To think this cannot be right?

[Coppercreek1]

DS is 9 years old and has severe autism, he attends a special school and in the holidays he occasionally attends a SEND play scheme, where I pay for a 1 on 1 to help him.

It was noted when he started going that he needs promoting to use the toilet, but otherwise rarely needs assistance, I was assured this was ok.

I dropped him off this morning, 1.5 hours later I get a phone call that DS has had a poo accident, and that they had tried to encourage him to clean himself up but no one there is insured to help him so I needed to come and clean him up, I advised I was 25 or so minutes away but that I would get there ASAP.

On arrival, I found a staff member holding the door to the disabled toilet shut as my son banged the door from the other side, so they shut him in the bathroom alone the entire time.

He had made a good attempt to clean himself up but he is non verbal and disabled! He had a small smear on his hands and feet and the tiniest bit on his butt.

I immediately cleaned and helped him dress and was just in such shock I just walked out with him and took him home.

Is this normal routine for a playscheme that is aimed at disabled children?! While their policies state they do not offer routine personal care nowhere does it state that in an emergency they won't step in for the well-being of the child.

He has attended this scheme in the summer holidays and Christmas holidays and earlier in the Easter holidays and they have never had to provide personal care so clearly they knew it was a one off, bit of a bad belly?!

Surely common sense should prevail and couple of baby wipes could have sorted it without locking a naked child in a toilet for 40 minutes rather than help him.

Surely they should have someone on sight insured Incase of emergencies like this.

wIBU to complain?

How is cleaning up a non verbal 9 year old so different from cleaning up a 2 or 3 year old. He's a child and needs help. If he were bed bound in hospital he'd have assistance - are nurses insured differently? This is not a criticism of anyone, I just don't understand it.

I'm very sorry for you and I hope you're both OK. I hope you're able to reassure him in your own way that "shit happens" ;-)

A setting like this should always have appropriate members of staff to carry out personal care, if they don't on particular days then they should make parents aware. I would want clarity on this, they know he sometimes needs support with this and I would doubt he was the only child there who does. If they are saying they can provide the relevant care and support then they need to clarify how this is assured. It is also absolutely unacceptable to keep him essentially locked in the toilet, bless him that would be horrible and scary for anyone. I'd also complain.

locked in a toilet-this is fucking barbarically. Your poor boy. I’m so sorry 😢
Insurance or not, this was a horrific was to deal with the situation. I would hit the roof.

I couldn't just read and run. I am so shocked and upset for you both. Where is the basic empathy and understanding?! There was absolutely no need to lock him into a bathroom alone, naked. What on earth were they thinking? I am so sorry.

Ok just seen that he was naked. So they were able to remove his clothes but the support stopped there?
He must have been cold!

Your poor son. Completely and utterly unacceptable how they treated him. Other posters have provided good advice, I'll just add another voice of support.

Poor wee lad, and poor you OP.

I'm guessing he had a bowel explosion, hence heavily soiled clothes which they couldn't put back on, but surly they had a towel or spare clothes for him?
No way could I leave a child like that, I'd be donning the gloves and helping him clean himself, whilst chatting to him all the time, and making him giggle by being quite ridiculous, even if he couldn't understand all the words I was saying. Fuck me it's not bloody rocket science is it, it's just basic human kindness.

not in a school setting, as your are insured by your union, but outside of that, yes, it is strongly advised, and in some work places compulsory

There isn't a specific name, as you can get it through any provider, although there are some that specialise.

I was a foster carer, and have to be insured against legal action being taken against me for the rest of my life - I paid a one off amount of around £400 some years ago. I did a lot of personal care, both in my own home and in special schools, and I was already hep B vaccinated, so turned down a booster shot, but had to have a blood test to prove my immunity instead. It was a condition of employment at the school

This is a different setting, so I don't know the details, and I am not sure hep B can be enforced these days, and what difference it makes to the employees who are not immunised. I would imagine the employer would not want to be seen to put staff at risk

I am not condoning how your son was treated, but I am trying to explain the broader implications, which others might not know about - yes, clean up a boy today, but if you are not insured, you could still be worrying about this 30 years down the line.

They might not have felt they could clean him up, and they might have feared contaminating themselves, but it should have been handled differently. They could have put a row of 3 chairs in the bathroom wrapped him in a large towel and sat him in the middle chair, sat on either side of him and talked to him, and hopefully been able to restrain him with a gentle hand on either arm if it became necessary. I know it can be very difficult to contain an soiled autistic child who has little awareness of the implications of spreading the soiling around, but he should not have been distressed like this.

Most of all, they should have a plan in place, and know what to do - it cant be such and out of the ordinary happening in settings like this

@Nimbostratus100 thus might be your experience as a foster carer. But in schools and other settings I can assure you that individual staff do not need insurance for this on an individual basis.

