I was really annoyed last night.  Nearly all of the swimming pools in my area of which there are several are adopting a policy whereas once a child has reached the age of 8 they are no longer allowed to enter a changing room of the opposite sex.  Basically I took my 8 year old to the pool last night something I've always done since he was a baby.  Only to be told that now he's 8 he can't use the ladies changing rooms he must use the gents.  I was so annoyed, I'm not letting him go into the gents on his own, you never know what could happen.  He's capable of getting himself dried and dressed so that's not the issue it's just that he'd be getting dressed in a room full of men that I don't know and it's not a risk I want to take.  So I had to get a refund and take him home. This pool or the other ones in the area don't have any family changing rooms.  So even though I was angry, it's now making me doubt myself.  Should I let him go in the male changing room on his own?  if anyone has kids, your opinions on this would be appreciated.  What age did you let your kids go into a changing room on their own.  Maybe I'm being over anxious, I don't know but my gut feeling was that he's too young.

Our local swimming pool just has one area full of individual changing cubicles and men and women are free to use any one.
I dont think i would be happy letting an 8 year old in on his own to get changed, but likewise is at the age when he's begging to understand the female form. Can see from both sides.

same for us freds mum. wonder why they don;t do that to? gets rid of all these probs. i know plenty of women who don;t like stripping off in front of other women

I am also the mother of an 8 year old boy and i definately would not let him in a male changing room or toilet on his own .
If he is out with me he comes to the ladies loos and i have no problem with other boys up to about 10 years old , accompanied , in a ladies toilet . All of the swimming pools near us are mixed changing .
  Do they have a disabled changing or somewhere else that you can change ? 

There's nowhere else to use.  Ironically, I chose that swimming pool as the last time I went there was major refurbishment to the changing rooms and I read in the local paper that they were making a family room as a response to the 8 year old age limit. But when I mentioned this yesterday they said that they had made family room ie bigger size cubicles in their existing rooms.  When I asked the receptionist would she let a boy go in the male changing rooms she said that they do get 8 year old boys turning up on their own for a swim.  I could tell that the receptionist didn't agree with the ruling by the looks she was giving me but she kept repeating that it was the swimming pool's policy. 

I understand from a woman's point of view that they might not want to see an older boy in there with them, but I always make sure that he's wearing his swimming trunks when we go and he always gets changed in a cubicle so that I can keep him out of their way as much as possible. 

I wouldn't let my 10 year old go into the men's changing room on his own - his dad takes him.  Would prefer to have solid cubicles and anyone using them, would make it so much easier for mums to take children.

> she said that they do get 8 year old boys turning up on their own for a swim

eh? he wasn't on his own!! ninnys

from the other side i'm not sure most parents would be terribly happy if a girl of about 8 or 9 went swimming with her dad and had to change in a room full of men. nor though would they be happy however sending her on her own to change. don't know why they need communal rooms, its cheap and easy enought to stick up partitians.

ok turm it round what if a dad took his daughter swimming and was changing in the man changing room.

we had this at my health club the other month,
god didnt the dad get a ticking of from another male member stating he was calling all different names.

the best thing if you are unhappy next time them change in the disable room,

I personally wouldn't want an 8 years old + in a female changing room when I'm getting changed.  But thats my opinion! :)

There is no way I would allow an 8 year old to go in a mens changing room by themselves, If there is no communual/family room then I would be playing wholey war with the manager there, and insist that my child came with me, it is ok if there are a group of boys going in together as long as they stay together, but not alone, there are many, many single mothers and fathers around today, as well as fathers/mothers at work and a lone parent taking them to swim.  They can not expect a vulnerable child son or daughter to go into a changing room alone.  How about not just complaining with the swimming pool, but the council too.

They must put in a family room if they are to enforce this new ruling.

Many pools are now having mixed changing rooms, now I didn't like this at first but they are all cubicled, so private, and your children can be in the cubicle next to you when older, and lets face it what is to hide men and women see each other in the pool, what difference does it make to and from the cubicles.

