Children asking to miss school or wetting themselves over 'horror movie' toilets
A new poll by charity Parentkind found almost a third of parents have raised concerns about school toilets to staff, while about one in six say the loos at their child's school are unclean.
One parent said the toilets were so dirty their children 'felt like they were stepping into a horror movie', while another said their child had spotted cockroaches in the toilets.
The Censuswide poll of 2,000 parents to school-age children found 11% of parents said their children had missed school or asked to stay at home because of worries about the school loos.
They added some children had either wet themselves in school or suffered constipation while trying to avoid using the toilets.
Earlier this week Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced schools will receive about £2.3billion per year to fix 'crumbling classrooms' and £2.4billion a year to rebuild 500 schools.
In response, the chief executive of Parentkind called on the government to use some of those funds to make school loos 'fit for use'.
Jason Elsom said: 'With a million children facing humiliation because of the disgusting state of school toilets, we need to shine a light on the health and well-being of our children who are refusing to drink during the day to avoid going to the toilet and the millions of children suffering constipation because their school toilets are so dirty.
'Parents tell us that we need to set aside the cash to clean and upgrade school loos.
'Parents tell us their children have seen 'cockroaches coming out of the floors' and toilets 'covered in poo and urine'.'
The Association of School and College Leaders (ASCL) says it's 'dismayed' at the research findings, and said 'years of government underfunding' may in part explain why parents feel this way about school bathrooms.
Pepe Di'lasio, general secretary of the ASCL, added: 'Schools understand the vital importance of toilets being clean and in good order, work hard to ensure this is the case, and will be dismayed at the findings of this research.
'Many schools are struggling with old and outdated buildings which require a great deal of maintenance. More Trending
'We urgently need improved investment in upgrading and modernising school buildings.'
A Department for Education spokesperson said: 'We're investing in excellence everywhere for every child, which is why this government is dedicated to fixing the foundations by rebuilding crumbling school buildings.
'Despite inheriting a schools estate in disrepair, the government is creating safe learning environments through condition funding and ramping up the School Rebuilding Programme to give children growing up in our country the best start in life.
'We have increased overall capital budgets by over a billion pounds a year on average, the highest since 2010, showing this government's strong and unwavering commitment to the maintenance and renewal of the education estate.'
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: Mums 'in love triangle' fought in school playground in front of children
MORE: I've been revising for my son's GCSEs – I'm more stressed than him
MORE: Free school meals to be extended to 500,000 chilldren across the country
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mirror
a day ago
- Daily Mirror
Crying at work isn't unlikely as you'd think - but what happens when you do
Rachel Reeves was seen visibly upset during Prime Minister's Questions which posed questions over her emotional wellbeing - but can being upset at work make you appear stronger, or can it have an impact? The weight of being the first female chancellor is weighing heavy on Rachel Reeves shoulders as seen during PMQ's on July 2 - but seeing her cry in the House of Commons was devastating. We've all had times where work can feel overwhelming and many women may resonate all too well with Ms. Reeves emotions after a bad day at work. Always appearing with a perfect stoic, with an unwavering tone and message staying strong, it was the first time people may have seen the chancellor on a more personal level. Besides being in front of peers, television cameras and opposition leaders, the chancellor openly displayed her feelings after being spotted with a tear rolling down her cheek. Whether it was work related or not, it's caused a mixed opinion - and her feelings aren't unusual. She's not alone in feeling emotional at work, a YouGov & Mental Health UK 2025 Burnout report study of 4,418 UK adults conducted found that the risk of burnout remains prevalent, with one in three (34%) adults experiencing high or extreme levels of pressure or stress 'always' or 'often' last year, compared with 35% the previous year. Meanwhile, nine in 10 (91%) experienced high pressure or stress at some point over the last year. Nobel Prize-winning scientist Sir Tim Hunt once boldly said women shouldn't be allowed to work in laboratories because 'when you criticise them, they cry'. But can crying at work truly impact your career? "Crying at work is neither inherently 'good' nor 'bad," Lucas Botzen, CEO of Rivermate and HR specialist told The Mirror. "What matters is the context. For example, I've seen people cry due to grief after losing a loved one, burnout from unmanageable workloads, or even overwhelming pride after achieving something meaningful." Lucas said these are deeply human responses, and when handled appropriately, they can strengthen trust within teams. "In fact, some companies offer emotional intelligence training now to allow managers to respond with empathy when employees exhibit emotion, like crying," he added. However, workplace culture can play an enormous role in opinions regarding tears in the office, and the expert noted that in some male-groomed or high-stress