OP like everyone on here I feel terrible for your son and you - just terrible.

In addition to the toileting issue - which as a SEND setting they should be doing without any problem there is a serious safeguarding issue here, plus loss of dignity and seclusion.

I am not sure what the setting must have in terms of any registration but they must be covered by the Local Authority in terms of safeguarding standards - I would call the LADO - each LA must have one - get advice from them .

I agree about reporting to the local authority as a safeguarding issue

@Nimbostratus100 crossposted with you - I do take your point - and your example of the towel shows that the setting could have done something.

With this , its just there is also a lack of any care and empathy and the absence of any human element in supporting a child in distress .

That alone in my book is simply not acceptable. Shameful actually.

I don’t know the rules and regs but I just want to say how angry I am on your behalf. Your poor son! I have an adult autistic son and I know how much time we parents give just fighting for our children’s needs. It is endless and demoralising. I am so sorry that this has happened and I feel so sad for your DS.

I taught children like your boy in a special school for many years. A summer play scheme was also ruin at the school by a charity, and some of our TAs would work there.
This is absolutely appalling treatment and there is absolutely no excuse for it.

but is run by a huge charity that provide activities for disabled children

If is run by such a charity, there is no way that they don't have whatever paperwork or insurance they need to be able to carry out emergency personal care, just as they'll have provision for first aid. I volunteer for a tiny organisation, and this sort of thing is in place.

I would be infuriated and would be contacting those at the highest level, who are ultimately responsible for him. Shutting him in a toilet cubicle, naked and covered in faeces is abuse, pure and simple.

I can understand not wanting to be pursued 30 years later, but shutting him naked in the bathroom would surely be extremely traumatic too and could be complained about down the line.

This is so upsetting to read. Definitely report

At the heart of this was a nine year old disabled boy, stripped naked, left with faeces on his hands and face, and trapped alone in a toilet by staff holding the door shut.

Anyone who is involved in this situation, who even stops and says, ‘I’m not insured, tough’, (I’m very dubious about that particular ‘defence’ ) has no business being anywhere near vulnerable people, let alone exceptionally vulnerable children.

This is terrible OP, complain! I would assume they are referring to liability insurance and what they mean is it isn't part of their job remit so they aren't covered. Despite that, there are so many failings here and you need to be asking questions.
Why weren't there any members of staff whose job this is, given the nature of the play scheme?
What is their intimate care policy? They should surely have one working with disabled children.
Was the problem that they need two members of staff to carry out intimate care and that would have left them out of ratio for the other children? If so, what is their plan for when this happens - your son can't be the only one.
It is fair that minimum wage untrained staff shouldn't have to help clean up a child if that isn't part of their job, but that doesn't mean they should lock him in a toilet. Why did they think that was acceptable?
Who was in charge and where were they?

i’ve read what everyone has written about the necessary training and insurances. However, I can’t for the life of me understand why a play scheme charging £25 an hour plus a one-to-one carer didn’t have all the necessary paperwork and training in place. What is the point of a specialist play scheme if they can’t adequately look after disabled children? Assume they have to be Ofsted registered and inspected and you can report this? Honestly a naked child shut in a room soiled and alone sounds abusive.

I don’t even think there can be any excuse to such appalling and cruel behaviour - insurance, training blah blah. It’s called humanity, seeing a poor child in distress, yet not proving the support they can. If they don’t wanna deal such incidents, why even work in such departments with children.

Agree this sounds abusive. I would be reporting to Ofsted. Hope you and your son are ok OP

in schools, not they dont, because you are cover by your union, but this isnt a school, so they might

sorry, I read on and saw you had already answered

I don't have any advice or experience with this kind of thing but this is heartbreaking OP and your son is lucky to have someone advocating for him so much.

The thought of locking a child in a tiny cubicle is abuse. He must've been so scared and so sad.

What the fuck are these people playing at.

I work with disabled kids and adults. Regardless of insurance/policy I’d have donned my gloves and helped clean the shit off your child because leaving it, especially on the face is a health hazard and just bloody mean.

Even if all I had to do was stand there and support and say ‘hey, look in the mirror you’ve got poop here use some soap’ etc and point out all the spots to be cleaned. Then call the cleaning team to clean after the child had left the room.

id have left the door wide open if appropriate (child fully clothed) or get a chaperone for me and the child.

Hit lost property or their spares for clean clothes.

I have a feeling OP this may have been a case of staffing issues and lack of training more than ‘insurance’. I bet by ‘insurance’ they meant they didn’t have the extra floating staff member to act as chaperone/support for the bathroom that’s on them and they should have that spare staff member for emergencies, any emergency.

I imagine its to prevent the smearing as its technically hazardous waste. not fair to lock him away but I can see why they did what they did