Labelling a child with a "I'm a biter" sticker.

[Dana Joy]

this is being discussed as part of the solution to a child biting in a mops program on another board. am i the only one that finds this horrendous?

[Aisling]

:eyebrow And this is supposed to help the problem....how? :hunh

[cklewis]

i thought that was a joke on malcom in the middle?

:td

c

[Dana Joy]

according to the poster it is her church policy for sunday school and she as moppets coordinator wants to institute it for moppets. :sick2

[cklewis]

huh? as isaac would say, "that's ewy."

:sad2

c

[Aisling]

I totally don't get what that's supposed to accomplish. The other kids can't read the sticker. The teachers should be paying enough attention to prevent the kids from hurting each other anyway. :/ Is it supposed to shame the child? His parents? I'm confused :scratch

[Mothering by Heart]

I would want to know if I was putting my child in with someone who bites. :shrug

The other kids wouldn't know what it said. It would be more for the teachers so they can be more pro-active and help head off dangerous situations.

[cklewis]

isaac has a biter friend. :( we all know it. :shrug do we need a sticker?

c

[Dana Joy]

I guess it is the wording and the labeling- if the sticker said- "watch me closely, in the past I have bit other kids" it might not bother me so much, but difinitively (sp?) labelling a kid by an action that they have done just seems mean, wrong and belittling.

[Mothering by Heart]

In a church situation where there may be new people coming and going, they might appreciate knowing.

Dana, yes, I would change the wording, but I don't see anything wrong with alerting other parents.

[ArmsOfLove]

I guess it is the wording and the labeling- if the sticker said- "watch me closely, in the past I have bit other kids" it might not bother me so much, but difinitively (sp?) labelling a kid by an action that they have done just seems mean, wrong and belittling.
that was my thought. something like "When I'm upset I sometimes bite. Keep an eye on me" or something. But labelling him as a biter--that just sets him up for failure and creates an adversarial relationship right up front :(

[Katherine]

:jawdrop :jawdrop

Are they also going to label other children with things they've done wrong?

"I'm a hitter."
"I'm a kicker."
"I'm a screamer."
"I'm a whiner."
"I'm a grabber."

(just so the adults know which imperfection to NAIL them for?!) :mad

And I presume the adults will also get stickers to highlight their shortcomings? :shifty

"I'm a lier."
"I'm passive-aggressive."
"I'm critical."
"I'm judgemental."
"I'm impatient."
"I'm unforgiving."

:hiding

or better yet...

"I'm a spanker."
"I'm a yeller."

(cause parents would want to know that, right?)

according to the poster it is her church policy for sunday school and she as moppets coordinator wants to institute it for moppets.

I would speak up and STRONGLY discourage this. Labeling someone--not just figuratively but literally--will do nothing except to negatively affect the care-givers' attitude towards him, IMO.

I would want to know if I was putting my child in with someone who bites.

The other kids wouldn't know what it said. It would be more for the teachers so they can be more pro-active and help head off dangerous situations.

I understand what you're saying :hug, but... If there is only one child who is having a problem, then care-givers can be cautioned verbally until the problem is resolved--which I think is totally reasonable. If there are so many kids that they can't remember who and need labels, then there's a bigger problem. :scratch :shifty What would you *do* as a parent if you went to drop your child off and saw a couple of kids running around with that sticker on their backs? :think :shrug And if you didn't see a sticker on someone's back, would you assume your child was safe with him/her? Every kid in the nursery is capable of hitting/kicking/pushing/biting/ramming or otherwise hurting another child. I'm not sure why biting has to be single out and labeled. :think

[Dana Joy]

Crystal- you always put my own thoughts so much clearer- I'm off to post what you said on the other board. :giggle

[Aisling]

Soooo..why not come up with some kind of color system that the parents/workers are aware of? Like "A green sticker means the child has bitten before". All of the heads up, not of the negative labeling of the child. I mean, seriously, when you drop your kids off, how often do you check the shirt of every child in the room to make sure they're not wearing a "biter" sticker? :rolleyes

I'm thinking that just seeing the label would change the worker's attitude toward the child. They might be more cautious, but hello? Everytime they see the kid, they're gonna think, "Little biter!" :( Not something I'd want for my child, or anyone else's for that matter.

[ArmsOfLove]

:hug glad to help

[Titus2Momof4]

Of course you aren't the only one. How :bheart Why the sticker? Why/how is it supposd to help? Presumably the child is in a biting stage, which to me would indicate that the child could be anywhere from around 1- around 4. Most kids at that age can't read. So you are putting a label on a child, the child has no idea what it even SAY (and is probably happy to "get" to wear a sticker :( ) I know Mops groups usually divide the kids up by age groups... so a young kid who can't read, his peers probably can't read - *whose* benefit is this supposed to be for, then??? And what good is it supposed to do anyway? Even if the kids around him can read (say there are 5-6 y/o's there) then they are going to naturally want to steer clear. Is the biter going to understand why they want to steer clear?

Whose idea was this anyway- MOPPETS leaders or the mom of the biter? :(

[Titus2Momof4]

I would want to know if I was putting my child in with someone who bites. :shrug

The other kids wouldn't know what it said. It would be more for the teachers so they can be more pro-active and help head off dangerous situations.

But wouldn't it be just as (if not more) effective to simply let parents know that they have a biter in the class (I don't think I would like it if the parents knew WHO the biter was, because I could see gossip about so-and-so's kid, and the so-and-so family, etc). Just to "know" doesn't mean much unless a parent based on that would like to keep ther child out of it. I don't see where it would matter who the biter is. As long as the teachers know, and can be more proactive. The "I have bit in the past, watch me closely" sounds a little nicer, but I still think it's icky and would vocalize my feelings to the director and SS director. And my kids aren't even biters!!! More than likely, mine would be the victims here. I think if a child is a biter, and teachers have a hard time, then parents should be asked to sit in with their child, and maybe they can help the child adjust to the SS/MOPPETS w/o biting, but if it comes to it remove their child. Would they be labelling teenagers in SundaySchool with problematic label stickers? Why is it ok w/a toddler/preschooler?

Probably the only thing that wouldn't seem so icky to me would be if the child would be allowed to wear a smiley face sticker, or some other sticker the child chose, and yet leaders knew that that was a 'flag' that that child is a biter/pincher/hitter, whatever. That way the child doesn't think badly of himself for the sticker, other parents can't look at the child and think "what a brat", and the child is happy with his special sticker. Accomplishes the same thing, w/o humilitation.

