To think male nursery workers should be banned for safety reasons?

[Carla786]

I KNOW most men who work in them are fine but sexual abuse in nurseries is overwhelmingly committed by men. No more men, much less abuse risk.
Yes we need more CCTV etc to watch bad women but it cuts SA risk immeasurably.

We can still have male primary teachers etc kids are old enough to speak up then.

And yes, you can ban on the basis of sex for safety reasons. In women's refuges, eg.

There are endless threads on Mumsnet from women who end up hating the fact that they're seen as the primary carer for their DCs while the fathers get away with barely changing a nappy. Do you think those women are wrong to feel that way and that, instead, they should see themselves as privileged to be trusted to do such important work?

These things cost money, we can't really afford that when so many of the (women) who would rather be looking after their own children are having to work in largely unproductive minimum wage jobs.

No staff should ever, ever be alone with vulnerable people.

Vanessa George was using her position as manager to break the rules. Reported by an agency worker iirc.

Two staff, always.

What studies

When men were asked if they’d rather meet a strange man in the woods or a bear, they also chose the bear.

Let’s ask men if men should be barred from intimate care jobs for vulnerable children. Or whether the solution is to double ratios (for adults and children) so as to always have a female chaperone.

I’m undecided on the thread topic but:

Personally, I don’t care removing men makes childcare look like women’s work. People already assume 99% of nursery staff are female.

Does having 1 sole male worker in every X nurseries really change perceptions?

Imagine if men were trying to ban women from a specific industry/field of work based on the behaviour of a minority of the population

YABU
My son is currently studying in the Early Years sector. He has received excellent feedback from colleagues and parents in his nursery placements and is adored by the children he works with.
He has become the strong male role model he never had himself, and as he is also autistic, he brings lived experience and perspective to his work. He is an extremely valuable asset to any Early Years Team and certainly no threat whatsoever.

While obviously it's better that less children are SA'd than more, I think there is huge problem in the industry when the way to achieve this is to ban half the population from a job. Cutting down the numbers of people who might abuse, is no help to the children who get abused. If we ban Colin and Frank because they might be abusers (but aren't), but fail to catch Gail because she wasn't like Colin and Frank, we've still failed the kids Gail has abused. Much better to focus on trying to catch Gail, or Colin, or Frank if any of them happen to be abusers, than get happy over the kids Colin and Frank didn't abuse, that they probably wouldn't have done anyway, while Gail's poor, traumatised little ones still suffer because we didn't think she'd do anything.

but in a setting with half decent safeguarding procedures they shouldn’t have any opportunity.

Two very basics are safeguarding are nobody changes a child without being at least in line of sight of another staff member and personal phones aren’t allowed anywhere children are.

If settings aren’t able to do that then there are much bigger issues afoot.

That women just got 8 years this week!

As I understand safeguarding practices are not being followed as the policies are already in place

they just need to follow them

Yes it does - and doesn’t sit right with nurseries enabling women working but men can’t so the jobs they need for that

I thought this was early years work? I see no reason to ban men from adult care. Though for dignity reasons the person should be able to request same sex carer. Especially for intimate care.

Safeguarding policies and reviewing them should be the focus here rather than banning men from caring roles involving young children, not to mention opening a can of worms regarding gender discrimination laws and societal impacts of viewing childcare as women's work only.

If parents are happy to leave their very young children in the care of unknown adult males to fulfill vague aims about 'role models' then I don't know what to tell them. Men commit almost all sex crime. A very small percentage of nursery workers are men. They obviously commit the most sex crimes against children in their care. Men with these nefarious aims will definitely flock to these sorts of roles where there is the opportunity to abuse on a plate. Pre employment checks to screen out such men obviously don't work that well since there are so many examples of men who passed these going on to hurt kids.

It was key for me when choosing a setting that there would be no men present, and that they'd never be hired. I couldn't give a flying f if this is prejudiced. It was a risk assessment I made to keep my children safe. I'd advise parents to vote with their feet and refuse to send their babies anywhere where random adult men will be doing intimate care, or make a song and dance about it if a man is hired and refuse permission for him to provide intimate care for your child. Threaten police involvement if your wishes are ignored. It really is time to end this crazy practice imo

What are your thoughts about childless men who enter into relationships with women with young children and take on a stepparent role?

Given that that, like male nursery workers, they

a. may be motivated to deliberately enter into such relationships to gain access to children, and
b, are show to be statistically a much, much higher risk to children they live with than natural parents.

Do you think that men living with young children who aren’t theirs should be made illegal?

And if not, why? If you’re happy to prevent all men from working in jobs that give them access to young children because some men might seek out and abuse the role, why not step-fathers?

interested to know where the distinction is.

That’s my point. And when that’s not happening then staff need to be reporting it straight away (with no repercussions) and immediate steps taken to remedy or if needed close the setting. Too many people have a “it can never happen here approach” and become complacent.

It isn't a man issue. It's a safeguarding issue.

Why was Vincent Chan ever allowed to be alone with a child long enough to rape them? Why was Vanessa George alone with a child long enough to take sexual images of them?

I don't think CCTV is the answer, particularly as it would be completely inappropriate to have CCTV in toilet or changing areas. Early years settings need to have robust safeguarding arrangements. If that means no staff is ever alone with a child, that's what needs to happen. That won't be popular because it means settings need more staff. It would mean settings not working on skeleton staff barely meeting ratios. It means proper funding, not what they currently get.

Day nurseries scrape by on the minimum staffing required, using building ratio and other loopholes and that's why these terrible events can happen. It needs to change. Banning men would be the cheap and easy way and still leave children in danger. But no one wants to hear that, least of all the government.

Don't you know that children are far more at risk from sexual abuse from family ?

We should bar male care workers doing personal care for vulnerable females who can't decide for themselves.
And all women should always have the option of refusing care from a male.

All this is true. But the difference here is that the family unit is not a business as childcare settings ultimately are and therefore there are limitations on state intervention and involvement. You can't totally eradicate risk but you can reduce and mitigate. The benefits of having men in early years - what is the concrete benefit? - are not worth the risk of letting any tom dick or harry off the street change pre-verval children's nappies

Excellent post

@balletflatblister

Those pre employment checks don’t prevent anything if the person has never been convicted.

All staff, male or otherwise, have to have a DBS to work in regulated activity. Unless there is a conviction, caution or even comment on there - there is no way of knowing if someone ever will harm a child.

We don’t ask as part of the interview process “Sir, are you a paedophile?” The checks are done based on the information that is available.

I think sadly that we do need to ban them as the risks are just too high. I don't think all male childcare workers are a risk, and in fact some are fantastic. But on a overall balancing of risk I think it makes sense.