I think this is the best way to go then families are not seperated, and all are safe, with no worries.

I concur :-)

I can understand that you would be worried about your son going in the changing rooms on his own,but there HAS to be some kind of age limit....you have to think , where do you draw the line? Nine, ten, eleven, fourteen? The age limit as far as I understand has been set on the advice of experts in child health and behaviour.

"I understand from a woman's point of view that they might not want to see an older boy in there with them, but I always make sure that he's wearing his swimming trunks when we go and he always gets changed in a cubicle so that I can keep him out of their way as much as possible."

...I think that you may be missing the point......I wouldnt be offended by seeing your son without his trunks, but I WOULD be offended by being ogled by a boy whilst I was naked. Even if you get him into the cublice as soon as you arrive, it would not stop him from  seeing whoever was in the changing room at that time, as you enter the changing room with him. Any woman changing or naked at the time you entered would have no warning, and would not be able to protect their modesty if they wish to do so. As a Mum you are obviously comfortable with nudity around your son, but it is not fair to expect other women to want him to see them naked. You may see him as a little boy, but plenty boys of that age have a good giggle about boobs and such, and take quite an interest even if they dont let on to their parents. I remember when I was that age hearing them!

I feel that there should be a reasonable expectation of privacy in a single sex changing room. I DO agree that family changing rooms should be available, and frankly I have seen such rooms at ALL pools I have ever been to. ( and as a frequent swimmer, I have been to loads!)

I can see both sides to the 'arguement'. I do think thought hat sometimes parents are overly paranoid, and seem to think there is a paedophile 'waiting under every bush' to abduct or harm their child. The actual chance of this happening is tiny beyond all belief.

That said, I would not be happy for my 7 year old to go into a changing room on his own, but he is not very sensible for his age. But I probably wouldn't take him in a ladies changing room either, as I respect that ladies who are semi-naked might not feel comfortable around a boy of that age. My right for my child to be safe is no greater than their right to privacy.

My youngest son has Downs Syndrome, he is only 4 now, but will need supervision changing well beyond the age of 8, I suspect. What would people suggest I do in his case?

In the case of an older child or adult who has learning difficulties, I feel it would be perfectly reasonable to utilise disabled changing rooms which are usually seperate in my experiences locally.

will need supervision changing well beyond the age of 8, I suspect. What would people suggest I do in his case?


Luckily he has an elder brother who I hope would help your younger child to dress and find his way around the changing room to the pool, so that is one solution.
Another would be that hopefully in another 4 years there are more and more mixed changing rooms,
Or that there are no more open changing rooms and all are cubicled, so you could still take your Downs child with you in the ladies anyway, it would ease all the problems to always have cubicles,

To be honest even as a grown woman with a figure I'm quite proud of, I detest open changing rooms, I always go to the cubicle, it would not bother me in the slightest if an elder boy was in the ladies area as I am in the cubicle, who ever thought that people want an open changing room anyway, why do they still exist? Does anyone like them? I don't want strangers oggling my body and watching me pop my underware on, it has always been unsavory for me.  An older child must feel even more upset, especially when in puberty.

I'd like to see all open changing rooms a thing of the past.

I doubt his older brother will still want to come swimming with me at age 16! I'm hard pushed to take him anywhere with me now. :-) I probably wouldn't take him unless there were cubicles or a family changing room, to be honest. Or unless my husband could take him. It wouldn't occur to me to use a disabled changing room, as I wouldn't really feel entitled.

I have no problems with communal changing rooms, to be honest. I have a hideous figure that I wouldn't wish to subject anyone to seeing, but I am quite confident no-one is ogling me when I get changed.

Oh, and my son is a child with Downs, not a Downs child. :-/

Oh, and my son is a child with Downs, not a Downs child. :-/

Don't be so touchy jackson, especially when it was a helpful reply. :-(

Carrington, I cringed when I read your first post and was gobsmacked when I read your follow up. 

