http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2077039/Katie-Ann-Guttridge-3-attacked-Leicester-nursery-2-year-old.html

Well, have fun seeing your children being beat by other children.

That's messed up.

Luckily, in Finland they have a system for things like that. If that happened here, the nursery staff would contact the beat up kid's parents post haste, tell them that their kid aggravated other kids to attack her, it's the kid's own damn fault and that the parents obviously haven't raised her well. Then they'd make a paper report about all the things the beat up kid has done wrong or weirdly to prove that the nursery isn't at fault, and then send the said report everywhere to make sure they can't be held responsible.

The attacker would be mostly left alone to not cause her any stress. Maybe they'd tell her that "that's not cool", because bullies listen to reason and shouldn't need to feel bad about the things they do.

You've just quoted the Daily Fail, so I would take the slant of that story with an extremely generous pinch of salt. Whether the name "Chucky" was actually used is in its own right dubious.

It was suggested in the article that the mother was washing her hands of the affair, but this is only selectively quoted in the Daily Mail, so the aim is clearly to put the mother in a negative light. I do think it's likely that the way the mother is upbringing her daughter is playing a role in it, but I get the feeling that there is more to this than meets the eye.

GOG.com

I noticed this:

"Police were called in to investigate the assault but were powerless to act because the girl who attacked Katie is below the legal age of criminal responsibility..."

Come again? What should the POLICE do? Take the 2-year old toddler to jail? Put her down like a raving dog?

Does UK have any social workers? I'd expect them to immediately contact the parents for their kid's apparent problems, check if everything seems ok at home, and maybe even take custody of the problem child (either in a replacement home or even an institution), in case it is deemed he/she needs more attention and mental help than home can provide. Or the very least arrange some additional help to the problem kid (and their parents).

But that is just my welfare state view on it.

The mother taking legal action against the kindergarten sounds nothing more than way to get money. White trash.

True, maybe I read the article too hastily so I'm not quite sure if it was true negligence on their part.

I did some bad things when I was in kindergarten (not to be said out loud, google remembers...), but I don't feel the caretakers were really at fault. I was just too sneaky for them in avoiding their eyes, and they can't have a personal caretaker for each kid. My parents were contacted, I felt very ashamed, I later a became a prime quality citizen contributing to the state, I've even finished military service excellently and do not smoke (esp. weed).

Sueing the nursery for a raving kid punching another kid... I see it a bit like a school being sued for school shootings.

No, it would be like suing the school for a school shooting by a child known to have brought a gun to school everyday while teachers turned a blind eye.

The girl was known to have repeatedly attacked students, and was still left unsupervised. Teachers only found the crying, bruised and beaten child because another student brought it to their attention. I'd be suing the school too, and it wouldn't be for the money.

Maybe so, then. So why didn't the parents of earlier incidents contact the social workers so that they could check what's the problem with that kid, and act accordingly? Banishing the problematic toddler from a nursery is not a solution to her(?) problems. (sorry I read the article so fast I wasn't sure if "Chucky" was he or she; I really love how in Finnish you don't have to care about the gender of the subject, it is always "hän").

Ok, I got a bit alarmed about the seriosity of that newspaper when I saw stories like these: etc. In Thailand you don't know about the gender of a subject even after... but let's forget about that, just look up "One Night In Bangkok" in the Urban Dictionary...

That's not the worst of it. The Daily Mail is a well-known hate rag with absolutely appalling journalistic standards. Perfect recent example:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2104567/Zach-Avery-Pity-poor-year-old-victim-politically-correct-gender-identity-industry.html

This thread has a title worthy of Daily Mail.

Other suggestions for future threads:

Cars are death traps (somebody got killed in an accident a few days ago)
Youths are homicidal maniacs (remember the knife crimes?)
Women are worthless (after all, statistically they earn less then men)
Sports are damaging to your health (you can get injured)
Lego kills your children (a child choked on a piece a few years ago)
etc etc etc.

And no, nursery is not child abuse.

If you look at the photograph of the accident report book, you can see the nursery has recorded the previous incidents as minor "accidents".

The nursery has a legal responsibility for all the children in their care, so if they are negligent, then it is perfectly reasonable to seek damages from them.

The biggest issue is that the nursery staff knew that "Chucky" was a problem child, but left her completely unsupervised.

Ok a poor child got badly beaten by another, how does that make nurs-
Oh wait it's the daily fail. I regret every time someone links to them, it give them the attention they crave and make up bullshit for. Don't feed the trolls.

I too would say negligence on the nurseries part. They are responsible for what happens to those children and what those children do while in their care.

Actually, it's a very real issue in the UK. In my old job, stuff like this came up on a daily basis. Most of it was successfully kept from the press though.