[Dana Joy]

well i've been told that
a. the stickers are ordered and made for churches so the wording cannot be changed
b. that the wording crystal suggested is bad since this child does not bite when she is upset, she bites "for no reason"
c. that no one but the 60 yo workers see the sticker
d. that the mom knows and is ok with it
:sick2 :sick2 :sick2

[Aisling]

:(

[Mothering by Heart]

Probably the only thing that wouldn't seem so icky to me would be if the child would be allowed to wear a smiley face sticker, or some other sticker the child chose, and yet leaders knew that that was a 'flag' that that child is a biter/pincher/hitter, whatever. That way the child doesn't think badly of himself for the sticker, other parents can't look at the child and think "what a brat", and the child is happy with his special sticker

I never said the sticker had to say. "I'm a brat, I bite"

I just said I would not be opposed to having some indication of who a biter was.

Are they also going to label other children with things they've done wrong?

"I'm a hitter."
"I'm a kicker."
"I'm a screamer."
"I'm a whiner."
"I'm a grabber."


*I* consider biting to be worse than hitting, pushing, etc *IMO* biting can cause serious damage and is something I would want to be aware of. :shrug

[Jillian]

:hunh I don't like that...at all.

I would, however, appreciate knowing there is (more of) a chance - or a good possibility - my child could be bitten if I left him somewhere. I think a more appropriate thing to do would be to hang a sign on the door, or put a note on the sign in sheet, or something else, that there is a child in the room who is in a biting phase. I don't need to know who it is.

And, actually, really that's for the workers to know and deal with. They should just watch "the biter" more closely to prevent any more incidences.

Yikes. :rolleyes2

[Titus2Momof4]

Amy, I know you didn't say that the sticker should say "I'm a biter I'm a brat". I meant that if other parents saw that sticker, especially punitive ones, they would likely think that the kid was a brat. I understand that you would like some indication as to *who* the biter was, but I guess I don't see what the point in that is. You still aren't going to be in the room w/your kids, whether you know who the biter is or not, so you still have to rely on the workers to do their job and be proactive about it. I'm sorry if I've offended you, and I am not trying to be snarky.

Dana- can someone suggest to the nursery/moppets director that they NOT order these stickers, then they don't have to worry about what "wording" is on them?? :rolleyes Smiley stickers are around $1 for hundreds of them at stores.. :/

[Aisling]

:hug
Probably the only thing that wouldn't seem so icky to me would be if the child would be allowed to wear a smiley face sticker, or some other sticker the child chose, and yet leaders knew that that was a 'flag' that that child is a biter/pincher/hitter, whatever. That way the child doesn't think badly of himself for the sticker, other parents can't look at the child and think "what a brat", and the child is happy with his special sticker


:hug I think I see where PP is coming from...of course you'd never label a child as a "brat", but because so many people think in a punitive mindset, seeing a "biter" sticker is sure to conjure up negative feelings towards the child for some people. A year ago, I would have totally connected a "biter" sticker with a "spoiled, mean, out-of-controlled child". SWIM? Now, I'd never make that mental leap, but I know a lot of people who work in a nursery that would. :hug

[Titus2Momof4]

:hug
Probably the only thing that wouldn't seem so icky to me would be if the child would be allowed to wear a smiley face sticker, or some other sticker the child chose, and yet leaders knew that that was a 'flag' that that child is a biter/pincher/hitter, whatever. That way the child doesn't think badly of himself for the sticker, other parents can't look at the child and think "what a brat", and the child is happy with his special sticker


:hug I think I see where PP is coming from...of course you'd never label a child as a "brat", but because so many people think in a punitive mindset, seeing a "biter" sticker is sure to conjure up negative feelings towards the child for some people. A year ago, I would have totally connected a "biter" sticker with a "spoiled, mean, out-of-controlled child". SWIM? Now, I'd never make that mental leap, but I know a lot of people who work in a nursery that would. :hug


Yes, that is exactly what I meant. And I too would have at one time labelled a biter as "a brat who needs swats". Now, I never would think that, in fact I sympathize which is why I made the certain suggestion of smiley stickers the child could choose IF they MUST have stickers.

[Mamatoto]

Ummm, maybe the child just shouldn't be there. Maybe he doesn't like groups or chaos. Sad. :(

[Sarai]

I would want to know if I was putting my child in with someone who bites. :shrug

The other kids wouldn't know what it said. It would be more for the teachers so they can be more pro-active and help head off dangerous situations.


Yes, but "I"m a biter?" as the wording? Why not just ensure that each teacher is alert to the fact the the child bites, rather than using that sticker? :shrug Using a sticker isn't going to prevent the biting.

[joyful mama]

:think no I don't like that idea... and ime a biter is pretty quick to be known by just about everyone there. My oldest is a biter, but rarely in group settings mostly at home and she is muuuuuuch better now that she's older. I've only ever been around one child who was a terrible biter. He bit as his coping mechanism when he didn't like a rule/sharing etc and would break the skin and hold on like a dog with a bone. I personally felt that if the mother couldn't watch him (she had 2 other kids with her) than she shouldn't have brought him to the playgroup :shrug

[Jillian]

Ummm, maybe the child just shouldn't be there. Maybe he doesn't like groups or chaos. Sad. :(


Yes! :yes

[Teacher Mom]

Probably the only thing that wouldn't seem so icky to me would be if the child would be allowed to wear a smiley face sticker, or some other sticker the child chose, and yet leaders knew that that was a 'flag' that that child is a biter/pincher/hitter, whatever. That way the child doesn't think badly of himself for the sticker, other parents can't look at the child and think "what a brat", and the child is happy with his special sticker. Accomplishes the same thing, w/o humilitation.


I vote for this idea, if anything at all.

I mean, the adults in the class should be aware of the situation and keep a closer eye on him. The parents should be made aware of the situation without anyone needing to know who the child is directly. But if they must use a sticker system, I think the one they are ordering is crazy. And if the parents know their child is a biter, they should not be dropping him off until he/she grows out of this stage and doesn't need constant supervision.

