I have been told by doctors not to give calpol purely to reduce temp, even at 40C, if the child appears not to be in discomfort. That the fever itself is not harmful. Calpol should be given to reduce pain and discomfort caused by illness and fever.
I think the point the OP is making rubbish is that she works over an hour away so she'd like paracetamol to be given while she makes her way there as the child could have a fit.
I know what her point is. Paracetamol can take up to an hour to work so it's not something I would be desperate for them to give my child as I made my way there, just for the purposes of reducing fever. I would be there with my child soon anyway.
And paracetamol doesn't reduce the chances of a febrile convulsion, according to the NHS.
And this from patient.info
"Although alarming, a febrile seizure in itself is not usually dangerous. Full recovery is usual. Most illnesses which cause high temperature (fever) and febrile convulsions are the common coughs, colds and viral infections which are not usually serious."
Do previous posters have other information that contradicts these sources?
I'm not saying I wouldn't care if my DC had a febrile seizure as it would be upsetting for them and me. I'm saying I wouldn't be complaining that the nursery wouldn't give my DC Calpol when she had a 40C temp in order to prevent a seizure (which it wouldn't anyway), for the various reasons I've mentioned.