AIBU - 2 year old suddenly crying at nursery with male staff member

[Francine84]

I might be being completely unreasonable here but I can’t get it out of my head. My 2 year old started nursery around 9 months ago and has always been very happy there. Always happy to go in and they told us that she’s happy all day, hardly ever cries.

In the last week she has become very clingy, waking up crying from naps and during the night calling for me. Really out of character for her but I put it down to separation anxiety.

She goes to nursery Wed-Fri and yesterday when I dropped her off the only male member of the nursery staff answered the door and my daughter burst into tears and was clinging to me. It was heartbreaking, I had to hand her over and she was hysterical. When I picked her up in the afternoon her key worker (female) said she was emotional all day, which again is so unlike her. She hasn’t cried at nursery drop off since she first started earlier this year. And even then once she had settled in she was happy all day.

This morning the same man answered the door again and the same thing happened - hysterical crying and holding on to me.

Given the recent news about a male nursery worker abusing the children in his care I can’t shake the thought that something is wrong. Why is my daughter suddenly so clingy and unhappy? I know that men work in nurseries but it seems like it’s only this particular member of staff that she has that reaction with.

AIBU to say something to nursery? What would I even say?

Or am I overreacting and this is normal for 2 year olds to have very clingy phases? I just want to protect her and it makes me feel so sad to think she’s not happy at nursery.

Advice would be much appreciated!

Men arent banned from them because they think that other males using the service will harm women. They are banned because women have been abused and traumatised by men and need a single sex environment to heal. It isnt because they think those men using the service are so dangerous that they will abuse the women.

And many parents do send their children to nursery!

Safeguarding procedures are followed to minimise risk. No system is ever going to be fail safe, like everything in life we assess risks and act to make changes.

If not sending your children to nursery is addressing the risk for you, then that is fine (taking into account that most abuse is carried out by people we know), Many parents do not have that choice.

Do you keep your children at home? Would you use a child minder? What about school?

If you want to limit ALL risk everyone must get sterilised immediately and no more children must be born.

But since that's stupid, we'll just work on removing the absolutely specific, well studied, verified and definite risk to little children - being left alone with strange men.

No, men do rape and abuse women in these settings too, and wank off to the women's stories of being raped and abused.

And because many of the women are absolutely totally and utterly terrified of them.

But the simple fact is that they are banned because they are men and men, as a group, are the greatest predatory risk. End.

I understand that you believe that. It might even be true. But that isn't why rape crisis centres are usually single sexed.

I understand that you know what I said to be completely true.

And yes, that is exactly why women have single sex rape shelters.

It really isn't. It's your choice to still believe that to be true, though. Good Luck.

It really is. It's incredibly creepy that you are pretending not to know this. You are a walking red flag. I won't passive aggressively pretend to wish you good luck.

"struggling" 🙄

What haunts me is that we probably don't even suspect most of those who are doing it because we are too busy worrying about men.

Speak for yourself. Women may be far less likely to sexually abuse, but it's certainly possible, especially if they're doing so with or for a male partner. They're absolutely still a risk - you never know, and you can't assume. And of course, they pose a risk for physical abuse and neglect, too.

As for the specific numbers, 'Childcare sexual abuse is mostly committed by men' but there is only one comprehensive study on the issue, from the 80s, where while 'men made up only about 5% of childcare staff, they were responsible for 60% of the offences'.

As this article says:

Four Corners asked Arachnid analysts to scrape dark web forums on child care to see how offenders talk and plan.
Most of the material is too explicit to show, but the discussions reveal how organised and deviant they really are.
One of these guides instructs predators applying for work at childcare centres on how to answer job interview questions about why they want to work with children.
"First of all, I love children. And since I don't have any of my own yet, I really feel like I'm missing out on something very important in life, that is being a father and having the role of taking care of and giving safety to children. I would really like to have this opportunity since I look at this profession and role as a gift," the guide suggests as an answer.
"One really good news for us paedophiles is that most daycare centers, or any similar institutions, look at men as a positive thing. This is because they want the children to have male role models — this is actually a very important subject in children pedagogy today," the handbook says.
[...]
'[Dr Bourke] said the rise of the internet had profoundly impacted child abuse and paedophiles.
"When I began working in this field 25 years ago, child sex offenders were the lone wolves out there … and now with the internet, they're hunting in packs and they are strategic, they are vicious, and they are supporting each other as they hunt.
"There is an entire network that is facilitating more and more egregious acts of harm against children. And … it's increasing at an almost exponential rate."
Dr Bourke's warning is stark: "They're better organised than we are. They're more strategic and, if they go to the right place where supervision is missing and policies aren't enforced, they're capable of having many, many victims.
"Parents need to be vigilant. They need to trust their instincts, and they need to communicate with their children and communicate with other parents and communicate with staff and make sure that they're not missing any signs that something is amiss."
[...]
Professor Salter said the disturbing nature of the material made it difficult for law enforcement to convey the gravity of the problem without "terrifying" the public.
"The truth is what we see online, it's worse than people could possibly imagine. It's beyond the outer bounds of a normal imagination."

Trigger warning:

"One statement from an offender on the dark web that really stood out for me was he said, 'Babies are meat, babies are meat and you can't tell me anything different,'" Professor Salter said.

So. I ask: Do you really want to hold the doors of nurseries open to these predators, and serve your children up on a platter?

The person you are replying to is pretending that men have not raped and abused women in women's rape shelters, that men do not masturbate to women's trauma stories and this person (man) is also pretending that the reason men are banned from women's rape shelters has nothing to do with the fact that men are by far the most predatory sex.

