Parents objecting to male nursery staff changing nappies

[popehilarious]

www.nurseryworld.co.uk/nursery-world/news/1168681/parents-uncomfortable-with-male-practitioners-changing-their-childs-nappy

Hope the clicky link works.
The male staff are usually the key workers who would normally change nappies but some parents object.

I'm not a safeguarding expert but presumably the same rules and policies apply to both sexes of staff? How can a nursery as an employer discriminate duties on the basis of sex, or would this fall under the exemptions (ie asking for same-sex person to do intimate care) where the child is female? I'm a bit muddled about this.

My son had male nursery key workers who were great role models.

And then I do wonder given how few men are interested in childcare and how poor the pay is what the motivation is for the few that do it.

So you think women are somehow naturally motivated to do jobs with shit pay?

You seem to enjoy peddling twaddle. No one has mentioned going bankrupt apart from you.
Male nursery nurses are few and far between not because of sexism but rubbish pay ( the rubbish pay is sexism though ).

Congratulations on such an intelligent and well thought out post. Hard to find arguments against any of that logic.

Lweji
You’re spot on......for once 👍🏽

"@Scott72 why don't you think it's good for men?"
Because of all the suspicion and unhappiness it seems to generate, judging by this thread. The risk of actual abuse is also there, but other posters are right this would very small. Although if there were more male childcare workers this suspicion would diminish?

And regarding pay, there are plenty of jobs with poor pay which men are okay with. There are a couple of reasons for men's reluctance here. One is that men are uncomfortable in working in traditionally female dominated fields, which I suppose is due to societal sexism. The other is all this suspicion and mistrust described in this thread.

@Scott72 I see your point but don't you think that's why it should be challenged?

I work in a male dominated environment and I just get on with it. I also am proud to be challenging stereotypes.

Not read the whole thread but we've had male key workers for our kids and been delighted to have the- great to see men role modelling caring professions. I know when the odd parent has not wanted male key workers or men doing nappy changes the CEO of the nursery chain has said very clearly that it is not the setting for them. If you have so little trust in the setting you need to reconsider your childcare options tbh.

(if you do want to avoid men in a setting then you are free to use a childminder or nanny where you are essentially the employer. What you should not be doing is expecting an employer to discriminate on your behalf. There are also men in reception teaching, and they do keep an eye on toileting etc).

I'm sure all the managers I know would just say "this isn't the nursery for you" to any parent who demands male workers can't do certain things.

If the child is upset by a man that's a different story. I've been "banned" from going into a baby room due to a child having issues with men many times. No problem. Children's feeling always come first. It's parents who need to recognise their feelings are wrong and need to change.

And if you insist a man shouldn't be changing your child's nappy you should hear how the rest of the staff talk about you! You'd be better off changing nursery.

It's parents who need to recognise their feelings are wrong and need to change.

Rather an entitled viewpoint
No, not wrong and they don’t need to do anything other than choose a nursery that suits their needs.

If I refused to get on a bus with a female driver because I felt unsafe would my feelings be wrong? Or should I just wait for a male driver? Or ask the bus company to employ a man for that route?

Rather an entitled viewpoint

I'd think it's the parents who refuse to have a male carer just because he's male that have an entitled viewpoint.

This thread is awful. That implication that nursery care workers should have the right to change the nappy of a child is just horrific.

Lots of girls are abused by their own Dads. Should Dads not be changing nappies? Where is the line drawn?

Exactly!!! I think those posters campaigning for no male workers at nursery's should seriously think about this point.

I think about this point everyday as someone who was sexually abused and raped for many years by an adult male relative. I have also been sexually assaulted, raped again age 17 and sexually harassed by many very different sorts of people, both known to me and strangers, in the years since then - the one and only thing they had in common, apart from their desire to sexually abuse, was that they were all male.

So I will continue to use the knowledge of my own experiences, including my own personal knowledge that the vast majority of predators are never caught and are far more common than the majority of people are willing to believe and will couple that with my knowledge of the statistics and research around the sex of the vast majority of sexual abusers and I will assess the risk to my children on that basis and in conjunction with other safeguarding measures.

I'd think it's the parents who refuse to have a male carer just because he's male that have an entitled viewpoint.

Equally any nursery that can not understand that a parent may be traumatised by their own horrific life experiences and that handing over their most precious child is one of the hardest things to do should not be in the business of looking after anyone's child. They should not ever be thinking that the parent is 'entitled'.

This is a good twitter thread on the topic.

mobile.twitter.com/SafeSchools_UK/status/1175342988517683200

How ironic I was in the newsagent and saw this a moment ago.

I just thought this headline might be of interest to some of you, as all paeodophiles are men...apparently;

all paeodophiles are men...apparently;

You are the only poster I have seen who is suggesting this.

