Changing Children

[Guest]

Hi everyone,

could anyone tell me their views about changing children when they have wet/soiled themselves. Just that in our practice it is not always possible to have another person present when changing the child. The last place i worked always said you had to have a second person there, but this is not always possible. The only way round this is to bring the child out of the toilet so that they are on view in front of other staff when changing. but i feel this is unfair on the child.

What is everyone elses view on this

thanks christine 0258

[AnonyMouse_4544]

The official line is that staff are CRB checked so only one person is required

"Child Protection

The normal process of changing a nappy should not raise child protection concerns, and

there are no regulations that indicate that a second member of staff must be available to

supervise the nappy changing process to ensure that abuse does not take place. Few

setting/schools will have the staffing resources to provide two members of staff for nappy

changing and CRB checks are carried out to ensure the safety of children with staff

employed in childcare and education settings. If there is known risk of false allegation by a

child then a single practitioner should not undertake nappy changing. A student on

placement should not change a nappy unsupervised."

http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/eyfs/reso...ds/p0001663.pdf page 4

Edited August 1, 2008 by Marion

[AnonyMouse_1027]

we dont have enough staff for 2 to be present - but staff member has to tell another staff member and change child in a private but accessable space (that can be seeen)then write it down in a notebook

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Definitely don't have two members of staff changing nappies or cleaning a child after an accident. We seek to protect children's privacy wherever possible and as Hali says, we discreetly let another member of staff know where we are and at least leave the door ajar...

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_832]

I would be more concerned about neglecting the child by not changing them than by worries about child protection issues. Staff just need to be sensible about it and not put themselves or the child at risk - ie ensure that other staff are aware and reasonably close by and that you always inform someone that you are going to change a child as Happy maz said.

[AnonyMouse_534]

same as everyone else. One member of staff door left ajar and within ear shot so they can call if they need any help.

[AnonyMouse_3139]

Dont you think though that by being asked to have another person present or to tell everyone where you're going or to have the door partially open, we are being distrusting of the very people we are asking to take care of our children?

Why dont we just scrap the CRB checks?

 

 

You may notice this gets to me everytime I hear of it. The day I'm not trusted to toilet a child on my own is the day I pack it all in.

[Guest]

Hear, Hear Rea.

 

So how effective is the CRB, I've always wondered, inspired by your rant to do a very quick number crunching research.

 

20,000 people per year stopped from working with children. , must be good news.

 

CRB figures

(see who compiled these statistics)

 

 

BUT, LETS PUT THE ABOVE IN PERSPECTIVE.

 

scathing attack of the CRB system in Daily Telegraph July 08

 

TELEGRAPH

 

3 MILLION CRB checks done per year

 

so the percentage of applicants for checks found not suitable is: 0.66% , (not even 1% of the applicants for clearance are deemed unsuitable)

 

With this in mind, do we really need to supervise the adult changing a nappy? I think not.

 

I would add that it's good for children that 20,000 unsuitable people were kept away from them, but the Telegraph article highlights mistakes in checks, 600+ people wrongly excluded following CRB's.

 

So is this system really effective, is it cost effective, what other method/s could be better to safeguard our children?

 

I think I'll start a new post and ask that question again.

 

Peggy

[AnonyMouse_8282]

I'd like to follow that post - I myself had 4 CRBs done last year... which rather bumps the figures oneway or another- my car details are on a central system - why can't CRBs... well at least recognistion you have one!

 

xxx

[AnonyMouse_8466]

You may notice this gets to me everytime I hear of it. The day I'm not trusted to toilet a child on my own is the day I pack it all in.

Quite agree, Rea!

 

We leave the door slightly ajar for a couple of reasons: we use our accessible loo to change our children if we need to lay them down - no ventilation Also if we need to call for help for any reason we would never be heard if the door was closed.

 

Please don't get me started on CRB checks: I agree with them in principle, but the system is just so flawed. I have lost count of how many CRBs I have for the various organisations I am involved with when surely I need only be checked once? And there must be a better system whereby if someone was convicted of an offence the authority/employers who have requested the CRB would be notified that they are no longer deemed suitable.

