Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

Is this unreasonable punishment from Teacher of 5 year old?

573 replies

sharond101 · 14/09/2017 21:52

DS is 5. He has never been in trouble before, not really but there was incident at school yesterday and a boy told him to pull down a little girl's pants which he did and she told the Teacher. He had his picture put on a dark cloud on the wall and given Time Out which meant yesterday and today he spent playtime in the class without adult supervision drawing pictures whilst the other children played outdoors. What has really annoyed me though is that when the Teacher returned after breaktime she took his picture off him and put it in the bin. He is very upset. Says he doesn't want to go to school and that she (teacher) shouts all the time.

OP posts:
Lozen · 19/09/2017 00:09

Oh officer, stop making things up. My 4 year old started at the same time as the 5 year olds and you don't know the girl is smaller. No one has used the word baby in relation the the OPs son and there is nothing wrong with the OPs attitude. Your hysteria is quite frightening and I'm saying that as a dedicated feminist and someone sexually assaulted as a child. No one is saying that this shouldn't be dealt with but saying this is how it all starts is pathetic. FFS get a grip.

The school has handled this badly but instead of offering advice the OP has been accused of being a bad parent and abuser who will probably be beaten up. The 5 year old has been accused of having a sexual motivation for the incident (and people are making uup the severity and circumstances to justify their over the top vile comments) who will turn into a sexual predator who deserves to be attacked, barred from school, on a watch list, etc, etc. Why not go the whole hog and insist he signs the sex offenders register.

I repeat, pathetic.

PigletWasPoohsFriend · 19/09/2017 08:41

My 4 year old started at the same time as the 5 year olds and you don't know the girl is smaller.

We don't know whether they were Y1 or R. OP was asked to clarify numerous times when they were still posting.

They didn't.

Gottagetmoving · 19/09/2017 09:12

A 5 year old would not realise this was such an appalling thing to hysterical adults.
Kids of 5 will tease each other and play pranks until they are educated to understand it can upset the other child. Its as big a deal as responsible adults make it and in this case a 5 year old boy is being treated like some sex pervert.
Of course the boy had to be told that this is cruel and wrong and he should be made to apologise to the girl. I think both children would be more traumatised by the reaction than to the actual incident.

Mittens1969 · 19/09/2017 09:49

It was definitely bullying and there needed to be consequences so it isn't repeated. But ascribing it to a potential predilection to sexually abusive behaviour is just slightly OTT. It's the sort of thing that can happen when children egg each other on, things they probably wouldn't do if they were on their own. Obviously the teacher was right to act but wrong not to tell the mum. If one of my DDs was unkind to a child in school I would make her apologise to the little girl and the teacher, and explain why what she did was wrong. (I also have a DNephew who used to get into all sorts of trouble at that age, though not what this boy claims he did, and my DSis was at her wits' end. His behaviour is improving now.)

It can signify that there is abuse is going on, but it's not something that should be said lightly. It could be that something untoward going on at home, but again we don't know. A lot of PPs have been shooting from the hip about something that we know nothing about, except what one mum said her 5 year old told her.

CorbynsBumFlannel · 19/09/2017 11:38

No posters early on in the thread said knickers and the op has posted since and not corrected them. Look back at the thread. The child pulled a girls knickers down. Not the crime of the century when you are 5 but if the school mum/act like it's nothing that's what the child will grow up thinking.

brasty · 19/09/2017 11:41

Not the crime of the century, but unusual behavior for a 5 year old that is wrong.

3EyedRaven · 19/09/2017 13:18

Jem is on Netflix at the moment, (or it was a few months back).
I still know all the words to 'glitter and gold' Grin

Lozen · 19/09/2017 16:01

Piglet we don't know the full details, that's the point I was making. The OP won't come back and clarify and neither would I. Some of the comments are unhelpful, OTT and vile.

Lozen · 19/09/2017 16:28

Corbyn I'v just had a quick look and I think the OP has only posted twice. In between both posts the word knickers was not used (unless I've somehow missed it). Her second post made it quite clear that she wouldn't be happy if she was the girls mum. Then the posts became increasingly vile. Can you really blame her for not coming back?

As for all those saying it's unusual behaviour for a 5 year old, is it really? I've just done a google search and the results of which would suggest otherwise and I can remember little boys and girls doing the same when I was a child.

Before the mob turns on me, no I don't think it's acceptable behaviour and it needs addressing. Not telling the boys parents about it was wrong and the OP is entitled to be concerned about the lack of communication.

Mittens1969 · 19/09/2017 20:22

@Lozen, You're not correct there, the OP posted 4 times early on, she herself never used the word 'knickers', but other posters had already spoken about him pulling down the little girl's knickers. And she didn't correct that presumption so we have to assume it's what she meant.

