In a thoughtful article about how to mend our broken system of child protection, Camilla Cavendish in The Times endorsed Lord Carlile’s suggestion of bringing back the annual school medical check.
This was described as one which ‘examined all pupils in bare feet’
I was mystified by this. Does it mean introducing a low-cost cadre of bare-foot doctors for this purpose? Or examining only those children who are too poor, or too neglected, to wear shoes? Or does the state of the feet provide some infallible proof of abuse?
It turns out that it is the latter, up to a point. Since “Poor care of the feet is likely to provide an indication of unsatisfactory family hygiene” it is recommended that "routine, compulsory, annual medical examinations for all school pupils up to at least year 11 should include weighing and measuring, a basic inspection of oral health, of the feet, and of sight … Each such examination is unlikely to take up more than five minutes. If it is universal there is no need for embarrassment or any sense of discrimination as between one child and others”. While not, of course, providing conclusive proof of neglect, such examinations would provide important clues.
Link
Related posts
