To think 2 1/2 hours is too long in a dirty nappy?

[RandallFloyd]

DS started pre-school this year and is not potty trained at all. Just not ready.

The school handbook thingy says "your child will not be precluded from attending Nursery should they not be toilet trained. In such circumstances a programme/plan will be drawn up between the school and parents as a positive step towards improving the situation".

He was dirty when I picked him up on Monday so yesterday, at drop-off, I asked them what their policy is. I was told they aren't allowed to change them, they have to encourage them to do it themselves. Also that they have to rely on the child telling them they are dirty. I explained that although he does wear pull-ups he wouldn't be able to do that and there is always wipes, nappies and nappy bags in his bag.

She just re-iterated that that's what they have to do, so I asked that if he is dirty again can they ring me and I'll sort him out (I live 5 mins away). Tbh I couldn't think of any other option.

She agreed but I left feeling like I'd asked something really unusual.

I know it's only morning but surely up to 2 1/2 hours is too long in a dirty nappy? Of course he could have only been dirty for 5 minutes, I'll never know, but he was uncomfortable enough that he wouldn't walk home and was quite sore. And a diet nappy stinks, how can they need to wait for the child to tell them?!

Am I being massively pfb? I genuinely want honest opinions.

'Trying hard.'
Something else I can try.

As someone else said out of a class of 25 if there are 1 or 2 children with special needs who need changed thats not going to make as big an impact on the day compared to 20 still needing full nappy changes through out the day.

I really understand that in the minority of cases children arent ready but when growing numbers are getting older and older it does make me go

DS was not ready before the summer. He had no concept that he had dirtied his nappy, he would sit in a dirty one and deny he had done a poo even if he smelled.

He would poo and wee all over the house without a nappy on. Despite every encouragement he became upset and cried when being sat in a potty saying he was really scared.

So what would you do then, o miracle workers?

Let's keep this to OP's issues. Which are a neglectful preschool and ensuring that her son is well cared for.

Randall...when are you planning to go in to speak with them?

Why? What difference does it make to your daily life when children use a potty? Weird.

Happy, you appear to have your skirt tucked into your ignorance.

There's no point trying to toilet train a child who doesn't realise where the wee/poo is coming from. Most of us have taken a child's nappy off, they've wee'd and looked totally shocked as to where that wee has just come from. It takes some children longer for their brains to develop that connection, that's all .

My mother used to preach we were all potty trained at 18 months old, but that's bollox really. We were given drinks and then held over potties, fed put on a potty. She'd say "if they can talk, they can tell you they need a wee!"

Where are these classes of 20 nappy-wearing 5yo's?
And what's that got to do with my 3yo?

I would love to not send him, i don't think he's ready, I think he'd really benefit from another year, or 6 months at least, at home but if he doesn't do this year of practise he'll be thrown straight into full time school next year and I think that would be even worse.

Not necessarily - he'll be a year older for a start, a year more mature. You don't have to do anything! If he's not ready it could be counterproductive sending him anyway. I think people often assume their DC have settled in really well because they don't cry or fuss when being dropped off, but it may be that the DC have just resigned themselves to going. Either way it sounds like a horrible place

There aren't Randall people are being ridiculous. We all know that the vast majority of NT children are toilet trained by the time they start school. -Some posters have been reading the Daily Mail too much

Well 7 has ASD and developmental delay and was potty trained at 3.5 I was really chuffed, but still can't get the nights sorted. I tried training dd at 2 but she just wasn't ready. After all you can lead a horse to water but cannot make them drink!

God almighty. Not potty trained at three years old

Sorry Randall - not a stalker, honest! There was a poster a couple of days ago with similar issues also in Wales. I wondered if this is a regional thing.

I nearly killed myself trying to find a combination of pre school/nursery/cm so ds could attend a Welsh pre school as I work. In the end, we kept him at the private nursery he was at. He has at least 2 accidents a week despite being potty trained at home and out and about for 6 months. They have no issues with changing him. He is nearly 4.

None of this helps you op, but it makes me question the policy of pre school from 3. If the teachers/TA can't handle it, then maybe sending them at 4 is better. I think you need to meet with the school.

What's with the confused face?
Which bit can I explain better?

I'm in work for the next two days but hopefully I can ring them and set something set up for early next week.

I want to make sure I'm fully prepared with all my facts and resources so they can't bamboozle me.

I've heard loads of this type of thing in Wales as well.

Not being potty trained at three is nothing to about dear.

My theory is with exception of SN or medical needs, as long as they are potty trained by the time they start school, no biggie.

I wonder if it's anything to do with more women being at work? Nothing wrong with going to work. Some have to and some like to (I did). What about research into how children of those two sets of parents - including fathers - fare where toilet training is concerned?

Why bother when it's such a non issue.

And I wouldn't imagine that has any impact whatsoever. The child is being looked after by CM or nursery in that event, both of whom would be training the child, if indeed they are ready.

Happy is it arse to do with that. It's to do with a better understanding of children. Do you mind not derailing the thread any more?

Did you read the article I linked Happy?

Really, Harold, that's interesting.
I'll have a google and see if the policy is different here, maybe.

If it is, then that's the way it is. I just wish they'd told me. Why say they don't preclude children in nappies if they can't change them? It doesn't make sense.