Our primary school says if children need medicine at specific times 'pop' in & DIY

[wonkywillow]

Surely this penalises busy working parents, with occupations where they can't just 'pop' in? Or a parent who simply has other pressing commitments..

Can schools actually do this? They seem to be negating their responsibilities towards providing education and support for children with long term medical conditions that require regular medication.

Kaya,

If children need medical care in schools it is not up to the teaching staff to provide it. It's a medical need so a nurse or suitably qualified TA should do it (and imo it should be funded by the NHS). Too many schools are trying to do it on the cheap and force teachers to do something they do not feel qualified to do.

So children and their parents get caught in the cross fire?

And Kaya' as a parent, I was discussing, primarily, schools' legal obligations not individual teachers'.
I'm really not concerned whether it is a TA that is trained to do this in school or other personnel.

What does concern me is teachers who come on here to post that schools have no legal obligation for administering medicine because they, as teachers, cannot be forced to do this. This does not take away a school's legal obligation. The solution is not for parents to make up for this shortfall in provision. This only further disadvantages families.

It's obvious that you don't care who does it. Just force someone, that's what you want. Even if they don't want to, don't feel able to, don't feel capable. Not going to happen.

Let's make teachers responsible for even more, shall we? Maybe we should clean our own classrooms and cook the school dinners. Sometimes hard put on teachers do say enough is enough. it would be nice if people supported them instead of slagging them off and trying to force even more on them..

Fortunately you aren't in any position to make it happen.

Have you got any concrete evidence that this is a problem in your or any school you have contact with?
If so what is that (beyond the paragraph in the school bulletin you haven’t queried at your school)?

I felt the newsletter was indicative of a problem in attitudes at the school in question. As I have pointed out anode why I think this in several of my earlier posts. I have not queried this because my own child is not directly affected and also I am currently receiving quite time consuming and invasive treatment for cancer. However, should it come up in discussion with the school I would communicate my understanding on the issues surrounding this.

Let's make teachers responsible for even more, shall we? Maybe we should clean our own classrooms and cook the school dinners. Sometimes hard put on teachers do say enough is enough. it would be nice if people supported them instead of slagging them off and trying to force even more on them..

To be fair, Kaya, as a parent my primary concern will be my children's welfare. I am not responsible for organisation within schools. Much as I support teachers, the fact that they feel put on seems to be getting in the way of reasonable discussion concerning schools' legal obligations.

So it’s just the line in the newsletter?

No. I know the school and how they have handled catering to (fully funded) additional needs in the past.

it would be nice if people supported them instead of slagging them off and trying to force even more on them

And this support would be much more forthcoming if teachers' solution to shortfalls in the legally required provision was not that 'parents should do it themselves'.

Much as I support teachers, the fact that they feel put on seems to be getting in the way of reasonable discussion concerning schools' legal obligations.

No, you don't support teachers at all, we've gathered that.

If you're worried about your children's welfare maybe you should petition for every school to have a nurse. Because, no matter how much you bang on, most teachers just aren't going to do a nurse's job. Our proper job is onerous enough.

What will happen is that more children will not be able to go into school at all because no one will do any medical care, because enough is enough. And those children will have to be educated at home.

Kaya, I have a BEd in English and Education. I have trained and taught. Admittedly I have not worked for years partly because the additional needs my own D.C. was diagnosed with made working very difficult. At the moment my ability to petition etc is compromised due to cancer treatment.

You seem to have the energy to post here - starting a yougov petition isn't hard.

By one of those weird coincidences I'm recovering from radiotherapy and chemo as well. I hope we both get through ok.

This thread has got me musing.

I gather that administering medicine during school hours involves 'costs'. Time, training, infrastructure, in some cases somebody has to be employed for this who wouldn't otherwise have to be employed/could be employed at a lower rate.

And I understand that in many schools, resources are at breaking point. Teachers have no 'spare' time and there is no 'spare' money.

Ok. In simplified terms: So demands on schools (& teachers) have risen, resources have been cut. What happens? Teachers stretch themselves thin, trying to still meet all demands. Then comes the point where they are stretched too thin, cannot meet all demands anymore. Something has to give. Teachers (schools) have to stop /reduce doing one of the things they ought to be doing, because they simply cannot do everything anymore.

So what gives?
In the case illustrated by OP, it is the weakest that miss out. If we can't educate the 29 healthy kids AND make sure the chronically ill kid can attend as well, because we simply do not have the resources, then we can choose to make life harder for the minority, the ill kid, who incidentally happens to be the least likely to be able to fight back.

The alternative would be to cut back on teaching the 29 healthy kids. If there are not enough resources for everything, one of the things we ought to be doing will have to be compromised.

Perhaps if schools reduced the teaching for the majority, rather than reduced their efforts to enable vulnerable children access to school (neither of which should need compromising on, if resources were adequate), more parents would realise just how short funded schools are; and perhaps be willing to do something about it (voting/campaigning/etc).

Where would that support come from zzzzz?

Not in all schools apparently. We're lucky with ours, their policy's exactly what you're suggesting, although I'm glad DS1 didn't go there, as they fail to understand that you can't prevent someone with CF from going to hospital for 2 weeks unless you homeschool in the first place (I got a heavily worded letter when DD was off for 5 days, and I asked what they'd do in that situation).

Even before DS had an EHCP (and therefore a 1-1) his medical needs where met both from the day to day medication needs (at the moment he needs medication 2 or 3 times in the school day depending if it is Pe), and the emergency medical needs that can arise from that.

We have never had issue finding a staff member willing to be responsible (even if it means carrying a bag around the playground all lunchtime!)

The vast majority of schools want to help, and will find a way to help BUT I can fully understand why some individuals don’t feel able to and I undetsrand even more why the attitude of some parents is enough to put some off wanting to help for fear of repercussions

By one of those weird coincidences I'm recovering from radiotherapy and chemo as well. I hope we both get through ok.

Me too, Kay.

brilliotic - yup, I'm with you on that. I don't know wonky but I interpreted it that this was the sort of pondering that s/he hoped to achieve with the thread.

Yes, you're right, t1.

AndKaya' as a parent, I was discussing, primarily,schools' legal obligations not individual teachers'.
I'm really not concerned whether it is a TA that is trained to do this in school or other personnel
And yet it was you who brought TEACHER unions into the thread, you who brought up action short of strike, you saying how awful it is that TEACHERS won't do it and you talking about militant unionism as if somehow teachers are being selfish abd should have our job description increased because our job description isn't fit for the role you think we should have.

Then people correct you and you wait for someone to give you a spot of support and then pounce on it as if everyonr else has ruinined the echo chamber you were hoping for. In other words you keep throwing random issues into a discussion and then get annoyed when people correct you.

For what it's worth though, schools would stop running properly if we all worked fully to rule. Most teachers don't end up working to rule because it affects the children. But obviously though you are an expert on the whole sector so that shouldn't need pointing out to you.

All our first aid on site is done by pastoral admin and all management of medical stuff for long term.conditions is done by TAs who have been given additional training.