Jackson has a child who happens to have downs syndrome - jackson's son is not and should never be defined by his illness.  It may be semantics to you but your phraseology is very disempowering and patronising. 

Any helpfulness in your reply was certainly outweighed by your negativity and bad terminology.

Apologies, but having to deal with people on a daily basis who recognise his genetic condition and for the person he is makes a person a bit touchy. :-)

It is only terminology, and I am sure you meant no offense when you tyoed it, but he is no more a Downs syndrome child, than a child with cancer is a cancer child. Cheekychow is quite right, he is a child who happens to have a genetic condition called Downs syndrome. A child, my child, first and foremost.

Carringtons response was well was very clearly not meant to be ill mannered. Please do not shoot someone down in flames for making a minor error . After all cheekychow...do you consider yourself to be perfect? you just criticised carringtons post heavily for rudeness, yet yours absulutely excelled it in rudeness...talk about pots and kettles! how totally iilll mannered . Are you really so perfect yourself??

Having no experience in these matters I'd like to thank you, Jackson, for helping us avoid inadvertently causing offence in the future. :-)

cheekychow,

Your post was completley uncalled for, I merely missed out the word with, jackson was the person who mentioned that her youngest child has downs syndrome and asked what special preperations she could take with regards to this when her child reaches 8.

Perhaps you have been on the ribena too much this evening, there was nothing negative or of bad terminology in my post as anyone reading them can see, what exactly did you find so gobsmacking in my first post?

I think a nice apology should be called for actually, you are bang out of order with your post.

Thank you pinklilies.

beacuse your child has special need like my nice who to is downs syndrome she would go in the change room with her dad untill the age stage to go into diffrernt change room, then she would go in the disable room with her dad or mum.

now she a young lady of 35 changes in the womans on her own.

Isn't 8 years old when kids have to stop sharing bed rooms? by that I mean brothers & sisters its a legal thing somewhere or other.

I agree with most above family cubicles or something, yes I would hate to change in front of an 8 year old I was not related to, but alternatively 8 is too young to be changing alone in a single sex changing room.

You would think child protection issues wwould also have to be considered for the safety of the child as well. The autority running the pool should be asked for their child protection guidance and perhaps put an area aside for family changing.

Isn't 8 years old when kids have to stop sharing bed rooms? by that I mean brothers & sisters its a legal thing somewhere or other.

I agree with most above family cubicles or something, yes I would hate to change in front of an 8 year old I was not related to, but alternatively 8 is too young to be changing alone in a single sex changing room.

You would think child protection issues would also have to be considered for the safety of the child as well. The autority running the pool should be asked for their child protection guidance and perhaps put an area aside for family changing.

Carrington, I do not think for a moment my post was rude towards yourself - I will explain why I cringed at the first and was astounded by the second.

I did not think that people would still speak about and generalise people defining them by something related to their appearance or behaviour e.g. the colour of their skin, illness, characteristics etc.  Reading your post where you posted 'downs child' was like stepping back 25 years.

I was then shocked that you told Jackson not to be so touchy.  If anything it was your post that was out of order.  It may seem to you that there was no 'bad terminology' in your post but I found it offensive.

I also resent your comments carrington about being on the ribena - I rarely drink and again find that offensive.  TBH I have never had a problem with any of your posts until these ones but thoughtless statements like 'downs child' I find very offensive and my perception was that I put in my post an explanation about why I had a problem with it - perhaps it is you who needs to be less touchy?

And pinklilies, nowhere have I ever stated that I consider myself to be perfect and on reflection re-reading my post do not think it consitutes shooting carrington down in flames.

Having no experience in these matters I'd like to thank you, Jackson, for helping us avoid inadvertently causing offence in the future. 

Sorry to swing back to this..... sorry JG you know I like to have my two pennys worth, but as this is on the thread now and as we are talking of offence being taken for the benefit of future posts I really think that something needs to be clarified, as posts getting snippy like this are going to be the downfall of those who do it, when others simply won't post for fear of being offensive.

