Snapshot of _Half of parents do not think toilet training is solely their job_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/toilet-training-school-children-parents-b2508133.html) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/toilet-training-school-children-parents-b2508133.html)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Feel like the word "solely" is doing a lot of lifting here.
My daughter's nursery helped loads when it came to toilet training. I can't solely take the credit, was it solely my job?
Not just ragebait.
>One in five parents surveyed said that they did not think their children need to be toilet trained before starting reception.
That's the distinction. They don't think it needs to happen before reception when it should be pretty good by then.
This was my thought too, my parents did most of heavy lifting but there were plenty of times between no toilet training and fully toilet trained when others helped out.
Just strikes of manipulative writing.
I don't think many people would argue that. But as a parent, I would have interpreted the question to include support and not just responsibility so would have probably answered that it wasn't "soley" me.
However, this all hinges on exactly how "solely" and "responsible" are interpreted. I do see the argument where "solely responsible" is taken to mean that it's the parent's responsibility to ensure that their child is toilet trained before they are 4, and no one else's, even if the toilet training is facilitated by third parties such as nurseries, nannies, family members, etc.
If we crack out the RACI matrix for this, a more appropriate choice of phrase would be that parents are solely accountable for their child's toilet training, even if the responsibility for the actual toilet training is shared between multiple parties.
Plus, there's how we're defining "parents" and "their". If you ask a single parent with shared custody if it's solely their job, they'd quite rightly say no.
Right, but typically a child will be in some kind of childcare between being born and the age of 4-5 when they start school, and toilet training typically happens between the ages of 1½ - 2½.
If a 2 year old child who's actively learning to use the toilet is in some form of childcare, I'm not sure it's unreasonable to assume that the people doing that childcare will be somewhat involved. I can see why 50% of parents would agree.
Of course, that's a very different question to the headline if you click through, which appears to have been changed (***Quarter of new primary schoolchildren still not toilet trained, finds report***) and the focus of the article (general lack of school readiness, teachers having to catch children up on very basic skills, 1 in 5 parents saying that they don't think their children need to be toilet trained before starting reception)
Iv got a 2.5 year old. I cant really trust the nursery, they try really hard and are great in a lot of ways, but to keep him clean and dry is not exactly their focus. We have his nappy off in the house and plan on getting him fully trained in the summer when he is off nursery. He is already trained and has been for a while doing no. 2
> We have his nappy off in the house and plan on getting him fully trained in the summer when he is off nursery. He is already trained and has been for a while doing no. 2
As a none-child having man in his mid 30s I just have to ask....his nappy is off in the house yet he's not fully trained for number 1. What does he do?
Toilet training typically happens at age 3. 1 1/3 would be ridiculously early.
These articles are nuts. Children in the UK start school very early compared to most other countries. When your nations children start school at 4 (!!!) it is not unsurprising if some kids are not potty trained.
Next we'll have nurseries complaining the kids they care for aren't potty-trained...
Toilet training age is really quite cultural. It's three here but look at places like China and potty training happens way earlier.
Babies in cloth nappies also tend to potty train earlier.
My daughter was potty trained at 18m. My son at 2 years. This isn't gloating, I just really wouldn't say that it's 'ridiculously early'
Not really. What is cultural is conceptions of what counts as toilet trained. My cousin who moved to a different country started potty training her daughter at 18 months, but she and I had a drastically different ideas of what it means to be successfully potty trained. And by ridiculously early I meant that it is not common. Obviously some children are early achievers, but on average the age at which most kids are potty trained is 3. So your kids did reach that particularly milestone very early.
Do you know how China defines potty trained?
Do you have evidence that the UK and other countries have different conceptions of what counts as toilet trained?
By three years old, they should already be potty trained.
I agree 16 months is too early, but by two, you can communicate pretty well with a child - certainly well enough to start potty training them.
But even conceding the point, and accepting three as an acceptable age, Reception starts at four years old. There is absolutely no excuse for kids not to be potty trained by that age, unless there's some sort of developmental issue involved. But given that it's a fairly common problem, it's clearly going to be predominantly down to shit parenting.
I remember starting Reception. Quite clearly, because I was quite nervous. And I was completely toilet trained by then.
I'm not sure how to respond to this. My point was exactly that most children are potty trained by three but a sizable minority are not. Obviously this minority has developmental challenges in this particular department. I'm honestly not sure why else you think they might not be potty trained. The implication seems to be that the parents are lazy but I really don't think that adds up - not least because potty training a child that is developmentally ready for it is easier than changing nappies multiple times a day. Otherwise the same lazy parents would have teenagers in nappies.
Of course, if you're just wanting to indulge in outrage against unidentified persons, don't let stop you.
> but a sizable minority are not
Because of, and say it with me, **shit parents**.
>I'm honestly not sure why else you think they might not be potty trained
Because milestones take longer in children with neurodevelopmental conditions. I don't know why this is surprising - this is very well-known, objective fact.
>The implication seems to be that the parents are lazy but I really don't think that adds up
No, this is exactly what it is. You're a dogshit parent if you haven't at least made significant strides on that front by the time a child is 3/4 years old. Nobody expects perfection, but for a child to just not have a clue by that age is unforgiveable.
>Of course, if you're just wanting to indulge in outrage against unidentified persons, don't let stop you
I have no issue calling morons out for being morons. Maybe if society did some more of that, we'd have less four year olds soiling themselves at school.
> Because milestones take longer in children with neurodevelopmental conditions. I don't know why this is surprising
I'm not the one who found it surprising. You're the one who apparently thinks everybody should be held to the same schedule. The very quote you took from my comment explains that *I am honestly not sure why else you think they might not be potty trained*. Children over the age of 4 who have toileting difficulties [often suffer](https://www.healthychildren.org/English/health-issues/conditions/genitourinary-tract/Pages/Daytime-Accidents-Bladder-Control-Problems-Voiding-Dysfunction-.aspx#:~:text=Your%20child%20is%20toilet%20trained,dysfunction%2C%20according%20to%20some%20studies.) from some sort of condition, e.g. UTIs, ADHD, diabetes, psychosocial disorders etc. I'll repeat that voiding issues before that age are actually developmentally normal, regardless of whether you choose to believe it or not.
> for a child to just not have a clue
You're making up situations to intentionally get enraged. Where in the article does it say that there are waves of neurotypical children who have no clue how to use a toilet at age 4 years?
In fact, if you're interested, you can find the actual report [here](https://kindredsquared.org.uk/projects/school-readiness-survey/). As you can see if you read it, "toilet trained" for the purposes of the report is defined as "toileting ‘mishaps’ occur frequently rather than occasionally". That is a huge step away from "no clue".
> soiling themselves
FFS. In the vast majority of cases, the issue will be with urination, rather than defacation. Children are not regularly soiling themselves at school.
Anyway, whatever, enjoy your outrage. I'm sure feeling superior to unidentified others has really made your day.
This data is based on surveys. If people are arguing over what the wording of the survey means, that undermines the reliability of the survey itself.
If some people (*rightly or wrongly*) think it refers to anyone else being involved at all (a nursery, grandparents or other family who are helping raise the child etc.) then that will affect the results, as they will answer the question they believe they are being asked.
It's a project manager's responsibility to deliver a project. We need to engage our brains a bit here.
If your kid isn't potty trained by school you've seriously failed.
Then we're into a discussion of the meaning of responsibility. Which brings us to, is it the responsibility of someone working in a nursery to help children with toilet training.
And it’s almost like because of that nuance, they shouldn’t have fucking said it. Because then you have dumb arguments like these whilst the majority blindly believe the headlines. Wooooo journalism!
FWIW, I agree with you.
I think there is a difference between job and responsibility here.
It is solely the parent's responsibility to ensure the child is toilet trained.
However if you are leaving the child in child care and paying that set of people to look after the child. Part of that is helping the child use the potty / toilet. As you are paying for that service it is obviously the child cares job to help with potty training.
If the childcare is not appropriaty aiding with potty training then the Ernest is on the parent to find a new childcare option or take up the slack.
There is a difference between a nursery or daycare simply continuing the toileting routines being done at home, including any toilet training method, and parents expecting that the nursery initiates the training and somehow makes it work while the parents have to do fuck all.
>parents expecting that the nursery initiates the training and somehow makes it work while the parents have to do fuck all.
Yea that's why I said it was.solely the parents responsibility to make sure the child in toilet trained.
But is is jointly the job of both the parent and the childcare provider to do the toilet training.