[Bonnie]

If a child is left with a group of children in this age group, there's a good risk (s)he could be bitten. Period. It's not "normal" but it's common. Labeling kids - and they will get the jist of it, on some level or another, either from their own parents comments, or from overhearing the workers, or whatever - is icky. About the only way I could countenance this would be if EVERY child is labeled, I know nurseries where every kid in the door gets a name tag on his back, and you can put a special warning dot or something that the workers know the meaning of but that doesn't spell anything out. Some kids might get a mark that means they have food allergies. Some are potty training. Some aren't. Some are "being challenged by the transition to a group dynamic and need some extra supervision and help." ;)

If you knew a kid in your child's room was a known biter, what would you do about it? Stay and supervise? If not, how is it helpful to know who it is? (I'm not being snarky, and I'm not aiming this at any pp. I'm thinking out loud.) In this case, forewarning is not fore arming. Unless you count just acknowledging the fact that some kids do bite and it's always a risk in a group setting.

[Mothering by Heart]

I wouldn't leave my child alone in a room with someone who is a serial biter :shrug

FWIW, I don't think a serial biter should be in there in the first place :shrug

[Teacher Mom]

:spit I'm sorry ......serial biter sounds funny!

[CelticJourney]

I wouldn't leave my child alone in a room with someone who is a serial biter

From what I understand this point doesn't apply to the situation. They say only the workers will see the sticker (in response to labeling). So mothers will not be informed via this system and if the worker knows to put on the sticker, what's the point?

[AmyDoll]

I don't understand at all. :shrug In any situation that I've ever been a part of (Sunday School, Bible Study, Preschool) one bite and you're done. You can't come back. You're not safe. Biting isn't tolerated. In VA - the health dept has to be called if the biter breaks the skin of the bitee and they treat it kind of like the bite of a wild animal. It's incredibly serious.

I'm not sure what the whole point of the Scarlet A on the child's chest is. I think I'd prefer to "jail" him in a playpen or something (I'm assuming he's under 2) Did we know how old he is?

[Dana Joy]

she's 18 months

[Bonnie]

I don't understand at all. :shrug In any situation that I've ever been a part of (Sunday School, Bible Study, Preschool) one bite and you're done. You can't come back. You're not safe. Biting isn't tolerated. In VA - the health dept has to be called if the biter breaks the skin of the bitee and they treat it kind of like the bite of a wild animal. It's incredibly serious.


Um, wow. I totally get treating a broken-skin bite as something medically serious. But to forever bar a child from the nursery or Sunday school or whatever because they bit someone once? My ds, at about 11 months, bit a little girl on the face. :jawdrop I was horrified, to say nothing of the girl's mother. :blush But for Pete's sake, in this case, my ds had no idea what he'd done, he was still figuring out how to "kiss" and used his teeth by mistake. Once or twice on other occasions he scraped his teeth on my cheek, much as he'd done more forcefully with the girl, but other than that, it was never repeated, and he never developed the habit of biting in response to stress, or whatever, like some kids do. The "you're not safe" thing really strikes me as unreasonable. Kids do this. You can have a "no tolerance" policy against biting without barring children for something that is developmentally understandable and not necessarily habitual. All I can think is, "so the kid bit someone and now the parents can't go to church?" we've had long periods of time where going as a family was simply not possible. At two, my ds would've been bored silly.

[righteous mama]

Mary was a serial biter (or cereal biter?). It was so hard as her mom. At MOPS they made me feel REALLY bad. I think MOPS workers in general just don't want to deal with any problems. Even though I was willing to work with them, they made me feel horrible. Although they are also the same teachers who left my child in the hallway and when I went to pick her up she came running and sobbing to me 'cause she was so scared. :banghead

I like the color code, though. I don't mind a head's up...thankfully Mary worked through it, but she is a very oral person and chews on her hair, etc. So...I wonder if that had something to do with it.

[Lady TS]

I guess I'm not totally against them putting a label on a child who is going through a biting stage. I know that when you get more than 5 or 6 toddlers in one room and moms are dropping off their kids and the workers are working with the kids and everyone is talking, it's a bit chaotic and many times the info (such as this child is going thru a biting phase so watch more carefully, this child has allergies to X so only give him/her the snack in the bag, etc) doesn't get around to everyone, even though it's written on the sign-in sheet. My kids wear name tags with their name and my name on them. I actually wish they had some sort of system with the tags re: food allergies or other issues, because then dd wouldn't have been given a snack before I had introduced solids(I intro'd solids at 7 mos and they'd assumed she'd started long ago :mad).

I would assume they wouldn't use the sticker once the danger was gone and she outgrew that phase. :shrug

[expatmom]

I just think its a weird way to deal with a problem. :shrug The mom is okay with dropping her kid off & dealing with the situation with a sticker. :hunh

As a mom of a former biter, I just wouldn't have set my ds up like that. He couldn't have handled being dropped off in a big bunch of kids all by his lonesome, especially at the young age of 18 months. It would have been a recipe for disaster. When he was in his biting stage, I stuck to him like glue. We tried to limit any opportunity for biting. A sticker won't help the child learn not to bite & unless it is a gigantic childcare situation (which I would avoid completely) the workers should know the children well enough to not have to identify them by sticker.

[Titus2Momof4]

I don't understand at all. :shrug In any situation that I've ever been a part of (Sunday School, Bible Study, Preschool) one bite and you're done. You can't come back. You're not safe. Biting isn't tolerated. In VA - the health dept has to be called if the biter breaks the skin of the bitee and they treat it kind of like the bite of a wild animal. It's incredibly serious.


Um, wow. I totally get treating a broken-skin bite as something medically serious. But to forever bar a child from the nursery or Sunday school or whatever because they bit someone once? My ds, at about 11 months, bit a little girl on the face. :jawdrop I was horrified, to say nothing of the girl's mother. :blush But for Pete's sake, in this case, my ds had no idea what he'd done, he was still figuring out how to "kiss" and used his teeth by mistake. Once or twice on other occasions he scraped his teeth on my cheek, much as he'd done more forcefully with the girl, but other than that, it was never repeated, and he never developed the habit of biting in response to stress, or whatever, like some kids do. The "you're not safe" thing really strikes me as unreasonable. Kids do this. You can have a "no tolerance" policy against biting without barring children for something that is developmentally understandable and not necessarily habitual. All I can think is, "so the kid bit someone and now the parents can't go to church?" we've had long periods of time where going as a family was simply not possible. At two, my ds would've been bored silly.