No one has the right to dictate how someone else writes, speaks or thinks, we all have opinions on things which is fine but we live in a country where we have freedom of speech, thank goodness, freedom to write and think what we want, as long as we are not being malicious, or breaking the law.

The truth is many years ago I worked with a woman who had a Downs child, yes I've said it again as that is exactly how she refered to her daughter, why should Jackson or Cheekychow dictate that others should refer to things as they do, and when they don't be made to feel guilty, (which I don't) I find that very offensive.  The truth is we already have minority groups and the PC brigage trying to dictate to us how we should say and do things for fear of offending others, when infact they have no legal backup behind them whatsoever yet the country is running scared of opening their mouths incase of offence to others, it has gone beyond ridiculous, and is a shame that it even raises it's ugly head on public forums.

It actually is not illegal to offend someone unless it is with malice, my post certainly was not with malice or even sarcasm, just a way of referring to something which others wished to pick up on and dictate that it should be defined in their way. Which is WRONG! I know my rights too. Therefore nothing was said with offence and should not have been taken as such, if some took it offensively then that honestly is their problem, not mine, and I refuse to join the bandwagon and offer aplogies as JG did in trying to smoothe things over there is too much tip toeing around others when the truth is we are on a planet with billions of other people all of whom talk, write and think differently and those who take offence to things like this need to stop being so sensitive or in one case make sure they really oil the chip on their shoulder.

Jackson you need to remember that you deal with doctors and others with experience of D.S. and their terminologies and understanding of it used, It  will often be different to those of Jo Public and infact other mothers with the same children too. I expect as you are only 4 years in you are more senstitive than you will be 10 years from now. That is fine and I can understand that sometimes things may feel raw, but you really need to not be so sensitive especially when no offence was meant.

At the end of the day no-one has the right to tell others how to phrase things or to only do things as they do.  WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!

And I would hate for other posters to be to afraid to post about subjects incase they cause offense to someone who is too sensitive or after doing a spot of warmongering, inadvertently offending someone is every day life, we all have it happen, it is not something that needs to be smoothed over or worried about, at least it shouldn't be.

I took your first post as pretty harmless and unoffensive, to be honest, although I felt the need to mention that it is not the prefferreed way of talking about a child who has Downs. However, now you are aware that it is not acceptable to me to call a child with Downs a 'Downs Child' you still insist on doing it, which I find both offensive and provocative.

Anyone wh knows me knows I am not in the slightest bit sensitive or anything else about my son having Downs. However, there is a right and a wrong way of doing things. Many years ago people may have found it acceptable to call children witht his condition 'Downs Children' but they also found it acceptable to treat them as second class citizens, not teaching them to speak or go to school, an dnot allowing them to reach their full potential. They were seen by their condition only, not as people just like the rest of us. THAT is why the comment is offensive. It may not be ILLEGAL to offend someone. However, it is not pleasant to deliberately offend someone, which is what you have now done. I am sure you (or society in general) wouldn't find it acceptable to call someone who was overweight fat or lardy, because it might upset them or cause offense.

I am all for free speech, and also very outspoken myself. I would not deliberately offend or upset someone though.

Regarding the topic of changing rooms, I really do think its time for family rooms. I don't want to change in front of young boys, not for them to see me naked. I don't really like changing in front of anyone in a public room, and always wait for a cubicle. However, I wouldn't have wanted my sons to go in a changing room full of men alone when they were little, and I can fully understand why other mums don't want them to as well. You simply do not know who is in the rooms and with mobile phones capable of taking clear pictures and short movies this could happen and unsavoury pics of your child could well appear on internet sites. I also wouldn't want some peado letching at my son, even if he didn't touch or approach him. Its the same with public toilets, I wouldn't let them in mens on their own either. Had an incident with my boys once, the eldest went in with the youngest, me thinking there was safety in numbers and my son being old enough to go in without me (as in the mens, rather than the ladies :) ) and some perv came on to my youngest, maybe he didnt think they were together. my eldest made a commotion, the toilet lady and me rushed in, this bloke nearly trampled me getting out! Unfourtunatly there were no other adult men in there. So, even thought there is not a perv behind every bush, you do have to remember that public toilets/changing rooms and these type of places are a magnet for the weirdos in our society.