workplaces, like finance, law, or tech start-ups, crying can be "severely criticised even if unfairly." Lucas suggested that while one's professional reputation is concerned, an isolated incidence of crying, especially if it's in the context that is acceptable "will not damage your business credibility". However if it becomes a trend, and could result in something deeper such as emotional exhaustion, poor fit, or even a mental illness issue may be indicated - HR should be involved. He noted it shouldn't be with a disciplinary measure, but with "support, giving access to employee assistance programs (EAPs), mental health services, or workload adjustments." For more stories like this subscribe to our weekly newsletter, The Weekly Gulp, for a curated roundup of trending stories, poignant interviews, and viral lifestyle picks from The Mirror's Audience U35 team delivered straight to your inbox. Sometimes showing a little emotion can help bolster your passion for you career, as Lucas recalled a time he watched a staff member in a high-level position at a consultancy firm lose her cool in a client debrief. He said: "Although she was frightened it would be counterproductive to her credibility, the client subsequently informed her that it made her seem more empathetic and sincere. "In business cultures that value psychological safety, though, like those utilising Google's Project Aristotle model, vulnerability is a leadership asset." Whether you deal with stress head on, or take a moment to gather yourself, or even shed a tear, women should be allowed to use their emotions however they wish - even if you are being broadcast on national TV. This is echoed by Holistic Empowerment & Career Coach Jo Irving, who told The Mirror that Rachel Reeves' moment was "powerful" because it was honest. "We're shifting from the outdated idea that professionalism means emotional detachment. True leadership increasingly values authenticity and vulnerability," and added: "For leaders, showing emotion can actually be powerful, when it's clear, honest and with purpose." So when it comes to whether it affects your job, Jo said someone who expresses vulnerability and still shows up with purpose and resilience is "often perceived as more authentic and relatable, not less capable." Help us improve our content by completing the survey below. We'd love to hear from you!
Telegraph
2 days ago
- Telegraph
Starmer's 10-year plan for NHS may outlive his Chancellor
Labour MPs may doubt that their Chancellor is red in tooth and claw after she tried to cut the welfare bill, but Rachel Reeves had certainly been red in eye and nostril at PMQs. There is no shame in that – Winston Churchill was a famous blubberer, tears coming well ahead of blood and sweat and just behind Pol Roger in the fluids he spilt for his country – but you cannot easily hide in modern politics, and so on Thursday Ms Reeves was wheeled out to face the press in east London. It was a hospital pass. Or, more precisely, a neighbourhood health centre pass, since that was where the Prime Minister unveiled his 10-year plan for the NHS. Ten days seems an optimistic lifespan for most policies these days. Sir Keir Starmer wants us to use such centres more often. You don't even need an appointment, he said, you can just rock up. Why did no one think of this before? Wes Streeting was the warm-up act. The bronzed Health Secretary kept repeating a mantra about giving 'the care you need, not the care you can afford'. He added that he intended to 'give a megaphone to the voice of every patient'. I can see that going down well with GP receptionists who get shirty if you ask why you can't be seen in this lifetime. Then he lavished praise on Ms Reeves, saying that none of his plans would be possible without her, and told the doctors assembled to 'give her a warm hand'. Had he said that about Sir Keir, you might expect '...and ask him to cough' to follow, but as we now know, following the cave-in to his backbenchers, the PM is lacking in the balls department. Up stepped the Chancellor, a forced grin stitched on to her still puffy face, and honked for a few minutes about how fantastic NHS staff are and how the 10-year plan is good for the nation's health and its finances. The eyes weren't quite showing the same happiness. She did not accept any of the invitations to explain what had happened at PMQs. She got a big hug from Sir Keir, small amends for having failed to spot her snivelling the previous day, before he gave a speech that was brief and unmemorable. The NHS used to be about pride and optimism, he said, before the horrid Tories came in. He wants to rescue it with 'three shifts' relating to preventative care ('a move from being a sickness service to a health service'), community-based care and use of technology. 'With AI, you can find a clot in milliseconds,' he said. And several clots in the Cabinet even faster. His big idea is to give everyone a 'doctor in your pocket' (or are you just pleased to see me?) via the increased use of mobile phone diagnosis. This will be 'the new front door for the NHS'. I can see the government advert: 'If you're happy and you know it, clap your hands. Then wash them.' When he finished, Sir Keir remarked on how hot the room was. 'I'm sorry for making you look like a sweaty mess,' an administrator said, helpfully on mic. 'That's nothing compared with what my chief whip made me look like,' he could have replied. He pleaded with the press to think of the poor staff and keep their questions short. They ignored him. As he spoke, the nurses who had been arranged as scenery began to pass around cups of water. One hoped in vain for someone to faint so Sir Keir could miss it again. But nurses are made of sturdier stuff than the Cabinet, it seems: they don't just collapse when the heat is on.