I agree. I don't like the 'one strike you're out' thing. And, I have never had a biter (sure they have all tried it but I've never had a child who consistently bit- it was usually during teething, and never at other kids. I think I have been bit, probably less than 10 times by my 4 kids....so I don't speak as the mom of a biter, but I can totally understand what you are saying here)

[jenn3514]

Our MOPS group is pretty small compared to some of yours, and to be fair to the moppet workers we volunteer at another MOPS group, and they volunteer at ours.So the workers don't always know the kids that well. (we always have at least one familiar face in with them) But when I read this, my imediate thought was that the sticker would be on the childs back,(where we put name stickers) and if a symbol was used,like a toothy smile, I don't think it such a bad thing. I label allergies/ moms name/ special instructions on them. Sometimes we are overwhelmed with the amount of kids in there, and it is much easier to have the info attached to the child, then trying to look it up while playing with a dozen toddlers.
I also agree with Amy, biting is much different than hitting, screaming,etc. Biting has the potential to seriously injure another child, human bites are more likely to require medical treatment than hitting, or screaming, etc. Having said that- the "I'm a biter" sticker doesn't work for me at all. But letting the adult workers have something that lets them know and keeps it in front of them, :shrug, I'm ok with that.

[HomeWithMyBabies]

I don't think I understand the point of the sticker in the first place.

I've worked in a day care. Any kid could potentially bite another kid. Any kid who has a history of biting another kid should be observed more closely when in close proximity to other kids. If you can't manage that for whatever reason, the staff needs to improve communication between themselves and the parents, and/or they need a better staff to kid ratio. It seems obvious to me.

[DogwoodMama]

My child has hit (2 times) and bit (1 time) other children. I'm really glad that we weren't banned from our activity or labeled forever. :/

[Rabbit]

I can't even read everything before I respond.

First - Educational research indicates that labelling children in order to help them does the opposite. Labels go on, and don't come off. They color an adult's perceptions, interactions, and how they reflect a child back at themselves, such that even in subtle ways, the child acquires the label on their hearts, not just their clothes. It cannot be safely done. Teachers are no longer allowed to put little astrixs in their gradebooks to indicate children with any form of disability. The need to communicate is still there, but it cannot be done with a sticker or label, however shiny and pretty you might be able to make it.

Second - I am highly suspicious of the spirit behind putting a sticker with words about the child's problem anywhere at all on a child. As a student teacher, I saw a student come to my class with a sign on his back, telling everybody that he was a bed wetter. He was still in his wet undies. My stomach is still in knots over it, and I will never ever forget the child. Nursery workers who have seen this done or had it done to them may be in your church. Other parents with this kind of negative experience are going to be in your church. People who might want to adapt it in even further negative ways are going to see it.

This label does not need to happen, because it isn't a health warning in and of itself. "I'm a biter" is not a positive communication. It has negative meaning. "I'm allergic to peanuts" or "My epi pen is in my fanny pack" doesn't have that same emotional punch. This label is inherently different.

Absolutely, staff can find a better way to communicate than this sticker idea.

-Natalie

[jenn3514]

I don't think I understand the point of the sticker in the first place.

I've worked in a day care. Any kid could potentially bite another kid. Any kid who has a history of biting another kid should be observed more closely when in close proximity to other kids. If you can't manage that for whatever reason, the staff needs to improve communication between themselves and the parents, and/or they need a better staff to kid ratio. It seems obvious to me.

That works, if you are talking about a situation that you can 'staff' and not depend on volunteers, which,(here anyway) does not occur in MOPs or kids church. As I said before, I am not an advocate of an out and out "i am a .....", but for example, our usual amount of kids in a meeting is about 15, due to whatever reasons, our last meeting had almost doulble that. This left one adult worker with 2 home-schooled teens to help out. I'm looking at the age and figuring that a signal, if only a different color ink on the name tag, isn't horrible.
Natalie-the wet my pants sign, sounds more like a deliberate attempt to humiliate a child, then any attempt to help them.(to me that classifies as abuse)Poor kid. :hug,poor you.I would have wanted to bring him home with me.
I am still out on the health issues, because I've seen many kids over the years with seriuos infections from human bites. The majority of them were from pre-schoolers,and were just deep enough to draw blood.

[cklewis]

the child who bites in ds's class -- i would never want him banned. :sad2 ds and I talk about it a lot. "Honey. he bites because he has big feelings and can't find his words. he needs to punch a bag or pound some clay or some dough."

C

[greenskittle]

I agree with everything that Natalie said. :yes

I was a day care teacher for 2 yo's when I was younger and we would get the "problem" kids from the younger class pushed up to our class. As hard as I tried, I never liked one of those kids. It's almost impossible to assign positive intent to a "problem." There's no, "I should be helping him cope," or "I should be supervising more closely," because everyone knows that the child is the "problem."

It's really sad. I'm really sorry to the moms of Bubba, and Kelsey, and Terryle. I was told that their kids were trouble, and I could never find it in myself to see past that. :(

It's the same reason that I won't call my DD "gifted" no matter how smart she proves herself to be. She's really smart and incredibly verbal, but I don't want to pressure her with the baggage that comes with all of the adults in her life expecting her to act "gifted." Even though it's supposed to be a good thing, it's still a label that's placed on a child, it is not the child themselves.

[HomeWithMyBabies]

I don't think I understand the point of the sticker in the first place.

I've worked in a day care. Any kid could potentially bite another kid. Any kid who has a history of biting another kid should be observed more closely when in close proximity to other kids. If you can't manage that for whatever reason, the staff needs to improve communication between themselves and the parents, and/or they need a better staff to kid ratio. It seems obvious to me.
That works, if you are talking about a situation that you can 'staff' and not depend on volunteers, which,(here anyway) does not occur in MOPs or kids church. As I said before, I am not an advocate of an out and out "i am a .....", but for example, our usual amount of kids in a meeting is about 15, due to whatever reasons, our last meeting had almost doulble that. This left one adult worker with 2 home-schooled teens to help out. I'm looking at the age and figuring that a signal, if only a different color ink on the name tag, isn't horrible.

I get what you're saying, but I still don't get the point of the sticker. If a situation is that understaffed, no sticker is going to be preventative enough. All it will do will single out the child and identify her as the problem.

For a kid to be permitted to bite so many times that staff feels a physical label is neccesary to help keep the other children safe...that says to me that the program needs a major overhaul. Yes, kids are going to do impulsive and inappropriate things no matter how closely we watch them. But for a child to bite that often just screams at me that there's a bigger issue here.