But she won't be coming back.

roundaboutthetown · 19/09/2017 21:05

Only two people mentioned knickers before the OP's last post (neither of them being the OP), and there were a couple of mentions of underwear (neither from the OP). The OP's response in her last post? That she needed to clarify with the school what actually happened and find out why she was not told about it. After this confirmation that the entire story from beginning to end was based on what her 5-year old ds told her, not what the school told her, thus being a million miles from any kind of confirmation, tacit or otherwise, that her ds meant knickers not trousers, there was a deluge of comments obsessing about knickers. Apparently, this part of the story, interpreted in its worst light, must be 100% true, but the rest is the wild imaginings of a depraved five year old trying to minimise what he had done and make himself out to be hard done by, when in fact, hanging, drawing and quartering would have been too good for him...

Lozen · 19/09/2017 21:44

Mittens did you miss the point when I said "I've had a quick look" and "unless I've somehow missed it".

It's quite bizarre that your paying so much emphasis on this and yet ignore the fact that the OP can only go off what her ds has said and thate everyone has jumped on the OP and made up the worst case scenarios (by that I mean invented scenerios).

Why on earth would the OP post back? Some of you would ignore everything she says and continue with the view that he's a nasty pervert who should be ostracised and she's a bad parent. I'm surprised at the venom in some of these posts about an incident that hasn't been confirmed one way or the other. Some of you need to have a serious word with your selves.

Mittens1969 · 19/09/2017 21:48

I do agree that this whole thread has been based around what a 5 year old has said to his mum, and that a lot have posters have made some wild assumptions.

But I think it's a leap, in the UK, to think the OP meant trousers rather than knickers. I've never known a child in this country to be aware that pants can mean trousers in other parts of the English speaking world.

Besides, the majority girls wear skirts to school, so for that reason, too, it's probable that the little boy pulled her knickers down.

Anyway, I expect the OP has spoken to the school by now, but we won't know the outcome because of the hostility to the OP on this thread.

LadyWire · 19/09/2017 22:15

Been dropping in and out of these comments, not read them all but got the gist of some of them.

This is a little boy who was egged on to do something stupid to a little girl by another little boy. Not sexual in any way, just stupid. I remember it happening to my friend at the same age 35 years ago and it did not scar her for life.

It also happened at the Brownie pack I run about 15 years ago to one little girl by another. This was dealt with by removing the offender for the rest of the evening and then telling her parents. She wasn't at Brownies the next week but the week after she came with a card and a little dolly for the de-bagee and all was forgotten.

I don't think this little boy would have told his mum what had happened unless it was true because he knew by then that it was very wrong. The teacher handled it terribly by 1. not telling his mum immediately, 2. dragging the punishment over 2 days and 3. throwing the picture away.

At 5 years old they're still not much more than babies imo. OP on the off chance you're still reading the comments I hope you got to the bottom of things and that both your boy and the little girl are ok.

roundaboutthetown · 19/09/2017 22:16

Not at all a leap. You just need to watch American films and TV to know that pants can mean trousers and that's beside the fact that some posters on here have said that they use the term pants to mean trousers in the bit of the UK they live in - particularly in Manchester.

eddiemairswife · 19/09/2017 22:28

Perhaps we should use that vile word 'panties'!!

roundaboutthetown · 19/09/2017 22:30

Nah - knickers and underpants will do just fine to avoid confusion with over-pants, trousers and pantaloons!!

roundaboutthetown · 19/09/2017 22:32

(NB, over-pants is, of course, made up, because people don't tend to wear anything over their pants, only under them... Wink).

Mittens1969 · 19/09/2017 23:15

@roundaboutthetown, ok I'll concede that point. But I think the assumption was made because

  1. Little girls do mostly wear skirts or dresses to school;
  2. The OP didn't correct the posters who mentioned knickers or underwear.
Anyway, we'll never know, which is a pity after all these posts about this incident.
marilyntaylor · 19/09/2017 23:28

Mittens It's not just in the USA that pants mean trousers. In the North West of England, when we talk about pants, we usually mean trousers. If we're talking about underwear, it's knickers for girls/women and underpants or boxers for boys/men.

Mittens1969 · 19/09/2017 23:47

I said I concede that point. There certainly is that possibility.

But I do reiterate that I don't see many little girls wearing trousers, which makes it less likely that this little girl was. I also can't really see that a 5 year old pulling trousers down would have made the teacher react like she did.

Lozen · 20/09/2017 00:06

Oh for goodness sake this continual going back and forth about pants, knickers and trousers. It's ridiculous. The issue here is that the OP came for advice and the majority of posters turned on her like a rabid pack of wolves. But oh no, you must all be right with your condemnations and psychic visions on what actually happened because the OP hasn't come back. Well no shit Sherlock I wonder why that is.

roundaboutthetown · 20/09/2017 07:16

Hear, hear, Lozen.

Threenme · 20/09/2017 13:34

100% agree lozen

CorbynsBumFlannel · 20/09/2017 13:46

Of course the op got a mauling. Her son did something that was, at best, very mean to another child and all she was concerned about was that he didn't get to bring his drawing home. What did you expect?
Most parents would be absolutely mortified if their child was interfering with another kid's underwear (and I'm not even getting into debate about whether it was underwear as it's clear that it was or the op would have corrected it).
The op has left the thread because she didn't get the 'poor little man' replies she wanted.