to think this school policy is really odd?

[Oakmaiden]

My daughter is 16. Her school have just implemented a new toilet policy. If you wish to go to the toilet you have to go in 2 minutes, and you have to be chaperoned to and from the toilet by a senior member of staff.

I just think this is really odd. From my daughter's point of view she has food intolerances and sometimes it can take her a fair while on the loo if her tummy is unsettled (just to add, as a general rule she will avoid going to the toilet at school at all, if she can possibly manage it). But even without that, as she has said, she doesn't want to have to go to and from the toilet with an adult, or to discuss her toileting needs with anyone.

I do get that toilets in secondary schools are an ENORMOUS problem, but this just seems a totally bizarre way of managing it.

Not to forget - you now have the headteacher accompanying children to the toilet. Surely she has better things to do?

I don't know - am I wrong to think this is a very strange, and not quite right, policy?

But what would you do if you were Head?

I don't know, because, as I've said, I have none of the required information to formulate an appropriate response. I also don't work in education, so I don't have the expertise or experience.

I could come up with all manner of ideas, but who knows how many of them are workable in that particular school? Did the head and SLT actually consider any other options or just go for the knee-jerk one? Again, who knows?

However, I've worked for many years as a senior manager in corporate environments including, as it happens, having to deal with incidents of employees doing all manner of unpleasant, destructive and downright weird things in toilets (and the reverse - doing all manner of toilet-related activities outwith the provided facilities ). The one thing we never did was restrict toilet access to the whole workforce because that would be, quite frankly, inhumane.

And whenever we do implement interim measures (about anything) with a view to revising them, we're very clear in our communications about that, and what will be happening next.

One thing, though, that strikes me as being blindingly obvious from what the OP has said is that 4 toilets can not provide for the needs of 600 girls in the combined one hour of break and lunchtime, which is quite clearly going to lead to pupils needing to use them during lessons. That's probably where I'd start.

Something must have happened to trigger this it isn't normal practice.

Doesnt matter what happened. Surely it's not even lawful to have a Toilet set up where its impossible for more than one year group to access a toilet once at lunch.

4 toilets 4 girls at a time , forty min lunch that's 160 girls with a minute to pee each. If you do the same fir the boys then thats what 320 kids in total that can pee at lunch. In a school if 1500 that's only like 21 percent if kids that can pee. Once a day.

That cannot be even legal.

Likely to have been some serious issues for the SLT to do doing this.

If it was vandalism you would have timed passes and regular toilet checks rather than the personal approach.

Again now does that even matter when if u took one at a time thr entire day fir the two minutes that's still only 180 kids. Add that too the 320 who might get to pee at lunch if they are lucky and you have a whopping 2/3 of a school who have still have no access to a toilet at all. All day.That's unjustifiable

Bad policy. Toilet attendants required - or have individual rooms (floor to ceiling walls and door) and cctv outside.

Expensive - but so is fixing damaged toilets or dealing with lawsuits from kids who have worsened health as a result of the policy. I guess they can take a strict line on kids who are proved to damage toilets - eg fine/suspension.

It's funny how staff exist to personally take the kids to the toilets.

They exist alongside thousands of pounds if funding when the toilets get turned into unisex ones.

Where are they fir the regular toilets.

Sounds very odd. I would ask the school to explain the reason for this policy. There must be some reason why busy senior staff are being used in such a way. Whatever it is, it sounds serious. As for no access to toilets at break times that sounds cruel and ridiculous.

Even if something has happened this is ridiculous. Even without a medical issue it can take more than 2 minutes to poo! What if a child suddenly has a funny tummy and can't wait?

How many children in the school? Let’s say 500 but could be so much more. Each one needs toilet at least twice a day. That’s 1000 loo trips that need to be supervised and at 2 minutes each, 2000 minutes. That’s 33.5 hours of supervision from senior staff. If 11 members of senior staff (assuming there is that many) each took 3 whole hours out of the working school day, this would be achievable. But then that’s not counting the time it takes for the child to ask to visit loo, walking there, walking back, and the actual 2 minutes likely overrunning.
I’m thinking this policy is not implementable and therefore prevents most children from using your loo when they need it.
This is probably against their human rights! Poor kids. I’d be fuming and I bet other parents are too and I’d be discussing my concerns with head.
Policy would be ok IF it just applied to during lessons. At break and lunch thru need senior staff bring toilet supervisors as a previous poster suggested.
Learning is not going to be improving or even happening for children needing the loo but not feeling able to go. What if they are desperate and there’s no senior staff nearby?

My daughter is at an all girls school who pride themselves on respectability and good behaviour with an ultra strict uniform policy. She's in year 10 and tells me how disgusting the state of their toilets are - doors broken, shit (literally) on the walls and floor. Used sanitary products, toilets not flushing and graffiti all over. I thought she was exaggerating however we visited a public toilet that was so grim I could not use it but she said the school toilets were much worse and had no problem using it. What the hell is wrong with the girls for treating it this way and the school for putting up with this and also not maintaining? unsurprisingly potential parents are never shown these toilets when visiting the school. I think I'd prefer a rule like your daughter's school if it meant that the facilities were decent although I don't agree with a time limit.

