"Safeguarding" - I don't get it.

Bob'n'weave · Sep 26, 2017

A few months ago one of the kids at my youngest's junior school ended up getting a nasty bit of sunburn on her face and arms. After much ado, the school told parents that under 'Safeguarding Policy', teachers are not allowed to touch a child, so the application of suncream is 'out of the question'. I confronted the head of the school and asked her straight, "is this about protecting your school from litigation?", and she replies 'yes'. So I said, ' Thats fine, but what about your duty of care to the child, surely that must come first? She had no answer, just that 'its policy' along with a condescending smile.
Last week a 7 year old kid at the same school had a tantrum because he hates the place and did not want to go in. End result, he was physically dragged in by two teachers, quite roughly, with no thought of his wellbeing or state of mind.
This shite makes my f**king blood boil. WTF is going on when teachers will watch a child burn under this bullshit flag of "Safeguarding" but then manhandle a 7 year old kid about like a pair of untrained bouncers with no regard to the child's safety.
This safeguarding scam is guarding only one thing, the jobs of the c***s in on the swindle, and while they're counting out the 'funding', our kids are burning.
:rant:

censored:

Razzoo · Sep 26, 2017

If it's sunny and hot its the parent's duty to apply sun cream before school starts. I do it all the time up here in sunny Yorkshire.

bhanutz · Sep 26, 2017

Bob'n'weave said:
A few months ago one of the kids at my youngest's junior school ended up getting a nasty bit of sunburn on her face and arms. After much ado, the school told parents that under 'Safeguarding Policy', teachers are not allowed to touch a child, so the application of suncream is 'out of the question'. I confronted the head of the school and asked her straight, "is this about protecting your school from litigation?", and she replies 'yes'. So I said, ' Thats fine, but what about your duty of care to the child, surely that must come first? She had no answer, just that 'its policy' along with a condescending smile.
Last week a 7 year old kid at the same school had a tantrum because he hates the place and did not want to go in. End result, he was physically dragged in by two teachers, quite roughly, with no thought of his wellbeing or state of mind.
This shite makes my f**king blood boil. WTF is going on when teachers will watch a child burn under this bullshit flag of "Safeguarding" but then manhandle a 7 year old kid about like a pair of untrained bouncers with no regard to the child's safety.
This safeguarding scam is guarding only one thing, the jobs of the c***s in on the swindle, and while they're counting out the 'funding', our kids are burning.
censored:

Safeguarding scam? yeah ok...

Bob'n'weave · Sep 26, 2017

Of course, silly me.

Oh, by the way the child is still burning and in pain. What are you going to do? Get the popcorn out?

bhanutz · Sep 26, 2017

Bob'n'weave said:
Of course, silly me.

Oh, by the way the child is still burning and in pain. What are you going to do? Get the popcorn out?

Why didn't you as the child's parent put suncream on your child?

mejonaNO12 aka riskit · Sep 26, 2017

Bob'n'weave said:
A few months ago one of the kids at my youngest's junior school ended up getting a nasty bit of sunburn on her face and arms. After much ado, the school told parents that under 'Safeguarding Policy', teachers are not allowed to touch a child, so the application of suncream is 'out of the question'. I confronted the head of the school and asked her straight, "is this about protecting your school from litigation?", and she replies 'yes'. So I said, ' Thats fine, but what about your duty of care to the child, surely that must come first? She had no answer, just that 'its policy' along with a condescending smile.
Last week a 7 year old kid at the same school had a tantrum because he hates the place and did not want to go in. End result, he was physically dragged in by two teachers, quite roughly, with no thought of his wellbeing or state of mind.
This shite makes my f**king blood boil. WTF is going on when teachers will watch a child burn under this bullshit flag of "Safeguarding" but then manhandle a 7 year old kid about like a pair of untrained bouncers with no regard to the child's safety.
This safeguarding scam is guarding only one thing, the jobs of the c***s in on the swindle, and while they're counting out the 'funding', our kids are burning.
censored:

Surely the issue is that they weren't meant to grab the child under the same reason they can't apply sun cream.

Both would fall under safeguarding.

Icy Gull · Sep 26, 2017

They can't give an upset small child a cuddle either, how the world has changed...mostly for the worse. I get it but it's a sad reminder of the times we live in.

Thunder Bolt · Sep 26, 2017

Putting sun cream on a child at 8.30 is not going to help a child at lunchtime.