But, you should not be offended by others phrasing, it is not even offensive in any way, you are one person who does not like the terminology, I do not bow down to how others wish me to speak, especially when I had a work colleague who used the phrase all the time whilst showing photo's of her child to us, who are you dictate that it is wrong for that mother to say it the way she wishes or anyone else, it isn't wrong at all.

I know Autistic children whose mothers refer to as my child is Autistic not my child has Autism same with ADHD and many others it is choice of how others wish to say things, there is nothing wrong with it

Saying you have a Downs Child or a Child with Downs?  Sorry but you'll never convince me or others that there is anything wrong with either way of saying it. It is the same phrase except with out the word with.

And bringing in that D.S children were second class citizens and not going to school is not relevant to saying it either way is it? Just a change in attitude and times, it is beyond me that you can even think a different way of wording can cause any effect. Perhaps you have been brainwashed into thinking such a thing.

As to the example of overweight, fat or lardy, the word Downs has not been changed has it? Therefore overweight should not be changed to fat or lardy either.

You are making an absolute fuss over nothing, there are actually real problems going on in the world, people being murdered and starving to death and you wish to use your energy up on something so silly.

Oh dear :(

I think it is very understandable that a parent can find it exceedingly difficult to have their child's condition be the main descriptive factor for their child. I took Jackson's comment to mean that she was only trying to point out that, although her child has Down's Syndrome, the condition is just one part of him and not the whole of him :) I also believe  that Carrington did not mean to intentionally cause offence in the post that started the current controversy but I don't believe that Jackson stating the error in how her son was being referred to is an attempt to curb somebody else's freedom of speech.

It is not illegal to offend someone but it is, however, polite to respect the views of a parent who wishes their child to be seen as a person in their own right rather than to be labelled by any disability or condition they may have.

Children with Downs were refered to as 'mongols' up until the 70's, due to the resemblance of their facial and body features to a race of people deemed to be 'second class'. Downs Syndrome replaced this awful name with all its hidden (and not so hidden) meanings. Same as 'Spastics' even the charity changed its name. When these conditions became more understood, and these wonderful children were found to have a far greater degree of intelect than had been thought, they became part of the community, rather than being shunned or considered idiots, as the 'mongol' term suggested.

I would think we have now moved on from calling a child a 'Downs child' to a child with Downs in much the same way. it is defining a child that had a symptom called Downs, leaving the child free to be what it came become, (as any child) rather than putting the cart before the horse and describing it as the symptom, rather than just simply a child.

Would any of us like to carry a label all our lives?

a parent who wishes their child to be seen as a person in their own right rather than to be labelled by any disability or condition they may have.

I always thought all children were seen as individuals not by their disabilities (which you can't get away from anyway) perhaps this is where the confusion comes in, whatever a childs disability they are seen as individuals by other children their friends, teachers and others meeting them, phrasing will not stop those who typecast from doing so that is just in their nature to do so, and mothers getting upperty won't change those peoples opinions at all, there are always people who typcast disabilities, race and religion it will unfortunately always be there, but wording things differently will make no difference whatsoever to those people so why get so hete up about it.

Sorry if some disagree but taking offence of these slightest things is beyond my reasoning and a waste of time. I do take children at face value no matter what and my opinions obviously aren't there due to using Jackson phrasing rather than my own.

typecast from doing so that is just in their nature to do so, and mothers getting upperty won't change those peoples opinions at all, there are always people who typcast disabilities, race and religion it will unfortunately always be there

I think this may be what some people thought you were doing - labelling a little boy by his condition :) I don't think his mum was getting upperty, just upset that his condition was used to describe him. I work with children who have Special Needs and find it rather sad when people refer to them as Special Needs Children rather than children who have Special Needs. It may not seem important to those who are not involved with children who have disabilities but to those who love and care for them it most definitely is.

