To wish people would consider the 48 hour exclusion rule!

[Namechanger520]

I have namechanged for this thread.
I work as a nanny and don't want to risk outing myself!
Yesterday I had a phone call to say one of my charges had been sick in the night and just to prewarn me before I arrived, and double check if he should go to preschool!!
The child spent the whole day tired, laying around, had a temperature and no appetite and no inclination to want to do anything, however there was no more sickness just a constant streaming runny nose.
I text today to see how he is (as I was sick in the night last night and was worried his sibling might have been).
I received a reply to say he seems fine, enjoyed his swimming lesson and the birthday party he went to.
Aibu to think he shouldn't have gone swimming or soft play today?? I have worked in various forms of education and childcare over the years and I am getting fed up of parents who seem to think that the 48 hour exclusion rule is there for their inconvenience.
Maybe I am feeling bitter as I have spent the day feeling ill, so mumsnet aibu???

the paediatrician on the hospital ward told me the incubation period for noro virus is 24 - 48 hours.

user it's 48 hours clear, and eating and drinking normally if you work in healthcare. There was discussion at one point of increasing it to 72 hours, but that didn't happen.

48 hours in the guideline set out by the NHS. There's lots of info on this site

Squedgie, a friend of mine who works at our local hospital is encouraged to stay away for 72 hours with a 48 hour minimum.

I think the 48 rule is only sensible for young children (up to about age 7), because they're the least likely to do a good job washing their hands thoroughly after using the toilet/putting their fingers in their mouths, etc. Children over that age should be able to wash their hands well so as not to share any lingering bugs after using the toilet.

Thats a guideline, a suggestion. Not any kind of rule.

And that might be a rule in healthcare, but if I took an extra 2 or 3 days off work every time I was sick for one day, I'd be fired. So would most people.

These parents are dickheads

How often do you have a vomiting bug User? I was last off with a sickness bug in February 2012. Even allowing for one a year I'd be hard pushed to get to firing levels of sickness (especially if I was complying with their policy that I had to stay off).

Here in the US our town has changed the 48 hour rule to 72 hours this year. It has helped cut down on the number of kids coming down with things. They are strict about it too. If your child has thrown up at school they require a doctors note to return earlier than 3 days later.

It's not easy with both DH and I working to coordinate care from home but so far we have only had pink eye and the baby had a day of D&V associated with a cold she picked up from daycare. Both times they stayed off school for 3 days.

Selfish parents. Theres a bunch of them at my daughters nursery. The teachers tell them that vomiting/diarrhea needs 48 hours off...they ignore. Some even send their kids in WHILST ill. Fuckwits. Yes it may be an inconvenience for you to look after your own ill child and have to have a day off work or whatever, but all you are doing is purposely passing on the illness to other kids, and the inconvenience (plus usually illness) to other parents. Its just selfishness, not giving a shit about your own ill child, or other children and its a massive pain in the fucking arse that is just unneeded with a bit of common sense and listening to teachers/doctors.

YANBU my kid is one who could end up really ill in hospital from this sort of thing and it really annoys me when people are so utterly inconsiderate. It has happened from his toddler group before and half the class ended up with vomiting because one mum thought, like several people on here, that the guidance was somehow fabricated purely to inconvenience them. We have several doctors who have quoted this and consider it a minimum to prevent spreading of illness.

Yes, user, it is an actual thing. I'd be very surprised if you had enough sickness bugs to put your employment on the line - and if you did give 'sickness bug - staying off for 48hrs as per NHS guidelines' on your sick note then it would be very hard for work to argue with you.

It's incredibly selfish that people know the rule and don't stick to it.

Ok, this one has lots of yukky stuff about transmission of norovirus and is mostly quite readable (don't read if you like eating out a lot )

www.journalofclinicalvirology.com/article/S1386-6532(08)00366-1/pdf

It does talk about shedding after recovery but not the 48hr rule, I've not been able to find any of those that aren't behind a paywall, but yes it is still fairly arbitrary, but is probably the longest they can realistically suggest as a week would be ridiculous. Between adults in, say, an office, once the symptoms have gone then standard personal hygiene should be adequate without the 48hrs, but it does seem that children shed far more virus than adults, so I guess the 48hr rule is sort of reasonable. In healthcare many trusts now give 48hrs infection control leave once symptoms have gone if you have had norovirus as it's such a problem.
Here's another interesting one on rota-virus (which accounts for many of the standard school bugs)
www.antimicrobe.org/Lancet11.pdf

Also I used to work with food and we were told not to come in until you were 48 hours clear of a vomitting bug. It was a pain for management finding cover and such but it was needed. And if you were found to have ignored it it was actually disciplinary action taken (though how they would ever prove it I don't know)

It makes my blood boil - it's ridiculous, and people bleating on about their sick record or no pay are even more irritating. There is NO excuse for passing on a contagious virus. You never know if you are sitting next to someone going through cancer treatment or with a compromised immune system. Yes to most it's a minor inconvenience but to some, it's a death sentence. I've been really lucky that my kids only ever got it once or twice in their school years and I kept them off for 72 hours from their last bout of vomiting/diarrhoea.

As an HCP it's 72 hours clear for D&V in hospitals I've worked in.

The WAHACA fiasco is a good example of why the rule exists

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/37857215?client=safari

Have I missed something? The OP didnt mention any diarhoea, just one episode of being sick.

Not all diarhoea is infectious and not all vomiting is from an infective cause. So no. I dont think the 48 hours rule should be applied as a blanket ban. But in the OP case, i think she needs to clarify things. Being a little unwell isnt the same as having infectious d&v

not all vomiting is from an infective cause

But the point is, you don't know. The 48 hrs is a universal precaution. In this case it seems fairly clear that the sickness was infectious (because the OP caught it). So the boy has probably infected a whole swimming pool. You have to hope there weren't any immuno-compromised people in it, don't you? (Fortunately chlorine does kill most of these viruses.)

It makes my blood boil - it's ridiculous, and people bleating on about their sick record or no pay are even more irritating

Yeah, those fuckers who want to keep their jobs and not lose their houses, how fucking dare they? The main thing is the remote chance of your precious kid getting a big, isn't it? That's what should matter to them, not their livelihoods.

the guidelines are for D&V anyway, not V and temp, so fuck the lot of you.

bug

YANBU
I've kept my immune compromised son off school.last week due to selfishness.
The bug that's going around seems to be very shortlived but v infectious .

The main thing is the remote chance of your precious kid getting a big, isn't it?

Or, in many cases, the far less remote chance of their loved one dying.

Yeah, those fuckers who want to keep their jobs and not lose their houses, how fucking dare they?

That's a fair point, but not many people loose their job due to not sending a child to their Swiming lesson and a birthday party though..

No-one is going to be sacked for taking 2-3 days off work for norovirus (assuming that they were otherwise a capable employee). No tribunal in the land would allow it.

Agree with stitchfusion - it really depends on the situation. My younger daughter vomits quite easily, as soon as something does not agree with her stomach in effect. I couldn't possibly keep her off nursery for 48hrs each time if she is fine, no diarhea and no fever! I would be broke if not fired (not fired as it is dependent's leave but broke as unpaid!)! But if it seems like a sickness bug (vomiting and diarhea and fever) then yes absolutely fair enough!