Going to the loo during lessons.

[Judge]

Nt? What does that mean?

-Neurotypical. A non-autistic person.

From what I see in a legal sense, in the UK I suspect that's the one mitigating factor.

That if the student has medical "special needs" they are apprised of at the outset. Where it becomes incumbent upon the teacher to recognize and predetermine what conditions to establish for the student which may constitute exceptions to rules.

 

[Progster]

But I do disagree that anyone would abuse it.

Not all children are honest. Not usually younger ones, but older ones. I've known kids try to play games or chat on their phone or tablet at the same time as having a lesson, I've seen (older) kids take a mobile phone, put it in their pocket and tell me that they want to go to the toilet (I know because I have seen them, that is how it is obvious), then spend 20 minutes on the toilet. This is unacceptable behaviour. I always allow them to go to the toilet when they ask me, but I won't accept them using this time to sit and play on their phones. Abuse can work two ways.

Edit: I would also never acccuse a child of any such abuse of my toilet policy without having evidence.

 

[Mary Terry]

Not all children are honest. Not usually younger ones, but older ones. I've known kids try to play games or chat on their phone or tablet at the same time as having a lesson, I've seen (older) kids take a mobile phone, put it in their pocket and tell me that they want to go to the toilet (I know because I have seen them, that is how it is obvious), then spend 20 minutes on the toilet. This is unacceptable behaviour. I always allow them to go to the toilet when they ask me, but I won't accept them using this time to sit and play on their phones. Abuse can work two ways.

That's easy to remedy. Require them to deposit their phones on your desk when they go to the bathroom. They can pick up their phones at the end of class. No exceptions. We're talking about children. Children always push the limits to find out where they stand, how the world operates, and how much crap adults will take from them. It's just part of growing up. That said, I think it is almost sadistic to require children in UK level three, which I assume is the same as third graders in the US meaning basically 8 and 9 year olds, to hold their bladders for two hours.

 

[Progster]

That's easy to remedy. Require them to deposit their phones on your desk when they go to the bathroom. They can pick up their phones at the end of class. No exceptions. We're talking about children. Children always push the limits to find out where they stand, how the world operates, and how much crap adults will take from them. It's just part of growing up. That said, I think it is almost sadistic to require children in UK level three, which I assume is the same as third graders in the US meaning basically 8 and 9 year olds, to hold their bladders for two hours.

I teach online, so that isn't an option. If I see that a child is doing this, and I have evidence for it, I tell the child that it has got to stop, and why. I let them know that I will need to email their parents about it if it continues, so they are aware of what action I am likely to take should it continue. If it continues, I email the parents, and they talk to the chid. But I always try to resolve it with the child first.

But when stuff like that happens, I have to do something about it, I can't just let them walk all over me.

 

[AGXStarseed]

This isn't a good policy at all. As several people have pointed out, we can't all plan when our bladders have decided they need to be emptied - especially as our bodies will eventually force it out sooner or later.

If I was in your class and was desperate for the toilet but you told me no, I would be like "screw it" and leave the class anyway.
Sure I'd get in trouble but I think in this situation, both my parents and the Headteacher would agree that preventing children from going to the toilet (especially that age group) for that length of time is cruel and inhumane.

Every human is different and that includes how often our bladders need to be emptied - medical condition or not. Not every kid is needing the toilet before break and even if they are, they might not get to go if numerous kids are going at once.

A better solution would be for you to note down who in your class is going to the toilet, how often and how long for. This way, you can analyze what you find and catch out those who are spending more time in the toilet than they should; leading to discussions with the parents to see if there's a legitimate medical condition that isn't addressed or if they're skipping the lesson purposely.

Personally, I am pretty disgusted that you have this rule in the first place and would advise you drop it pretty quickly. All it will take will be one child 'having an accident' or getting fed up of your rule and telling it to their parents. Considering that today parents love to kick up fusses on social media about it and the Media loves to jump on any drama, it likely won't take long before the school has a media storm to deal with and your job potentially put at risk all because of yourself been too strict.

