Schools providing Sanitary protection

badmemory

happyandcontented wrote: »

I think that there are lots of issues that !!!!less adults need to be brought to account for, but when they become !!!!less parents can we really countenance taking their 'punishment' as far not providing access to Sanpro for their daughters?

Exactly! You cannot hold a 10-16 year old responsible for their parents behaviour & missing school what could be a quarter of the time is certainly not going to help them pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Not just because they are missing out on learning but they are also being told how worthless they are.

Rosemary7391

JWM wrote: »

I left this thread a while ago because the same 2 people were posting numerous replies arguing against the majority and repeating the same old nonsense. Just revisited and they are still at it.

How on Earth do you know that 'we all managed perfectly well up and till now'? When I was at school 40 years ago none of us would have even considered telling all but the closest of friends that we had been off school because of our periods. People just didn't talk about it the way they do now.

I'm sure a lot of girls are off at the same time each month - but with 'tummy bugs' or 'colds' - they are not going to tell the teacher that there was no money for pads and they had to use loo roll instead.

Providing free sanitary protection at school to those that need it is the simple, logical and - most importantly - correct thing to do.

I have no clue why a couple of people are so dead against it that they have to keep posting on this thread - 307 replies! A quick poll round my team of 11 - every reply was a yes to the Scheme. As a colleague said ' Why would anyone be so uninformed as to doubt the need for this'?

Uninformed ! Charming! Seriously, how is it obvious that because an unspecified number of girls miss school for a lack of sanitary protection that it must be provided in vast quantities in every toilet?? I've suggested the less costly measure of having it available on request - more than just a financial reason there too. But I'm uninformed for doubting apparently..!

badmemory wrote: »

Exactly! You cannot hold a 10-16 year old responsible for their parents behaviour & missing school what could be a quarter of the time is certainly not going to help them pull themselves up by their bootstraps. Not just because they are missing out on learning but they are also being told how worthless they are.

I don't think anyone is going to feel more self worth because they get free sanitary protection. Having parents who care would do a lot more in that department - and even parents who are struggling financially can ask for products on behalf of their daughters, eg foodbanks have them.



How is this different to parents who don't, for example, wake their kids up, give them breakfast and send them to school on time? No amount of money will fix that. We need another way.

Smodlet

I find it staggering that this is an issue in this country in this day and age; have we actually gone backwards? I also find it shameful we need food banks but realise that decades of erosion of the benefits system and the ever-increasing gap between rich and poor is to blame for this so suppose period poverty is just another symptom, along with every other kind of poverty.

Of course, no girl (or woman for that matter) should ever have to be without SP; that is just stupid. I welcomed the menopause with open arms and am grateful to this day I no longer have to suffer the pain and indignity of menstruation. I was never without SP except on perhaps 2 or 3 occasions in 34 years (we can all forget things) Had I ever had to decide between food and SP, I would have chosen the latter and yes, I have been so poor I stayed in bed because I could not afford heating.

Do I think SP should be free for all? Not in a million years. For those who are too precious to carry it with them at all times, there should be vending machines: Since when are schools "cashless"? Ridiculous! If there is any need for them to be so, a workaround would be put in place such as tokens which could be paid for later, by the parents.

For those who really cannot afford it, there should be "free" protection - in the form of income sufficient to purchase it as well as food, heating and all the other essentials.

I really think it high time the benefits and taxation systems received a serious overhaul. The first thing I would do is remove the VAT from SP. It is not a luxury item.

How would I pay for all this? Re-introduce the 60% income tax band (and the 80%, and the 95%) but not before I reintroduced the 10% one for the lowest paid. I would ban zero hours contracts and don't get me started on immigration, "health tourism" e.t.c.

I am all for making those who can afford it pay for what they use and even more for making parents accountable for their daughters' lack of SP. I am totally against those who do not need it being awarded Winter Fuel Payments, Child Benefit, State Pensions and anything else. I wonder how many pads and tampons those would fund?

Unfortunately, not everyone has the means to "better themselves" because they lack the means to access adult education, relocate, emigrate or speculate.

Red-Squirrel_2

Comms69 wrote: »

Not deliberately I can assure you.


My understanding, for avoidance of doubt, is that we need low skilled labour. I agree to a point.


Unemployment over the last 40 years was largely due to surplus of lowskilled labour with manufacturing being done more and more abroad. But as individuals people are able to better themselves if they choose to.

Cognitive dissonance?

Comms69

Red-Squirrel wrote: »

Cognitive dissonance?

Did you deliberately misread that. I said ‘I agree to a point’

Comms69

Smodlet wrote: »

I find it staggering that this is an issue in this country in this day and age; have we actually gone backwards? I also find it shameful we need food banks but realise that decades of erosion of the benefits system and the ever-increasing gap between rich and poor is to blame for this so suppose period poverty is just another symptom, along with every other kind of poverty. how is either the gap between rich and poor, or the benefits system to blame?