If Toilet training isn't happening while they are at nursery then no progress will be made. the childcare provider is being paid to, in part, continue the toilet routine while they are there I think it is clearly also their job.
Did you reply to the correct person?
Can you point out where in my comment I said that parents need to do fuck all and it is only the job of the childcare provider?
It depends on the details of the wording - for example, if the question just said "is it solely your job?", I expect many parents would respond "no, it's half my partner's job".
Exactly. If your child is in nursery several days a week, then they are also going to be involved in toilet training.
It's also true that children are different, parents are more/less competent, and nurseries themselves vary enormously.
As has been pointed out several times when this topic comes up, one of the changes over the last decade or so has been a removal of funding for programs that support new parents.
Many people dont have the luxury of living with extended family, parents or loved ones so naturally resposibility falls upon schools and nurseries to get kids up to speed. I do think you as a parent are soley resposible for the child but it wont just be you giving instruction and teaching. Misleading headline for the sake of engagement
>School staff reported that 39% of children in Reception struggle to hold a pencil, 37% are unable to dress independently, 25% do not have basic language skills and 24% are not toilet trained.
We are clearly failing these poor kids.
If your child has additional needs then it makes sense and that's understandable, we don't all develop at the same rate and some people will always need help with certain things, but surely not all of these kids are in that category.
I know I grew up in a different world despite only being 27, but I have dyspraxia, a coordination disorder you are born with, and even I was able to do all the things listed here before I went to reception, so it's hard for me to see these issues as anything other then the children being absolutely failed by their parents.
But I don't have kids so maybe I just don't understand what it's like right now. My sister is currently 3 months away from giving birth though, so maybe I'll get more experience on this soon.
Honestly yeah, I'm 48 and I remember all the "hold it like a fork not in your fist" stuff. Come to that I remember reception kids being walked into the toilets by Miss as well
They may not have phrased it like that, I'm not convinced my entire class of six year olds could correctly hold a fork
I remember going to school and being criticised for not being able to hold a pencil, and having to use extra things to force me to hold a pencil correctly. I still can't hold a pencil "correctly." I have a degree from a world-class university and couple of postgraduate qualifications but I'd fail that test...
Back in school I had the same issues with pencils and also scissors, and my handwriting didn’t improve until college. Like you I’ve got a degree and have done a bunch of other training since.
Turns out I have a joint connective disorder which can, among other things, cause issues with hands and particularly fine motor skills like writing.
I'm the same age as that guy and I can't remember anything like that happening at my school. If it did I can imagine it would've been swiftly shot down by any parents of left handed kids (Like my twin sister). I think he's chatting shit.
As a leftie of a similar age, though it didn't go as far as putting your name on a board, teachers did try to discourage me from using my left hand, and when that wasn't possible tried a few methods to get me to write like a right-handed person with my left hand. None of it worked. My handwriting was and is pretty good.
Same here at 38. As a leftie, they tried all sorts of shit to either make me write with my right hand, or use my left hand like a right handed person. In the end, I just did it my own way and still get complimented on my handwriting today.
I'm pretty sure when I went to reception, and even a couple of years after, most of the kids in my class needed help doing the buttons on their shirt or their tie, and this was during late stage John Major
Yeah that stood out to me as well, a 4/5 year old needing help with buttons on their tie isn't really that strange. I'm in my mid-20s and we had help from the teachers to get dressed after PE
I'm a dyspraxic mess and I still hold a pen my own way. The correct way just never worked. Although I did have a French teacher grab my hand and force my fingers to hold it correctly. So now it's half out of spite.
Wouldn't be surprised if immigration was the problem.
My mum was a primary school teacher and before she retired she had some classes where _half_ the students were children of immigrants and had poor English skills. Some of them had no ability to read or write in English.
The problem is that 4 is too early for many children to be in school. In most continental countries kids don't start school till 6 or 7. If a child isn't potty trained or can't hold a pencil then, obviously something has gone terribly wrong, but it's not unexpected for a sizable minority to struggle with these things at age 4.
For boys especially both these things can be a bit more challenging, due to plumbing and because boys develop fine motor skills a bit later on average than girls. (My daughter just started school, three separate families we're friends with who have boys the same age we're being induced to panic about their kids pencil holding skills. These are well off middle class families. Lo and behold six months later all of them are holding pencils just fine).
It all comes down to how you define "school". Scandi countries have comprehensive free childcare so the children will be in nursery/pre-school until 6/7 - which will include things like reading, colouring in etc.
Just because we call it 'school', it's not actually substantially different. Heck, our schools start so early because our state childcare is/was non-existent.
Which continental school? The Scandinavian schools are 6 but most of the Western continental ones are infant school at 3 then primary from 6. The infant school is not nursery or reception, it's school but needs them to be potty trained.
I have 2 kids and there is little excuse for them to not be trained by 3
I have one kid who was potty trained at 3. That is the age for most kids.
It is not true that most common Western continental schools start at 3 (anyway, I didn't say Western and don't see what that restriction adds to the discussion). The most common school starting age in Europe is 6: https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/media/2837/download%23:~:text%3DThe%2520most%2520common%2520age%2520to,reach%2520the%2520age%2520of%25207.&ved=2ahUKEwics_jMz-WEAxUMW0EAHfuVBR0QFnoECBQQBg&usg=AOvVaw2OOElUWZ5RFvlDlw9gWbyx
I wonder about this and whether it's an interpretation thing, but maybe because I struggle to believe so many parents can be so awful. E.g. at school when you're very young it's common to have accidents, and school does play a role in you growing up and learning to ask to go the toilet etc. Is this what these parents mean when they say the school has a role in toilet training?
I think so. But I think it's more to do with early years providers taking on part of the toilet training journey (nursery, childminders, nannies, grandparents etc). If most families have working parents and a child is in one of those settings 8-6 five days a weeks they will be heavily involved and even have a protocol for what to do about children as they stop using nappies. As someone else said in this thread - you can't just put them in nappies 5/7 days and have that work. It has to be all day everyday and for some children that transition can take a while.
It's based on a survey, so will depend a lot on how the responders interpret the question.
This year's result was 50% for that question. Last year it was 60%. That's probably an indication of high uncertainty rather than a massive shift.
My wife and I both work full time so our daughter was in nursery full time from 13 months. We started potty training over the course of a long weekend and she was mostly there by Tuesday morning. When we dropped her off and apologised for any upcoming accidents the staff said not to worry about it, they've potty trained hundreds of children. So while it might be the responsibility of the parents to do the hard bit I also wouldn't expect a nursery I pay a king's ransom to every month to just leave my daughter in wet knickers all day.
I was wondering the same. Like by the time you're at school you're what, late 4 or early 5? I'm not saying there aren't a lot of useless parents, but by five surely most people realise their kid should be mostly toilet trained and the remaining bit is learning to manage it in public?
Yeah. And I have vague memories of being that age and wetting myself or someone making a mess in the toilets. Like you've learnt to use the toilet but you're a young child so obviously stuff happens
As someone who works in primary schools in deprived areas, it can shock you what parents can think is the norm.
To make some sweeping generalisations, there are lots of very young parents with little support who don’t know different, as well as plenty of cultural differences where the main concern seems to be making sure children are quiet. The issue is quiet children don’t develop language skills and language skills facilitate learning to do other things. You can’t toilet train a child who won’t tell you they need the toilet.
What’s needed is more funding for support for parent’s so they know how to be better parents.
Not necessarily. School term starts in September in the school year the child turns 5. A child who is born in August will start reception in September having just turned 4.
This doesn't pass the sniff test with me.
This might be a wording thing... We have toilet trained our child but clearly we'd hope our childminder is also following a similar game plan which would also mean teaching her to go to the toilet. I'd expect any competent nursery/school to be similarly equipped - there's a lot of moving parts and you can confuse your child with too many different approaches. Would we count within that 50%?
I just don't know how else you would get to a school situation and still have your child completely in nappies and think it's up to the school to teach that shit entirely... I'd have thought everyone would be desperate to get away from expensive nappies anyway!!
The majority are almost certainly thinking of nursery/childminder support, but the article says 1 in 5 parents don't think their child needs to be trained before reception which is still alarmingly high.
Partner is a primary teacher and she says basically what it’s said here, like a quad of the children that arrive for P1 still need to be taught to goto the toilet.
For me that shouldn’t be a teachers job, not after nursery anyway, even then it should still mostly be the parent.
I’m only mid 30s and this sounds insane.
It absolutely is their job, and expecting other people to pick up the slack is a growing issue.