@Oakmaiden
Not an answer to the accessibility issue but has your DD been medically investigated?

I had 'intolerances' for years. Turns out I'm actually coeliac and my upset tummy was caused by something called bile acid malabsorption which is really common and massively under diagnosed. It causes the symptoms you describe. Some links below.

gut.bmj.com/content/gutjnl/67/8/1380.full.pdf?ijkey=b4mvD8AzDIvjCeq&keytype=ref

gutscharity.org.uk/advice-and-information/conditions/bile-acid-malabsorption/

I’m sorry your daughter faced this OP. Unfortunately a community of 100s of people will include the Few anti social who abuse the system and property and they are to blame. Budget cuts mean TAs are being made redundant, PPA time for teachers are being cut and there are not enough people around to patrol the corridors, if there isn’t enough money for paper there definitely isn’t enough for toilet attendants. SMT will not want to be doing loo escort duty but they will have a lighter timetable due to their other responsibilities and therefore will be able to be placed on call for some of the lessons, it doesn’t add to the budget and they will have to do the work that is missed when pupils go home and after the many meetings that take place.
I’m afraid the solution to the problem has been rejected by the people, higher taxes, more funding for education, including the buildings so they are fit for purpose and investment in young people’s services. Maybe we could privatise school loos?!

Spot on Tinabn, that is the situation in many schools. I wouldn't actually be surprised if they are privatised one day!

Christ - it looks like PTA needs to raise funding for toilet attendant(s) or get volunteers (both equally unlikely) - I can imagine boys going elsewhere ….

@mrshoho
In reality though you wouldn't prefer that policy because it's ridiculous. It means the student's health is going to be affected. If there are senior members of staff on call all day (and realistically it would be 2 members of staff full time) they can afford to maintain the toilets or rebuild them so they're individual toilets with floor to ceiling walls.

Locking them at break and lunch times and timing the students is frankly bizarre. There may well be a few reasons why someone would need to take longer than two minutes, can you imagine the pressure of having someone standing outside timing you as well? It’s bloody awful.

Having said that there must be a safeguarding reason for the chaperones, I just can’t see a logical reason for timing them!

True Crips in an ideal world redesign and rebuild. Along with the dining facilities as these are not great either according to my daughter. The older school buildings are not practical. Schools though would say they have higher priorities. I personally think having comfortable toilets and dining creates a more harmonious learning place. CCTV outside the toilets may be a deterrent?

All the new ££££££ schools, in my experience, have less toilets than the older schools. Often three sets of boy / girl rooms with 3 cubicles each room, per school.

I often unlock them when on lunch duty. Especially for 11 year olds desperately needing pee, as it's bloody heartbreaking.

It is v much sackable offence as it's directly contravening school policy.

I don't go into toilet room (room outside cubicles) and in my experience never has this resulted in vandalism.

Teachers have zero influence on these policies. It's all SMT.

I get that vandalism and abuse of facilities needs to be tackled, but however did it come to this?

It sounds like the school in the OP and others mentioned in this thread are actively trying to deter the children from using the toilets and/or somehow make them ashamed of needing to go. No wonder so many MNers on the recent thread were so frightened to poo at work or in public toilets where others might hear and judge them for doing a very natural thing in the purpose-designed place for it, if that's how people are being educated these days.

What next: do away with lunch breaks and expect them to manage the whole day without eating - with those who can't stay the course without fainting being humiliated by having to ask a teacher for permission to grab a bite of a sandwich?

I really don't think there can be any reasonable explanation for this policy. Yes it's difficult if your the head teacher and some kids vandalise the toilets but that's your job to sort as headteachers you can't deny reasonabke use of toilet facilities to the 99% of students who just want to take a dump/wee/change their tampon in peace!

Sounds like potentially a safeguarding issue has happened which no one would be informed about. Sounds like they are trying to keep the children safe and this is an immediate response to the situation. I’m sure the head also has better things to do than keep taking secondary school children to the toilet so I would there is a very good reason for this. Maybe speak to them and ask if the policy will be in place indefinitely or if they are working on something. They may not tell you the reason it is in place so don’t be surprised if they don’t

Adult chaperone in the toilet? That's a safeguarding issue. It puts students and staff in a vulnerable position as accusations can and are often made. A better solution is having g open toilets with just cubicles for privacy.

Sorry forgot to say they may be timing them as if they have to do this for multiple students a day and I assume they have other work that needs to be done. I’m not saying I agree only that it appears to have a reason behind it rather than just the head wanting to take children to the loo constantly all day

I wonder if there is a drug problem at the school?