AIBU to raise concerns after school let father-in-law apply suncream when not an approved collector?

[Tryingtohelp12]

My father in law called in today to drop something off and I said can you do me a favour and drop dc2 Suncream at school I’ve just realised it’s not in her bag and it’s on your way past. Just leave it with the office (my child school has allowed them to take their own cream in this week and apply it themselves). About 20 minutes later came back and he said the office wouldn’t let him leave the cream and had retrieved my child from her classroom and allowed him to apply it.

i have no problem with him actually doing this as we are close and he is trustworthy, but was really surprised, he’s not on the list of approved collectors as he has never done a school run for us and honestly could have been anyone. What if he’d come in and said they need to take child out of school- would they have let him?

I mentioned it to the teacher at pick up who said she will look into it but now I’m worried I have overreacted and got the office staff in trouble.

Jeepers. So glad my kids got through school decades ago. So many rules these days.

You're quite possibly right about the AIBU, but that doesn't mean it isn't a better option. Some people on Mumsnet have a very poor understanding of safeguarding as evidenced by this thread!!

Then it’s lose-lose isn’t it, really. So the OP is BU because they created the situation in the first place.

The better option is to take the suncream yourself I suppose.

No because somebody making a Mumsnet thread isn't a lose for the school or safeguarding! Thread away, no-one cares!!

The school needs to follow sensible safeguarding procedure. If that upsets some parents and causes them to make a Mumsnet thread about it so be it!

I'm with you OP and actually surprised by most of the replies thinking it was acceptable. Just because she knows him and can point out that he's a relative, doesn't mean you would want him to apply sunscreen on your child. For all they knew, there could've been a situation where you didn't want them having contact.

Ok what's her problem then? She is saying the grandad putting suncream on her was a risk. What else could be implied by that?

It's the potential isn't it?

Any adult (who isn't on the approved list) could wander into the school and end up being granted access to a child because they know them. It doesn't matter if the kids say 'hi X' because the majority of abuse happens when the children knows the abuser.

School should have checked in.

But surely the child identified their own grandparent? He would've said something like 'my daughter asked me to pop in with gd's suncream as she forgot. Can I leave it with you'?' then obviously they wouldn't allow it so brought out the child and she clearly knew him closely.

I just think it seems OTT. The only reason why I'd be concerned would be if I didn't trust FiL to touch child.

The lack of logic on the part of the school is the safeguarding issue.

If they Grandfather couldn’t, because he wasn’t known to them, leave the suncream for the child (who had been doing their own suncream so it’s not that the child couldn’t) because of safeguarding for allergies or him potentially being a random person, then that’s understandable. The Op likely should have called them to let them know grandad was bringing it.

Dealing with the issue of unknown grandad not being allowed to leave the cream by allowing him to put that very cream on the child himself is just madness.

There were multiple ways of dealing with the situation and they picked the one that would be the “so wrong it’s almost funny” example in a training course.

And if she was no contact with him for whatever reason? He'd still be able to name the daughter-in-law, the kids may still recognise him as grandpa...

These incidents are near misses; situations that have exposed gaps in safeguarding procedures. The school weren't aware that he had authorised access to that child... Assumption shouldn't be the fall back position when it comes to child safeguarding.

It's bizarre that instead of the suncream being delivered to the classroom for the child to pop on themselves (as they'd been doing all week), school decided to allow an unknown and unapproved male (to school) apply suncream to a child. Surely that strikes you as inappropriate?

The school is lucky that, in this case, it wasn't something sinister. In the schools I've worked with, they'd absolutely want this flagging to ensure they can keep children safe.

Yeah you're not wrong. I don't see why on earth the school didn't just take in the cream and give to kid on break? Why pull them out of class and put them in a position where an adult not known to school touches their body?
So yeah I think I get the point now.

It just seems really silly to pull the kid out of class, disrupting the lesson, to have to have suncream applied (assuming she's not nursery / reception age bad needs help) rather than just passing it on

A bit like dropping in a water bottle and them making the kid come up and take a drink out of it.

It's just such a weird decision from school staff. It makes very little sense. There were lots of other options before that one.

The school were very lucky in this case that nothing more sinister was at play.

If you didn’t give them an ‘approved sun cream person’ list, this is on you. He didn’t collect her, so they won’t have checked the collector list.

So anyone who isn't on the approved collectors list should have access to children at school, as long as they're not collecting them? Is that your logic?

You will also be aware then that not all parents share all their life history with school, and sometimes people are embarrassed about what happens in their family life or don’t even consider that school needs to know. I have worked with families who would reply to this situation with ‘well we never thought Granddad would come to school so why would we tell them’.
Schools only know what parents or other people tell them. Do not assume you know everything going on in someone’s life as very often you don’t.

So, why did you send a person to school who is not on your contact list?
By doing this you have consented and the school has done nothing wrong.
Stop stirring trouble and causing a ridiculous fuss over nothing.

He is her grandfather! Your husband's Dad. Why on earth would be raise this?

The school weren't aware of that consent. That's the failing.

Missed the point entirely. She isn't raising a concern about the grandfather, she's raising a hole in the schools safeguarding processes.

Then why didn’t she make them aware?
The blame lies with her.
And why is he not on the contact list?
I would have phoned the school to pre empt them.

That doesn’t excuse the school.

The Op should have given them a heads up. That doesn’t make their absolutely illogical decision to allow him to physically put the cream on the child ok.

It in fact makes it worse that they allowed it despite not having heard from the op.

Schools are mega busy.
if you sent your child to the corner shop, do you expect a phone call asking if it’s OK they are in the shop?

A corner shop and a school are not remotely comparable.

Having worked in schools for 20+ years there is no busyness that’s an excuse for such an illogical safeguarding fail as this one.

That's wonderful for you, and I'm pleased you would have done that. I would have done likewise.

My school only has X amount of spots on the system for approved & emergency contacts, so FIL wouldn't be on that list in our case. In other cases, parents would be expected to set up a password with school and the adult collecting or visiting. The onus to make sure that system works is on the school.

The school granted that access, without known or explicit consent.

If this was a more nefarious or sinister situation, the parent wouldn't have been blamed, the school would have. Ultimately, they didn't follow appropriate safeguarding procedures.

For all intents and purposes, school granted access to an unknown (to them) person, to a child, without knowing if there are parental consent. Instead of just holding the suncream, they then invited the unknown (to them) person, to apply suncream on a child's body. The child has been applying sun cream on themselves all week.