Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 21 22

Original poster

kicked out of nativity with 5 week old.

541 replies

nativity15 · 15/12/2015 07:51

I'm just after your opinions. I have name changed but am a regular.

We received a letter about the school play and it said no children under 5 due to limited seating. I have a 5 week old new born and took her along in her car seat as opposed to her pram so she could go on my lap in her car seat not to take up space. Lots of other parents done the same. Once we got there we was all kicked out it was horrible and highly embarrassing. The hall went so quite and I'm sure everyone was looking at me. I quietly explained that we was taking up no extra space (lots of empty seats due to lots being kicked out) and she said I still have to leave due to health and safety. I do not do public confrontations well so quietly got up and left but must say I felt very heartbroken about it. I know it's just a school play but my eldest who is 6 was extremely excited her new sister was coming to 'watch' and now both of us will not be in the audience. My husband works full time and never made last year's due to work but was on paternity leave so this year we was able to all go together....it's Christmas.....we also have a new born and I was very happy about it all....abit of family time and all of us going to see her at her christmas play it just made me feel all warm and cosy and christmasy.

Anyway turns out it was nothing to do with health and safety and was an excuse to get me and the parents before me out the hall.

I have complained about this. Lots of the children have younger siblings. Not everyone has childcare so a lot of angry mum's and dads missed out.

So it turns out that this new 'heath and safety rule' was really the new head teacher didn't want any children under 5...I assume due to noise maybe. This school has always been brilliant in my opinion. They invite in parents with young siblings to do work shops etc and the school children visit other places and people in the community....that's what i like about the school makes you feel and also helps others in the community. But now this has happened I feel the opposite
I'm sure all the children and teachers worked hard for the play and now some children's families won't all be able to come and see them now...very sad.

Aibu to say under 5s are also part of our community and they are part of the families who want to come to the play to see older siblings and shouldn't be excluded due to their age.

I would.like to say this new rule only came in this year. Last year there were other children. I didn't have to think about it until this year but don't recall anything bad happening last year's play so the younger children where obviously not that disruptive.

OP posts:

Fairenuff · 15/12/2015 08:23

At least you know now for next year OP.

NotMyMonkey · 15/12/2015 08:23

Yabu. School clearly stated no under 5's, you chose to ignore it.

Also I would have been annoyed if I had made childcare arrangements for my other dc only to find that other parents had ignored the rules and had their younger children there.

TheWildRumpyPumpus · 15/12/2015 08:24

If there were 2 performances you should have gone to one each and the other stayed home to look after the baby.

I think the majority of schools say no under 5s at performances, many allow them to go to the dress rehearsal.

PurpleDaisies · 15/12/2015 08:25

We received a letter about the school play and it said no children under 5 due to limited seating.

I really don't understand how you can misunderstand this. It says no under 5's.

LadyPenelope68 · 15/12/2015 08:25

Sorry but they were clear no under 5's were allowed but you still took an under 5 so were asked to leave. It wasn't a decision made at the performance, you had advance notice. As a teacher who has to plan/prepare and arrange nativities, it would be lovely for everyone to come slog but the fact is that babies and very young children do spoil things for others if they are crying/making too much noise. Young children with speaking parts can't be heard and it ruins the moment for that child and their parents. As staff it's extremely frustrating when babies are crying/toddlers are let off knees to wander round. It spoils the performance for the children taking part and the parents of those children. I don't think the school have been unreasonable at all.

AyeAmarok · 15/12/2015 08:26

YABU. You were told the rules. You ignored them.

You were embarrassed by your own actions, because of your own assumption that the rules applied to everyone except you.

catfordbetty · 15/12/2015 08:27

maybe I need things dumbed down for me

How could "no under fives" be made simpler?

OldFarticus · 15/12/2015 08:27

But nativity they did say no children under 5 according to your OP. The more apposite question is why you thought the rules did not apply to you. You should have clarified with the school before rocking up with DH and a baby.

TheAnswerIsYes · 15/12/2015 08:27

I would have gone fucking spare and complained to the school and then the Governors as soon as I had found out about this rule. It's discriminatory to exclude breastfeeding mother's and there was no way I would have been able to, or wanted to, leave my 5wo bf baby.

I would be making a formal complaint and I would inform Ofsted too.

MilkTwoSugarsThanks · 15/12/2015 08:29

TheAnswer - the discrimination would only be if a mother who was actually feeding was asked to leave. Banning all children under 5 means it not discrimination.

