"Safeguarding" - I don't get it.

[Bold Seagull]

and when the trip is in the afternoon, and the kids want to take off their teeshirt at the beach?

School trip you'd already have a permission letter and a list of things they should bring, informing parents they should apply sun cream in the morning, and the children should carry their own. Most brands of sun cream now do 6 and 8 hour protection. You'd have done a risk assessment, and you'd have a certain number of helpers per child. You'd have probably stated that kids need a sun hat and suitable clothing. As a teacher, I doubt you are letting them take t-shirts off.

 

[Shropshire Seagull]

Did my First Aid renewal recently and one of the blokes asked how you could put a female wearing a mini-skirt [e.g. Hockey player] into the recovery position without one hand brushing her boobs and the other close to disappearing up her skirt.

The course lecturer [Jenny Stretton ex Wolves first team physio and brill lady] gave an example of how the manoeuvre could be modified to look less like a free fumble but added that in all her years as a sports physio, she'd never heard of a case being brought. She referred to safeguarding and said, if you're really not comfortable doing it, ask another female [e.g. player] to do it under your instruction. I thought, how sad that anyone could think in that way [making an accusation] but the key message was make sure you safeguard yourself ....

 

[el punal]

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

Is the correct answer.

 

[beorhthelm]

.... As a teacher, I doubt you are letting them take t-shirts off.

oh how we parents laugh. deal with the two hour strop? are you going to restrain them, hows that fit with the policy? yes, of course the kids should have with their own sun cream, and reasonable to ask that teachers and assistance apply it. see how sensible that is?

 

[Half Time Pies]

I wonder if the this is less to do with touching and more the application of a cream. The Head Teacher may know what the regulations are but not necessarily why they are in place.

I run a Home Care company and even the application of a moisturiser to one of our clients is a regulated activity, our staff have to be trained, clients have to give explicit consent and all applications are recorded.

I would imagine its even more complicated in the case of a child who wouldn't themselves be able to give consent and if there was a skin reaction to the cream then the School might be culpable.

 

[Bold Seagull]

Did my First Aid renewal recently and one of the blokes asked how you could put a female wearing a mini-skirt [e.g. Hockey player] into the recovery position without one hand brushing her boobs and the other close to disappearing up her skirt.

The course lecturer [Jenny Stretton ex Wolves first team coach and brill lady] gave an example of how the manoeuvre could be modified to look less like a free fumble but added that in all her years as a sports physio, she'd never heard of a case being brought. She referred to safeguarding and said, if you're really not comfortable doing it, ask another female [e.g. player] to do it under your instruction. I thought, how sad that anyone could think in that way [making an accusation] but the key message was make sure you safeguard yourself ....

Ultimately there isn't a black and white set of rules. In that instance, with a critically injured person, you would ask yourself is what you are going to do necessary. If the answer is yes it is necessary in order to save the person's life, or at least protect their life, then you are not going to get into trouble if you accidentally brush a boob, or touch a thigh. You would have to be prepared to judge the necessity of what is required. You would first identify if anyone around has medical experience. The second thing would be to ensure someone is contacting the emergency services. If you still then need to act, you would tell whoever is there with you what you are doing, "this girl needs to be put into the recovery position, I'm going to grab across her chest here and her leg and move her into the position".

A lot of safeguarding is about common sense. Another example is all about communication, never touch a player without speaking to them first, try to ensure you can be seen and heard by others. Safeguarding didn't change how I would attempt to care for a player, but simple things like "where are you hurt, is it your ankle, shall I take a look at it, shall I pick up your leg so I can see if it's okay?" so the only difference in behaviour of the coach is to ask the player first and keep them informed.

 

[BigGully]

Did my First Aid renewal recently and one of the blokes asked how you could put a female wearing a mini-skirt [e.g. Hockey player] into the recovery position without one hand brushing her boobs and the other close to disappearing up her skirt..

What an utterly inappropriate train of thought ...................

 

[Bold Seagull]

oh how we parents laugh. deal with the two hour strop? are you going to restrain them, hows that fit with the policy? yes, of course the kids should have with their own sun cream, and reasonable to ask that teachers and assistance apply it. see how sensible that is?

So as a male teacher, let's say with a year 3 class of 7 year olds, you're going to let the girls and boys down the beach take their tops off and you're going to apply sun cream to them. Okay Jimmy.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Is the correct answer. Thank you.


A little bit of thought about how to manage the risk of burning is all that is required. Parents are quite happy to supply their own cream, contribute to a school supply, or accept that their child cannot play out in the sun without proper protection. All perfectly reasonable measures, it just takes a little thought and a willingness to put the child's wellbeing first.

....... That sounds amazingly like common sense..........

 

[Insel affe]

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:

I do not get why your so upset, most children above the age of 5 can apply their own sun cream, it is not rocket science and at my daughters school in the holiday or after school clubs they provide sun cream and the kids apply it, don't see the issue myself.

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

What an utterly inappropriate train of thought ...................

It's not inappropriate at all - unless I'm misreading you.