 

[Progster]

Once one goes they all want to go

Yes, this does tend to happen, and they need to understand that it's not ok to ask to go to the toilet without a genuine reason. But it isn't fair not to allow a child that genuinely needs to go to the toilet - if they need to go, they should be allowed to. I would never have an outright ban on going to the toilet because in most cases, the need is genuine and it can harm the child not to let him/her go.

 

[Misskel]

This isn't a good policy at all. As several people have pointed out, we can't all plan when our bladders have decided they need to be emptied - especially as our bodies will eventually force it out sooner or later.

If I was in your class and was desperate for the toilet but you told me no, I would be like "screw it" and leave the class anyway.
Sure I'd get in trouble but I think in this situation, both my parents and the Headteacher would agree that preventing children from going to the toilet (especially that age group) for that length of time is cruel and inhumane.

Every human is different and that includes how often our bladders need to be emptied - medical condition or not. Not every kid is needing the toilet before break and even if they are, they might not get to go if numerous kids are going at once.

A better solution would be for you to note down who in your class is going to the toilet, how often and how long for. This way, you can analyze what you find and catch out those who are spending more time in the toilet than they should; leading to discussions with the parents to see if there's a legitimate medical condition that isn't addressed or if they're skipping the lesson purposely.

Personally, I am pretty disgusted that you have this rule in the first place and would advise you drop it pretty quickly. All it will take will be one child 'having an accident' or getting fed up of your rule and telling it to their parents. Considering that today parents love to kick up fusses on social media about it and the Media loves to jump on any drama, it likely won't take long before the school has a media storm to deal with and your job potentially put at risk all because of yourself been too strict.

One of the mums was annoyed I made her daughter hold it for the afternoon and she was bursting on the way home. She could have gone after I dismissed the class?

 

[Beguiling Orbit]

@Misskel, just so you don't feel like everyone has "piled on," please realize that we are not attacking you personally. We are stating our strongly held opinions about the topic that you brought for discussion.

One of the mums was annoyed I made her daughter hold it for the afternoon and she was bursting on the way home. She could have gone after I dismissed the class?

Parents that are annoyed about your classroom policy are a good indication that our opinions here are reasonable.

 

[Progster]

One of the mums was annoyed I made her daughter hold it for the afternoon and she was bursting on the way home. She could have gone after I dismissed the class?

Children sometimes aren't aware that they need to go to the toilet, and it can suddenly hit them. The child went outside to go home: going from a warm environment to a cold one can make someone need to go, or even the sight of water. She might have forgotten to go to the toilet before going home, or there could have been bullies in or around the toilet, older kids, and not wanted to go because of that. There are many reasons why she might not have gone at that time.

 

[Mary Terry]

I teach online, so that isn't an option. If I see that a child is doing this, and I have evidence for it, I tell the child that it has got to stop, and why. I let them know that I will need to email their parents about it if it continues, so they are aware of what action I am likely to take should it continue. If it continues, I email the parents, and they talk to the chid. But I always try to resolve it with the child first.

But when stuff like that happens, I have to do something about it, I can't just let them walk all over me.

Gotcha! Wow, that's a good way to handle those issues in online classes. I'm regrettably mind blind about online teacher issues because I teach in person, face to face.

I love that you try to resolve it first and privately with the child. I think it helps give them a sense of equality, privacy, and respect. It helps them understand that they have the ability to change self-harmful behaviors and that you will help them do that. Some children - not many - have such extensive problems that teachers alone cannot rescue them, and government has proven itself totally inept in that regard. Just feeling sad today about the latest school shooting in Florida. And wondering how the hell we came to this?

Anyway, I thank all teachers out there for what they do. Thanks, Misskel, for asking for advice.

 

[Suzanne]

I have to ask you a question of why this ruling? Is it because you have had experience of children saying they need to go and then causing disruptions ie an excuse to get out of lessons?

As everyone is saying, you cannot stipulate the bladder to say: it is break time now, so I need to be emptied.

