beeefcreep Sun 28-Oct-18 09:22:32
@Lostinlondon999 The majority of people on this thread didn't detect a hint of neglect from the wording of the OP.
I'm one of those who did pick up more than a 'hint of neglect' Lost. And I don't think you really even needed to do some massive 'reading into it' or deconstructing of it to see that? OP:
Seemed spectacularly unconcerned as to why DD was ill or even the fact she was ill;
Seemed blind to any possibility of a relationship between the lack of breakfast/fuel and the feeling ill;
She conflated DD not eating breakfast with avoiding the 300-400 calories of that meal, uber clearly raising a red flag about what message she is giving DD about her weight/meal skipping;
She made a 'joke' - in a safeguarding meeting FFS
- about DD at least not smoking a joint on the way to school;
She quite genuinely not only thought the school were OOO for their concern, but was perfectly seriously asking if she should 'let it lie' (eh?) or 'speak to them about it' (that would have been an interesting convo to be fly on the wall for!)
She then mocked the school for doing it's, y'know, job in terms of duty of care.
Collectively, I'd say it was pretty clear that OP didn't/doesn't have any sense of child centric focus; absolutely is risking an ED for DD; has very screwed up thinking vis weight management; has zero respect for the school; doesn't understand the safeguarding process at all; and has buggered off as she didn't get the unanimous 'ah hun, they didn't do that did they
??' response it looks like she was after.
I repeat, schools don't do this stuff for shit n' giggles - it takes time and effort and care. I don't think this single incident is why a safeguarding meeting was hastily convened and agree with the many PPs who were surprised at school doing this about 'just' one missed breakfast. Patently the school already had concerns or else it would just have been the phone call. But it wasn't, it was more than that, a swiftly convened safeguarding meeting with all relevant members of staff inc. safeguarding member ergo it is not a stretch for PPs to be registering that fact, that's not 'speculation', it's (IE that there is more going on than just this one missed breakfast/feeling ill one day) fact.
Anyway, OP has clearly buggered off now and thread is a bit of an echo chamber. It's sad she didn't stick around as clearly something is amiss with DD. Could be something to do with weight and self-esteem since starting senior school or maybe even God forbid that she's pregnant - who knows? More importantly, who cares? As it's clear the school do, but OP not so much. And it's that that is both sad for DD, and also a bit of a piss take of the school's genuine care and their legal obligations vis safeguarding.