be at work either when they should be home with their poorly children. I'm
Pretty sure there's a fair amount of guilt there that they arebt home feeding them chicken soup and giving them the cuddles they need, no matter what you think of someone who sends their kids in.

It's shit for everyone

I do understand that someone's rent and the roof over their child's head comes first but the blatant "I don't care" attitude just stinks.

Giles It's shitter for Silly's child who may end up in intensive care, so I don't see how you can say it's shit for everyone. There are major losers in this game. And it's not that unlikely.

Someone up thread already pointed out that more than one person in her child's school is having chemo (that's the ones she knows of and doesn't include other immunosuppressive conditions)- so it's not necessarily that unlikely or rare.

But it isn't that people don't care (generally).

I can't afford to care more about other children than I do my own.

If we didn't need my job, I'd quit tomorrow and stay at home.

My job isn't 'important' in any sense of the word other than as a means to pay the bills. Anyone could walk in off the street and do my job with minimal training, and my employers know that.

So I'm holding on to it by the skin of my teeth, because what alternative is there?

Don't discount family members too - if DD catches something despite being in a different nursery/ class/ whatever then we're on tenterhooks for days in case DS catches it. We have to keep HER home too when CP is going round. Not that there's much you can do about CP pre-spots and there are medicines to lessen its damage.

I don't doubt it's shit fir silly and her family. It sounds horrendous.

Im just saying that I doubt everyone is really thinking "I do t give a fuck"

It's human nature to care about others.

And these employers are a joke. Think about it, I bet there are plenty of them who started at a lower level , who you yourself used to cover for knowing full well they were out on the lash the night before, and now are in positions above you giving other staff crap about " there's no cover you have to come in"

People are literally "drunk with power" these days knowing full well there are hundreds of others willing to put up with it just to have a job.

I'd be mortified of dd was somehow the source of infection for another child who ended up seriously ill.

But I don't think anyone is laughing about sending their sick child to school. Not really. We'd all rather be at work than at home with sick children.

By that I mean we eouldvt take the kids. We don't skive off, looking after children who are ill isn't fun. I don't know why anyone would think we are just trying to get out if working.

Just to clarify, I don't think that anyone has said they don't care at all, just that they don't always take the seriousness of their actions into consideration.

What CouthyMow said about the NHS is spot on - I have been in trouble more times than I care to mention because my son was ill / I needed to attend an urgent school meeting.

I was even called from nursery to collect him as he had vomited and my manager refused to let me leave for over an hour as I was the only trained member of staff on. She actually used the words 'duty of care' in her discussion to indicate it was a professional issue.

That said it is absolutely NO excuse for sending an infectious / ill child to school or nursery.

I was a lone parent with no family in the area until my son was 5yrs old and I never did it... I think you have to be utterly selfish and are not prioritising your child if you choose to anything different...

And yes I have fear for my job, yes I have been threatened with disciplinary and eventually I was 'managed' out of my flexible working agreement but even so it does not change my stance that ill children belong at home where they can't infect others and can get better themselves.

I think a lot of people do take account of the consequences of their actions and put keeping a roof over their DCs' head first.

It's the system that lets working parents be in this dilemma in the first place that we need to challenge.

If someone has a child whose immune system is so weak that being expose to the normal childhood illnesses that everyone should reasonably expect children to be exposed to in school, shouldn't that child be educated outside of school? Why is it the other parents' responsibility to go beyond normal steps of exposure to normal childhood illnesses, surely it's the immune suppressed child's parents' responsibility to make sure their child is educated in an appropriate setting? For some children, school is not a sensible place to be. Why should other parents have to take time off work instead of the sick child's parents taking time off work to educate their child themselves?