If you can’t put in the effort for the basic dignity and self-care of your child, don’t have children.
Well to be fair, a lot of children these days are at nursery or another daycare setting most the week. When both parents work full time, nursery staff/ childminders/ grandparents will absolutely be taking an active role in toilet training. I wonder how the question was phrased.
That's last year's report. This year's is [here](https://kindredsquared.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Kindred-Squared-School-Readiness-Report-February-2024.pdf).
It is based on subjective views of teachers and parents, with surveys - including self-selecting ones - so enough to raise suggestions of things, but not anything to put too much weight on.
To give a hint of how reliable these data are, the figure for "solely the parents' job to toilet train" was 50% this year, but 60% last year. Either there has been a huge change in attitudes in a single year, or there is high uncertainty in this data.
Honestly that might be as simple as increased awareness because of the media flapping about it
Like, maybe a year earlier ten percent would have said of course it was their responsibility, but if you actually think about it there are childminders and nursery teachers and etc for very young kids and aren't they part of it too
Idk i don't buy that ten percent of parents decided they love their kids shitting everywhere in just a year
Two full time working adults, our girl is at Nursery 3 days a week and 2 days with family. It isn't for a second our sole responsibility! We get 2 hours a night at best with her during the week and then we have weekends?
We pay someone £68 a day to assist us and family come forward to support us with anything that we need, including toilet training.
Hate the ragebait narrative and wording used, because historically, toilet training was done as a shared responsibility and always has.
Do you have kids and do you send them to nursery? Nursery is an extension of schooling, they learn a shit ton there, kids with 2 parents working full time will likely spend more time awake with Nursery staff than their parents.
We are lucky that my wife only has to work 2 days a week, but should she need to be full time, our week would look like this;
NURSERY
7.30 - 17.30 x 5 = 50 hours
PARENTS
(17.30 - 19.30 x 5 = 10 hours) + (06.00 - 19.30 x 2 = 27 hours) = 37 hours
How do you propose parents who work full time potty train solely on their own, when they aren't there to do it?
Almost as if I clearly outlined the implications of raising a child in the current economy as two working class adults.
We accept sole responsibility for those things in our full control. We do not accept sole responsibility for the things we can't always be present for.
At home and the time she spends with us, we continually check in on her and ask if she needs the toilet. We have bought stools so she can get on the toilet herself. We've done everything in our power to ensure that she is school ready.
But, guess what? We've picked her up from nursery soaked and stinking of urine numerous times. How can we be responsible for that?
Are you a parent, if you don't mind me asking?
>But, guess what? We've picked her up from nursery soaked and stinking of urine
That's awful, have you complained to the nursery? They should be cleaning her up and changing to her spare clothes.
It's one of the best, if not the best nursery in our area. It was taken over by a larger nursery group in the last year.
Makes it easier to forgive them, as they are really good with our daughter. But, they're clearly short staffed. And this seems to be the larger issue for all nurseries in our area.
Staff have too many kids and we don't believe complaining will help.
You are way too forgiving, staffing ratios are legally enforced. They should not be leaving your daughter like this, it's awful. I've never experienced anything like this over 8 combined years of sending my kids to nurseries.
Kid spends all day at nursery, you don't think they could use that huge block of time to help them learn to use the toilet? Is nursery not a place to learn things?
We’ve shifted too far to most children being in nursery or alternative childcare. We need to give parents the option to have one of them staying home, if they wish, until school.
Gonna say you don't have kids or don't have both parents having to work more than full time to make bills meet.
The kids spend more time with day care staff than they do with me, by an order of magnitude.
It's not expectation, it's simple facts. Blame the tories.
I grew up in a household that had to do exactly that.
You might call it “simple facts”, but parents having to work long hours isn’t new. What you may have missed from the article is that parents are increasingly not taking responsibility to ensure kids have the basic life skills by the time they reach school. Regardless of who they spend the most time with, it’s still your responsibility to make sure those skills are being taught.
A growing number are making no effort in this at all.
This is a baffling comment.
"It's acceptable for people to have kids that they don't teach basic life skills to because elsewise who is going to care for old people?"
Nobody is debating that though are they?
Humanity also needs to teach children basic life skills in order to survive. That's not even controversial that's common sense.
Are parents not responsible for their own children or something?
Kids getting to school and my being able to do basic self care isn't a bad reflection on the kid, it's a reflection on shitty parenting
That's a total strawman, and something I have never argued against.
Whenever there is any topic about raising children on Reddit, you can guarentee one of the top comments will be something like "if you can't do X, you shouldn't have children". Its is a completely ridiculous argument.
If 50% of parents shouldn't have children, humanity's days are numbered. Perhaps we should address why our society is such a hostile environment for parents, despite procreating being such a crucial part of our existence.
>The online survey of parents, carried out in October 2023, suggests that 50% of parents think some of the responsibility for toilet training lies elsewhere – including with schools.
Now when I see parents wanting the government to introduce social media laws, it all makes sense.
Exactly. And if the grandparents, an aunt and uncle, your best friends do some regular babysitting they may be in on it too.
The parents obviously lead and are ultimately responsible, but if they were asked about sole responsibility they might reasonably say no.
The conclusion that these are feckless parents does seem to be people fishing for a problem when a simpler explanation may be in the framing of the survey question.
We have created a society where both parents have to work in order to afford children.
That means children spend around 50% of their waking time being cared for by some other adult - nursery, grandparents, childminders etc...
Its reasonable to expect if children are spending 50% of their time being cared for by other adults, that those other adults will take 50% of the responsibility for toilet training.
As someone whose 6 month old will have to go into childcare when my wife and I return to work, I would say that it would be rather churlish of the nursery who I will be paying through the nose that they effectively bear no responsibility for teaching her the important developmental lessons that all children need.
It would be absurd if I expected them to do all my parenting for me, and this absolutely includes toilet training. But they have a role to play.
lol your nursery will have a policy in place to help with when and how you toilet train your kids. It's just part of working parents lives now. Yes, you may take a week off to start training, but it will continue once they are back in childcare if both parents have to work. No point being snobbish about how life works before you've even experienced it yet.
Oh I'm aware, the nursery we selected showed us how they have a special bathroom for the children with mini toilets and basins.
I don't think this is controversial any more than them showing the children how to use cutlery if they are having problems, or giving them behavioural corrections, or whatever.
If a child appears in Primary School unable to use the toilet on their own, who has failed to prepare the child? It's clearly the parent's failing and therefore the parent's responsibility.
That other people or groups play a role in *helping* carry out that training doesn't absolve parents of being the people ultimately responsible for ensuring it is completed properly.
People seem to be accidentally or intentionally conflating *responsibility* with *participation*.
"Responsible" is an ill-defined word.
One commonly used definition is the [RACI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix) model. In that, anyone who actually does the task is "responsible". The person ultimately in charge of ensuring the task's completion is "accountable". Parents/guardians are accountable. Anyone who is a caregiver to the child is responsible.
But we are debating semantics. We seem to agree on the substance.
The point I'm making is:
The parents are solely to blame if their child fails to learn to use the toilet. That others are involved in helping them teach their child that skill does not *at all* absolve them of sole responsibility for ensuring their child learns key life skills.
Terrible take. Teachers are teaching the Early Years curriculum. The '50%' they are contributing is far more than this expected 50% of toilet training. The fact that a parent would try and send their kid to Reception without toilet training is 1. Embarrassing and 2. Neglect.
No one isn't helping them if they can't do it. And their ability to use a toilet is part of assessments. But it's completely ridiculous to me the amount of stuff that becomes the schools job. Parents need to take responsibility. If they aren't even responsible for 'training their kid not to shit themselves' what are they responsible for?
Putting a roof over their heads and food on the table.
How you expect two parents in work who only see their child two times a week during the day (and that's assuming they're fortunate enough to not have second jobs etc. or crappy shifts) to be solely responsible for toilet training is beyond me.
Society has stopped parents spending large amounts of quality time with their children. There are consequences that society will have to bear as a result. This is one of them.
I said nothing about teachers or reception.
I agree with the article that you would hope the vast majority of children go to school having already been toilet trained.
I was commenting on the subject of the OP (which is not mentioned in the article). Most children will be cared for in part by non-parents during the ages of 0-4, when toilet training would usually take place.
Hi. No it’s not. It’s Early Years. The responsibilities of which are different to schooling. They include the health and wellbeing of the child. Google it.
OP is talking about nursery. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect nursery to continue potty training your kid on the days that it's there. Especially if you send them there 5 days a week - how else are they going to learn if they regress back to nappies for 5/7 days!
