One of the mums was unhappy because I didn't let her daughter go during the afternoon and she was dying for the toilet on the way home. She asked 5 minutes after lunch. Why not go after I dismissed the class at the end of the day?
OP was basically winding people up because she got called out (probably to her superiors) by an upset mother.
She wanted to be vindicated that the mother was being totally unreasonable while she was being fair and rational.
The example given
on the surface seems to justify her reasoning (if the kid can wait that long, she didn't need to go that bad in class), but that isn't the point.
There are just too many variables and unknown factors to unilaterally deny a child an opportunity to go to the bathroom, and erring on the side of grace and compassion seems preferable.
I understand teaching is a challenging profession, and it can wear on you dealing with young people of all ages.
Kids can be sneaky, and they can find every loophole to take advantage of situations.
Kids can be cruel and bullies when they sense an opportunity to take advantage of others as well.
At the end of the day, its as simple as this, sometimes a kid needs to go to the bathroom.
Sure, maybe they should have gone when they had the opportunity, but they didn't.
Or maybe, just maybe things changed internally in the kid since the last break (maybe lunch didn't agree with them).
But no child should be made to urinate or defacate on themselves to prove a teacher's "I told you so" point.
And just because it hasn't happened yet, doesn't mean it won't the next time.