 

But having a CRB check didn't stop Ian Huntley - the system does rather rely on people being honest about the names they have used/are using.

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_8466]

my car details are on a central system - why can't CRBs... well at least recognistion you have one!

So many things are centralised these days: my friend's husband rang the police from his mobile phone to report that they had found a small child wandering dangerously near to a main road last week. The first thing they did was to check that they were speaking to him - is this Mr Joe Bloggs? He was flabberghasted that they knew who he was....

 

Clearly they know what our names our, where we live, what our mobile numbers are, how much tax we paid last year, which post office we collect our child benefit from (or which bank account it is paid into), what make and model of car we drive - and even what colour blouse we wore two weeks ago last Wednesday when we were caught on CCTV going into Marks and Sparks on the high street. Yet they can't work out how to track the number of our enhanced CRB check so that prospective employers can call and check the number and whether the applicant is still suitable to work with children.

 

And that's all before we have ID cards...

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_534]

Do agree with you Rea about the crb checks but we have the door ajar in case we need help. We inform people of where we are going because that way everyone is aware that the child and member of staff are not in the main hall.

[AnonyMouse_10713]

We change our children in the quite room with large screens for children's privacy. Always someone else at hand for emegencies.

[Guest]

Hi everyone,

well i started a discussion here didnt i about changing children. Its just that i work in a school as a nursery nurse and we were talking one day about changing children who has messed themselves 3-4 year olds and one of my collegue said that she didnt like having to wipe a child down with wipes incase she was ever accused of doing anything. She said that you cant be too careful nowadays even though shes worked in a school for over 20 years! Obviously we have all had crb checks done several times!

This is where having another person present came up, she said if a child said anything it would be if the parent beleived their own child or member of staff.

Thanks everyone for all your interesting replies.

0258

[Guest]

I have to say the one thing that worries me in all this is the children. Children pick up on adult Vibes and if we are giving off such negative energy around the children because we are scared to care for the in a relaxed atmosphere the children will begin to wonder what is wrong.

 

I have always said and always tell parents I will treat the children I look after like my own, so if they need changing or a cuddle I will always be the same as with my own and the day some one tells me not to be "normal" around a small child will be the day I finish in child care.

 

Its a sad world when we can't show children love and care.

[AnonyMouse_3735]

I'd like to follow that post - I myself had 4 CRBs done last year... which rather bumps the figures oneway or another- my car details are on a central system - why can't CRBs... well at least recognistion you have one!

 

xxx

 

That is happening.. ISA

 

You can sign up for regular updates.. was due this year but delayed until next

 

As ever another cost involved...

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Wow - I had no idea this was in the offing!

 

Its due to go live in October 2009 - it will cost individuals to register with the ISA (but not if your work with children is voluntary) and also for employers to register.

 

I know this is going off topic, but I am a bit worried that we won't be able to employ staff until they have registered with the ISA. At present we can employ people without a CRB check provided they don't carry out certain activities. However if we need to wait for the bureaucratic systems to work before people can join the workforce, we could find ourselves a bit short staffed...

 

Maz

[Guest]

Thanks for that Inge. I've only had a very quick scan read of it but this section worries me,

 

Only applicants who are judged not to pose a risk to vulnerable people can be ISA-registered. Once the scheme has been fully rolled out, employers who work with vulnerable people will only be allowed to recruit people who are ISA-registered

similar reason to Maz's comment and also the cost. Why there can't be one central site who does checks and offers the checking facility I don't know. There are the various CRB check sites to choose from and I bet there will be more sites similar to the ISA one (just to confuse us more) who will gladly take our money again to check on job applicants.

 

Unless I've read it totally wrong and the ISA does all the checks too, which will put the current CRB check agencies out of business.

 

 

Peggy

[Guest]

Hi everyone,

well i started a discussion here didnt i about changing children. Its just that i work in a school as a nursery nurse and we were talking one day about changing children who has messed themselves 3-4 year olds and one of my collegue said that she didnt like having to wipe a child down with wipes incase she was ever accused of doing anything. She said that you cant be too careful nowadays even though shes worked in a school for over 20 years! Obviously we have all had crb checks done several times!

This is where having another person present came up, she said if a child said anything it would be if the parent beleived their own child or member of staff.

