To feel really upset that a mum sent her child to school ill again

[Yesitismeagain]

I work in a primary school. One boy (age 9) cried today because he felt so unwell. He was ill yesterday (temperature and feeling ill with it) and his parents were called early, but they didn't come till normal pick up.

Today he was back in, but was obviously very unwell from the start. The school phoned by 9.30am to come and get him. He was crying, shivering and just lying on the floor in the 'sick room' (a small room off the office).

By 2pm a parent still hadn't arrived. The office were told that the neither parent could come as they work.

Is it just me that this is neglect?

There is systemic illogic in the job centre requiring a 90 min radius but school sick bays being closed.

If each child is sick 1-2 days a year, in a two form entry school there must be 2-3 sick every day.

Yonic, why does it make a difference that school is compulsory? The plain fact is that it is not compulsory if your child is ill.

Because you can tell your neighbour you aren't doing it for her again, of course.

We aren't going to agree, clearly, so

For all the frothing and outrage on this thread, how often is this really an issue? In three years, I've only had to pick DS from daycare once (because he fell off a swing and banged his head) and kept him home one day due to a yucky cold. I probably only have to call a parent to come pick up a child from class a couple of times per year out of a class of 30.

Most parents will leave work/home/wherever and come down as soon as they are called. There aren't rooms full of sad faced children waiting to see if mummy or daddy will show up. We're talking about a very rare incident across a school year, yet people are talking about parents paying for full time back up emergency contacts to sit around on the off chance that they might have to pick up a child. Nearly all parents have no major issues if they have to do a pick up, a few will struggle but manage it, one or two may not have any options available to them and just be doing the best they can, and only a miniscule number will not care, and there are avenues the school can follow in that very very small percentage of cases.

Work is no excuse!

You make sacrifices and prepare to be there for your kids, you have a back up plan then another back up plan.

If you're a doc or nurse you have someone on call, and you know this could happen! You make sacrifices and plan to be there if your kids really need you and if you can't be you pay someone or enlist someone!

Unacceptable I would be so embarrassed and ashamed if I had done this

The idea that all parents should be able to arrange emergency back up for the odd occasion when they can't get to the school quickly is ridiculous. How are they supposed to do that if they have no family or friends nearby who don't work and are willing to look after a sick child?! As for paying for emergency backup-who would do that? Childminders don't usually look after sick children.

Who do you call though? If you haven't no local family and all your friends also have jobs?

So, Yonic, it's all right to force someone else to look after your ill child (rather than doing so yourself) so long as they can't refuse to have your child back again the next day?

That is really twisted and utterly selfish logic.

I'm actually shocked that so many parents are unwilling to take personal responsibility for their sick children!

It's a problem. I see it as one for the parents to sort out, not school. What other parenting problems do you get to delegate to unwilling third parties? As i Asked before do people with literally no choice still drop their child at school when it's closed because of snow.

It's parents' responsibility end of story.

Marynary, it isn't a case of all parents having to arrange emergency back up. The plain fact is that for the vast majority of parents that won't be necessary, because they will be able to leave work. But if they are in a job which means they can't leave work easily if their child is ill, then certainly they have to arrange back-up. There really aren't that many jobs like that, and those that are tend to be well paid so that, given that you will need to arrange child minding anyway, you can opt for a nanny. As I've pointed out before, in that scenario you would have to have something in place during school holidays, so why not during termtime? If it's a childminder, for instance, and you try to pull the trick of just not turning up to collect your ill child, you will certainly find yourself frantically looking for an alternative the next day.

If you are in the very rare situation where both you and your partner (I'm assuming a partner because it equates to the OP's scenario) are in jobs where you can't go out to deal with your sick child at short notice, and neither is sufficiently well paid for you to afford a nanny, and you have absolutely no friends or family to help out if your child is ill - then, frankly, one or both of you is just going to have to change jobs. You have to have the capability of ensuring your child is looked after if they are ill. Otherwise you shouldn't have children.