I think a label on the door is more appropriate: "Our program is unable to provide each child with a reasonable level of supervision."

[Rbonmom]

To me if the nursery is so full that the workers can't keep an eye on a "biter" and know by sight who they are, then there are too many kids :td

ITA that the label, no matter how "nice" is still going to cause people to treat the dc more negatively. Even if it is just the workers, and not the moms too. As a mom of a reformed biter, it would have made the situation much worse and I would hate to think that the stigma would have followed him. And I also confess that in my former days working with kids, if I knew a kid bit, I would have labeled him/her a "brat" and not be as gracious :bheart

[Titus2Momof4]

To me if the nursery is so full that the workers can't keep an eye on a "biter" and know by sight who they are, then there are too many kids :td

ITA that the label, no matter how "nice" is still going to cause people to treat the dc more negatively. Even if it is just the workers, and not the moms too. As a mom of a reformed biter, it would have made the situation much worse and I would hate to think that the stigma would have followed him. And I also confess that in my former days working with kids, if I knew a kid bit, I would have labeled him/her a "brat" and not be as gracious :bheart


ITA with all of this!!! I don't see why the sticker is so needed *to begin with*?? Why can't they just remember who the biter is and be more proactive?

[jenn3514]

To me if the nursery is so full that the workers can't keep an eye on a "biter" and know by sight who they are, then there are too many kids :td

ITA that the label, no matter how "nice" is still going to cause people to treat the dc more negatively. Even if it is just the workers, and not the moms too. As a mom of a reformed biter, it would have made the situation much worse and I would hate to think that the stigma would have followed him. And I also confess that in my former days working with kids, if I knew a kid bit, I would have labeled him/her a "brat" and not be as gracious :bheart
Sometimes there are alot of kids. Fortunately our core group is used to each other from being together outside of mops. When there are more kids then normal, we ask for extra volunteers. Most of the women don't. Short of telling people That they can't come, or they have to volunteer once in awhile, I'm not sure what else to do. :shrug Having said that- if there were no stickers, for names or whatrever, no I wouldn't suggest a special sticker..
I guess I am fortunate that the main group of women who would be there believe that the situation causes the behavior, not the child himself. That label would not cause the leader to look at a child as a brat,or wait to pounce on them when they do something. When we know a child has something, (even a low melting point), we look for ways to keep that child engaged to avoid the situation.-But if you have 6 new kids, and 2-3 have special needs/or behaviors, it is hard to keep up with that.
The point that I am trying to make is that while I don't necesarily agree with the label thing, I can see instances where some type of identifying would be helpful. Not that it is necessary all the time,or should be done on a regular basis.

[MomTo7]

:hunh I don't like that...at all.

I would, however, appreciate knowing there is (more of) a chance - or a good possibility - my child could be bitten if I left him somewhere. I think a more appropriate thing to do would be to hang a sign on the door, or put a note on the sign in sheet, or something else, that there is a child in the room who is in a biting phase. I don't need to know who it is.

And, actually, really that's for the workers to know and deal with. They should just watch "the biter" more closely to prevent any more incidences.

Yikes. :rolleyes2


That's what I think too. It's really that simple for me. I totally think that's fair for everyone :yes I can just see all the little 18-24 months old sitting around quitly as they try to pull the sticker off their friends back! :giggle This recently happened at our church but not with mean stickers. The teacher put smilie face stickers on the little ones shirts and they all tried so hard to pull them off to play with them. :shrug

[Titus2Momof4]

Short of telling people That they can't come, or they have to volunteer once in awhile, I'm not sure what else to do.

I don't necessarily think this is a bad idea :shifty I mean, gently letting the mamas know that the number of volunteers is not consistent enough to keep up with the demand they have (emphasis on how this is a GOOD thing because it means more mamas are coming, yada yada) and say that if you are in need of MOPPETS then we need you to volunteer on a rotating basis (ideally, at least one person will be consistent in the room every week, maybe with the other person/people being MOPS moms) I once attended a woman's bible study that did just that- it was meeting for 8 weeks, and I believe it worked out so that each of us only had to do it once.

[Eowyn]

he needs to punch a bag or pound some clay or some dough."

C


Ian loves that song. :heart He sings it when he's feeling frustrated.

While I can see the value in finding some way to alert a teacher that a child will need extra supervision, I am really uncomfortable with the idea of a label or a sticker. :think

[Lady TS]

What would be more damaging to a child? To have a sticker on his back letting others know he bites, or for the child to hear about 6 or 8 times as the different workers are told "___ is a biter. We need to watch him more closely."

I personally would rather my child have a sticker on their back that in some way lets others know and not hear it over and over again.

:soapbox
*sigh* I try not to get all bristled up about these things. Takes too much energy. I find myself here a lot and :yes with the majority of things re: discipline. Then I go out into "the real world" and find myself judging and getting all offended by those who choose to do things differently. I don't want to be that way. Everyone is not going to do things the way we think they should. There is a point where we have to give a little and assume positive intent, no?
Ok, stepping down from the :soapbox :shifty

[Sarai]

What would be more damaging to a child? To have a sticker on his back letting others know he bites, or for the child to hear about 6 or 8 times as the different workers are told "___ is a biter. We need to watch him more closely."


I wouldn't want that said in front of my child, either, which is why the workers should be notified quietly. That's not unrealistic, IMO.

[expatmom]

What would be more damaging to a child? To have a sticker on his back letting others know he bites, or for the child to hear about 6 or 8 times as the different workers are told "___ is a biter. We need to watch him more closely."

Don't you think that as parents walked in the room & saw the sticker, they would comment on it though? "Oh, what happened?!" "Who did he bite?" "Hey little Suzy, be careful. Come play over here instead of by that boy." I think it would get talked about just as much. :shrug

[RubySlippers]

I wouldn't leave my child alone in a room with someone who is a serial biter :shrug

FWIW, I don't think a serial biter should be in there in the first place :shrug

:yes
And I think the idea that only the workers will see the sticker is bogus. Are they going to wait till every child is dropped off and then sneak the sticker on the child? And will they sneak the sticker off before the parents pick up their children? What's the point of the sticker then? And the workers will just know *sarcasm* when a parent might come to check on a child? :eyebrow Ah well...
If my child were the "biter", I wouldn't leave her in a situation where she could harm other children. :no

[Mothering by Heart]

If my child were the "biter", I wouldn't leave her in a situation where she could harm other children

:yes I don't think it is fair to the other children. :sad2 I wouldn't leave my kid if she were a biter :shrug

[Lady TS]

What would be more damaging to a child? To have a sticker on his back letting others know he bites, or for the child to hear about 6 or 8 times as the different workers are told "___ is a biter. We need to watch him more closely."

