Would you be happy with this?

[mickeyfartpants]

DM had my DD today - 4yrs. She let her go upstairs to the toilet on her own while there was a decorator in the room next to the toilet. Obviously she cannot lock the door so potentially the door could have been open the whole time with a half naked child on the toilet. DD told us when we get in from work that she'd had a chat with the decorator on the landing.

No bad came of it, granted. But when I've mentioned to my Mum that I'd rather she went to the toilet with DD if there was a stranger in the house, her reaction is to say that its fine because the guy has his own kids, she was downstairs the whole time and then put my brother on to tell me that I'm being silly about all. We don't really know this man, and even if we did, I'd rather my toddler wasn't put in a vulnerable position.

Am I being silly?

"I certainly wouldn't let my daughter go to bathroom on her own."

This child is four, YAN! How long would you keep up the practice of accompanying her to the loo for?

I'm in agreement with 306235388. Calling a four year old a toddler indicates to me too that she's a bit babied, OP.

4 is old enough to go to the toilet on her own and shut the door while she's at it, fgs. I think you referring to a 4 year old as a toddler is quite telling.
Get a grip.

YANBUP I feel the same as you OP. The risk of the decorator abusing your child while she was in a vulnerable position was slim but would have been non existent if your DM had accompanied her. I don't understand why anybody would take that unnecessary risk.

That's exactly it, yes!

Yo are being silly. At four years old she is old enough to be taught to shut the door and is not a toddler btw.

mickey, was your mum looking after your DD as part of agreed and/or regular childcare while you went to work/dentist/whatever? Or was she just spending time with your daughter?

TheAnswerIsYes the risk of the grandmother abusing the child was slim too, but would have been non existent if the decorator had accompanied.

Abusers exist, you don't prevent them by infantilising little kids.

YABU.

If it was one of mine I would've gone with them to check the door was shut, but more from the perspective of it being pleasanter and more dignified all round. No one wants to listen to someone else's kid curling one out.

It's not even the opportunity to physically abuse her that worries me, it's that he could accidentally walk in on her and make them both uncomfortable, as OP said he had the opportunity to film her or take pictures, he could even have just given her a leery look that could have frightened her. And if she had relayed that back incorrectly, as children often do, there would be no one to verify anything. All avoided by just going to the toilet with her when there's someone you don't know in the house.

YAB a little bit silly. Just a little bit though!

Why can't she shut the door at 4?

I'm blown away by these comments. You're all fine with your four year old sitting on the toilet in front of a stranger? You don't have to think every man is a paedophile to not be ok with this. I don't think every man is a rapist, but I also don't want an audience when I sit on the loo. This is about preserving the dignity of a child.

I didn't say she couldn't shut it. I said she couldn't lock it.

She can shut it but is unlikely to at DM's, given the amount of junk in the doorway from the redecoration.

"Do you seriously think that a man employed doing a job in someone's house would opportunistically abuse a child, with her grandmother in the house, in the time it took her to wee?"

My abuser managed to abuse me with other people in the fucking room. He knew I wasn't going to say anything as I was too scared and even though I was much older than 4, I was very naive and didn't really 'get' what he was doing. So yes the grandmother in the house would have made no bloody difference had this man actually been a paedophile.

Massive overreaction. You are going to spend a lot of your life worrying if you think every time your daughter is out of sight but still within earshot for more than a minute she is in danger of being abused. YABU.

How would you feel if your DC's school let work-men or work-women in and didn't vet them - and let children be alone with them for short periods of time without teachers close by.

Someone mentioned this scenario above.

Why shouldn't schools be allowed to do this seeing as the risk of abuse is so low.

"Not every man is a paedophile"
No that's very true but this man could have been...YANBU...better to be safe than sorry.

I think that was exactly CrapBag's point.

I am very jumpy about possible paedophiles as I was sexually abused as a child from about age 4 or 5 (that I remember).

Even I wouldn't be too worried about this situation. But my abuser was a relative, which is more common. Perhaps that is why I am not so worried about this

The school situation isn't comparable I don't think because if workmen:women are working in the toilet they're unable to let the kids use the loo. Fair enough. What if they were just working in the corridor or in fact anywhere in the school? Would all toilets be on lockdown? I think not.

If the door is blocked how does your mum use the toilet when he's there?? Does she not close the door?? She IBVU...

She's not a toddler.
Unless she removed her pants, trousers, socks and shoes completely then she wasn't half naked.
Nothing happened.
YABU.

I feel sorry for those who think paedophiles are around every corner. It must be a very stressful way to live.