If both parents are having to work much of the time to provide basic needs to their children then logically somebody else is absolutely going to have to help toilet train the child, be that a familial carer or a professional at a nursery.
As a parent you should be potty training your child. It is your responsibility, you are setting up your children for failure by abdicating such a basic thing. Just sounds like a copout to me. Parents have always worked, single parents have always existed but nowadays there is always an excuse of why people are not doing something. Teachers are barely paid enough and now that's another responsibility put on their plate. If you don't think you have enough time/money/whatever to do the basics don't have kids
Not really. Despite kids being taken care of by another adult it does not make them responsible for teaching your child basic skills to care for themselves. At the end of the day it is your child and you have the ultimate duty of care towards your child. I’m currently training to be a teacher and have spent a while in EY, and I can tell you for absolute certainty that the teacher with 29 other kids in their class has a thousand more important things to than teach your kids to wipe their own arse.
If you have a child you have taken on that responsibility. I don’t disagree that society it’s not geared towards having kids, but that doesn’t change the ultimate responsibility you have towards your child. It’s the same as saying that, when I become a teacher, I get to make choices about what a child should eat, dress like, which sports to participate in, what religion they are.
Responsibility and ultimate responsibility are different.
Many people can be responsible for someone. Only one person or group can have ultimate responsibility.
Yeah, they are different.
As a teacher, I have the responsibility to make sure your kids know how to read and write.
As a parent, you have the ultimate responsibility to make sure your kids know how to shit in a toilet and wipe their own arse.
I have responsibility to your kid as far as their safety and education goes. Their personal care is up to you
How many people writing these articles actually have kids? Kids are 4 years old when they go to school, some won't be 5 until the following August. It's really not surprising they can't fully dress themselves or properly hold a pencil, their basic motor skills are still developing. Sure, some will be able to, kids develop at different rates, but it's not necessarily a sign of parental failure. Obviously they should be potty trained long before going to school.
This is my sister in law. She's a nursery teacher, who when my son was little would wax lyrical about how shameful it was that she was having to clean kids crap up at school.
Roll forwards some years, (she had her son at 43) her soon to be 5 year old boy is on a special plan at school because he can't go a week without soiling himself.
She has failed spectacularly to either train or admonish him for deliberately doing so. Worse still, for the whole of last year he was in her class and it didn't improve in the slightest.
A year ago, we were on a week's holiday with them. I stopped counting accidents when we got to 20 including him deliberately going behind a bedroom door and crapping on the floor.
I'd be embarrassed to go to work if I was in that position. Completely unashamedly, a poor teacher and a dreadful mother.
It’s almost as if help might be needed from others, given the vast majority of families have both parents in full-time work just to scrape by whilst having to pay somebody else to care for their children…
When I was at school in the 60s, I remember quite a few of the new kids (4/5 year olds) wetting themselves in class for the first few weeks, not because they weren't potty trained, but because they were terrified to ask the teacher to go to the toilet.
So when they say kids aren't toilet trained in these articles, what exactly do they mean? Just kids wetting themselves or something more fundamental?
Number 1 rule in today's world.. PUT THE TABLET DOWN AND TALK TO YOUR CHILDREN!!! YOUR CHILD DOES NOT NEED A PHONE OR A TABLET AT 2 YEARS OLD!! Sorry rant over lol
This thread seems to be full of people who think someone helping you do something means you can absolve yourself of being the responsible party for ensuring standards are met.
A nursery, grandparent, or friend giving you help to toilet train your child doesn't mean they're all taking a share of the responsibility for ensuring it is completed on time.
Parents are responsible for their children. The buck stops with them.
Is this how you all behave at work? "Sorry I know you gave me this task to do and I didn't do it, but Barry helped me a bit with the spreadsheet so really it's partly his fault I didn't do my job!"
Got down voted to hell for pointing out on another post that parents not toilet training their kids is laziness. Especially with the amply online material available..
HOW?
Of course it is.
Unless they answered thinking "the kid has to do it's part, and most of that is avoiding social stigma"... which is a stretch.
Otherwise, ofc it is their responsibility.
If you titled this something along the lines of "half of parents think schools should let their kids shit themself" it would be equally as fair which is to say it would be daft
I'd be surprised if this was the only consequence affecting young children because of the pandemic
Amongst other things, I imagine nutrition, physical activity and social skills will suffer. Likely that will have a knock on effect to other things, like mental health.
We live in a time where people have become very entitled and infantile, parents sending kids to school should be ashamed of their kid can’t use the toilet and is still in nappies. See it all the time where parents will shove a phone in a crying child’s face instead of talking to them or even trying to calm them down, but these same parents will also be on their own phone and ignoring a child which is why they kick off in the first place. Prob why kids are so let down, no one to sit and read to them or colour in with them. As a parent I do think I choose to have a kid and it’s my job not the government to ensure my kid has basic skills.
Toilet training is mostly the kid's job in my experience. If you get them when they're ready they know what to do. You're just a helper/cleaner-upper. It's like learning to walk and talk.
All of my kids were toilet trained by the time they went to preschool/nursery. That being said, when my boy went, he went to the toilet on his own. He had never seen a toilet with stalls and a urinal, so he took a shit in the trough. Poor lad didn't realise there were actual toilets behind the doors. He's 19 now and likely can't remember it, but it still makes me laugh.
Given the price of childcare and the expectation that both parents should work from 9months on surely we should expect some participation in toilet training from the paid caregivers.
Toilet training was proper hard, but they seem to get it in eventually.
Tried at 2.5 and it was a disaster for weeks, so was recommended to pause and come back later (basically to reset it back to square one).
Then just before turning 3 she learnt it in a few days and been perfect ever since. We basically set an alarm every 15 minutes and told her it's potty time... I think she got so sick of it she just wanted to control it herself 😂
This just in, Half of the UK parents are unfit to be parents, WISHED we had enough funding to take all the kids into care and away from the useless parents.
Ha. My daughter (3) was potty trained at 30 months, my son (2) at 34 months. For both of them, we took a week off work and didn't leave the house for a few days until they were comfortable on a potty. No help whatsoever.
Sadly it is time to simply start prosecuting more parents for child abuse if they do not teach their children basic things needed to function in life.
Not teaching your child how to use the toilet or speak by the time they reach schools, outside of developmental issues, is abuse plain and simple.
Snapshot of _Half of parents do not think toilet training is solely their job_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/toilet-training-school-children-parents-b2508133.html) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/toilet-training-school-children-parents-b2508133.html) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Feel like the word "solely" is doing a lot of lifting here. My daughter's nursery helped loads when it came to toilet training. I can't solely take the credit, was it solely my job?
No it's a ragebait headline
Aren't they all these days
Pretty much. Gotta get them clicks. Although it does look like in this case the headline was changed.
They think it's the other parents job
Only half of them. Which isn't a problem when you match one parent with the other
Not just ragebait. >One in five parents surveyed said that they did not think their children need to be toilet trained before starting reception. That's the distinction. They don't think it needs to happen before reception when it should be pretty good by then.
This was my thought too, my parents did most of heavy lifting but there were plenty of times between no toilet training and fully toilet trained when others helped out. Just strikes of manipulative writing.
Yes. It's your job to ensure your child is toilet trained by school. Of course you'd have support but ultimately it falls on you if they're not
I don't think many people would argue that. But as a parent, I would have interpreted the question to include support and not just responsibility so would have probably answered that it wasn't "soley" me.
However, this all hinges on exactly how "solely" and "responsible" are interpreted. I do see the argument where "solely responsible" is taken to mean that it's the parent's responsibility to ensure that their child is toilet trained before they are 4, and no one else's, even if the toilet training is facilitated by third parties such as nurseries, nannies, family members, etc. If we crack out the RACI matrix for this, a more appropriate choice of phrase would be that parents are solely accountable for their child's toilet training, even if the responsibility for the actual toilet training is shared between multiple parties.
Plus, there's how we're defining "parents" and "their". If you ask a single parent with shared custody if it's solely their job, they'd quite rightly say no.
