Article in the Telegraph about kids starting school and not being potty trained.

[wintera]

I read this in the paper this morning and thought it was an interesting article.

www.telegraph.co.uk/education/primaryeducation/5956231/Pupils-start-school-still-in-nappies.html

What are calling 'trained' though. If I can persuade ds (2.8) to sit on the potty at regular intervals then he can be dry all day and even go out in 'big boy pants'. But he doesn't seem to feel the need for himself, never asks to use the potty and if he's not in the mood or busy he simply wets/poos himself and is happy to sit in it.

We've put him back into pull-ups until he starts to tell us that he needs to go. If that's lazy then I'm guilty as charged.

My mum kept on about how she started at 12 months and that we were all completely 'trained' by 2 but on closer questioning it turns out that she had to watch us like a hawk for 2 years and we didn't start telling her we needed the toilet until we were at least 3.

I agree with MrsT and Athene - would be surprised if more than a tiny number of 5 year olds in nappies were without Sn/medical issues. IME there's a huge family and social pressure to train kids once they hit 24 months. And if a school aged child is regularly soiling 5 plus times a day surely they should be medically investigated.....

It's not hard to pull elasticated pants and trousers up and down. Dealing with dribbles and helping to wipe is far more straightforward than changing dirty nappies.

TotalChaos the soiling was fully investigated and no medical condition was discovered and once the child's grandparents took on toilet training him there were no more incidents of soiling and only occasional wet pants.

TotalChaos you might be interested and suprised

latest discussion on TES re nappies
and here
and here

and lots lots more threads

My union issued the following advice

ATL often receives enquiries from members about what their responsibilities are when pupils wet or soil themselves in class, and what schools are required to do if a staff member does help a pupil change their clothes..............
Additionally, under no circumstances should staff be expected to potty train children, unless this expectation is specifically included in the job description by agreement. ATL members are reporting an increasing number of four- and five-year-olds starting school without having been potty trained. Where this occurs, members should report the matter to their line manager, and the school should then take appropriate action.

believe it it's really happening

sounds like a very peculiar situation then mrz, can't get my head round parents thinking having zillions of soiled outfits is less hassle then encouraging some form of training.

crossposted mrz, thanks for the links. i am not doubting that it's an issue, just would have thought it was mainly an inclusion/SN issue.

In the case of this child mum sent him without pants or any changes of clothes so it was our spare pants and trousers that got soiled and never washed so no hassle whatsoever for mum.

@bonsoiranna - the benefit is simple: i only buy one/two packs of nappies a month (for overnight) - i was using reusables for her and 7 monther and this frees up the whole cloth nappy supply for him alone.

she just can't manage her own pants yet, or at least, she doesn't relise she needs to do that first before pottying(if left to get on with it, she will sit and wee on the potty still wearing her knickers)

Her speech still isn't up to asking to go, but she can run to the gate/ pick up the potty to let me know.

the point is also: the main problem i had training her at 19mo was she was absolutely convinced the nappy was the right place to wee, and tried to hold it in until nap time. This problem was only going to increase with time...also now she can remove clothes (although not to order), she takes her nappy off overnight - so I'm going to have to get her dry overnight (whether i want to or not!)
Glad to have already done the groundwork for this.

as others have said, i find it much less hassle than changing nappies, she is dry all day and she is also ever so pleased with herself when she gets her round of applause for a Big Wee-Wee...

Also..nappy rash is now a thing of the past (and she got it something awful poor mite)

lots of good reasons to train ASAP as far as I was concerned...

on the other hand if you want to leave it, that's up to you. Lord knows I haven't found it as straight forwards as i first thought, but still worth doing.

The kindergarten I worked in Tawian was scandalised to get a 20 mo that wasn't PT already - they felt it was just asking too much. Of course, kids in my class had accidents (4-7 yo) but that doesn't mean they weren't PT. I think expecting someone else to do it is unfair unless is is specifically something they have agreed to do.

