Wondering what others would do in this situation

[farmergirl15]

Person A told person B that their DC was poorly on a Thursday, their DC was off school for two days. There was a weekend away planned with a club.
Person B assumed person A's DC would not be attending as they hadn't been at school and said as much to person A. Person A rang Person B shouting so Person B hung up and informed person C who is in charge of said club. It was originally decided that person a's DC could attend as person a said that their dc wasn't poorly on the Friday, they were off for a family emergency. Then person C made the decision that person A's DC could not attend. Person B messaged person A to let them know and provided contact details for person c. Person A rang person C and shouted at them also.
Persons B and C feel that persons A DC should transfer to a different club, however Person B also feels that the DC shouldn't suffer because of Person A's behaviour.
So AIBU let the DC stay even tho person A has threatened volunteers of the club
Or AINBU transfer the DC out, nobody should be threatened especially when they're volunteering.
Person A and person B are acquaintances at school, person B and C are volunteers.

I agree, I couldn’t follow this at all!

Op of course you’re not going to use real names, but for future posts, please replace Person A, Person B etc with fake names!

Too long didn't read

Was the same for me tbh

Sorry

to paraphase a film quote the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one

Too long didn't read

@farmergirl15 did she tell you about it the role of being a volunteer in the group or as a school acquaintance bexause HOW she told you is paramount
becuase if it wasn’t in the context of the club you have massively overstepped sharing personal and private information that wasn’t yours to share and in effect made decisions based on knowledge that in your role you shouldn’t have

if it is the above is she the type to complain and take further

@farmergirl15

In the film The Wrath of Khan, Spock says, "Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." Captain Kirk responds, "Or the one." This quote is a reference to Charles Dickens' novel "A Tale of Two Cities"

but then its a good thing they did have the knowledge to protect others wellbeing

There was shouting because mum told me that child was poorly, then she wasn't poorly, mum quite often is accused of being a hot head, and unfortunately has been on the wrong side of the law for it.
I told the third person because they were in charge of the whole weekend, whereas I'm in charge of the club the child goes to.

Person B should not have got involved. It was nothing to do with them only with person C whether the child attend the weekend. Person B had created a lot of difficulty for person As child and this has made their parent understandably angry. Person B is the problem. Person As child must very definitely not be punished any further.

What was the 'serious' illness? The plague?

As a volunteer, I haven't seen her since the last session

I haven't actually been told what the illness was or wasn't.

I agree that the chopping and changing of whether the child was ill or not is suspicious, but I disagree that a child who isn't well enough for school cannot be well enough for a weekend activity. Unless it was d and v or similarly contagious, it wasn't up to you to decide that the child wasn't well enough to atttend.

So the child may have been better in time for the trip, not infectious, and able to attend?

That makes me think you are VV unreasonable.

Plenty of illnesses can be of short duration and not contagious.

Up to person A to decide if their child is well enough to go.
They could have been off school with something non contagious.

Person B was really unreasonable.

Ex teacher and I worked in a school for years.

So so many things her child could have been poorly with that are not infectious illnesses.

Epileptic seizure, migraine, sprained ankle, toothache, etc etc.

I would not have assumed her child was unable to come on the trip and it really does look like person B was making trouble.

So it could have been earache, or a UTI, or a headache or something else that posed absolutely no risk to the other children on the trip?

It wasn't me that made the final decision.
We couldn't risk everyone becoming poorly.
If the child wasn't poorly then they shouldn't have said they were poorly, if they had said oh I can't be bothered to drive child to school it probably would have been a different story. But once you've said they are poorly but having said what it is then you really have to think of the health of everyone else.

but on the flip side, how is it fair risking infecting 40 odd people

exactly, but unfortunally most people dont think of this

I think the thing to do would be to ASK the mother in the first instance.

If person A DC vomited on a Wednesday then they would have to be off school for rest of the week but might well not still be ill. Was it a cold or something serious?

I assume B is for busybody.

B should have kept their Big Beak out.

they did and got mixed information