The Independent
2 days ago
- The Independent
The success of this government now rests in Wes Streeting's hands
As part of his presentation on the 10-year plan for the NHS, the prime minister promised the nation 'a doctor in your pocket'. It was an all-too-rare example of the government offering the public a tangible, and significant, improvement in the quality of their individual and collective lives. Rather than the depressing routine of being bombarded with tax hikes and cuts to services and the welfare state, here is something – a greatly enhanced NHS app for smartphones – that the voters can actually look forward to. Sir Keir Starmer, flanked by a more confident-looking Rachel Reeves, declared that, under the plan, everyone will have the opportunity to use their smartphones or tablets to book appointments online, have access to 24/7 health advice, order repeat prescriptions, review their own medical records, and be given guidance to approach charities and companies that may supply more help. It would indeed be transformative, part of the long-overdue NHS transition from analogue to digital systems. If all goes well, the NHS will transform from a service with fax machines in its clinical offices to a world leader in the application of artificial intelligence to boost productivity and save lives. Indeed, in reviewing scan results, AI is already proving its worth. For these reasons and more, the government's NHS plan deserves a cautious welcome. Sir Keir was graceful enough to say that none of the extra resources flowing into the service would be there were it not for the decisions that his chancellor had taken. No one can deny that Ms Reeves made some serious errors of judgement in her first year in post, but she has also tried to rebalance the economy towards investment and put the public finances on a more sustainable footing. That her backbench colleagues sometimes blocked her is not entirely her fault. There is still, after all, such a thing as collective cabinet responsibility, and neither Ms Reeves nor Liz Kendall at the Department for Work and Pensions deserves to be scapegoated. Her private life should be respected. The welfare bill fiasco stands in stark contrast to the government's NHS reforms. The changes to sickness and disability benefits were essentially small-scale reforms, affecting, at most, £5bn out of a total social security budget of more than £300bn. The bill was also marred by being perceived, with reason, as a rushed attempt to plug a hole in the public finances – something Ms Reeves can be fairly criticised over. The rest of the social security sector, not least the state pension and its 'triple lock', was untouched by the welfare bill, entirely unrealistically, as was the tangle of other, in-work benefits within the universal credit system. There was no attempt and no time to 'roll the pitch' in policy terms, nor to carry the parliamentary Labour Party. Failure was almost preordained, and blame should be shared by all those involved. By comparison, the NHS reforms are, thus far, a model of public policy-making and political communication – and done at speed. Within a few weeks of taking office last year, the new health and social care secretary, Wes Streeting, commissioned the distinguished surgeon and health expert Lord Darzi to report on the state of the NHS. By September, he had reported, and in the spring, Mr Streeting announced the abolition of NHS England, which duplicated too much of the work of his department. Now, just within the first year of office, we have the 10-year plan: a long-term, comprehensive strategy, at least for England (health policy being a largely devolved matter). In medical terms, this 77-year-old patient, the NHS, has undergone a thorough examination, has been prescribed medicine, and has a treatment plan and, hopefully, the resources, skilled staff and industrial peace it needs to restore it to full vigour. Of course, Mr Streeting has the great advantage over Ms Kendall, and almost all his other colleagues, in that he is managing a real-terms increase in resources, rather than cuts and austerity. But, then again, an ageing population and advances in drugs, some expensive, will always pile on the pressure on the NHS. For that reason, Mr Streeting is wise to place preventative medicine at the forefront of his reforms. Prospectively, Mr Streeting will be the first health secretary to shift the traditional focus of the NHS on treatment towards prevention instead – public health measures (such as vaccine uptake), the promotion of lifestyle and dietary changes, and cancer screenings can save lives and huge amounts of money in the longer term – and the NHS will be less of a 'national sickness service'. With the expansion of free school meals, breakfast clubs and better access to dentistry, a marked improvement in the wellbeing of the nation's children should follow. The previous government's long-term staffing plan, launched in 2023, will be retained but amended to make use of more staff trained in the UK. The move towards a 'Neighbourhood Health Service' is also worthy of guarded praise. Purpose-built, multi-disciplinary 'drop-in" clinics with family-friendly opening hours sound like a fine idea for people to be able to access help, rapid tests and minor procedures. These clinics should take some of the strain off A&E departments – too often a first point of triage for non-emergency cases – as well as GP surgeries. Nonetheless, the GP service still has much to offer, provided patients can actually get an appointment; in any case, there will probably never be enough neighbourhood centres to replace experienced general practitioners. Reform of the NHS is essential for the good of the country. Politically, it is the most critical of all for the future of the government. Already, there are tentative signs that more resources are improving the service – more appointments, for example – and the public should, in due course, give the government the credit for that. But this is, to borrow a phrase, only the end of the beginning of a long journey of reform and modernisation. Mr Streeting has a difficult job ahead, especially in carrying the trade unions and professional bodies with him. He shows every sign that he understands the nature of the task – and the stakes. If the NHS is not delivering what the voters expect of it by the time of the next election, then they will start looking for second opinions and alternatives. If Mr Streeting fails, that would be the ultimate betrayal of the trust the British people placed in the Labour Party only one year ago.