A child should be able to be excused during such a long lesson of 2 hrs and as another said: if they make a pattern, then you should enquire whether it is a medical factor or something else, but the problem with you making this ruling, is in danger of causing phobias in children and for girls, holding in their wee is really painful and not at all good for the body.

 

[Bolletje]

I'm not sure I could wait two hours to pee (nor would I want to) and I'm a healthy 64 year old.

I'm a healthy 32-year old and I had to ask a bus driver on my one hour commute to pull over because my body suddenly decided it was go time. Luckily the man saved the day and helped me out of a potentially very messy situation.
Anyway, as a kid, I have had accidents on more than one occasion because the teacher wouldn't let me go on a bathroom break and threatened punishment if I did go. To anyone who thinks this is reasonable, I recommend crapping your pants in a room full of 30 people and seeing how you feel after that.

 

[Katleya]

I find your rule unnecessary cruel. Yes, cruel.
And unfair: because some kids might abuse bathroom uthorization, all of them are treated like potential offenders? Way to show respect and trust.
Bathroom breaks are needed due to essential bodily function. Some people are healthy enough to be able to plan ahead, others aren't, and it's got nothing to do with any sense of responsibility.

There are so many reasons a kid might not go during their break: maybe they didn't need it then, maybe they needed to but didn't realize it, or maybe they did need to go, but the bathroom was too crowded and they didn't have time, maybe they hate going during the breaks because they get bullied out there, and trust me, having your head hung over a nasty school toilet is reason enough to make you ask to go during the lessons.
I spent 10 years of school with frequent UTIs, and the lessons weren't longer than 1 hour, so I can only imagine what 2 hours would be like.

I have this thing, maybe other people have it too: I don't feel I need to pee until it's almost too late. Meaning I could very well need to go, but not feel any sign of an urge, and when I do, then I have a 5 to 10 minute frame to find a toilet. And forcing oneself to go during qtandard bathroom breaks isn't an option.

Medical reasons are obviously an exception.

Yeah, the thing is, a child could have a legitimate medical reason, but not get the diagnosis until years later. And, as a result, they wouldn't have any medical certificate to show for it or request special accomodations, while the need is very much there already. I would know: it wasn't until I turned 33 that we solved that puzzle. If a kid needs to go, they just have to go, period. You're free to ask them to leave their cellphone with you to minimize possible abuse of the system. But you don't need to be barbaric about it. Or not let them back in if they exceed a pre-determined amount of time (one reasonable enough, some take a long time wiping for a variety of reasons).

 

[Katleya]

This is so insensitive and cruel. Yes, cruel. And unfair.
So, just because some kids might abuse bathroom permissions, all of the kids are now treated as potential bathroom delinquents? Way to show trust and respect. And if you don't show it, you surely don't deserve it, where I'm from.

There are a myriad reasons why a kid might need to go during class:
- Maybe they didn't feel the need during standard breaktime, but have an urge now,
- Maybe they felt it, but the bathroom was too crowded and they had to choose between going anyway, showing up late to class, or not going,
- Maybe they felt the need, but their bully is in the bathroom, and they prefer to avoid possible incidents. Trust me, having your head held over a nasty school toilet will definitely make you want to go during class,
- Maybe there's a medical issue that's not been diagnosed yet, so they wouldn't have a medical certificate to show for it, but the impairment already exists,
- Maybe they just have a smaller bladder. Not everybody has the same size, or the same capacity to hold it.
And yes, maybe they want to go play on their phone. Which can easily be solved by asking that they leave their phone with you when they go.

Forbidding unscheduled toilet breaks can cause so much anxiety, that won't help the kid focus, in case their full bladder wasn't already enough of a distraction. Good for you if you were granted a nice, fully functional bladder, but not everybody was blessed with that.

I spent 10 school years with frequent UTIs due to such policies, and our classes were only 1 hour long, maximum. I didn't get a diagnosis explaining my urinary issues until I was 33 --way too late to show any school teacher. I, for one, do not feel a small need, ever. I only feel the imperious urge, by which time I have a 5 to 10 minute window to find a toilet. I would love to be able to plan ahead, but this is an essential bodily function we're talking about, not a sleepover. It has nothing to do with being a responsible person. It's as nonsensical as asking a woman to "hold in her period" and not bleed on a particular day, which anybody with a basic knowledge of anatomy knows doesn't work like that. Well, same for bladders. Holding in pee is bad for them, and for the kidneys.

