Note: Please bear in mind that this is a discussion board, not a place to advertise childcare vacancies or recruit childminders/nannies etc. We don't mind the odd mumsnet regular mentioning that they're looking for a job/mindee (although you're probably better off in MN Local) but repeated job "ads" and posts from nanny/babysitting agencies aren't fair to people who are paying for small business ads. Do feel free to report any you see. Thanks, MNHQ.

All these unregistered people...

(43 Posts)
Caitycat Fri 26-Apr-13 17:28:13

Hi more of a vent than a request for advice as I've already had some brilliant help. I have now seen two registered childminders and have another two lined up, unfortunately I really couldn't leave dd with either "toast for snacks and toast for lunch" or "massive alsation but he loves babies" person so am getting a bit frustrated. All the more so because I now have four different recommendations, all from trusted friends for unregistered people who have been doing it for ages, sound perfect and are much more local to me. They all sound lovely and apparently can't face the paperwork of registering. I know I can't use any of them but all I want is for my baby to be safe and happy, I'm not at all interested in box ticking, meeting EYFS targets or the like and I know that if it was just a health and safety, first aid and safeguarding requirement they would have been happy to register. So frustrated that what seems best for dd is not possible. Starting to wonder if I should be going back to work at all...

OutragedFromLeeds Fri 03-May-13 21:32:05

When I did my last one with SJA there were only 12 in the class and the instructor made sure everyone took part. One person was late on both days and on the second day when she arrived he told her he she'd failed and sent her home because she'd missed stuff where she'd been late.

OutragedFromLeeds Fri 03-May-13 21:29:32

I think you're right Cloverer. I think SJA or someone call it the '12 hour paed first aid' to differentiate it from the 6-hour not Ofsted approved one, but it doesn't actually have to be 12 hours long, it can be done in one day 8:30am-5pm or similar.

NomDeClavier Fri 03-May-13 20:32:53

The CM one is 12 hours but a nanny one can be approved and only 6 hours long. I'm not sure whether the partly online, partly 1 day attendance ones are suitable for CMs.

I think providers can decline to issue a certificate if they don't think someone is competent but that would be bad business, as word would get around and people would go for the easy option.

HSMMaCM Fri 03-May-13 20:15:26

I did a 12 hour course over two days

Cloverer Fri 03-May-13 20:04:30

Ofsted don't specify a length of time for the course as far as I know, just what it has to cover.

OutragedFromLeeds Fri 03-May-13 19:06:53

The one day courses are ok for nanny Ofsted registration. Is the childminder first-aid course different? The nanny one is the 12 hour paediatric first aid.

minderjinx Fri 03-May-13 18:11:01

A one day course would not be regarded as adequate for CM registration purposes in England.

suchashame Fri 03-May-13 16:47:00

The thing about a one day first aid course is that it is a certificate of attendance only not competence. Certificates of competence are only issued after a four day ciurse and independent assessment.... so yes peple could attend a course a d play on phone or fall asleep and still get a certificate. Although depending on the trainer and circumstances as to who is funding place etc perhaps lack if enthusiasm might be passed on to an employer.

Strix United States Fri 03-May-13 14:12:34

Some good points made here. It would be an interesting a nd positive turn of the culture if someone actually asked parents what they want from their childcare. Liz Truss seems to think it's all about preparing them to perform when presented with the rigors of reception. Most parents I know just want someone to keep their children safe, warm, fed, and happy whilst they go to work.

So really... is it time we actually tailor the childcare in this country to serve the parents. Or are we all just put here to serve the state.

I tend more towards the view that the state exists to serve the people.

HSMMaCM Fri 03-May-13 12:37:29

irishlee - your CRB is checked, you just don't know it. I asked Ofsted about it once (mine is 13 yrs old) and they said that once I was in the system, if I did anything which meant I wasn't suitable for minding, it would be flagged on their system and my registration would be withdrawn. Whether that actually works in practice, I don't know.

I agree about the first aid courses ... I have seen people stare out the window, play on their phones and generally not take part, but they still got their certificates.

I have spent this week doing a pile of paperwork which I am sure is more for Ofsted's benefit than the children (but the parents like it too).

I really really hate minders that pull out all the stops for an Ofsted visit. Ofsted can come to me whenever they like and I will be doing the same activities and paperwork that I always do. That way, I don't stress about inspections at all. I'm sure I won't get another Outstanding grade this time round, but hey ho.

irishlee Mon 29-Apr-13 22:12:18

ok as a recently registered childminder I have to say it is an eye opener. For starters what a long drawn out process I was shocked to see no child care qualifications were required so the fact I was level 3 trained didn't matter, you can choose to do a 3 day course(3 saturdays) at the end nobody fails but are graded to asses the level of support they would need by the borough or you can do the CYPOP 5 on line which you at least have to pass to get certified( i chose this option), I attended my paediatric first aid in my class of 14 one really stood out as being completely incompetent she passed by the way, OFSTED do CRB but only once this is never rechecked which I'm sorry is a bit worrying or insurance I agree with but the checks on your home I had a conversation with a childminder in my area and was shocked when she said after her inspection within the first few months they do a quick check and then you dont see them for a few years ( she said you can go back to normal) this threw me...... You can argue what is best but there is no right answer you will fine the good and bad in each scenario I just hope to provide a service that is talked about but for all the right reasons.

Cloverer Sat 27-Apr-13 20:07:08

I definitely think exempting CMs from the EYFS would be a good idea, and also from full Ofsted inspections.