Thanks everyone for all your interesting replies.

0258

 

 

quick tip, for 3+ yr olds (unless very messy) Place tissue / wet wipe in childs hand, adult guides the childs wrist to enable the child to wipe him/herself. No contact on childs private parts of body by adult. Record adult interventions in toilets stating time taken as well as support given.

I wonder now what the statistics are for allegations made by under 5's against adults, of incidences, in an early years setting, during toileting support.

 

Just trying to keep it in perspective.

 

Peggy

[AnonyMouse_8466]

I wonder now what the statistics are for allegations made by under 5's against adults, of incidences, in an early years setting, during toileting support.

I wonder if this sort of statistic is held anywhere? I'll bet if any exist, the numbers are low - if there were any perceived danger there would be a firm rule about how to handle the need for this intimate care in all child protection training. But that said, I've had students tell me that Sure Start have told them they must not sit with children on their lap for a cuddle...

Sorry - probably just raised Rea's blood pressure again...

 

Good toileting tip, Peggy - will have to try it out and see how it works in practice!

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_3139]

Sorry - probably just raised Rea's blood pressure again...

 

Maz

 

 

 

Honest, I could feel it rising even before I read your last words.

 

Another one I heard was to sit them on your lap on a cushion

 

 

Sorry I've made your post into a rant robinson0258 and I quite understand the reasons some people need to have the door open.

I'd be interested to know how many under 5's have gone home and said 'teacher touched me' too. I imagine that if you're going to go to the trouble of years of training, slogging through reams of paperwork at all hours of the night, battling to finish assignments, getting into debt and registering with various bodies, then you're not in it for unnatural reasons. I think we should start trusting again, the world isnt full of paedophiles and we should stop being scared and suspicious that everyone we meet in our jobs with children is one.

 

The ISA sounds good in principle but as we found over the years with the CRB and people like Ian Huntley, the checks are only as good as the information available.

[AnonyMouse_534]

Oh no have to have a cuddle its a perk of the job. I would have to rethink my job if I couldn't cuddle a two year old who is missing there mum. A pat on the back saying there there just doesn't seem right.

As for the ISA sounds good but will wait and see.

[AnonyMouse_534]

Rea I find it is good to hear everyones points of view. What works for one doesn't always work for another but I have got some good ideas and changed the way I look at some things because of someone ranting.

[AnonyMouse_3735]

 

The ISA sounds good in principle but as we found over the years with the CRB and people like Ian Huntley, the checks are only as good as the information available.

 

 

ISA is supposed to address that issue -

 

"Our records will be constantly updated as fresh information is gathered. If new data indicates that an individual might pose a risk to vulnerable people, they will be put on one of the ISA Barred Lists and their current employer will be informed immediately."

 

This does rely on information being recorded though...

 

Inge

[Guest]

I've also thought CRB's only valid for before and the day it's done, there's always a first time to offend you know (this is tongue in cheek for the valid reasons Rea gives that we should be trusted).

 

We all have safeguarding systems in place at our settings, nearly I would say to the detriment of childrens freedom. To go overboard lets the paedophiles win, their 'thrill' being 'Power and Control' not whether they get access to wipe a childs bottom or give an upset child a hug.

 

Believe it or not as a foster carer I am supposed to 'supervise' my husband, and make written records every time he puts the children to bed, enters their room, helps them shower/bath etc, yet, 'quote' from my S.Worker, he doesn't have to supervise me. The rationalle for this is that it protects him from allegations. My husband is as equal as me in terms of all aspects of being a parent.

A while ago when our SW was visiting our Foster daughter went to open a door to a room she shouldn't enter (our 24 yr olds bedroom). Hubby said, "we don't go in there do we", she went to turn the handle and hubby moved her hand off, (by the wrist) saying "no." The S.W told him, you can't do that, "What?" he asked, "physically move her", she replied. (constitutes forceful restraint apparently). Hubby was not impressed.