And now I see they were pretending they can't just Google the stats proving that men, are the predatory sex.

This person is a walking red flag.

Exactly. And it's a choice to leave your child with a female nursery worker, who could easily be one of the perpetrators of 2% of CSA - which is just as devastating and horrific if you are their victim as it is the male perpetrators.

You have to decide whether you're happy with eliminating only 98% of the chance of your child being abused, or whether nothing less than 100% will be good enough. Either that or you trust the safeguarding procedures and remain vigilant when using a childcare facility, as most parents do.

It's not strange men who are the most likely abusers, it's members of the family and those already known to the family

Some of the posts on this thread are hysterical. Suggesting that a man who wants to work with children must only want to do so because they're a predatory paedophile seeking access to victims - seriously? Do you assume that's the only reason a man would volunteer at beavers or cubs, or become a primary school teacher? Or a children's doctor?

A child is most likely to be abused in their home by your new boyfriend, your brother, your father, your friend you've known for 20 years and happily let babysit them. What safeguarding procedures are in place for when their dad baths them or changes their nappy? Oh, that's not necessary because he's their dad, he would never? Okay then. If you're going to assume all men would be paedophiles and abuse children if they had access to them, then look closer to home. Or rationalise that maybe you are being unreasonable.

But if the men who do love children and would naturally smile and interact with them in a kind, engaging way do so, if they know that it will be seen as proof positive that are seeking to 'access them', are seriously creepy and are almost certainly paedophiles... do you blame them for deliberately looking away and ignoring babies and toddlers on the bus or in the street?

It's a big vicious circle. Obviously not all adults are fond of children - which is fine - but why would we just weirdly assume that none of the adults who make up 50% of all parents could have a genuine love and affinity for children without assuming that they want to abuse them?

Exactly, what on earth are the call the police posts about? Say what exactly? That your child cries at nursery drop off - what exactly are they supposed to do about that?!
Lots of kids do, and get separation anxiety and are fine minutes after you've gone. Doesn't automatically mean anything nefarious!

but if the men who do love children and would naturally smile and interact with them in a kind, engaging way do so, if they know that it will be seen as proof positive that are seeking to 'access them', are seriously creepy and are almost certainly paedophiles... do you blame them for deliberately looking away and ignoring babies and toddlers on the bus or in the street?

This - it's a seriously damaging attitude to society to have.

I don't interact with strange kids in public because I know it makes some parents uncomfortable and scared. I used to if I was with my wife as then we'd both be smiling and interacting. That seemed less scary

It's shit that this is the case but I think it's better to not interact and not stress/upset the parent

For balance, my 4 have been to multiple nurseries over the years, all bar 1 Female only, the works nursery we used for 3 years took on a male, kids loved him. Kids used to follow him around in the toddler room.

#3 child had a period of being unsettled at an all F nursery after no previous issues. Turned out to be she didn’t like one of the other children who kept invading her space.

talk to the nursery.

Agreed! I only read your exchange with them after writing up my reply, and their replies are absolutely red flags.

Generally, I'm shocked by the number of people who can read that paedophiles are specifically using nurseries as hunting grounds, and still want to have male nursery workers.

As mothers we should reduce risk as much as possible, and not having male nursery workers is a very easy way to reduce the risk of catastrophic damage to our children. So why would people not be in favour of that? It's disturbing to see just how deeply ingrained the desire to uplift men at the cost of everything else is.

So hysterical!

Let’s face it, the only way to keep your child completely safe and eliminate all risk is to supervise them, just you and them always.

No nursery, no child minder, no school, groups, clubs. No husband, partner, family members.

We all live with risks. It is part of life.

I haven’t read the whole thread OP.
But just on your first post, go with your instincts! Take her out!

My youngest started at a nursery, she got progressively worse going in, the last day she went she was dragged off me screaming. It became apparent the staff were threatening and punishing toddlers for wetting themselves amongst other things 😢 She never went back.
Started at a pre-school a couple of weeks later and was happy as larry again.

Maybe most men would run a mile from wanting to work in a nursery school... which may be why most men don't work in nurseries.

Plenty of women would hate it too... which may be why most women in the population don't work in nurseries either.

But 'most' is absolutely not the same as 'all'. People are not one great big homogenous lump - or even two big homogenous lumps, one male and one female.

Like with anything, there will be people who find it rewarding doing a job that many people would run a mile from - steeplejack, working on a building site, caring for elderly people with dementia, traffic warden, zookeeper just to name a few off the top of my head - even if they see that reward as nothing more than doing an essential job well with pride and to the best of their capabilities and then earning a living from it.

When women first started campaigning to be given the vote, they too were treated with great suspicion. It was a clear red flag, as what woman would even want to busy herself with men's stuff like politics, finances, the economy and all that?

The same with women wanting to be allowed to work outside the home and earn their own money - even thinking that they should be paid as much as men, who obviously needed to be the family breadwinners!

Their nefarious motives were crystal clear and all concerned citizens rightly did as much as they could to try to put a stop to these dangerous people acting completely against nature and the clearly proper order of how the world should work........

https://x.com/bindelj/status/1996282869875150994?s=46&t=kS1Jlgo9qmN1IdMmSHL7UA

Horrible, isn't it? Is this the kind of society that we actively prefer to live in?

I'm thinking back to the times when people would shudder in terror every time they heard somebody with a NI accent speaking.

And even now, there are still people who see a black or Asian face and automatically assume the worst possible scenario and avoid them at all costs - one enormous homogenous, dangerous lump and certainly not just a whole load of ordinary individual people encompassing the entire spectrum of humanity, just like everybody else.