Don't you think that as parents walked in the room & saw the sticker, they would comment on it though? "Oh, what happened?!" "Who did he bite?" "Hey little Suzy, be careful. Come play over here instead of by that boy." I think it would get talked about just as much. :shrug


I don't take the time to read every child's name sticker when I drop off dd. In fact, I only know one other child's name in the room of oh, maybe 10 toddlers. I just don't even think to do that. I'm just bringing dd, settling her, signing her in and then I'm out the door. :shrug

[Dana Joy]

If my child were the "biter", I wouldn't leave her in a situation where she could harm other children

:yes I don't think it is fair to the other children. :sad2 I wouldn't leave my kid if she were a biter :shrug

perfect world that would be great, but as a single mama trying to feed my children, i had no choice but to leave my child, even though she bite.
one of my clients also has biting issues- his mom is a single mama- how horrible for her if i kicked him out of my daycare for having a very typical 2 year old issue.

[Titus2Momof4]

If my child were the "biter", I wouldn't leave her in a situation where she could harm other children

:yes I don't think it is fair to the other children. :sad2 I wouldn't leave my kid if she were a biter :shrug

perfect world that would be great, but as a single mama trying to feed my children, i had no choice but to leave my child, even though she bite.
one of my clients also has biting issues- his mom is a single mama- how horrible for her if i kicked him out of my daycare for having a very typical 2 year old issue.


((((Dana))))) I *think* the person who wrote that was speaking in terms of things like MOPS and Sunday School - things that are *optional*.

[expatmom]

:hug I think daycare is a totally different situation though. You & his mom can work together, and be really consistent. A MOPS situation where caregivers are never the same & the kids don't really know each other & there is no predictable routine seems just so unfair to a kid who doesn't have the control or words yet to express him or herself.

[Mothering by Heart]

((((Dana))))) I *think* the person who wrote that was speaking in terms of things like MOPS and Sunday School - things that are *optional*.
:hug I think daycare is a totally different situation though. You & his mom can work together, and be really consistent. A MOPS situation where caregivers are never the same & the kids don't really know each other & there is no predictable routine seems just so unfair to a kid who doesn't have the control or words yet to express him or herself.


Yes and yes :yes

[jenn3514]

:hug I think daycare is a totally different situation though. You & his mom can work together, and be really consistent. A MOPS situation where caregivers are never the same & the kids don't really know each other & there is no predictable routine seems just so unfair to a kid who doesn't have the control or words yet to express him or herself.
In our situation, the "routine" is predictable. We have sign/greet time, story time, song time, usually a game involving the story, 'craft' or color time, snack time. then whatever is left is free time. Moost of the kids are able to follow this, those who aren't are given toys or things to do whilestill remaining in the group.
As far as the caregivers never being the same, I'm not sure where that came from. As stated in pp, there is the same one adult there every week, and the same three teens, (about 16 yo).we do borrow additional ones when we can,because the response from our moms has been anything from 'I cant schedule that far ahead' to 'I come here to get away from my kids'. :( Also, this is a situation that rises occassionaly. Again, as said in a pp, our core group of kids, (about 15 of them) are very used to each other and spend time together outside of mops.
Tasha-yes we have gotten to the point where I think we have to not ask for vlounteers but just tell them we have to have them.

[GodChick]

I don't agree with having the child wear a sticker, no matter how it's worded. I can't remember how old the kid is -- 2yo? At that age, the other kids can't read the sticker, that's true . . . but my kids, by the time they were about 1yo, would be asking, "Why does ____ have that sticker?" "Can I have a sticker?" "What does it say?"

Somehow, one of the kids is going to be told, perhaps by his parent dropping him off:

"What does ___'s sticker say?"
"It says that he bites."

And then soon all the kids will know ___ has a sticker because he bites.

I used to work in daycare . . . I would think that just TELLING the teachers to be on the lookout because he bites should be sufficient . . . I don't think they need a sticker as a reminder. I agree maybe the parents of other kids should be made aware of the situation too, but I think that also should be done verbally -- letting them know when they drop the kid off, perhaps -- that would be more effective than the kid running around with a sticker, anyway, because if ___ is playing on the other side of the room, parents dropping off their kids may not even notice the sticker.

[expatmom]

As far as the caregivers never being the same, I'm not sure where that came from.


I wasn't speaking to your situation. I was responding to Dana, the OP.

[tiglet]

I don't agree with having the child wear a sticker, no matter how it's worded. I can't remember how old the kid is -- 2yo? At that age, the other kids can't read the sticker, that's true . . . but my kids, by the time they were about 1yo, would be asking, "Why does ____ have that sticker?" "Can I have a sticker?" "What does it say?"

Somehow, one of the kids is going to be told, perhaps by his parent dropping him off:

"What does ___'s sticker say?"
"It says that he bites."

And then soon all the kids will know ___ has a sticker because he bites.

I used to work in daycare . . . I would think that just TELLING the teachers to be on the lookout because he bites should be sufficient . . . I don't think they need a sticker as a reminder. I agree maybe the parents should be made aware of the situation too, but I think that also should be done verbally -- letting them know when they drop the kid off, perhaps -- that would be more effective than the kid running around with a sticker, anyway, because if ___ is playing on the other side of the room, parents dropping off their kids may not even notice the sticker.


This makes really good sense to me. Does everyone have a sticker, and the "biter" sticker is just different? Even so....I think it's a terrible idea. If the problem is really with one child, then why can't it be that parent's responsibility to tell the caregivers, every time? Not so difficult. For *weeks* I told the same daycare workers every day not to give B milk, until everyone KNEW. If this is best solution your coordinator can come up with for something like biting...what will she do with something like life-threatening allergies? A sign on the door warning other parents (as was suggested in pp) is a good idea, too. Then parents will know, the caregivers will know, the child doesn't let labeled, the other kids don't learn more negative labels, and there aren't any sticker fights.

Dangle a sticker in front of my child and she'll do *anything* to get it....

