to be annoyed at parents who send children to school when they are ill?

[heartmoonshadow]

I am a teacher and I went back to work last week after my maternity - I managed unlike a lot of teachers to travel the 25 miles to work in the snow and ice and was fully prepared to teach. I had on average only 6 pupils per day (out of a class of 30) who managed to get in - even though they all live within walking distance. So why is it that the parent of a violently sick child decided to send him to school to spread his bug? The child looked positively deathly when he arrived - he was pushed through the front door of the school - had he have made it to my class I would have refused to take him in. Within 2 minutes of taking off his coat he projectile vomited in the class and we had to call his parents to fetch him - this took them 3 hours - btw neither of them work they in my opinion just wanted some peace after Christmas!

Anyway as a result I now have this awful bug and I have to be off work - DH an DS have gone to stop at MIL for a few days so that they don't catch it. I feel awful letting down my school and my class after 1 week back.

So am I being unreasonable should parents with sick children keep their child away from others? I also worry how many of the other children in the classroom that day got the bug - I assume it is just because my immunity is down after being away from school for 6 months.

i hate the "dosing up" thing but am sahm so reluctant to judge (a bit reluctant )

yanbu
apart from the snidey comment abot them not working

peacocks i too feel there is a fine line to the dosing up

if you had a headache and slight runny nose or sore throat I am guessing you would take a couple of paracetomol and go to work yes?

However, if you were throwing up or rushign to the loo every 10 minutes you would stay home yes? Or if you had a temperature that would not be brought down by paracetomol, obviously you would stay home.

Surely it's the same for children.

no, but am sahm would keep children home with a temperature they are cooking something

this really annoys me. My eldest goes to a sld/pmld special school and we have parents like this and it puts alot of our childrens lives at risk. od the parents need to get to work, big deal but some of us are struggling to keep our alive. Luckily I am not one of those parents but no way would I put any of those vulnerable children at risk

peacocks - if you do that every time your dc have a temp, surely they would be off a lot?

I have been in trouble with my ds school for him having too much time off ill - bear in mind that he started full time school at 4 - whenever he had a temperature or anything resembling a dodgy tummy, we kept him off. I was summoned to see the Head

Whatever area you work in, you will catch illness from other people. Offices are renowned for it. Surely being surrounded by children all day is going to make you more susceptible to illness? Is that not a risk of the job?

If my dc are ill, and I have to take time off to look after them, I have to take unpaid leave, or use my own holiday entitlement. So do most of the working mothers in this country.

I am genuinely confused here. As teachers, what would you rather we do?

I don't often get a truly sick child sent in, but if they've vomited before coming, they should stay at home. Likewise if they have a very high temperature.
I get a lot of ' Not feeling very well' to which my response is usually ' I'll see if they can be distracted, and I'll keep you posted'
And usually they are fine after the first hour or so.

I've never had time off for a sick child, either self-employed DH or my mother looked after them. Now they're teens, they cope on their own.
And yes, I thought about what I'd do before I made the decision to have children and planned accordingly.

YANBU - in fact I nearly posted a similar thread recently about someone bringing a dc to playgroup with a really bad cold. (I mean full on snotty nose, sneezing, coughing, couldn't breathe properly,whingey etc). That's bad enough, but a vomiting bug is something else entirely. It's very selfish of the parents imho.feel better soon OP

I kept dcs off when they vomited or had a temperature that wouldn't come down. As a result Head not only sent the welfare officers in but contacted social services. With some schools, this one is a difficult one to win.

OK, so how would it be if, when a child who has been knowingly sent in to school after having been sick at home during the night, the parent is sent for once they have projectile-vomited all over the classroom, and asked to clear it all up, before they take their child home AND KEEP IT THERE UNTIL THE BUG HAS PASSED.

"Goblinchild Mon 11-Jan-10 17:31:55
I've never had time off for a sick child, either self-employed DH or my mother looked after them"

Not picking you out goblin, but that is all evry well if you have a dh or a mother available! That said I have no family support and work have always been understabnding if one of the children are ill and have allowed me to make my time up afterwards

I agree ds vomited yesterday and he is bouncy of the walls today but I have kept him home but know other won't

2shoes, i cannot see why it is snidey to say they do not work, she was purely pointing out that they have no other commitments that she knows of

So I moved from London to near Manchester to have the children, so we could afford a house and a SAHH working from home. Then we moved back south to be near my parents and childcare. Not luck, planning.

willing parents are v lucky! believe me

gingernutlover - I have always been paid if I had to have time off for DD. It was in my contract. Think it was something like 3 days a year.

But parents, I reiterate - keep ill children at home. Too many bugs (caught by me from the 5/6y in my class) has led to my getting run down and now my pneumonia. As a result I am off now for at least 3 weeks, since I never actually managed to return after Christmas!

Goblinchild - I have had time off for a sick child. I will never apologise for that, neither does it make be a bad parent nor a bad employee.

My DH's work means it is harder for him to take time off, although we do share it as much as possible. My parents work and live an hour away. My inlaws live an hour away and FIL works PT. But even then, they can't always get here - and TBH when DD is ill she wants, no NEEDS, her parent IMO. Let;s face it - I am ill, and I need my family with me sometimes too!

Should people with children, who don't have family support or who prefer to look after their own ill child themselves, not have children then? It seems a rather drastic and judgemental POV I have to say.

YANBU - can't understand why parent would send child who was so obviously ill, really horrid thing to do to one's child, with zero justification, if not even the need to go to work,
difficult call, on balance, have to be sensible and let needs of child come first - if too ill ot be at school, you just have to bite the bullet and stay off, really hard though it is

Wasn't being judgemental of anyone, when we were up North DH looked after pre-school or sick children and lost money.
I think seriously unwell children should stay at home being looked after and that employers should be accommodating toward this. Whoever the employers are.

yanbu at all!!! Totally with you on this one.

ineedapoo - glad to hear ds is better!

Better to be a bad employee than a bad mother

However i do think many schools encourage 'attendance at all costs' by awarding certificates for 100% attendance.

Who is going to say it's better to be a bad mother then?
OP,you are definately NBU.
With regard to children saying they've been sick though,DD used to be sick if she got overexcited or upset,and I was sure DS was going to tell his teacher he'd been sick and get sent home recently - in fact he had coughed "wrong" on the journey in and spat up a small amount of mucus,almost invisible to the naked eye!
"Mummy,look,I've been sick!"
"no you haven't"
"yes,look here"
"No, thats not sick..."