Toilet training – Time for Clarity, Not Blame

Why Are So Many Children Starting School Not Toilet Trained?

More than a decade ago, I wrote about toilet training after the Association of Teachers and Lecturers reported that 71% of primary staff had seen a rise in three‑ to five‑year‑olds wetting or soiling themselves during the school day. At the time, many teachers felt parents were delaying toilet training, and nearly 38% of schools admitted they offered no guidance at all to families about expectations before starting school. ERIC—the national childhood continence charity—sensibly advised schools to be clearer about expectations and give parents practical support early.

Fast‑forward to today, and the issue hasn’t gone away. In fact, it has intensified.

This year’s Kindred2 survey reignited national debate by reporting that 26% of children starting Reception in 2025 are not fully toilet trained, up from 24% the year before. The Government has responded with new guidance for families, now available at startingreception.co.uk/potty-training. It’s a welcome step, but we still lack solid national data to understand why this is happening and what would genuinely help.

What We Know About Toilet Training

Almost all children can learn to be clean and dry, and toilet training is a process, not a one‑off event and most children can be out of nappies between 18–30 months, well before starting school. The only exception should be children with diagnosed bowel or bladder conditions.

Being toilet trained matters: it boosts confidence, supports independence, and ensures classroom staff can focus on teaching rather than constant intimate care. But across nurseries including LEYF settings we are increasingly seeing three‑year‑olds arriving still in nappies.

And this isn’t simply about children who have not been to nursery. Reception teachers report children arriving untrained from both nursery and non‑nursery backgrounds. This tells us the issue is not caused by a single factor.

What LEYF Teachers Are Seeing

When I spoke with LEYF staff, several themes emerged:

1. Ultra‑absorbent nappies disrupt learning

Modern nappies keep children so dry they can’t feel when they are wet. Without that sensory feedback loop, the internal cues needed for toilet learning take much longer to develop. In the 1970s and ’80s, when we used old‑style towelling nappies, 83% of children were out of nappies by 18 months. Today, that figure has reversed.

2. Parents don’t always realise early training helps everyone

Some parents delay toilet training because their child seems comfortable in nappies. Yet families spend more than £400 a year on nappies and wipes, money they could save by training earlier. Many also underestimate how proud, confident, and independent children feel once they master toileting.

3. Sustainability arguments haven’t landed

Despite widespread concern for the environment, disposable nappies are rarely mentioned. The UK throws away 3 billion nappies a year, each taking up to 500 years to decompose. Disposal costs local authorities £60 million annually. Toilet training earlier is one of the simplest environmental wins available to families.

4. Post‑pandemic delays are real

Many children who arrived at nursery post‑Covid had missed out on routines, peer modelling and social opportunities. Toilet training like speech, physical development and behaviour was affected.

5. Newly trained staff lack essential knowledge

This is perhaps the most shocking finding. Many new Early Years teacher/educators report receiving no training whatsoever on toilet learning: not the developmental stages, not the health implications, and not how to support parents. How have we managed to create a workforce without equipping them for one of the most basic developmental milestones?

We Need Data, Not Assumptions

This is the point where government guidance alone won’t solve the problem. Much of the debate is shaped by surveys and charity reports; these highlight concerns but do not give us a true national picture.

If we want meaningful, practical guidance that actually changes practice we need better data. We need to understand:

• What are nurseries doing?
• How confident do parents feel?
• What training do staff really receive?
• How much has Covid changed routines?
• What expectations do schools communicate, if any?

Without this, we risk producing well‑meaning but ineffective guidance that doesn’t shift practice.

It is time for a national conversation about what good Early Years education looks like including the basics of physical development for children starting school as young as three. And for that, we urgently need a proper national survey.