[RubySlippers]

If my child were the "biter", I wouldn't leave her in a situation where she could harm other children

:yes I don't think it is fair to the other children. :sad2 I wouldn't leave my kid if she were a biter :shrug

perfect world that would be great, but as a single mama trying to feed my children, i had no choice but to leave my child, even though she bite.
one of my clients also has biting issues- his mom is a single mama- how horrible for her if i kicked him out of my daycare for having a very typical 2 year old issue.


((((Dana))))) I *think* the person who wrote that was speaking in terms of things like MOPS and Sunday School - things that are *optional*.

Yes, I was referring to the MOPS situation in your OP. I don't know where daycare enters into the discussion for you...but, you seem touchy about it. No offense was intended. :hugheart


Dangle a sticker in front of my child and she'll do *anything* to get it....

:laughtears I could totally see another child snatching and wearing the sticker by the end of "class." :giggle

[expatmom]

Dangle a sticker in front of my child and she'll do *anything* to get it....

:laughtears I could totally see another child snatching and wearing the sticker by the end of "class." :giggle


Or eating it. :eek

[Katherine]

Now, for allergies, I think stickers are a great idea! :tu Anything to catch someone's attention before they unthinkingly give my son a piece of candy with nuts in it--I'm all for! :) I'm visiting a church now that has medical alert stickers, and I tell them each time that my 5yo has food allergies... they write it in big letters and put the sticker on his back, so I feel pretty secure they'll remember because each time it is verbalized and they write it themselves, AND there's a sticker on his back. :)

[Lady TS]

Now, for allergies, I think stickers are a great idea! :tu Anything to catch someone's attention before they unthinkingly give my son a piece of candy with nuts in it--I'm all for! :) I'm visiting a church now that has medical alert stickers, and I tell them each time that my 5yo has food allergies... they write it in big letters and put the sticker on his back, so I feel pretty secure they'll remember because each time it is verbalized and they write it themselves, AND there's a sticker on his back. :)


You know, a kid can feel alienated and be labeled by other kids(and adults) because of his behavior(biting). The same thing can happen with kids with allergies, I feel. Ds2 was no dairy/no wheat for awhile last year, and is now pretty much no dairy(I'm not as anal about it as I was) and there is a stigma that comes with it. "Here comes the kid with the allergies. :rolleyes Don't feed him anything." The difference is that the kid who bites can do something to change his behavior. The kid with allergies can't do a thing to change his "label". :shrug

With allergies, the child's health is at stake. With biting, other children's health is at stake. I still don't have a problem with the sticker thing. I just see it as one way to get the word around and keep the kids as safe as possible. In a perfect world, yes, all the workers could be quietly told that _____ bites and to keep an eye on him, but this isn't a perfect world and often the check-in time is pretty chaotic (at least at our MOPS). I'm not against putting a notice on the door or a place on the sign-in sheet or the other ideas that have been mentioned, I just see the sticker as one of many tools in the toolbox, kwim?

[tiglet]

Hm. If my girl realized that the way someone got a sticker was to bite, I think she'd *start* biting. :shrug

To me, it's like using a sledgehammer when a screwdriver is needed.

[Katherine]

The same thing can happen with kids with allergies, I feel. Ds2 was no dairy/no wheat for awhile last year, and is now pretty much no dairy(I'm not as anal about it as I was) and there is a stigma that comes with it. "Here comes the kid with the allergies. Don't feed him anything." The difference is that the kid who bites can do something to change his behavior. The kid with allergies can't do a thing to change his "label".

I do think they're different, but not in the same way that you do, I guess. ;) :lol :think

For a person with serious, life-threatening allergies, it DOES have to become part of their identity and lifestyle to an extent. :shrug For as long as my son lives, he'll NEVER be able to walk into a Thai restaurant or a Roadhouse Grill. His life is literally at stake. Everyone who knows him and associates with him on a regular basis will have to learn not to break out a jar of peanut butter while he's in the room, or pass around the peanut-containing cookies; even if he doesn't eat one, he's still in danger from being near them. It's NOT something he can change, and until he's old enough to protect himself, other people have to do it for him. It requires *constant* attention and caution--even I goof up sometimes. :nails :eek :( And if someone isn't paying attention for just a minute, he won't just have a set of teeth marks and an upsetting memory--he might be dead. :cry Your average child-care worker has not had to deal personally with nut allergies, and are not used to checking labels on the snacks they bring to church. (I check the labels every week when I drop him off)

Biting, on the other hand, is a normal developmental behavior. Most kids do it at some point... some kids do it more than others... all of them generally grow out of it unless there are profound special needs involved, and--in contrast to serious allergies--they do not have to modify their lifestyle choices to accomodate it. ;) It *shouldn't* be part of their identity or "specs" and labeling it simply makes it so. I WAS a "biter" so I'm speaking as someone who has borne that label... and it's still in the back recesses of my mind. I *am* a biter. :/ :( (Even though my sis was, I believe, the only other child I bit... and even though I haven't bitten anyone in decades.. still... that was made to be part of my identity as a young child, and it shouldn't have been.) Every person who has worked with children for any significant amount of time has probably encountered biting behavior, and it doesn't require special tools or medications or precautions other than supervision.

I think allergies are a different thing altogether, and sorry if I got the conversation off track by bringing them up. :O I just remembered the stickers they've used, which I thought were a good thing, so I was contrasting the two. :shifty

[Lady TS]

The same thing can happen with kids with allergies, I feel. Ds2 was no dairy/no wheat for awhile last year, and is now pretty much no dairy(I'm not as anal about it as I was) and there is a stigma that comes with it. "Here comes the kid with the allergies. Don't feed him anything." The difference is that the kid who bites can do something to change his behavior. The kid with allergies can't do a thing to change his "label".