Carrington, some information on Downs Syndrome is here:

http://www.downs-syndrome.org.uk/DSA_Faqs.aspx

You might especially find the bit where it refers to correct terminology useful. Of course, if you care to read it.

I work in a mainstream secondary school that accepts a range of chilren, some have OCD, some Autism, Some cystic fibrosis. Some disabilities are more noticeable than others, mainly those that rely heavily on crutched or wheelchairs. Its funny how the peers of these children take no notice yet it is the adults who claim to be PC & disability aware that make a big deal of it.
You might say something about "joe in the wheelchair" or "Mary whos mixed race". The kids i know just talk about Joe and Mary.

Oops can we all calm down a bit, I thought we were talking about a young boy having to change in a room away from his parent? Where did we get to children with Downs or Downs with children?
Labeling kids has always happened I went to a bording school for maladjusted children. 1 kid at home said to me "my mum said I can't play with you cause your mental" stuck with me always and Im 53 now..
But the truth as her Mum saw it was there was something wrong with me (it was child abuse but in those days all kept in the family).
Things have moved on kids are kids and all are special, some just need a bit more help than others.
I got banned from a web site by telling someone to get a life when they took offence to a post i made, an a re read I was out of order. So lets all just stay nice doggie people and concentrate on shared family changing rooms.
Some of my best friends were labelled maladjusted. I have two grown up boys, a home, a business a degree in History and Im still a bit mental but thats what and who i am, Im also lardy but i can do something about that thanks to my doggies.
Lets not write about peoples specific problems please, I like this web page it stops me from throttling the workmen in my office when they haven't brought their brain cell to work!!

It seems to be going slightly off topic folks but FWIW I'm sure anyone who has had a lengthy period over which to "get to know" Carrington will have found her to be one of the least likely to be described as offensive posters on here :)  Personally I found nothing in her original helpful reply to be offensive or demeaning in any way - unfortunately in this PC gone mad world of today, it can be extremely easy to raise someone's hackles over next to nothing and IMO it would be better to move on (or away) from this particular branch of the thread :)

Anyhoo, back to changing rooms :-D  Personally I wouldn't ever use a communal one - whether in a swimming pool or clothes shop.  I've never been to a pool where there is not at least one family changing cubicle and disabled changing room.  If there were no separate changing facilities other than these, then I would utilise one of them (in the unlikely event I was using a pool LOL).

Some people are not comfortable with being semi-dressed never mind butt naked in front of others :)  It doesn't make them odd, stuffy or paranoid, just means they like their privacy and IMO any establishment which requires clothing to be removed should invest the necessary expense of providing for this need.  Bearing in mind that many mums or dads will be taking a different s#x child to places like swimming pools on a fairly regular basis and more so throughout school holidays, it seems to me that the best solution is to only use such establishments providing family cubicles and put in writing a complaint to the authority of any pool not providing same setting out the various problems outlined by many posters previously :)

There are two pools close to me, any others I would have to travel 18/25 miles away. neither have a family room, and the disabled rooms are inside the ladies and the gents communial changing rooms. Don't know if anyone else encounters this? they are talking about building a new leisure complex though, so hopefully the changing rooms will allow for family and seperate disabled changing rooms.

>Isn't 8 years old when kids have to stop sharing bed rooms? by that I mean brothers & sisters its a legal thing somewhere or other.

Whistler,

This only applies in rented accomodation.  If you live in your own house (ie. buying it) and have only one bedroom for the children then it's tough! you either have to move house or if you can't afford to move, they have to put up with it :(    We had to put up a partition wall and had 2 x 4.5ft bedrooms until the oldest moved out :(  hardly room to put in a bed

this gives some idea of the problem in the UK

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5216356.stm?ls

Can't understand why councils refurbishing swimming pools can't put in family changing rooms with proper cubicles it would solve a lot of problems,

We went to a wedding in Stoke-on-trent a few weekends ago and they have a fabulous Aqua centre there, (sorry forgotten the name) I Know there are others through out the country and they had all cubicles and a huge mixed changing room, loved it, it felt safe was very clean and as a family we could all stay together and we  had a fabulous time, so hopefully new pools will also accomodate for not just the single and proffessional swimmers but the family, who I would say are their main customers.