This is a good point:

And then I do wonder given how few men are interested in childcare and how poor the pay is what the motivation is for the few that do it. Hopefully just that they enjoy working with children. But given the prevalence of men looking at abuse images I do worry.

You're generalisation of men is the reason why there is sexism, Racism, homophobic bullshit in our society.

Yep, parents being cautious about the risk profile of who cares for their children is the fundamental reason we live the n a sexist, racist, homophobic society. Absolutely, I’m sure of it.

Gay men by the way are statistically far less likely to commit child sexual abuse than straight men.

Interesting deletion.

Apparently it's no ok to point out faults in arguments relating to previous abuse brought up by pps.

The point is that regardless of previous experiences it's still not ok to associate and discriminate entire classes of people.
We all have to learn through life to do that, or we would have to lead very odd lives indeed.

"If the child is upset by a man that's a different story. I've been "banned" from going into a baby room due to a child having issues with men many times. No problem. Children's feeling always come first."

Interesting! Occasionally children will have an initial aversion/preference for either me or DH. One little girl had been used to a male nursery nurse she'd adored at her nursery and definitely wasn't having me as a replacement!
We've found that, if the more unpopular of us takes over the care for that child whenever possible, the preference very quickly disappears as they get used to us - obviously, a distressed child is another story!
To use an example, my DS was initially frightened by a nursery school teacher who had pulled a scary face during Singing at his induction morning. Once he'd learned that she wasn't as scary as he'd thought, she ended up being his favourite teacher.

There ae all kinds of statistical correlations we can find between some sort of dangerous undesirable behaviour, and a demographic fact.

What race commits the most violent crime? White collar crime? Petty theft?

What religion is most likely to engage in terrorism?

Yet in no cases do we consider it acceptable to prevent these behaviours by simply banning the whole group from certain activities.

We even say it is wrong to profile people and pick them out as at elevated risks because of these things. We tend to be critical when we hear about Muslim men being targeted for extra precautions at an airport, for example.

The idea that elevated risk in a group makes it ok to discriminate against individuals is generally seen as wrong.

It's just statistics? yes, t's just statistics. It works, the statistical analysis for it works. If the drug trade in a particular town is run mainly by a particular ethnic group, using that as part of your analysis, pulling over those cars with those particular drivers, searching those particular passengers etc, it increases your chances of finding the right people.

But that's usually seen as problematic to say the least.

Or how about women shouldn't be allowed to be driving instructors because statistically we get more involved with car accident because we are 'shit' drivers.

No idea what you are basing this on. Women are safer drivers than men. Men are far more likely to be killed or injured than women, no matter what mode of transport they choose. And even if you adjust the statistics to account for the fact that men tend to drive more miles, male drivers are still consistently more dangerous to themselves and others than female drivers. So much so that 95% of convictions for causing death by dangerous driving in the UK are against male drivers, for instance.

(This is why until recently it was cheaper to insure a female driver.)

There is an overabundance of statistics to prove this worldwide, there's even longitudinal studies exploring the reasons - which lie in different risk taking behaviours leading to more aggressive and dangerous driving habits in men.

The same goes for the risk assessments in the case of intimate care for children. We have the data. And the statistics proving that parents who are concerned are neither paranoid nor entitled. They are doing their job - protecting their child. Hopefully, this will lead them to a nursery with robust safeguarding procedures that apply to both sexes. And where no one pretends that worries about child sexual abuse committed by males are based on myths, prejudices and misconceptions, but where staff can ensure parents that their concerns are taken into account, and that their policies minimise the risk that we know exists.

If a woman gets on the train at night and can choose between a near deserted carriage with only a woman in or a near deserted carriage with only a man in which us she likely to choose? If she avoids the one with the man in is this discrimination?

Lol at the posters trying to label as ‘discriminatory’ parents following their instincts to protect their children based on statistically sound risk analysis.

IIf a woman gets on the train at night and can choose between a near deserted carriage with only a woman in or a near deserted carriage with only a man in which us she likely to choose? If she avoids the one with the man in is this discrimination?*

I travel a lot on the tube late at night.

It wouldn’t be as simple as male/female. I’d judge on dress, demeanor, a whole load of things.

A man in a suit with a copy of the FT getting on at Canary Wharf vs.a woman obviously drunk/high in clothes I’d associate with gangs - i’d pick the carriage with the man.

We risk assess all the time.

The difference with nurseries and places of work we don’t need to judge on appearances or chance of something bad happening. We check the safeguarding policies and make sure they are as tight as possible so it doesn’t matter about sex, race, clothing, or anything else, no one gets the opportunity to hurt anyone. We have access to police records and checks, references to make doubly sure.