My sister in law works at a school, where there are children crawling with head lice, but they're not allowed to send them home, shampoo their hair or even comb it with a fine toothed comb.

Bring back Nurse Nitty Norah.

LlcoolJ · Sep 26, 2017

Oh no. Another moron.

Coach_Carter_92 · Sep 26, 2017

Apparently now teachers and nursery practitioners are also unable to check if a child has head lice

Horton's halftime iceberg · Sep 26, 2017

Simples surely just send them in with this - let them have suncream fights

Stat Brother · Sep 26, 2017

Excuse the sideways step, but...

...earlier I was listening to Julian Clary talk about his school days in the 70's, a school run by Benedictine monks.

The upshot was tales of violence, abuse, and sound thrashings, with each monk having a prefered method of cane, stick, shoe, cricket bat, etc.
One had no implement so the child in question had to walk the length of the school get another monk's cane and take it back to the monk who'd then beat them with it.

I'm not entirely sure what they'd make of 'safeguarding' although as JC said over half of them were now in jail, I doubt they'd have been a problem applying suncream.

beorhthelm · Sep 26, 2017

yep, the suncream thing is load of bollocks, at my boys school they applied sun cream, so down to how precious a school wants to be. i was surprised because my sister's school had the "no touch" policy and then had to deal with a sunburnt child. short version as i recall, if the school tells you they wont do something, they shift the responsibility of care back to the parent.

GT49er · Sep 26, 2017

Nobody ever put sun cream on me when I was a kid. Never heard it mentioned, or knew of its existence; don't think my parents or teachers did either. Who can I sue?

Coach_Carter_92 · Sep 26, 2017

I work in primary schools and as staff (especially male staff) we can't win. We have had parents moan at us after their child fell ill after participating in an after school football club during the winter. Only problem was they sent their kid with no hat, gloves, or a proper coat

hans kraay fan club · Sep 26, 2017

beorhthelm said:
yep, the suncream thing is load of bollocks, at my boys school they applied sun cream, so down to how precious a school wants to be. i was surprised because my sister's school had the "no touch" policy and then had to deal with a sunburnt child. short version as i recall, if the school tells you they wont do something, they shift the responsibility of care back to the parent.

Yep. So much of what you read in the crappy newspapers about what "you're not allowed to do anymore" is either made up rubbish, isolated cases, or schools that take the no approach to everything, to make their lives easier.

At my wife's place of work (working with 3 and 4 years olds) they are perfectly able to cuddle upset children / apply plasters / apply suncream / force kids to cover up if they want to play outside / etc. 'Not allowed' is generally nonsense.

Thunder Bolt · Sep 26, 2017

Coach_Carter_92 said:
Apparently now teachers and nursery practitioners are also unable to check if a child has head lice

She didn't need to check. The poor child was so infested the lice were walking around on her shoulders.

Marshy · Sep 26, 2017

Icy Gull said:
They can't give an upset small child a cuddle either, how the world has changed...mostly for the worse. I get it but it's a sad reminder of the times we live in.

mmm thats not what i was told on my safegaurding course for football, you can put your arm around the boys and console them at the end of the game if they are upset for whatever reason.

Just make sure you dont do it where there are no witnesses ! then you are asking for trouble,

Icy Gull · Sep 26, 2017

Marshy said:
mmm thats not what i was told on my safegaurding course for football, you can put your arm around the boys and console them at the end of the game if they are upset for whatever reason.

Just make sure you dont do it where there are no witnesses ! then you are asking for trouble,

Interesting. It was one of my daughter's teachers that told me this, quite a few years ago now too.. Maybe she just didn't like my daughter :smile:

Bob'n'weave · Sep 26, 2017

mejonaNO12 aka riskit said:
Surely the issue is that they weren't meant to grab the child under the same reason they can't apply sun cream.

Both would fall under safeguarding.

Surely the issue is the burnt child? Or more to the point the prevention of the child getting burnt? Sort of missing the point here aren't you.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

"Safeguarding" - I don't get it.

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Back on the rollercoaster

Silly old bat

Mama said knock you out.

Active member

Blooming Marvellous

Attachments

Well-known member

A. Virgo, Football Genius

Well-known member

Active member

The voice of reason.

Silly old bat

Well-known member

Back on the rollercoaster

Well-known member

Share this page