If the large swimming centres are doing it, I hope it will catch on.

> Some people are not comfortable with being semi-dressed never mind butt naked in front of others :-)  It doesn't make them odd, stuffy or paranoid, just means they like their privacy and IMO any establishment which requires clothing to be removed should invest the necessary expense of providing for this need.

Even my OH doesn't have the mis-fortune of seeing me butt naked or undressing!!!!! I definately wouldn't get undressed infront of strangers. I also wouldn't like my boys (aged 8 & 10) to be in a room of naked/undressing men OR women, I think they would find it much more uncomfortable than any adult having to put up with thier presence.
We're very lucky with our local pool, it has 1 large changing room full of cubicles so nobody has to see any body elses 'bits' and ones own 'bits' aren't on public display :)

Give me a few drinks and i'll expose my "bits" to anyone....however, at the swimming baths i am glad we have the individual cubicles. In the past you had to try your best to cover up with your towel and manouvere yourself to try and get dressed without the towel slipping.

Why is it whenever you go swimming you can never properly dry yourself? I always come home with damp underwear and soggy socks!

x

Give me a few drinks and i'll expose my "bits" to anyone.   *****laughs fit to drop*******.....and adds , eee ya take me back....:) :) :)

anyone ever tried to get changed and dressed under a towel on the beach.........:) :) :) oh, or changing from work clothes to partry clothes in the back of a moving car :) :) :)

Try a swimming chamois!! My OH is all furry!!so I got him a swimming Chamois and he uses that straight out the shower, keeps his furry bits dry!!! You can buy in boots or from the swim shop last for years..

I knew I had read or heard something. I was woundering if that was why they restricted kids of 8 changing in other sex changing rooms?
Its easy on the way in swimmers under clothes but on the way out you need to get them dry.

A local village hall has recently put notices up on their changing rooms, where children's football teams change, to say that parents are no longer allowed into the room whilst children are changing, the only adults permitted entry are club officials. I wonder if this is to do with the fact that all adults working with children have to have a current CRB check so parents would not be allowed in to a place where children other than their own are changing? If this is the case then it would make me wonder if all changing rooms would come under those regulations and communal changing rooms that will be used by children, whether accompanied or not, would then not be conforming with the law. Perhaps someone on here has up to date knowledge of the rules?

I do sort of understand the rules with child protection etc etc, but its PC gone mad. When i was younger (not long ago as im only 22) i can remember having a bath with my neighbours kids cos we'd all got mucky when playing, seeing their mum naked in the bath & things like that. Even things like getting changed in front of ech other wasnt taboo. Nowadays there would be uproar if children got changed in front of another childs parents or something.

With reference to CRB checks-they're only good if someon has been caught by the police and therefore has a record f it. How many abusers/paedaphiles are there out there that would have a clean CRB simply because they havent been caght. Ian Huntley is a great example of that.

Im sorry, ive gone off subject but its just been making me think how far things have moved on in a few short years.

I have never used communal dressing rooms,like mastifflover,my OH never even saw me butt naked,lettalone a room full of strangers.Nor do i want to see other women naked,some have no shame at all.

I think an 8 year old boy is probably too old to be taken into a room that could be full of naked females,both for his sake and theirs.
When my kids were that age,they had a time limit of when they had to be out of the changerooms,i usually waited by the door and kept in voice contact with them. But the thought of sleazy pedophiles etc etc wasnt in the forefront of my mind.Yes,these things are a worry but some parents let it take over their lives,and wont let their kids out of their site incase a predator may get em'.

>parents are no longer allowed into the room whilst children are changing, the only adults permitted entry are club officials.

This became a rule at our local rugby club at least 10 years ago - only the team coaches were allowed into the changing rooms with the boys - even the minis (aged about 6). No parents at all.