 

The paranoia, I think has reached unacceptable heights, and affects everyone in everyday life. A recent TV programme I watched the panel discussed this issue and all the men said that if they saw a child fall over, say on the school run, or in the park, they did not feel able to go to the childs assistance for fear of accusation. The people who prey on our children, the weak people who gain power and control over others, have won, because these 'fears' affect how we all respond to children, how we all feel we have to think twice, or justify how we carry out basic love and care needs with our children. These fears were not held in my childhood days. Lets all take the power back from these people and not let them control us (our society) by provoking irrational fears, lets hug & hold and tickle and care for all children like we were cared for 2 or 3 decades ago.

 

 

 

Peggy

[Guest]

Hi.

The link Marion added about students not being allowed to change nappies/toilet children was interesting and made me wonder... I thought if they had a CRB you could allow them to change children or take them to the toilet.

The guidance stated it was from Leicester LEA so is it valid in all other LEA areas or do other areas have there own guidance?

[Guest]

We had this come up last week at work. At my setting my group is down a flight of stairs from the main toilets. They are 3 and 4 year olds and the toilets are at the top of the stairs. They are capable of going to the toilet themselves and we generally stand within our room but within earshot. In four years there has never been any questions raised about the children toileting themselves or even the stairs. Now a staff member has a new assessor and she has said we are not allowed to do this as the children must be supervised when going to the toilet. Also the two people whilst changing is something we are supposed to do. But staffing simply wouldn't allow this and OFSTED have never said anything despite three inspections. Waht are your opinions? Should I send my unqualified assistant to the toilet every time a child needs the toilet - therefore leaving me with 15 children, as well as arranging an extra member of staff for nappy time?

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Providing you have done the necessary checks and the staff member has a CRB check there should be no reason why two people should be present when changing a child's nappy. We have to balance the child's right to privacy against any perceived threat to a child's safety. If the setting's procedures insist on two members of staff being present then it sends a powerful message to parents and staff that the practitioners can't be trusted - hardly a way to foster close and trusting relationships.

 

We accompany some of our three year olds to the toilet because some of them have not yet fully mastered the whole process - and some just like the presence of an adult for reassurance. Our staffing levels reflect the need to be flexible - after all toileting accidents often come in clusters and weneed to be able to cope with these without affecting the safe supervision of the other children.

 

Only you can tell whether your children are safe and whether the stairs pose a threat - presumably it is covered in your risk assessment. I'd say that if you (and your children) have coped well with your present arrangements then I would see no reason to change them - especially if Mrs Ofsted has given tacit approval by not mentioning it in your report!

 

And I have a query about assessors - I can see how they encourage their learners to adopt good practice, and might make recommendations. However I doubt that they can actually tell you how to run your setting. If it were me I would put this back in the assessor's court by asking her where she has got her information from: if she can show you were the EYFS or Ofsted regulations say you must do these things then you can look at your practice. However if you feel confident that your group is operating safely and appropriately, then you should take on board her views and opinions - but on reflection you may just decide to carry on as you are.

 

I can understand that your staff member may be caught in the middle here - if there is a full blown dispute between the setting and the assessor there will be a higher authority to appeal to within the training provider.

 

Good luck - let us know what happens!

 

Maz

[Guest]

ISA should make CRB'S more transferrable i would think

i dont have a problem with one staff changing a child they have crb clearance and you have to have a certain level of trust between staff child and parent. i dont understand how changing a child can be viewed a inappropriate behaviour.

[AnonyMouse_64]

And I have a query about assessors - I can see how they encourage their learners to adopt good practice, and might make recommendations. However I doubt that they can actually tell you how to run your setting. If it were me I would put this back in the assessor's court by asking her where she has got her information from: if she can show you were the EYFS or Ofsted regulations say you must do these things then you can look at your practice. However if you feel confident that your group is operating safely and appropriately, then you should take on board her views and opinions - but on reflection you may just decide to carry on as you are.

 

I can understand that your staff member may be caught in the middle here - if there is a full blown dispute between the setting and the assessor there will be a higher authority to appeal to within the training provider.

 

You are right Maz - an assessor can merely flag up concerns and ensure that a candidate is aware of what is good practice, even if the setting they are working in doesn't always display it! In this instance though, I would say that it is the assessor that is misguided. Please remember these are just mortals like the rest of us and they can be just as gullible or fallible as the rest of us.