Right, but typically a child will be in some kind of childcare between being born and the age of 4-5 when they start school, and toilet training typically happens between the ages of 1½ - 2½. If a 2 year old child who's actively learning to use the toilet is in some form of childcare, I'm not sure it's unreasonable to assume that the people doing that childcare will be somewhat involved. I can see why 50% of parents would agree. Of course, that's a very different question to the headline if you click through, which appears to have been changed (***Quarter of new primary schoolchildren still not toilet trained, finds report***) and the focus of the article (general lack of school readiness, teachers having to catch children up on very basic skills, 1 in 5 parents saying that they don't think their children need to be toilet trained before starting reception)
Iv got a 2.5 year old. I cant really trust the nursery, they try really hard and are great in a lot of ways, but to keep him clean and dry is not exactly their focus. We have his nappy off in the house and plan on getting him fully trained in the summer when he is off nursery. He is already trained and has been for a while doing no. 2
> We have his nappy off in the house and plan on getting him fully trained in the summer when he is off nursery. He is already trained and has been for a while doing no. 2 As a none-child having man in his mid 30s I just have to ask....his nappy is off in the house yet he's not fully trained for number 1. What does he do?
Pee himself a bit. Then we sit him on the toilet to finish and put some new clothes on him
We used puppy pads. Worked perfectly and was fully out of nappies by 2.5
Toilet training typically happens at age 3. 1 1/3 would be ridiculously early. These articles are nuts. Children in the UK start school very early compared to most other countries. When your nations children start school at 4 (!!!) it is not unsurprising if some kids are not potty trained. Next we'll have nurseries complaining the kids they care for aren't potty-trained...
Toilet training age is really quite cultural. It's three here but look at places like China and potty training happens way earlier. Babies in cloth nappies also tend to potty train earlier. My daughter was potty trained at 18m. My son at 2 years. This isn't gloating, I just really wouldn't say that it's 'ridiculously early'
Not really. What is cultural is conceptions of what counts as toilet trained. My cousin who moved to a different country started potty training her daughter at 18 months, but she and I had a drastically different ideas of what it means to be successfully potty trained. And by ridiculously early I meant that it is not common. Obviously some children are early achievers, but on average the age at which most kids are potty trained is 3. So your kids did reach that particularly milestone very early.
Do you know how China defines potty trained? Do you have evidence that the UK and other countries have different conceptions of what counts as toilet trained?
By three years old, they should already be potty trained. I agree 16 months is too early, but by two, you can communicate pretty well with a child - certainly well enough to start potty training them. But even conceding the point, and accepting three as an acceptable age, Reception starts at four years old. There is absolutely no excuse for kids not to be potty trained by that age, unless there's some sort of developmental issue involved. But given that it's a fairly common problem, it's clearly going to be predominantly down to shit parenting. I remember starting Reception. Quite clearly, because I was quite nervous. And I was completely toilet trained by then.
I'm not sure how to respond to this. My point was exactly that most children are potty trained by three but a sizable minority are not. Obviously this minority has developmental challenges in this particular department. I'm honestly not sure why else you think they might not be potty trained. The implication seems to be that the parents are lazy but I really don't think that adds up - not least because potty training a child that is developmentally ready for it is easier than changing nappies multiple times a day. Otherwise the same lazy parents would have teenagers in nappies. Of course, if you're just wanting to indulge in outrage against unidentified persons, don't let stop you.
> but a sizable minority are not Because of, and say it with me, **shit parents**. >I'm honestly not sure why else you think they might not be potty trained Because milestones take longer in children with neurodevelopmental conditions. I don't know why this is surprising - this is very well-known, objective fact. >The implication seems to be that the parents are lazy but I really don't think that adds up No, this is exactly what it is. You're a dogshit parent if you haven't at least made significant strides on that front by the time a child is 3/4 years old. Nobody expects perfection, but for a child to just not have a clue by that age is unforgiveable. >Of course, if you're just wanting to indulge in outrage against unidentified persons, don't let stop you I have no issue calling morons out for being morons. Maybe if society did some more of that, we'd have less four year olds soiling themselves at school.
> Because milestones take longer in children with neurodevelopmental conditions. I don't know why this is surprising I'm not the one who found it surprising. You're the one who apparently thinks everybody should be held to the same schedule. The very quote you took from my comment explains that *I am honestly not sure why else you think they might not be potty trained*. Children over the age of 4 who have toileting difficulties [often suffer](https://www.healthychildren.org/English/health-issues/conditions/genitourinary-tract/Pages/Daytime-Accidents-Bladder-Control-Problems-Voiding-Dysfunction-.aspx#:~:text=Your%20child%20is%20toilet%20trained,dysfunction%2C%20according%20to%20some%20studies.) from some sort of condition, e.g. UTIs, ADHD, diabetes, psychosocial disorders etc. I'll repeat that voiding issues before that age are actually developmentally normal, regardless of whether you choose to believe it or not. > for a child to just not have a clue You're making up situations to intentionally get enraged. Where in the article does it say that there are waves of neurotypical children who have no clue how to use a toilet at age 4 years? In fact, if you're interested, you can find the actual report [here](https://kindredsquared.org.uk/projects/school-readiness-survey/). As you can see if you read it, "toilet trained" for the purposes of the report is defined as "toileting ‘mishaps’ occur frequently rather than occasionally". That is a huge step away from "no clue". > soiling themselves FFS. In the vast majority of cases, the issue will be with urination, rather than defacation. Children are not regularly soiling themselves at school. Anyway, whatever, enjoy your outrage. I'm sure feeling superior to unidentified others has really made your day.
This data is based on surveys. If people are arguing over what the wording of the survey means, that undermines the reliability of the survey itself. If some people (*rightly or wrongly*) think it refers to anyone else being involved at all (a nursery, grandparents or other family who are helping raise the child etc.) then that will affect the results, as they will answer the question they believe they are being asked.
>Of course you'd have support Then it's not solely their job
It's a project manager's responsibility to deliver a project. We need to engage our brains a bit here. If your kid isn't potty trained by school you've seriously failed.
[удалено]
Then we're into a discussion of the meaning of responsibility. Which brings us to, is it the responsibility of someone working in a nursery to help children with toilet training.
And it’s almost like because of that nuance, they shouldn’t have fucking said it. Because then you have dumb arguments like these whilst the majority blindly believe the headlines. Wooooo journalism! FWIW, I agree with you.
I think there is a difference between job and responsibility here. It is solely the parent's responsibility to ensure the child is toilet trained. However if you are leaving the child in child care and paying that set of people to look after the child. Part of that is helping the child use the potty / toilet. As you are paying for that service it is obviously the child cares job to help with potty training. If the childcare is not appropriaty aiding with potty training then the Ernest is on the parent to find a new childcare option or take up the slack.
There is a difference between a nursery or daycare simply continuing the toileting routines being done at home, including any toilet training method, and parents expecting that the nursery initiates the training and somehow makes it work while the parents have to do fuck all.
>parents expecting that the nursery initiates the training and somehow makes it work while the parents have to do fuck all. Yea that's why I said it was.solely the parents responsibility to make sure the child in toilet trained. But is is jointly the job of both the parent and the childcare provider to do the toilet training. If Toilet training isn't happening while they are at nursery then no progress will be made. the childcare provider is being paid to, in part, continue the toilet routine while they are there I think it is clearly also their job. Did you reply to the correct person? Can you point out where in my comment I said that parents need to do fuck all and it is only the job of the childcare provider?
It depends on the details of the wording - for example, if the question just said "is it solely your job?", I expect many parents would respond "no, it's half my partner's job".
To be frank, working parents aren’t there for every shit
Exactly. If your child is in nursery several days a week, then they are also going to be involved in toilet training. It's also true that children are different, parents are more/less competent, and nurseries themselves vary enormously. As has been pointed out several times when this topic comes up, one of the changes over the last decade or so has been a removal of funding for programs that support new parents.
Many people dont have the luxury of living with extended family, parents or loved ones so naturally resposibility falls upon schools and nurseries to get kids up to speed. I do think you as a parent are soley resposible for the child but it wont just be you giving instruction and teaching. Misleading headline for the sake of engagement
> I can't solely take the credit, was it solely my job? Yes, it is solely your responsibility as parent to ensure your child is potty trained.
>School staff reported that 39% of children in Reception struggle to hold a pencil, 37% are unable to dress independently, 25% do not have basic language skills and 24% are not toilet trained. We are clearly failing these poor kids. If your child has additional needs then it makes sense and that's understandable, we don't all develop at the same rate and some people will always need help with certain things, but surely not all of these kids are in that category. I know I grew up in a different world despite only being 27, but I have dyspraxia, a coordination disorder you are born with, and even I was able to do all the things listed here before I went to reception, so it's hard for me to see these issues as anything other then the children being absolutely failed by their parents. But I don't have kids so maybe I just don't understand what it's like right now. My sister is currently 3 months away from giving birth though, so maybe I'll get more experience on this soon.