I need to work tomorRow.just going to drop the dc on the childminders doorstep and drive off, turning off my phone. Not ideal but I have no choice, I have to work.

Icimoi Firstly I disagree that the vast majority of parents will always be able to pick up their children immediately (i.e. be at the school within 30 minutes).
Secondly, I disagree that the people who can't leave work immediately will be in jobs that are so well paid that they can employ a full time nanny just so they will be able to pick up their child if the school ever calls to say they are ill.
Many people use holiday clubs during the school holidays but these are obviously not available during term time and they wouldn't accept sick children anyway.

I'm actually shocked that so many parents are unwilling to take personal responsibility for their sick children!

This sums it up so very well. I totally agree.

Marynary, I never mentioned 30 minutes, and to be honest I think that's a bit of a red herring. I'm sure most schools accept that the likelihood is that it may be an hour or two - though they're also perfectly within their rights to expect parents not to send their child in at all when they know they're ill.

It's not good enough to say you "don't accept" that people who genuinely are in jobs that they can't leave quickly tend to be well paid. Can you give examples? The only ones given on this thread are, firstly, nurses whose employers have fouled up by having no cover available: but the reality is that those employers would have to sort something out if one of them became ill, and by law they're not entitled to prevent a nurse from leaving to look after a sick child just because they haven't arranged cover. Secondly, someone mentioned people working on a factory production line who won't allegedly be allowed to leave - but that assumes that their employers are prepared to break the law and take the risk of being prosecuted and/or a successful unfair dismissal and discrimination claim (and those are expensive). Thirdly, someone mentioned people working unlawfully in sweatshops who would lose their jobs. Are schools really supposed to provide free care for ill children just to benefit sweatshop owners? And in all three situations if you genuinely wouldn't be allowed to leave even if, say, your child's life were in danger, then you really shouldn't be in that job.

You refer to people who use holiday clubs and rightly point out that they won't accept sick children. So if these particular parents had tried pulling this trick with a holiday club they would lose their child's place at the club and, again, would just have to think of something else the next day. Why should they be entitled to do it to a school?

It's finally saying employers legal have to give people time off, but some will make people feel like they can't. And if you get fired for it, yes you could bring a complaint against them (depending on how long you have worked there) but it's expensive and what do you do about having no income in the meantime?

The reality for a lot of people is that they have to take the chance that their child is fine/will perk up. It doesn't mean they want to send them to school, but their other choices might be incredibly limited.

But is it acceptable that, if they are told that actually their child is not fine and is lying on the floor shivering and crying they should just leave him there for hours? Yes, they may have to take that chance, but in that event it is the parents who have to take the chance, they can't impose it on the school.

It's not good enough to say you "don't accept" that people who genuinely are in jobs that they can't leave quickly tend to be well paid.

Sorry that it is not "good enough". You are quite naive if you think that nobody needs to worry about getting dismissed. Employers don't even have to give a reason for dismissal if the employee has worked there for less than two years so fat chance of suing them for wrongful dismissal. They probably need to keep their jobs to feed and cloth their family. I doubt that they are working for the fun or it and they probably can't get another more suitable job.

I'm not sure what you mean about holiday clubs. They would be in the same position as the school i.e. they would have to call the parents and wait for them to pick the sick child up.

Kim, I'm not sure if you're reading the same post as everyone else. Where on earth do you get your conviction that these parents were desperate to get to their child? Absolutely nothing in this account of their conduct suggests anything of the sort. These were parents who took too long to get there the preceding day; who were irresponsible enough to have brought their ill child in that morning; and who, five hours after being told their child was ill, shivering and distressed, simply told the school office they couldn't get away from work.

There is nothing whatsoever that says this school was ignoring the child. And
the point is surely that the school didn't know that the parents were trying their best to get there, given the history I've referred to above. Of course the school will do their best by the child, but are the parents really entitled to dump the responsibility onto them?

The days of a sick bay, small bed, school nurse and a dose of Calpol (or probably junior aspirin in those days before they knew any better) are long gone in most state schools.

Both my children's school have a sick bay with bed.