To think that if the school says no mobile phones to be teken on trip then everyone should respect that.

[kreecherlivesupstairs]

DD went off for her first school trip, she'll be back on Thursday. She is/was thrilled about the whole thing since she found out about it three weeks ago. I dropped her off at 7.30 this morning, saw her onto the bus, had a quiet grizzle to myself then went for a cup of coffee with another mum. She asked me how much cash I'd given dd, I said none, she didn't need it, she then asked about whether I'd topped her phone up for her. It turns out, she's given her son 100 francs (about 60 quid) and sent his iphone along with him. I am sitting here seething with anger which I know is unreasonable, but ffs, the school made some rules that, imho are worth keeping.

riven - schools simply cannot run like home ed, or a parent taking out their own child. It just isn't the same. Teachers do need to have tat position of authority and there does need to be the distinction in place. Believe me, in schools, where that distinction is not kept, things can quickly go horribly wrong for many reasons.

-

Children simply do not need a phone. We all managed in the past without one. So will our children.

Also, teachers and children having them are different. The teachers are adults who are giving up their time for free to ensure your children have a great opportunity. They may have a young child hey wish to say goodnight too - something they are unable to do because they agreed to take your children away on a trip for free - teacher's don't get paid overtime for the extra hours they give.

The children/pupil are coming through choice. If they don't like the rules, then they don't have to come.

YANBU

I was a teacher back in the day when chewing gum and sony walkmans were the worst distraction we had to deal with. The idea of them all having phones is just intolerable - it's bad enough sharing a bus with teenagers with phones, never mind a classroom.

Kids are not adults. Teachers must absolutely have the right to be in charge of the pupils and not in partnership with them. There are lots of rights and privileges that only come to adults and having a phone with you at all times is one of them.

Why not just send kids out to work and get married at the age of 9 or whatever if kids are the same as adults.

Riven: RE school trips being abolished because they polarise those who cannot afford them and those who cannot. Perhaps the same could be said of iPhones.

Here are some examples I have witnessed or heard of from reliable witnesses about how mobiles actually endanger children:

A child stepping in to the path of a moving vehicle on an adventure track because he was concentrating on a game on his phone.

A child who missed a vital safety information announcement for the same reason.

A child who made surreptitous arrangements to meet someone (a male stranger)who made contact via fb / msn used on thier phone - intercepted, than god, by the adult in charge.

A child set upon by another group and mugged for their phone.

I imagine teachers weigh up the pros and cons of every decision they take. If they take responsibility for my child away from home I will either respect those decision, or make the chpice not to entrust them with the huge burden of rsponsibility.

I am glad that having been out all day that we have some common sense replies! I very much hope that those who do send them don't expect the teacher to raise a finger when it is lost, stolen or dropped in the lake!
When mine were at primary school and went away, a daily bulletin was posted on a school window and the DCs sent a postcard.
At secondary school they organised a phone tree so that it was easy to let parents know what time they were back.
I agree with MorrisZapp-the idea of pupils with phones is intolerable. One of the points of a trip is to get away from everything. (Having had DH taking work related calls on a beach-I think all adults should leave them at home too!)

Brett girl had a very valid point-if any DC gets a call from home with bad news it should go through the teacher.

Mine also don´t have phones and I see no reason for them to have them until they can pay.

We have a landline they can use.
School has a landline they can phone me on.

They can email.

I don´t see why they need to be texting friends who they have just spent the day at school with!

I used to go out & come home at the agreed time, and I don´t see why mine shouldn´t do the same when they are older.

I hate mobiles and don´t understand why a lot of people feel the need to be contactable "24/7".

"Avoiding that kind of possibility is one really good reason for not having rules or limits at all"

That is a truly ridiculous proposition.

Part of parenting is showing children how to behave in society, what is right and wrong, that life (even outside the family) has rules that we should all obey.

If you don't start with rules and limits at home, how do they learn?

