Overreaction about glue gun incident at school

[backinthestoneage]

https://www-thesun-ie.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.thesun.ie/news/8810155/furious-mum-school-son-burn-glue-gun/amp/?amp_gsa=1&amp_js_v=a9&usqp=mq331AQIUAKwASCAAgM%3D#amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&aoh=16912722078861&csi=1&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesun.ie%2Fnews%2F8810155%2Ffurious-mum-school-son-burn-glue-gun%2F

Resulting in a teacher misconduct hearing
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teacher-misconduct-panel-outcome-ms-sarah-mead

No wonder more and more staff are unwilling to do activities and trips. If the slightest thing goes wrong there will be a petition at the school gates and a public hounding

The mother and the involvement the press was unnecessary and appalling.

The formal complaint, investigation and outcome of the investigation was fair.

The 10 year did nothing wrong other than being a 10 year old who wouldnt have been put in that position had processes to protect both pupils and staff not been disregarded by the trained professional adult in the room.

My dd enjoyed soldering at school when she was in year 6. She is a bit disappointed the electrical work we have done over the summer hasn't included soldering.

I used to love soldering, but we didn't do that til year 7. Very satisfying.

The formal complaint has been overhyped at the behest of a parent with a child who can't behave angling for her 5 minutes of fame and a possible payout.

The teacher's cowardly employers threw her under the bus

The fact it’s not being quoted as “primary diagnosis” but “impression” and there is no name of a diagnosing doctor being attributed for “superficial burn” both indicate imho that it was likely not the diagnosis of a doctor

No, that’s how medical notes are written in the UK, Australia and NZ. “Impression” is exactly that, the clinical impression. It’s what you’re taught to do - HxPC (history presenting complaint), PMedhx, exam (O/E) and impression followed by plan.

Something this minor wouldn’t have engendered a lengthy history, obvs.

The 10 year did nothing wrong

He left his group and joined another without permission.
He refused to go back to his group.
He used a glue gun when he had been told not to.
He presumably didn't follow the instructions on how to use it safely (admittedly that's an assumption).
He refused to show the teacher his injured hand.
He refused to go to first aid.

Its sad that so many children are so badly brought up by their parents that these sort of opportunities are not available to many of them.

The teacher threw herself under the bus ignoring processes in place to protect both herself and the children in her care.

These types of breeches of safety processes are taken very seriously in most workplaces. Why do you think teaching would/should be any different?

To expand on this, I think it’s because the initial assessing doctor doesn’t necessarily have a diagnosis in some presentations so the “impression” is used to guide further tests and management.

Not for a minor burn, of course, but for complex medical presentations. The “impression” turns into a diagnosis after time, response to treatment and investigations come back

But it’s very standard nomenclature for a first encounter documentation.

i run a brownies group, we let them make and light fires (supervised). There’s no way I would let them use a hot glue gun and I think the teacher made a mistake.
we do use them on occasion and each gun is used and supervised by a named adult, it they need to leave the room the glue gun goes with them.

He is 10! He behaved like a 10 year old that wasn't being adequately supervised.

Part of the reason he wasn't adequately supervised is because of u acceptable budget cuts. But the reason and only reason he was injured was a disregard of h&s processes and lack of risk assessment.

We're not going to agree about how this situation came to happen, so I see little point in continuing to discuss it with you.

Have a pleasant evening.

and yet everyone on the thread is throwing around hypotheticals about why she didnt follow the proper procedures of dealing with an injured child, maybe she was stressed, maybe she was over worked , maybe she forgot
and child can not be held responsible for his own safety and health, whether he refused or not.
A child can refuse a number of things that they need to be doing, its an adults responsibility to make sure they get what they need

what if the child was autistic, non verbal, had mental illnesses, and they were refusing to go to medical, what would happen then? Would it be that child fault too for "not listening"?

the teacher dropped the ball, and she paid a heavy price for it, they must have had a valid reason to sack her or she would still have her job

Thank you. You too.

For goodness sake.

and what did the teacher do about this behaviour? they just allowed it to continue , which allowed the child being injured
it sounds like the child should have been removed if he was not following the rules, again, that is the teachers responsibility , not the childs

Children in schools don't have 1:1 supervision. I expect my 6 year olds to follow instructions. This child did not. I hope he was spoken to about his behaviour.

The teacher was alone. How could they remove a child who was refusing to follow instructions designed to keep them safe?

I'm running out of eye rolls.

the teacher shouldnt have been alone, there should have been a TA, again not the childs fault, thats the schools fault

Thank you for confirming my much laboured point that a clinical impression is not a diagnosis.

borrow some of mine then i have plenty for you and everyone on the thread trying to blame the child

and most teachers have walkie talkies

Ha. Ha. Ha.

That's just not true.