I'm actually surprised the parents haven't brought more of a ruckus yet, with a policy like that. I certainly would, if I had kids. And I wouldn't take my kid out of your class; I'd be doing my best to have you removed, and not be in contact with children if you're unable to understand how a body works. If you can't see how barbaric this is on the sole grounds that some kids use that for their own enjoyment, you don't belong in a profession where you're supposed to help them grow to their fullest potential, not create extra problems. Attitudes like that are what leaves kids disgusted with school, teachers and certain subject. Most adult who say they hated this subject or that subject as a kid will say that it's because they had this teacher who was so mean.
What's next, physical punishment because their fingernails aren't clean? Pshhh...

 

[pjcnet]

I'm not a parent, but I would definitely allow it, especially for younger children, although I'd still strongly encourage them to take responsibility and use the toilet before the start of a class, especially longer ones. Make sure the child is back within a reasonable time or ask questions however and if they need to go more than once during the same class start asking questions too. It's not impossible there's a medical reason, if so you'd want to keep this discrete and I'd therefore speak to the child alone after class if possible, but it could also be that they're using it as an excuse to skive out of class as much as they feel they can get away with, which you obviously want to avoid. Unless it's considered desperate, I'd also try to only allow one child out at once if possible because you don't really want them conversing and potentially messing about out of class, it's easier to keep control of where everyone is and you want to keep the disruption to a minimum, if the child insists they are unable to wait until the previous child's return however I would still let them go, but I'd also watch for patterns, E.g. one child goes to the toilet, their buddy follows straight after and it keeps happening, or much worse a potential bully wants to go to the toilet straight after a child has left. When I was at school I used to dread using the toilet as they were a prime place to be bullied, I would sometimes hold it and if necessary be excused from class when it was safer instead, that's another thing to watch out for.

 

[the_tortoise]

I am a primary school teacher (year 3). I don't let children go to the toilet during lessons. Would you have a problem as a parent with this rule?

Yes. I absolutely would have a problem with that.

Your rule is unecessary and harmful. Please change it.

 

[Joel's Hear]

Has anyone considered that perhaps the OP is a crazy person intentionally trying to get a rise out of what he/she thinks are inferiors (auties/aspies)?

They come on here making one obviously BS post trying to rile people up for a private chuckle.

I like all of your responses by the way.

 

[Beguiling Orbit]

Has anyone considered that perhaps the OP is a crazy person intentionally trying to get a rise out of what he/she thinks are inferiors (auties/aspies)?

They come on here making one obviously BS post trying to rile people up for a private chuckle.

I like all of your responses by the way.

If that were the case, I trust that our fearless moderators would be on top of the situation.

 

[Joel's Hear]

If that were the case, I trust that our fearless moderators would be on top of the situation.

They are indeed good.

 

[pjcnet]

Has anyone considered that perhaps the OP is a crazy person intentionally trying to get a rise out of what he/she thinks are inferiors (auties/aspies)?

They come on here making one obviously BS post trying to rile people up for a private chuckle.

I like all of your responses by the way.

That would be making a judgement based on an assumption without any actual evidence, yes this post isn't specifically related to autism, but neither are many posts in the "off topic" section. Anyone you don't know in real life on the Internet may not be totally genuine, perhaps even a few of us here are pretending to be auties/aspies, while secretly having a good laugh at us behind our backs? The vast majority of people will be genuine however and in online communities such as this we have to take people on face value unless it becomes obvious later that something is amiss, otherwise we wouldn't be-able to take hardly anyone seriously, especially new members.

I also have to question whether opinions would have been different if the OP had stated that they were on the autistic spectrum rather than having a sister on the spectrum? I know it's difficult, but we have try to stop seeing NTs as almost like a different species if we expect them to treat us with respect too.