OldFarticus · 15/12/2015 08:30

I would have gone fucking spare and complained to the school and then the Governors as soon as I had found out about this rule

And what a wonderful example you would have been setting to the children by "going fucking spare" at your dispproval of a simple, reasonable rule with a clear and obvious justification.

And seriously, OFSTED? Reading some of the comments on this thread makes me really flipping glad I am not a teacher.

FluffyNinja · 15/12/2015 08:30

It's hardly the RSC. Has the school forgotten what the Nativity is actually about??? A total ban on under 5's is ridiculous.
I went to my DS's concert last week and you couldn't hear most of the kids speaking after the first couple of rows back for the younger siblings talking, crying and wandering around, but that's how it goes.
I think you should canvas the other parents and then let the head know that this ridiculous non rule isn't acceptable for future events and that if they trot out 'elf & safety' in future, you will be calling them on it.

lilydaisyrose · 15/12/2015 08:31

Cripes, I can't believe all the pp! No to crawly babies and disruptive toddlers I can understand, but to a 5 week old? I'd have been beyond furious if someone suggested I leave my newborn with someone else to watch a school play. At that age, for me, they are too young to be left with anyone. No under 5s, fine (although I still think it's mean and against the inclusive nature a school should have and causes unnecessary problems for parents), but babes in arms are should be seen differently, although I'm at a loss to how you'd phrase or police this...

Toughasoldboots · 15/12/2015 08:31

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PurpleDaisies · 15/12/2015 08:32

Nowhere has the op said she took the baby because she was breastfeeding. How is that relevant here?

Whatdoidohelp · 15/12/2015 08:34

You wouldn't find a babysitter who would sit for 20 minutes and I certainly wouldn't leave a young baby with a stranger.

You had a baby so must act responsibly and prioritise. Maybe this year only your dh should have went to the play and you should have stayed at home or vice versa. Having a baby does not grant you special treatment.

Original poster

nativity15 · 15/12/2015 08:35

She is breastfeed but I expressed a bit in a bottle as I knew there would be a lot of other people all with different opinions and wouldn't feel comfortable breastfeeding feeding there but that's my own insecurity and a different thread I suppose.

I took no under 5s due to limited seating as just that as a seat g issue. If it stand just no under 5s I wouldn't have took her.

I don't think I'm special and I don't think rules apply to everyone part from Mr. I am not a rule braker. I don't have a criminal record or points on my licence and I certainly do not encourage my children to brake rules ect I'm shocked you think this of me because a misunderstanding that the school implemented. They should have been honest and then I wouldn't of had to go through all this.

OP posts:

Toughasoldboots · 15/12/2015 08:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PurpleDaisies · 15/12/2015 08:38

They should have been honest and then I wouldn't of had to go through all this.

Can't you see how ridiculous this is? They clearly stated no under 5s. You took an under 5. They threw you out. This is absolutely not their fault.

FluffyNinja · 15/12/2015 08:39

It didn't simply state 'no under 5's' did it? That would be unambiguous.

It said 'no under 5's DUE to limited seating'.

That could reasonably be interpreted by anyone with half a brain that under 5's could be seated on a lap.

Unfortunately, the person drafting the new rule obviously has limited brain capacity.

mumthemovie · 15/12/2015 08:39

I think it's quite incredible that so many people have said you were unreasonable. This is a family event, it's about children, children watching, children performing, parents being proud, it's not about oscar nominations.

Not making it about the children is like running a bus that doesn't stop to pick up passengers.

OldFarticus · 15/12/2015 08:39

Yes, the school should absolutely have been honest. But you should also have taken "no under 5's" to mean just that and not "no under 5's (except nativity's DC)" !

Much better to campaign for a separate "noisy" performance with toddlers and babes in arms next year. Kicking up a fuss won't change anything now.

ArmchairTraveller · 15/12/2015 08:40

If parents could be relied upon to take children out of performances when they were being a problem for the performers and some of the audience, then schools wouldn't need rules like this.
But they can't. The rules came in as a response to the 'Fuck you' attitude. Same as needing parking patrols to stop parents parking on the zig zags and the like. It's all about me and mine and what I want.

Chococroc · 15/12/2015 08:41

"It's discriminatory to exclude breastfeeding mother's "

Well yes, excluding someone on the basis of them breastfeeding is discrimination, but that's not what's happened here.

PurpleDaisies · 15/12/2015 08:41

But mum that's not the question here. Challenge the rule that no under 5s are allowed-fair enough but to turn up with one and to just expect to be allowed in is ridiculous.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 21 22

Swipe left for the next trending thread