I do think they're different, but not in the same way that you do, I guess. ;) :lol :think

For a person with serious, life-threatening allergies, it DOES have to become part of their identity and lifestyle to an extent. :shrug For as long as my son lives, he'll NEVER be able to walk into a Thai restaurant or a Roadhouse Grill. His life is literally at stake. Everyone who knows him and associates with him on a regular basis will have to learn not to break out a jar of peanut butter while he's in the room, or pass around the peanut-containing cookies; even if he doesn't eat one, he's still in danger from being near them. It's NOT something he can change, and until he's old enough to protect himself, other people have to do it for him. It requires *constant* attention and caution--even I goof up sometimes. :nails :eek :( And if someone isn't paying attention for just a minute, he won't just have a set of teeth marks and an upsetting memory--he might be dead. :cry Your average child-care worker has not had to deal personally with nut allergies, and are not used to checking labels on the snacks they bring to church. (I check the labels every week when I drop him off)

Biting, on the other hand, is a normal developmental behavior. Most kids do it at some point... some kids do it more than others... all of them generally grow out of it unless there are profound special needs involved, and--in contrast to serious allergies--they do not have to modify their lifestyle choices to accomodate it. ;) It *shouldn't* be part of their identity or "specs" and labeling it simply makes it so. I WAS a "biter" so I'm speaking as someone who has borne that label... and it's still in the back recesses of my mind. I *am* a biter. :/ :( (Even though my sis was, I believe, the only other child I bit... and even though I haven't bitten anyone in decades.. still... that was made to be part of my identity as a young child, and it shouldn't have been.) Every person who has worked with children for any significant amount of time has probably encountered biting behavior, and it doesn't require special tools or medications or precautions other than supervision.

I think allergies are a different thing altogether, and sorry if I got the conversation off track by bringing them up. :O I just remembered the stickers they've used, which I thought were a good thing, so I was contrasting the two. :shifty


:hug
I was comparing the biting child to my ds who has allergies(but not life-threatening) and my experience with that. I hadn't thought of the extreme end of the allergy issue.

No hard feelings or anything.
Gotta go--dd is fussing again. :(

[greenemama]

:jawdrop

if i saw a child wearing a sticker like that i'd never leave my child in that room. how horrible. :bheart

[greenskittle]

I've been thinking about this more.

As I recall, when I taught daycare *I* was the lead teacher, and therefore it was *MY* responsibility to keep "the biters" from biting. I didn't have to tell anyone, not even the assistant teacher in my class (if she wasn't my regular assistant) who the biter was. And if he did bite, it was supposed to be my fault. I should have been there.

So theoretically, there shouldn't need to be any sort of communication about the biter besides between the parent of the biter and the authority figure in the class. If the authority figure in the class can't handle the situation and be discrete about it, perhaps there are too many kids.

And, when it comes to MOPS, one of the big reasons that I will never go is that I know that the classes get huge, and inconsistently so. I'm afraid to leave my child in a situation like that, especially when it is just for me to "get away from them" every month. :(

[MomTo7]

Hm|76|77
If|80|81
my|83|84
girl|86|89
realized|91|98
that|100|103
the|105|107
way|109|111
someone|113|119
got|121|123
sticker|127|133
was|135|137
to|139|140
bite|142|145
think|150|154
she'd|156|160
start|163|167
biting|170|175
shrug|180|184
To|189|190
me|192|193
it's|196|199
like|201|204
using|206|210
sledgehammer|214|225
when|227|230
screwdriver|234|244
is|246|247
needed|249|254
can|272|274
sooo|276|279
see|281|283
that|285|288
happening|290|298
So|303|304
hummmm|306|311
if|315|316
bite|320|323
get|327|329
pretty|333|338
sticker|340|346
too|348|350
mean|357|360
we|362|363
can't|365|369
possibly|371|378
believe|380|386
every|388|392
child|394|398
could|400|404
think|406|410
rationally|412|421
at|423|424
that|426|429
age|431|433
right|436|440

[CelticJourney]

Woah - I'm assuming there is a technical error of some sort.

[Titus2Momof4]

Woah - I'm assuming there is a technical error of some sort.


Me too....and I'm still trying to decipher it... :shifty

[jenn3514]

I'm afraid to leave my child in a situation like that, especially when it is just for me to "get away from them" every month. :(

This is what makes me :banghead, and :hissyfit. If you know they are short-staffed, how can you enjoy your time?

[Soliloquy]

The idea that being bitten can cause more damage than other aggressive act is is false. A child can push another child, they could fall and hit the back of their head and suffer a concussion or worse. The child who does the biting is exposed to the blood (if skin is broken) of the victim--but the victim isn't usually exposed to anything.

I worked in daycare and naturally, a few toddlers went through biting phases. We had to be vigilant. It did happen a few times, in the blink of an eye.

When you leave your child with someone else, especially in a group care setting like this, you assume these kinds of risks. It should be assumed when you leave your child in a church nursery with other young children that some of them may be going through aggressive stages. This is why we don't leave our children with anyone we don't know very well and who know our children very well

If the caregivers can't remember who the biter is, they're not competent to be supervising children.

[Heather Micaela]

My sunday school experience is the toddler age. I have seen several one-time only biting incidents and a few "serial" biters (my son is/was one). Never in all that time (and 2 different churches) has there ever been the need to label a child. Never.

SS teachers are supposed to arrive ahead of time before kids and parents arrive. At that time they can explain that Kyle or Kaylee bites and to keep and eye on him/her and give them extra love. They dont even have to *know* the child. When that child does arrive a happy "Hi KYLE how are you today! Look miss Tracy, Kyles here!" Should suffice.

It was always our policy to *not* "tattle" about one bite incident and just tell the parents of the biter/bitten. A child that bites regualrly I think we sent an annomyous note that there is a biter in the class. But the child was not singled out to the parents.

As the parent of a biter, I would be sad if my kid was wearing a "scarlet letter" or banned from returning. Even if it is not daycare, it is important. Why should my child never get to benefit from sunday school? (Now granted I have an older child - there is not much benefit to 18 month olds)

[Mothering by Heart]

I know I never said any child should be "banned"

I think if a child is a serial biter, then the parent should keep them out of those situations which set the child up for failure :shrug

[Heather Micaela]

I was speaking in general, not specifically to you, Amy. :hug

I agree if the child consistently bites, the parent should not keep putting them in the situatuon - especailly if it is a toddler. With an older child like mine, it becomes a special needs issue and the chruch should help accomodate the child just as they would (or should) the autisitc child. (Unfortunatley I have seen that NOT happen. My freind left a church because of the persecution of her autistic child.)

[Titus2Momof4]

I know I never said any child should be "banned"

I think if a child is a serial biter, then the parent should keep them out of those situations which set the child up for failure :shrug


I don't think anyone thought that Amy. Someone here mentioned that their church had a 'one strike you're out' policy (that is MY way of wording it) where if a child bites even once they are banned.