And I agree with diddl. DS doesn't need a phone now (aged 10) nor in the forseeable future.

If he wants one as an accessory or statement to his mates when he's 14 or 16, he can get a weekend job and buy it/top it up himself.

I personally believe that children do need rules and limitations put upon them. Children IMO require boundaries. Yes, they may try and challenge them, but it is then the parents (or teachers in some cases) to enfore those boundaries. It is how we help our children learn.

When I worked in prison education we had two very distinct groups thats tood out:

(a) no rules at all - never learnt boundaries, didn't appreciate rules were often there for a reason

(b) too strict at home - in the sense of discipline in particular; only knew how to control others by use of asserting power over others, often through violence though not always

Surely somewhere int he middle is better?

Also, phones can make young children targets. Phone crime, as in mugging for phones (and worse), is AFAIK, on the up. And young children are easy targets.

I think if a young child is going to be out with a phone they need to know how to be safe with it, not having it on show, etc.

But certainly I can see no reason for a primary school child to have a mobile phone. I will recosider once DD reaches secondary school, but the safety issue concerns me.

'Avoiding that kind of possibility is one really good reason for not having rules or limits at all'

I think it's wonderful that you home educate, because trying to teach or be friends with a child who has been given that philosophy from birth is usually a nightmare for all who come in contact with them.

And my son would have been dead through sugar overload by the time he was 8 if he'd had no limits.

We were not given guidance about mobiles, so dd1 took a cheap phone to brownie camp. She phoned me in floods of tears. On balance, I would not give her a phone to take to camp again. I would prefer not to know!

Probably because he knows the boundries at school, Riven!

If I let my DS1 watch TV, play on the wii, or use the computer as much as he wanted he would do very little else indeed. He is not yet six. In my experience he needs very clear rules about these. If we have clear rules we don't have fights.

My dd's mobile phone makes my life easier - we live in the depths of the country and I am, by necessity, her taxi service. I have been saved a lot of wasted journeys and long waits for busses she's missed by her phone. But that's no reason for her to take it on school trips!

never had any problems with security lost kids or the like and elder dcs 17 15 13

have seen a LOT of frustrated parents trying to contact children with phones - off/upstairs/out of charge/out of credit

My dds have had phones since starting senior school as they use a limited school bus service and I felt better knowing they could call me if they were stranded. BUT I do not have any illusions that having those phones keeps them safe. Neither have I encouraged them to let the phones give them a false sense of security; they are but a tool.

Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman had mobile phones - the phones did not save their lives .

Our 10 year old is on school camp at the moment. The area they're in was hit by a massive storm last night and a phenomenal dust storm today (we're in Sydney).

Mobile phones are not allowed, but we have all the teachers' mobile numbers this morning. We considered calling last night but realised it would be quite stupid to call and potentially distract a busy teacher in the middle of a storm like that. We called the school this morning and they had an update for all parents to say that the boys are fine.

Not only was there no real need to call last night, beyond wanting reassurance, it could quite possibly make things more dangerous to have kids on the phone during a difficult situation. There's nothing parents can do from a distance and the teachers need everyone paying attention if things do get hairy, not missing instructions because they're talking to mum.

I also think being able to constantly contact Mum/Dad stops some children thinking for themselves.
The slightest "problem" & they are on the phone.

It also gives them an excuse to not come home at an arranged time.

On the issue of phones keeping you safe - they don't, do they. My friend always insists on us ringing each other after a night out to make sure we're both home safe. It's a lovely gesture but in reality, if anything had happened to either of us then it wouldn't be averted by the other one trying to phone us.

It could serve as a first response to send help after the event, but it wouldn't stop something happening would it.

There was one time that my friend popped in to her neighbours on the way home (they were having a party) and had her mobile buried deep in her bag. I was phoning her at home and on the mobile long after she should have got back, to no answer. I was really worried, but to be honest, I wasn't sure what to actually do. Ring the police and say 'my friend got really drunk and now she isn't answering her mobile'?