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:

MilkTwoSugarsThanks · 15/12/2015 08:43

mumthe - I would love to have been a proud parent, but missed DS's part because of a crying baby. It was taken out after DS's bit and DS was upset! I hate that stupid selfish mother!

ArmchairTraveller · 15/12/2015 08:44

'it's about children, children watching, children performing, parents being proud, '

Yes.
Children and parents and staff who have worked had to have their efforts spoilt by screaming, light-sabre waving, wailing, yelling, scooter riding stage-invading siblings.
Bless 'Em all.

Original poster

nativity15 · 15/12/2015 08:44

Purple it is the main question. I'm honestly interested in your opinion so please respond.

No under 5s due to limited seats.
No under 5s.

Can you not see a difference.
Is one sentence not different from another.

OP posts:

lostinmiddlemarch · 15/12/2015 08:44

I suppose that any under five year old could in theory be sat on a knee instead of on a seat. I would probably have called ahead to explain that baby was very small and would be in a sling so no space issues, would that be ok? Or yes, I might have just turned up with her in a sling and put my coat on the outside so she was very inconspicuous! It perhaps wasn't the best idea to bring a big piece of apparatus along if you knew space was the issue here.

I don't think you have no common sense, I think they weren't very clear about the issues and expected you to obey like a primary school child would - without question.

londonrach · 15/12/2015 08:45

Yabu. Letter said no under 5 so you had prior warning. School was fair as all parents with under 5s were removed. The only thing you could have checked was to phone to school before and ask re babies in arms. However i understand why the school has this rule as im sure everyone else does. You may not agree with it but the children performing deserve their moment to be heard. Two performances meant you and dh could have gone separately leaving one to look after the baby.

PurpleDaisies · 15/12/2015 08:45

No under 5s due to limited seats.
No under 5s.

Both sentences say that under 5s are not allowed at the performance.

StrictlyMumDancing · 15/12/2015 08:46

DDs school have, after a few disastrous sessions with parents where some brought their younger kids, instigated a rule of you can bring younger siblings but: you must sit at the back, exit as soon as they make noise and this will be policed - no excuse for the performance being ruined for the children or the parents who have arranged childcare and/or time off to watch.

YABU though. They said 'no under 5s due to seating limitations' you chose to read that as 'no under 5s using a seat' rather than 'no under 5s'. If everyone brought their under 5 and sat them on their lap there would have been a fire hazard. You should have asked specifically beforehand rather than assumed.

Original poster

nativity15 · 15/12/2015 08:46

The answer is obviously to have two different plays but that was not given as an option.

This new rule is due to a new head teacher. She may well of had complaints in the past I don't know...but she was not at the school at lady years nativity play.

OP posts:

ArmchairTraveller · 15/12/2015 08:48

Doesn't mean she hasn't had prior experience of dozens of nativities though.

hazelnutlatte · 15/12/2015 08:48

Where are all of these schools with ridiculous rules? I went to my dd's nativity last week, we were told 'only 2 tickets per family due to limited seating.' We took 5 month old dd2 along with us and no one commented or cared, and there were loads of other people with babies and toddlers. It's a nativity play not Shakespeare! I don't think we are unusual in not having any alternative child care, if younger siblings were not allowed then lots of the parents wouldn't be able to go.

Original poster

nativity15 · 15/12/2015 08:48

Autocorrect is killing me here!!!

OP posts:

Brioche201 · 15/12/2015 08:49

The Nativity/christmas show is an educational exercise.The schools priority is to children on roll, not their younger siblings.

ArmchairTraveller · 15/12/2015 08:52

Depends on the school and the parents. Round here is very community-minded and so noisy children tend to be taken out of performances ASAP and so we don't need rules banning them. Parents self-regulate.

PaintedTshirt · 15/12/2015 08:53

YABU, but so are the school. Rule should be one concert with siblings and one without.

However on this occasion you and DH should have gone to separate performances and taken it in turns to stay with DD. Even 5wo bf babies can be left for 20 minutes (last part wasn't to you OP)

OldFarticus · 15/12/2015 08:53

Purple is right. The reason is irrelevant - you and other parents thought that the rules didn't apply to you. Why is that? Why should other parents be disadvantaged because they complied with the rules?

Two different plays is obviously the better option so lobby for that next year (when your new baby is much more likely to actually be disruptive to the other kids!)

catfordbetty · 15/12/2015 08:58

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

Yes, very good idea. You might also want to cc the LEA, your MP, and HRH Elizabeth Queen of England.

AnnPerkins · 15/12/2015 08:58

Whether it's justified or not, it's the school's choice. YWBU to ignore the rule so they were right to ask you to leave.

The HT was VVVU to use Health & Safety as an excuse though. It's dishonest and undermines genuine, necessary h&s measures.

OldFarticus · 15/12/2015 08:59

catford

tiggytape · 15/12/2015 09:03

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ohtheholidays · 15/12/2015 09:04

YANBU but they were!

In any schools I've worked in or my children have attended they allways let younger children and babys attend.But the heads of the school always had the sense to put in bold print on the letter that was sent home that if your child was being disruptive(crying,running around ect)that you would need to take your child outside right away or you would be escorted from the hall.
They'd sweeten it up at the end of the letter by saying that it was for the sake of the children that had worked so hard to put the performance together.

Every single time it worked,I've only ever seen the head of a school have to tell a parent that they needed to leave a handful of times and that's in over 20 years.

juneau · 15/12/2015 09:05

Well I think it was a very unreasonable request! Many primary age DC have small siblings and arranging an hour's ad hoc childcare would be very hard for many people. Plus, a 5-week-old baby is too tiny to leave with a random babysitter. What would have been better would have been to say 'under 5s must sit on laps' and 'if your small DC cries or causes a disruption please step outside to avoid disrupting the performance as its very distracting for the DC'. I'd have complained too OP.

Badders123 · 15/12/2015 09:05

Why do you seem to think the rules don't apply to you?

Enjolrass · 15/12/2015 09:06

Yabu. The rule said no under 5s. If you thought it might not apply to you you should have checked. End of

PaulAnkaTheDog · 15/12/2015 09:07

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.

This is so bonkers I have to assume it's a joke. If it's not then I'm seriously laughing.

OP I think yabu. However, fwiw, I think it's a ridiculous rule. A nativity play is not some sacred event. It's a bunch of kids putting on a play for parents. They never run smoothly in my experience, so why they banned under-fives is beyond me. It's all part of it, isn't it? The noise, the chaos etc. Also, I've not once seen a kid burst into tears because a baby cried during their line.

PurpleDaisies · 15/12/2015 09:07

Does it make any difference ohtheholidays that the op knew in advance the under 5s were not allowed at the performance but took one anyway?

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 ··· 21 22

Swipe left for the next trending thread