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.

Maisy, may I direct you to my earlier post. Here:

And I didn't say I would do nothing about it. I just said I would pick my moment thoughtfully, to act appropriately, to the circumstances. I was not about to carry out other posters instructions on order, to report back. That is not what this thread is about. There is a wider issue than one individual school's newsletter. ..

But I absolutely can't stand hot air fuming, not seeking clarity, not doing anything and thenjust bitching and making silly generalisations about schools.

I would suggest you, personally, want clarity Maisy because the issues surrounding schools' legal obligations to administer medication are very pertinent and have the potential to hugely impact on children and their family's lives and future lives. You very probably want find out the issue has been resolved and the newsletter wording was merely an oversight and good quality provision has been made. However, even if it were appropriate for me to provide you with that information, which I don't think it would be as it compromises anonymity and can only be done in a specific window of time which would not be optimal, there are other schools which do not make adequate enough provision which other posters on this thread, a news article and campaign testify to.

Quit the victim crap.
People aren't directing you to school to 'report back'.
They are saying that it's probably best to clarify with the school before using one newsletter to justify a ridiculous generalised attack on 'schools' like they're some sort of homogeneous group.

They're saying seek clarity because actually it might just be crappy wording (like the trip letter from my school last year. We changed all future letters because a parent rightly pointed out an issue of ambiguity)

Also, I pick my battles. If the antagonism on this thread is in any way indicative of how teachers and school staff will treat children differently according to how parents approach them, I would certainly be unwise to approach the school directly, unless this issue was actually affecting my child
So it's unwise to contact the school because some people online (many of us saying that it would be more than reasonable to contact school) have challenged other elements of your thread. But challengung other elements of the thread is derailing because that didn't give you the answer you wanted

Any further engagement with you is clearly only going to help you create some sort of silly victim status. I'm out. You make no sense at all.
If you wanted a thread discussing specifics of medical care then that's what you'd have done and done it without the working parents crap, without the teacher union crap and all the other random things you've thrown in (and then play victim when anyone challenges it)

I would suggest you, personally, want clarityMaisybecause the issues surrounding schools' legal obligations to administer medicationarevery pertinent and have the potential to hugely impact on children and their family's lives and future lives. You very probably want find out the issue has been resolved and the newsletter wording was merely an oversight and good quality provision has been made
Haha! Yeah. I'm the mean nasty boogeyman.

I don't want anything from the clarification. It suits you to have me as some kind of 'mean nasty teacher who always defends schools' because it bolsters your little keyboard warrior thing.

What i would expect is that people get their facts straight and clarify before starting some odd thread.

As i said earlier,
Had you said in your OP:
Newsletter says
i've called for clarification and their response is they are not able to meet medical
this is my view

Then I would be 100% on board witu raising complaints and taking appropriate action.

But you don't have that. So all this is hot ait.

As i said. I'm out. (Especially as now i'm obviously some school defending boogeman playing the evil villain to some poor discriminated against keybaord warrior)

What i would expect is that people get their facts straight and clarify before starting some odd thread.

And what if they were using the thread to get some background information and gage responses in order to clarify the state of play before an approach was made to the school?

Mumsnet is a good sounding board to this very purpose. I have used it before and would use it again in this way. It is one way the education boards, for example, have helped me very much in terms of successfully resolving issues with my DC's school in the past, as I am sure these boards have helped many others.

I used to get pissed off, I couldn't work because I had to be in the school every lunchtime, but I couldn't get carer's allowance because DS1 only got the middle rate of DLA.

Did you manage to resolve the issue, Perfectly? What happened? How easy was it to tackle?

It’s not really clear how your previous experience obtaining non-medical support for your own child lends any insight into this situation or how your own illness impacts things, though you have alluded to both. I suspect you bring those things up (along with odd ideas about people not liking you personally) because you feel stressed by what is being said to you. I think it’s probably best to wait a bit as you’ve suggested and maybe read the thread again and see if it hits you slightly differently. Sometimes we all need to take a deep breath and have a rethink.

zzzzz of course, it would be surprising if I came through the experiences I, personally, had whilst advocating for my own D.C. entirely unscathed, I accept that. Thankfully we came through it successfully though. It took time though, years. With much of that time involving research and preparation. No, I am not going to do anything immediately, that would be premature. The purpose of this thread was to help properly explore the whole issue and raise awareness.

I would have thought there is some common ground, in that they both involve schools catering to needs which are additional to what is normally expected. There is often cross over between learning and medical needs too. My D.C. certainly had to see medical professionals from the NHS trust, as part of Statement assessment and provision.

What is it about your experiences, seeking medical support from schools, that you think is entirely different to seeking support for other additional needs, zzzzz?

Oh, I can clarify you on the difference between medical and non medical support in my ds's school.
Medical support for him was spot on from the start. So is social emotional support.
He has no provision for his academic support for years. In my mind, school is failing him in that department. But it doesn't mean school is failing him in other areas.

You too, zzzzz.

irvine, it is good you got good support for your DC's medical and social /emotional needs. I hope the support improves for his academic learning needs. How ironic though! From a lengthy thread in which many teachers stress how teachers have no (personal), legal obligation to cater to additional medical needs and some claim (incorrectly) schools have no legal obligations for this either, this is the thing your DC's school do well. What they don't apparently do so well at is something which teachers do have a very clear legal obligation to make provision for.

Well I'm sure they do in that area for most children. Only reason they can't is because his subject knowledge maybe beyond most primary teachers, and they don't have enough funding to cater for outlier when there are a lot of children who needs help to get to expected standard, that's all.
This seems to be quite common among MNetter with able children, and it's up to us to fight with each school or not. I wouldn't generalise all the school are failing just because of my experience like you do.

If I recall correctly, I've not generalised that all schools are failing, irvine.I merely being discussing the issues surrounding schools legal obligations and whether they abide by the law. I acknowledge some schools fail to provide what they are legally obliged to provide. I also talked about various mindsets that exist but not in any way that indicated that I thought these mindsets are universal. I don't.

and it's up to us to fight with each school or not.

This does concern me. It perpetuates disadvantage because some parents do not have the same resources or ability to fight as others do.

Op you sound like a twat.

I'm glad I left teaching.

Well, it would appear you have made the right choice, Tufted, going from that (not so) delightful comment....I am pleased.

Tufted

And the 'grotto', that your user name alludes to, suggests using that particular term as an insult is a somewhat ironic choice!

That's why I don't want to have to fight zzzzz. I just want children to get the provision that schools are legally obliged to make. Preferably without a fight.

Come on you guys, 'Give peace a chance.'

But they are! Children with long term conditions that require daily medication will get it under a health plan. Children on antibiotics for a week, won't. That isn't discrimination, and I say that as a working parent who has had to try and work giving antibiotics to a child a school.

A school newsletter isn't going to give the minutiae of detail of medication policy. For one reason, many parents will then suddenly claim that there child has some essential health need, in order to bypass this rule.

Schools are struggling to avoid paper and pens. They making staff redundant. If no one volunteers to administer medicine what are they supposed to do?

You don't even know what your school are proposing because you haven't asked.