I think it's easier to cope with if you know there is a medical/physical /SEN reason for a child soiling but when a parent stands in front of you and says they haven't got round to toilet training yet or he doesn't know how to go to the toilet because I always do everything for him it is frustrating...sorry

Well this continence policy from the dept for children, schools and families looks sensible. Makes the point that "It is not helpful to assume that the child has failed to achieve full continence because the parent hasn?t bothered to try. There are very few parents for whom this would be true. In the unlikely event this is the only reason why the child has not become continent then continence achievement should be uncomplicated if a positive and structured approach is used."

It also says this:
"It is likely that most of the personal care will be undertaken by one of the teaching assistants on staff. There are some schools where teachers also take a turn with this task, but we recognise that this does not often happen. Occasionally a setting/school will say that offering personal care is not in the job descriptions of their teaching assistants. It is hard to believe how this could be the case for any assistant working with young children, and we would recommend that this be included at the next review. Certainly any new posts should have offering personal care to promote independent toileting and other self-care skills as one of the tasks." which seems sensible to me.

yes, I was looking forward to savin g money too.

Then again, how wise is it to expect children to be in school full-time at the age of 4?

That's the root of a lot of problems IMO.

still wonder how far there could be undiagnosed SN contributing to some of these cases - e.g. in some areas a highly verbal child may slip the net re:Aspergers DX till 7+ (toileting difficulties can sometimes be part of ASD).

mrst - when I've been looking at job descriptions for TAs/LSAs recently they do usually seem to include personal care.

Interesting debate, mainly reassuring as most teachers were fairly understanding about medical / SN isues but tehre's a lot of misinfo about arond the DDA isn't there? The DDA appertains to disabled people and not Joe Public. People who use it to claim things for non-SN kids are a preoblem, not the DDA itself- kids with SN need some legal backup. 'The DDA prevents us from saying that children should be toilet trained before entry into school or nursery so we as teachers are stuck with toilet training. ' nah it dopesn't, just that disabled kids wouldn't be included in this- which IMO is very fair enough

(debate on tes sorry)

Saintly you would need 2 members of staff (1 as a witness,this was always the case when I was teaching re undressing kids). That's 2 groups of children whose teacher/assistant was previously teaching dragged away for half an hour.

Totally unacceptable for any child without SEN to cause all this disruption.

In my son's class an SEN child is in nappies ,he has his own assistant so it's all dealt with with no disruption to others.

Bear in mind a child without SN can have bladder instability or chronic constipation, both of which can cause daytime wetting and soiling. They both need investigating but unless someone (teacher, TA, parent etc) pipes up and tells a doctor or nurse that this is happening then nothing much is going to get done about it.

Mila with LEA legal advice, we discovered that no in fact twop staff members were not needed if a disclaimer agreeing for a specific teacher was signed by the aprents, which obv. was the action we took.

(teacher / TA / secretary- named staff member)

What it says and the reality of the situation are two different things.

Another aspect of SEN as wella s bowel bladder issues is sensory- ds3 could control his bladder no doubt, but he couldn't tell if he were wet, dry or in the process of peeing whichblew it all out of the water. he's fine now at 6 but it still goes if routine is broken, so post- holiday we've had a few accidents but hopefully will be sorted sharpish.

mrz have you got any legal cases I could see where the DDA aqct has been used by a non-disabled person for their benefit?

i might add that most of the problems i have had in PT have been due to my own lack of experience at potty training.

next time I hope itll be much easier.

Although i agree a teacher shoudln't assume no attempt has been made to PT, in some cases it will be the case, or, they will have tried ways that don't work (e.g. just putting them in knickers and expecting them to work out what is required without any training at all)

was smug pleased with success so far after MIL told me she had trouble getting DH potty trained before school..knowing her, that would have been all about her trying things that didn't work and blaming it on him.

actually now I'm motivated to get DD to take her own pants off......if i let her wipe though, she'll wind up like the Andrex puppy!