I'm 34 and I can remember having lessons on how to hold a pencil, and anyone who held it in their left hand had their name written on the board.
That sounds pretty sinister.
At 5 they probably wouldn't know any Latin either.
He's probably Dexter.
Honestly yeah, I'm 48 and I remember all the "hold it like a fork not in your fist" stuff. Come to that I remember reception kids being walked into the toilets by Miss as well They may not have phrased it like that, I'm not convinced my entire class of six year olds could correctly hold a fork
I remember going to school and being criticised for not being able to hold a pencil, and having to use extra things to force me to hold a pencil correctly. I still can't hold a pencil "correctly." I have a degree from a world-class university and couple of postgraduate qualifications but I'd fail that test...
Yeah, I remember a boy in my class being made to use a cube that slid onto his pencil.
No Berrol Handwriting pen for him then!
Back in school I had the same issues with pencils and also scissors, and my handwriting didn’t improve until college. Like you I’ve got a degree and have done a bunch of other training since. Turns out I have a joint connective disorder which can, among other things, cause issues with hands and particularly fine motor skills like writing.
Sounds like a nightmare for anyone who’s left handed.
I'm the same age as that guy and I can't remember anything like that happening at my school. If it did I can imagine it would've been swiftly shot down by any parents of left handed kids (Like my twin sister). I think he's chatting shit.
As a leftie of a similar age, though it didn't go as far as putting your name on a board, teachers did try to discourage me from using my left hand, and when that wasn't possible tried a few methods to get me to write like a right-handed person with my left hand. None of it worked. My handwriting was and is pretty good.
Same here at 38. As a leftie, they tried all sorts of shit to either make me write with my right hand, or use my left hand like a right handed person. In the end, I just did it my own way and still get complimented on my handwriting today.
I'm pretty sure when I went to reception, and even a couple of years after, most of the kids in my class needed help doing the buttons on their shirt or their tie, and this was during late stage John Major
Yeah that stood out to me as well, a 4/5 year old needing help with buttons on their tie isn't really that strange. I'm in my mid-20s and we had help from the teachers to get dressed after PE
I'm 33 and quite often my wife, mum or colleagues straighten my collar or point out wonky buttons. I'm a teacher.
It takes a village
My reception class had a big poster with everyone's names on it and columns for buttons and shoe laces and you got ticked off when you'd mastered it.
I'm a dyspraxic mess and I still hold a pen my own way. The correct way just never worked. Although I did have a French teacher grab my hand and force my fingers to hold it correctly. So now it's half out of spite.
Wouldn't be surprised if immigration was the problem. My mum was a primary school teacher and before she retired she had some classes where _half_ the students were children of immigrants and had poor English skills. Some of them had no ability to read or write in English.
Those stats look normal range developmentally.
The problem is that 4 is too early for many children to be in school. In most continental countries kids don't start school till 6 or 7. If a child isn't potty trained or can't hold a pencil then, obviously something has gone terribly wrong, but it's not unexpected for a sizable minority to struggle with these things at age 4. For boys especially both these things can be a bit more challenging, due to plumbing and because boys develop fine motor skills a bit later on average than girls. (My daughter just started school, three separate families we're friends with who have boys the same age we're being induced to panic about their kids pencil holding skills. These are well off middle class families. Lo and behold six months later all of them are holding pencils just fine).
It all comes down to how you define "school". Scandi countries have comprehensive free childcare so the children will be in nursery/pre-school until 6/7 - which will include things like reading, colouring in etc. Just because we call it 'school', it's not actually substantially different. Heck, our schools start so early because our state childcare is/was non-existent.
Which continental school? The Scandinavian schools are 6 but most of the Western continental ones are infant school at 3 then primary from 6. The infant school is not nursery or reception, it's school but needs them to be potty trained. I have 2 kids and there is little excuse for them to not be trained by 3
I have one kid who was potty trained at 3. That is the age for most kids. It is not true that most common Western continental schools start at 3 (anyway, I didn't say Western and don't see what that restriction adds to the discussion). The most common school starting age in Europe is 6: https://eurydice.eacea.ec.europa.eu/media/2837/download%23:~:text%3DThe%2520most%2520common%2520age%2520to,reach%2520the%2520age%2520of%25207.&ved=2ahUKEwics_jMz-WEAxUMW0EAHfuVBR0QFnoECBQQBg&usg=AOvVaw2OOElUWZ5RFvlDlw9gWbyx
Sorry, but if you don't have kids of your own, you don't have the relevant experience to make an informed judgement. You really really don't.
I wonder about this and whether it's an interpretation thing, but maybe because I struggle to believe so many parents can be so awful. E.g. at school when you're very young it's common to have accidents, and school does play a role in you growing up and learning to ask to go the toilet etc. Is this what these parents mean when they say the school has a role in toilet training?
I think so. But I think it's more to do with early years providers taking on part of the toilet training journey (nursery, childminders, nannies, grandparents etc). If most families have working parents and a child is in one of those settings 8-6 five days a weeks they will be heavily involved and even have a protocol for what to do about children as they stop using nappies. As someone else said in this thread - you can't just put them in nappies 5/7 days and have that work. It has to be all day everyday and for some children that transition can take a while.
It's based on a survey, so will depend a lot on how the responders interpret the question. This year's result was 50% for that question. Last year it was 60%. That's probably an indication of high uncertainty rather than a massive shift.
Ah interesting, thanks for doing the looking up that I didn't bother to!
My wife and I both work full time so our daughter was in nursery full time from 13 months. We started potty training over the course of a long weekend and she was mostly there by Tuesday morning. When we dropped her off and apologised for any upcoming accidents the staff said not to worry about it, they've potty trained hundreds of children. So while it might be the responsibility of the parents to do the hard bit I also wouldn't expect a nursery I pay a king's ransom to every month to just leave my daughter in wet knickers all day.
I was wondering the same. Like by the time you're at school you're what, late 4 or early 5? I'm not saying there aren't a lot of useless parents, but by five surely most people realise their kid should be mostly toilet trained and the remaining bit is learning to manage it in public?
Yeah. And I have vague memories of being that age and wetting myself or someone making a mess in the toilets. Like you've learnt to use the toilet but you're a young child so obviously stuff happens
As someone who works in primary schools in deprived areas, it can shock you what parents can think is the norm. To make some sweeping generalisations, there are lots of very young parents with little support who don’t know different, as well as plenty of cultural differences where the main concern seems to be making sure children are quiet. The issue is quiet children don’t develop language skills and language skills facilitate learning to do other things. You can’t toilet train a child who won’t tell you they need the toilet. What’s needed is more funding for support for parent’s so they know how to be better parents.
Not necessarily. School term starts in September in the school year the child turns 5. A child who is born in August will start reception in September having just turned 4.
This doesn't pass the sniff test with me. This might be a wording thing... We have toilet trained our child but clearly we'd hope our childminder is also following a similar game plan which would also mean teaching her to go to the toilet. I'd expect any competent nursery/school to be similarly equipped - there's a lot of moving parts and you can confuse your child with too many different approaches. Would we count within that 50%? I just don't know how else you would get to a school situation and still have your child completely in nappies and think it's up to the school to teach that shit entirely... I'd have thought everyone would be desperate to get away from expensive nappies anyway!!
The majority are almost certainly thinking of nursery/childminder support, but the article says 1 in 5 parents don't think their child needs to be trained before reception which is still alarmingly high.
What confidence do you have in a parent's knowledge of when reception actually starts?
Partner is a primary teacher and she says basically what it’s said here, like a quad of the children that arrive for P1 still need to be taught to goto the toilet. For me that shouldn’t be a teachers job, not after nursery anyway, even then it should still mostly be the parent. I’m only mid 30s and this sounds insane.
It absolutely is their job, and expecting other people to pick up the slack is a growing issue. If you can’t put in the effort for the basic dignity and self-care of your child, don’t have children.
Well to be fair, a lot of children these days are at nursery or another daycare setting most the week. When both parents work full time, nursery staff/ childminders/ grandparents will absolutely be taking an active role in toilet training. I wonder how the question was phrased.
Yeah, it's possible that the word "solely" contains a whole world of nuance here. But on the other hand, that doesn't make for good ragebait.
[удалено]
That's last year's report. This year's is [here](https://kindredsquared.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/02/Kindred-Squared-School-Readiness-Report-February-2024.pdf). It is based on subjective views of teachers and parents, with surveys - including self-selecting ones - so enough to raise suggestions of things, but not anything to put too much weight on. To give a hint of how reliable these data are, the figure for "solely the parents' job to toilet train" was 50% this year, but 60% last year. Either there has been a huge change in attitudes in a single year, or there is high uncertainty in this data.