It's about the individual protecting themselve against unfounded accusations. People are well capable of making things up! And it happens....... quite often.

 

[BLOCK F]

Of course this situation puts lots of well meaning adults in a very difficult position. As a middle-aged bloke, if I see a small child fall over or hurt themselves in the street, or (as I have before) a small child who is clearly lost, I suppress my natural instinct to comfort or help the child, and end up looking round for a woman to step in - the risk of being accused of paedophilia by an angry parent who sees you touching or approaching their child is too great.

So I have every sympathy with schools who have to put in place 'safeguarding' procedures like this.

I wonder whether some of those people who complain about safeguarding and political correctness are also the same people who organise anti-paedophile witch-hunts (rather than letting the police and legal system do its job)... maybe not, but if they are, then I guess they are reaping what they sow.

Not all that long ago, I was out walking with my wife, and a small child just in front of us, took a tumble. I helped him to get up and looked behind to see if his parents were near. Suddenly, the mother rushed up, looked at me as if I was public enemy number one and carted the lad off whilst occasionally looking back at us and giving us the 'evil eye'.
Quite extraordinary behaviour, but sadly this is the world we live in.

 

[BigGully]

It's not inappropriate at all - unless I'm misreading you.

It's about the individual protecting themselve against unfounded accusations. People are well capable of making things up! And it happens....... quite often.

If they are making things up then what has actual conduct got to do with it, I suspect you mean minimising the chance of misinterpretation of actions. ?

At what point does someone flip from putting a young girl needing assistance into the recovery position whether in a hockey skirt or not go to brushing her boobs and their hand disappearing up her skirt, odd as hell.

 

[portlock seagull]

What makes a lot of people's blood boil is the cake and eat it attitude parents have. Eg don't touch my child yer cane wielding socipathetic paedo, he's only stopping the rest of the class from learning and costing the tax payer a fortune so suck it up....Ow, could you feed little tommy because I can't be arsed to, provide after school care, take him holidays, provide social services, act as his father and also general care including rub sun cream in...Grief, Sake! Your child, you're RESPONSIBLE!

 

[portlock seagull]

Not all that long ago, I was out walking with my wife, and a small child just in front of us, took a tumble. I helped him to get up and looked behind to see if his parents were near. Suddenly, the mother rushed up, looked at me as if I was public enemy number one and carted the lad off whilst occasionally looking back at us and giving us the 'evil eye'.
Quite extraordinary behaviour, but sadly this is the world we live in.

Yep been there got the t shirt. A parent who's lost a clearly distressed child in crowd so I was doing what any responsible adult would - what name, it'll be ok, we'll find your mum and dad, look there's a steward so we'll go to the information desk...etc. Suddenly angry parent arrives gives us the evil stair, no thanks and even worse starts shouting at poor kid for 'getting lost' to such a degree I told the kid 'adults aren't always right' and then had a stern word with ranty mum. Of course told to mind business but I said you made it public business when you lost your child and then started shouting at a 6 year old just a little OTT. In a huff she stormed off towing poor kid with her. No thanks, no apology, typical of today's parents really.

 

[Pretty Plnk Fairy]

i hope it doesent apply to all teachers as Mrs DR dresses up as a teacher and gives me a spanking on a thursday knight if i have been extra proper nawty like
regards
DR

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Sorry I but I disagree. Take the FA Safeguarding course. It is more about coaches being protected against accusations etc. Yes, there are elements where you are identifying signs of abuse and each club has a welfare officer that matters get reported through but on balance it is about the FA protecting themselves. If the FA were so concerned about child welfare why didn't they do anything when all the Jimmy Saville evidence started to come out. Anyone with half a brain would have guessed that something was likely to have been going somewhere bearing in mind the amount of kids spending time with coaches. In fact every sport should be looking at their procedures.

Got all safeguarding etc, a few years ago one of our players went down injured, I went on the pitch and could tell he wasn't badly hurt just a kick to the leg. I picked him up and carried him off the pitch. This women screamed at me running from the other side of pitch. On approaching she became insistent she was going to report me, the club, the county FA for me handling this child. By this time he was up and ready to go back on. With her standing there he turned to me and said " dad can I go on now". Her face was a picture. She was reminded as his parent I was allowed to pick him up and give him a cuddle.

 

[Guinness Boy]

All the sense on this thread is being posted by [MENTION=16159]Bold Seagull[/MENTION]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bold Seagull]

Got all safeguarding etc, a few years ago one of our players went down injured, I went on the pitch and could tell he wasn't badly hurt just a kick to the leg. I picked him up and carried him off the pitch. This women screamed at me running from the other side of pitch. On approaching she became insistent she was going to report me, the club, the county FA for me handling this child. By this time he was up and ready to go back on. With her standing there he turned to me and said " dad can I go on now". Her face was a picture. She was reminded as his parent I was allowed to pick him up and give him a cuddle.

U15s?

 

[Sussex Nomad]

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:

How else do you think these lilly livered tree hugging yoghurt drinking liberals will make money if they can't stick their ore in?