Of course, no girl (or woman for that matter) should ever have to be without SP; that is just stupid. I welcomed the menopause with open arms and am grateful to this day I no longer have to suffer the pain and indignity of menstruation. I was never without SP except on perhaps 2 or 3 occasions in 34 years (we can all forget things) Had I ever had to decide between food and SP, I would have chosen the latter and yes, I have been so poor I stayed in bed because I could not afford heating.

Do I think SP should be free for all? Not in a million years. For those who are too precious to carry it with them at all times, there should be vending machines: Since when are schools "cashless"? Ridiculous! If there is any need for them to be so, a workaround would be put in place such as tokens which could be paid for later, by the parents.yep agreed, make parents pay.

For those who really cannot afford it, there should be "free" protection - in the form of income sufficient to purchase it as well as food, heating and all the other essentials. define who cannot afford it

I really think it high time the benefits and taxation systems received a serious overhaul. The first thing I would do is remove the VAT from SP. It is not a luxury item. no issue there

How would I pay for all this? Re-introduce the 60% income tax band (and the 80%, and the 95%) but not before I reintroduced the 10% one for the lowest paid. does the benefits system adjust to this as well? Otherwise it seems a lost economy I would ban zero hours contracts and don't get me started on immigration, "health tourism" e.t.c. banning zero hours contracts is really very silly

I am all for making those who can afford it pay for what they use and even more for making parents accountable for their daughters' lack of SP. I am totally against those who do not need it being awarded Winter Fuel Payments, Child Benefit, State Pensions and anything else. I wonder how many pads and tampons those would fund? at what rate; at some point it becomes financially logical to not work...

Unfortunately, not everyone has the means to "better themselves" because they lack the means to access adult education, relocate, emigrate or speculate.

Sorry no. Everyone has that ability. Bettering oneself requires none of those things per se and certainly not all of them.

It’s about working hard and being sensible with money.

Silvertabby

Comms69 wrote: »

Sorry no. Everyone has that ability. Bettering oneself requires none of those things per se and certainly not all of them.

It’s about working hard and being sensible with money.

Exactly. Plus, despite comrade Jezza's squawks to the contrary, poverty hasn't increased in this Country - just the definition of poverty.

I grew up in the 1950s/60s as one of 5 of us in a 2-up 2-down with no central heating (ooh look ! See the lovely net curtains Jack Frost has made for us!), no hot water on tap and an outside loo. Our telephone was in a red box in the next street and not only was our B&W tv rented, but it was paid for by means of a coin slot on the back. We lived pay packet to pay packet and tea on Thursday night (before dad was paid) was invariably jam butties - but my sister and I were told that we were lucky to have that, as some poor children only had bread and dripping.

Our summer 'holiday' was a charabanc day trip to either the Lakes or North Wales - and if mum and dad could afford 2 trips, then we were made up!

In today's terms, that was abject poverty, but we clearly weren't 'poor' as we didn't even qualify for free school dinners (cue more jam butties). But I don't recall ever going without sanpro.

Of course I don't wish that life on today's children, but to be be 'in poverty' today means not having a colour tv, internet access, an annual holiday, birthday parties and new clothes (instead of the jumble sale offerings I grew up in). Far more cash benefits are available to today's parents - the problem seems to be how they choose to spend that money.

(Putting my tin hat on now...)

theoretica

Comms69 wrote: »

It’s about working hard and being sensible with money.

Silvertabby wrote: »

Far more cash benefits are available to today's parents - the problem seems to be how they chose to spend that money.

Indeed. And some people are very, very bad with money. The present system of providing benefits in cash does little to shield their children from this - whatever its cause.

phryne

JWM wrote: »

Fair comment - but could you explain to me WHY this is such a big deal for you?

Is it the cost?

I just don't get why this is bothering some people so much, it just seems like common sense to me. So much discussion over a little thing to make girl's lives better.

Because it's infantilising people, instead of assuming that - shock horror - they might take responsibility for themselves and their own actions, or lack thereof. And it's not equipping them with the skills they will need as adults. The result of which will have knock-on effects on society as well as the individuals themselves.

As well as the sheer practicalities of having to keep and store enough sanitary protection for 1000-2000 women, all the time.

And the system being abused (eg.mum sees that her daughter's getting free towels, so blags a few for herself, and her mate down the road, and so on)

There are just so many issues with this which people don't seem to have thought through.

Rosemary7391

theoretica wrote: »

Indeed. And some people are very, very bad with money. The present system of providing benefits in cash does little to shield their children from this - whatever its cause.

Neither does providing wages in cash - but there we are. I think we have to start from the assumption that the vast majority of people/parents are responsible adults, and then deal with the ones who aren't. I don't want to live in a world where we assume that adults cannot manage their own affairs or provide for their children by default.