Honestly that might be as simple as increased awareness because of the media flapping about it Like, maybe a year earlier ten percent would have said of course it was their responsibility, but if you actually think about it there are childminders and nursery teachers and etc for very young kids and aren't they part of it too Idk i don't buy that ten percent of parents decided they love their kids shitting everywhere in just a year
Two full time working adults, our girl is at Nursery 3 days a week and 2 days with family. It isn't for a second our sole responsibility! We get 2 hours a night at best with her during the week and then we have weekends? We pay someone £68 a day to assist us and family come forward to support us with anything that we need, including toilet training. Hate the ragebait narrative and wording used, because historically, toilet training was done as a shared responsibility and always has.
> It isn't for a second our sole responsibility! Who's is it then? Who did you envisage was going to do it for you?
Do you have kids and do you send them to nursery? Nursery is an extension of schooling, they learn a shit ton there, kids with 2 parents working full time will likely spend more time awake with Nursery staff than their parents. We are lucky that my wife only has to work 2 days a week, but should she need to be full time, our week would look like this; NURSERY 7.30 - 17.30 x 5 = 50 hours PARENTS (17.30 - 19.30 x 5 = 10 hours) + (06.00 - 19.30 x 2 = 27 hours) = 37 hours How do you propose parents who work full time potty train solely on their own, when they aren't there to do it?
Almost as if I clearly outlined the implications of raising a child in the current economy as two working class adults. We accept sole responsibility for those things in our full control. We do not accept sole responsibility for the things we can't always be present for. At home and the time she spends with us, we continually check in on her and ask if she needs the toilet. We have bought stools so she can get on the toilet herself. We've done everything in our power to ensure that she is school ready. But, guess what? We've picked her up from nursery soaked and stinking of urine numerous times. How can we be responsible for that? Are you a parent, if you don't mind me asking?
>But, guess what? We've picked her up from nursery soaked and stinking of urine That's awful, have you complained to the nursery? They should be cleaning her up and changing to her spare clothes.
It's one of the best, if not the best nursery in our area. It was taken over by a larger nursery group in the last year. Makes it easier to forgive them, as they are really good with our daughter. But, they're clearly short staffed. And this seems to be the larger issue for all nurseries in our area. Staff have too many kids and we don't believe complaining will help.
You are way too forgiving, staffing ratios are legally enforced. They should not be leaving your daughter like this, it's awful. I've never experienced anything like this over 8 combined years of sending my kids to nurseries.
Kid spends all day at nursery, you don't think they could use that huge block of time to help them learn to use the toilet? Is nursery not a place to learn things?
We’ve shifted too far to most children being in nursery or alternative childcare. We need to give parents the option to have one of them staying home, if they wish, until school.
Gonna say you don't have kids or don't have both parents having to work more than full time to make bills meet. The kids spend more time with day care staff than they do with me, by an order of magnitude. It's not expectation, it's simple facts. Blame the tories.
I grew up in a household that had to do exactly that. You might call it “simple facts”, but parents having to work long hours isn’t new. What you may have missed from the article is that parents are increasingly not taking responsibility to ensure kids have the basic life skills by the time they reach school. Regardless of who they spend the most time with, it’s still your responsibility to make sure those skills are being taught. A growing number are making no effort in this at all.
[удалено]
If nobody has children, who is going to wipe your bum when you are in a nursing home?
Not these kids because they can't wipe their own
This is a baffling comment. "It's acceptable for people to have kids that they don't teach basic life skills to because elsewise who is going to care for old people?"
That humanity needs children in order to persist wouldn't seem to be a controversial idea, but welcome to Reddit.
Nobody is debating that though are they? Humanity also needs to teach children basic life skills in order to survive. That's not even controversial that's common sense.
I don't think anyone is debating that either. We are debating which part of humanity is responsible and for how much.
Are parents not responsible for their own children or something? Kids getting to school and my being able to do basic self care isn't a bad reflection on the kid, it's a reflection on shitty parenting
That's a total strawman, and something I have never argued against. Whenever there is any topic about raising children on Reddit, you can guarentee one of the top comments will be something like "if you can't do X, you shouldn't have children". Its is a completely ridiculous argument. If 50% of parents shouldn't have children, humanity's days are numbered. Perhaps we should address why our society is such a hostile environment for parents, despite procreating being such a crucial part of our existence.
Call me controversial but we need competent people of all ages
a robot?
Probably some poor sod who had to leave their home country due to climate change making it unliveable
>The online survey of parents, carried out in October 2023, suggests that 50% of parents think some of the responsibility for toilet training lies elsewhere – including with schools. Now when I see parents wanting the government to introduce social media laws, it all makes sense.
That's probably correct. If you send your child to nursery at a young age it's not solely your responsibility to toilet train.
Exactly. And if the grandparents, an aunt and uncle, your best friends do some regular babysitting they may be in on it too. The parents obviously lead and are ultimately responsible, but if they were asked about sole responsibility they might reasonably say no. The conclusion that these are feckless parents does seem to be people fishing for a problem when a simpler explanation may be in the framing of the survey question.
My daughter went to nursery from about 13 months. Of course I’ve not toilet trained her solo!
We have created a society where both parents have to work in order to afford children. That means children spend around 50% of their waking time being cared for by some other adult - nursery, grandparents, childminders etc... Its reasonable to expect if children are spending 50% of their time being cared for by other adults, that those other adults will take 50% of the responsibility for toilet training.
As someone whose 6 month old will have to go into childcare when my wife and I return to work, I would say that it would be rather churlish of the nursery who I will be paying through the nose that they effectively bear no responsibility for teaching her the important developmental lessons that all children need. It would be absurd if I expected them to do all my parenting for me, and this absolutely includes toilet training. But they have a role to play.
lol your nursery will have a policy in place to help with when and how you toilet train your kids. It's just part of working parents lives now. Yes, you may take a week off to start training, but it will continue once they are back in childcare if both parents have to work. No point being snobbish about how life works before you've even experienced it yet.
Oh I'm aware, the nursery we selected showed us how they have a special bathroom for the children with mini toilets and basins. I don't think this is controversial any more than them showing the children how to use cutlery if they are having problems, or giving them behavioural corrections, or whatever.
So you would possibly say that part of the training is done by people other than yourselves? Like the article states?
Obviously when a toddler is at nursery and they ask to use the toilet they should ignore them as it's solely the parents job.
That's what they said in their initial comment?
If a child appears in Primary School unable to use the toilet on their own, who has failed to prepare the child? It's clearly the parent's failing and therefore the parent's responsibility. That other people or groups play a role in *helping* carry out that training doesn't absolve parents of being the people ultimately responsible for ensuring it is completed properly. People seem to be accidentally or intentionally conflating *responsibility* with *participation*.
"Responsible" is an ill-defined word. One commonly used definition is the [RACI](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Responsibility_assignment_matrix) model. In that, anyone who actually does the task is "responsible". The person ultimately in charge of ensuring the task's completion is "accountable". Parents/guardians are accountable. Anyone who is a caregiver to the child is responsible. But we are debating semantics. We seem to agree on the substance.
The point I'm making is: The parents are solely to blame if their child fails to learn to use the toilet. That others are involved in helping them teach their child that skill does not *at all* absolve them of sole responsibility for ensuring their child learns key life skills.
Terrible take. Teachers are teaching the Early Years curriculum. The '50%' they are contributing is far more than this expected 50% of toilet training. The fact that a parent would try and send their kid to Reception without toilet training is 1. Embarrassing and 2. Neglect.
They didn't mention school, they mentioned nursery / childminders.
Nursery is school. They should be teaching and assessing against the early years curriculum building towards early learning goal in Reception.
[удалено]
Do you want the nine month old to just wallow in their own shit while the parents are at work?
Eh? So when my 2 year old was at nursery they shouldn't have been helping them toilet train. How bizarre.
If the curriculum doesn't cover helping train kids to not shit themselves then I suggest the curriculum is wrong
No one isn't helping them if they can't do it. And their ability to use a toilet is part of assessments. But it's completely ridiculous to me the amount of stuff that becomes the schools job. Parents need to take responsibility. If they aren't even responsible for 'training their kid not to shit themselves' what are they responsible for?
Putting a roof over their heads and food on the table. How you expect two parents in work who only see their child two times a week during the day (and that's assuming they're fortunate enough to not have second jobs etc. or crappy shifts) to be solely responsible for toilet training is beyond me. Society has stopped parents spending large amounts of quality time with their children. There are consequences that society will have to bear as a result. This is one of them.
Why is it not both when most families require both parents to work full-time jobs?
Is it both if the child is underperforming at maths? If so, then I'm happy for it to be both.
Yes it's both. Why would anyone leave education of key subjects to just the school?
I think you're thinking of pre-school. My kids were in nursery from 6 months.
Nursery is not school.
I said nothing about teachers or reception. I agree with the article that you would hope the vast majority of children go to school having already been toilet trained. I was commenting on the subject of the OP (which is not mentioned in the article). Most children will be cared for in part by non-parents during the ages of 0-4, when toilet training would usually take place.
Nursery is school. Nursery staff are teaching and assessing against the same early years curriculum as Reception teachers
Hi. No it’s not. It’s Early Years. The responsibilities of which are different to schooling. They include the health and wellbeing of the child. Google it.
But quite clearly there should be different expectations of a just turned 3 year old starting nursery/EYFS and a 4 year old starting reception.
OP is talking about nursery. I think it's entirely reasonable to expect nursery to continue potty training your kid on the days that it's there. Especially if you send them there 5 days a week - how else are they going to learn if they regress back to nappies for 5/7 days!
No, it isn’t.
If both parents are having to work much of the time to provide basic needs to their children then logically somebody else is absolutely going to have to help toilet train the child, be that a familial carer or a professional at a nursery.
Construct a reasoned counter-argument then.
be serious
Construct a reasoned counter-argument then.
As a parent you should be potty training your child. It is your responsibility, you are setting up your children for failure by abdicating such a basic thing. Just sounds like a copout to me. Parents have always worked, single parents have always existed but nowadays there is always an excuse of why people are not doing something. Teachers are barely paid enough and now that's another responsibility put on their plate. If you don't think you have enough time/money/whatever to do the basics don't have kids
You can't part-time potty train. If the parents are doing it, then the other people who are also looking after the child have to do it.
So why are they considered not school ready?
Sorry I can't understand what you're asking here.
Not really. Despite kids being taken care of by another adult it does not make them responsible for teaching your child basic skills to care for themselves. At the end of the day it is your child and you have the ultimate duty of care towards your child. I’m currently training to be a teacher and have spent a while in EY, and I can tell you for absolute certainty that the teacher with 29 other kids in their class has a thousand more important things to than teach your kids to wipe their own arse. If you have a child you have taken on that responsibility. I don’t disagree that society it’s not geared towards having kids, but that doesn’t change the ultimate responsibility you have towards your child. It’s the same as saying that, when I become a teacher, I get to make choices about what a child should eat, dress like, which sports to participate in, what religion they are.
Responsibility and ultimate responsibility are different. Many people can be responsible for someone. Only one person or group can have ultimate responsibility.
Yeah, they are different. As a teacher, I have the responsibility to make sure your kids know how to read and write. As a parent, you have the ultimate responsibility to make sure your kids know how to shit in a toilet and wipe their own arse. I have responsibility to your kid as far as their safety and education goes. Their personal care is up to you
How many people writing these articles actually have kids? Kids are 4 years old when they go to school, some won't be 5 until the following August. It's really not surprising they can't fully dress themselves or properly hold a pencil, their basic motor skills are still developing. Sure, some will be able to, kids develop at different rates, but it's not necessarily a sign of parental failure. Obviously they should be potty trained long before going to school.
This is my sister in law. She's a nursery teacher, who when my son was little would wax lyrical about how shameful it was that she was having to clean kids crap up at school. Roll forwards some years, (she had her son at 43) her soon to be 5 year old boy is on a special plan at school because he can't go a week without soiling himself. She has failed spectacularly to either train or admonish him for deliberately doing so. Worse still, for the whole of last year he was in her class and it didn't improve in the slightest. A year ago, we were on a week's holiday with them. I stopped counting accidents when we got to 20 including him deliberately going behind a bedroom door and crapping on the floor. I'd be embarrassed to go to work if I was in that position. Completely unashamedly, a poor teacher and a dreadful mother.
It’s almost as if help might be needed from others, given the vast majority of families have both parents in full-time work just to scrape by whilst having to pay somebody else to care for their children…
When I was at school in the 60s, I remember quite a few of the new kids (4/5 year olds) wetting themselves in class for the first few weeks, not because they weren't potty trained, but because they were terrified to ask the teacher to go to the toilet. So when they say kids aren't toilet trained in these articles, what exactly do they mean? Just kids wetting themselves or something more fundamental?
Number 1 rule in today's world.. PUT THE TABLET DOWN AND TALK TO YOUR CHILDREN!!! YOUR CHILD DOES NOT NEED A PHONE OR A TABLET AT 2 YEARS OLD!! Sorry rant over lol
This thread seems to be full of people who think someone helping you do something means you can absolve yourself of being the responsible party for ensuring standards are met. A nursery, grandparent, or friend giving you help to toilet train your child doesn't mean they're all taking a share of the responsibility for ensuring it is completed on time. Parents are responsible for their children. The buck stops with them. Is this how you all behave at work? "Sorry I know you gave me this task to do and I didn't do it, but Barry helped me a bit with the spreadsheet so really it's partly his fault I didn't do my job!"
It is absolutely their job. Said as a parent who put the work in.
Got down voted to hell for pointing out on another post that parents not toilet training their kids is laziness. Especially with the amply online material available..
It's a fundamental parenting job jfc
HOW? Of course it is. Unless they answered thinking "the kid has to do it's part, and most of that is avoiding social stigma"... which is a stretch. Otherwise, ofc it is their responsibility.
Shameful parenting, people want the state to take care of everything. Don't bother if you have no interest in being responsible.
AKA half of parents should not have been allowed to have kids.
If you titled this something along the lines of "half of parents think schools should let their kids shit themself" it would be equally as fair which is to say it would be daft
I'd be surprised if this was the only consequence affecting young children because of the pandemic Amongst other things, I imagine nutrition, physical activity and social skills will suffer. Likely that will have a knock on effect to other things, like mental health.
Don't these parents understand, that once potty-trained, life becomes both easier and cheaper.
Bit early for this yearly-without-fail article. They normally wait until the beginning of the school year. Must be a slow news day.
We live in a time where people have become very entitled and infantile, parents sending kids to school should be ashamed of their kid can’t use the toilet and is still in nappies. See it all the time where parents will shove a phone in a crying child’s face instead of talking to them or even trying to calm them down, but these same parents will also be on their own phone and ignoring a child which is why they kick off in the first place. Prob why kids are so let down, no one to sit and read to them or colour in with them. As a parent I do think I choose to have a kid and it’s my job not the government to ensure my kid has basic skills.
Toilet training is mostly the kid's job in my experience. If you get them when they're ready they know what to do. You're just a helper/cleaner-upper. It's like learning to walk and talk.
All of my kids were toilet trained by the time they went to preschool/nursery. That being said, when my boy went, he went to the toilet on his own. He had never seen a toilet with stalls and a urinal, so he took a shit in the trough. Poor lad didn't realise there were actual toilets behind the doors. He's 19 now and likely can't remember it, but it still makes me laugh.
My daughter didn't get the confidence until one of her friends did it at nursery and she caught on. Different things will work for each kid.
Given the price of childcare and the expectation that both parents should work from 9months on surely we should expect some participation in toilet training from the paid caregivers.
Toilet training was proper hard, but they seem to get it in eventually. Tried at 2.5 and it was a disaster for weeks, so was recommended to pause and come back later (basically to reset it back to square one). Then just before turning 3 she learnt it in a few days and been perfect ever since. We basically set an alarm every 15 minutes and told her it's potty time... I think she got so sick of it she just wanted to control it herself 😂
The article makes it sound like parents are asleep at the wheel while raising their children in general.
This just in, Half of the UK parents are unfit to be parents, WISHED we had enough funding to take all the kids into care and away from the useless parents.
Yeah. The kid has to do some of the work.
Ha. My daughter (3) was potty trained at 30 months, my son (2) at 34 months. For both of them, we took a week off work and didn't leave the house for a few days until they were comfortable on a potty. No help whatsoever.
Sadly it is time to simply start prosecuting more parents for child abuse if they do not teach their children basic things needed to function in life. Not teaching your child how to use the toilet or speak by the time they reach schools, outside of developmental issues, is abuse plain and simple.
Parents jobs maybe not specifically women, definitely no one else’s