In fact I would much prefer a basic annual check of the premises being safe and the minder managing rather than having to do the full Ofsted inspection every 3-5 years.

Basic training, CRB, child protection, first aid, insurance and a premises check is sufficient.

OutragedFromLeeds Sat 27-Apr-13 18:10:45

'I am actually thinking about nannying so if anyone has any tips or advice that would be great'

Do it! That would be my advice. Although do check out jobs in your area first and maybe secure one before you give notice because job situation isn't great at the moment.

doughnut44 Sat 27-Apr-13 18:07:09

None of my parents give a hoot about paperwork. All they want to know is that their children are happy and safe. I don't need a trail of paper work to tell the parents that their child has delayed speech and it may be worth a trip to the speech therapist. I have had a child who has a problem with his left arm - the motor skills weren't quite what they should be - I mentioned it to the parents who got it checked out.
I know so many childminders who have the most fantastic paperwork, their own websites which show how what they are doing connects to EYFS and rave on about how fantastic they are when in actual fact I wouldn't leave my child in their care because all they seen to care about seems to be taking pictures and proving how good they are. I have been to messy play sessions with childminders who get a picture of the kids doing a bit of painting then tell them to come away so they don't get too messy.
When I was looking for a CM all I wanted was for someone to look after and stimulate my child the way I did. If I trusted her/him enough to look after my child then I wouldn't need to see policies and risk assessments etc.
I understand it is important to have insurance and pay my tax which is the only reason why I am registered.
I am actually thinking about nannying so if anyone has any tips or advice that would be great x

OutragedFromLeeds Sat 27-Apr-13 17:39:57

Interestingly I think the one thing that isn't inspected is 'sanity levels' grin. Probably should be though!

lljkk Netherlands Sat 27-Apr-13 17:30:26

I wouldn't have anyone who isn't registered. They won't have all the safety measures, or the insurance and possibly not up to date first aid.

If those factors were so important then most people wouldn't be allowed to look after their own children, never mind children of close relatives or friends.

Agree a basic CM rating, checked just for safety awareness & sanity levels, would be a brilliant development.

NomDeClavier Sat 27-Apr-13 17:15:43

But the argument many people have against registration is being forced to implement EYFS, which I sympathise with. It's reasonable to say that if you want to implement that you should have the chance to do so, on an EYE register, regardless of setting, and that if you don't want to then there should be some kind of regulation to keep children safe and ensure carers do have insurance and some basic training without jumping through all the EYFS/other hoops. That would go a long way to increasing the availability of childcare.

There can be regulation without the burdens of the EYFS, and it doesn't need to be excessive. I mean the vOCR is hardly arduous! It would also open up nannies caring for 3 families (although maybe still within certain ratios) or nannies-in-their-own-homes.

Tanith Sat 27-Apr-13 17:02:47

...is in need of care or support for the rest of their lives.

Tanith Sat 27-Apr-13 17:01:44

We already have Network childminders and non-Network childminders, though.
Before the EYFS was introduced, things were much as Nick suggests and the grumbles then were about elitism. Oh well...

Insurance does matter. Maybe its the last thing on your mind if your child is killed, but it sure as hell assumes major importance if your child is permanently harmed and needs expensive medical care or

OutragedFromLeeds Sat 27-Apr-13 15:46:18

I don't think it's to do with training as much as regulation though. I'm very qualified, but I don't want to be subject to Ofsted grading and endless paperwork.

With nannies you can have someone very highly qualified, with no input/regulation/hassle from the government. It can be a completely private arrangement. They should have something similar for people who can't afford a nanny, like the OP.

NomDeClavier Sat 27-Apr-13 15:37:48

That's a good idea, nick. An EYE register would be much easier to administer, although you'd still have to have legislation to stop Victorian style baby farms popping up or people who weren't on the EYE register would be tempted to over-mind.

nannynick Sat 27-Apr-13 14:09:29

'early years educator' is a term that has been mentioned in DfE: More Great Childcare though not clear if that will relate to everyone who meets Level 3 requirement, or not. It says things like "In future, people will train at Level 3 to become Early
Years Educators." "Early Years Educator qualifications will be the modern
equivalent of the highly respected Nursery Nurse Diploma, which used to be provided by the National Nursery Examination Board (NNEB)" - so perhaps it could be used to describe anyone, be they working as a childminder, nanny, or in a nursery, as someone who has completed Level 3 training.

Maybe then parents could choose between having a childminder who was an "Early Years Educator" or having someone who did not meet that training level. In the same way parents are currently able to choose to have a nanny with qualifications or have someone with no qualifications.
Also similar to nursery staff... nursery assistants may only have Level 2 training and may be working towards Level 3.

OutragedFromLeeds Sat 27-Apr-13 13:53:46

Maybe avoiding the word basic would be better. Maybe doing away with the term childminder altogether and having 'out-of-home nannies' or something like that and 'early years teachers'. So many people use the term 'childminder' to describe any old person who babysits their child anyway I don't think it would a problem to drop the term altogether.

tazzle Sat 27-Apr-13 09:33:20

I was a registered childminder some years ago before the paperwork became such an issue. I looked after child with very special needs ( tracheostomy) so had first aid plus additional skills. I was also insured etc. Could cater for special diets...one later child had Christmas disease for example.

These days there are just so many hoops to jump through that don't actually mean in practical terms that a child is automatically any more cared for, or has a more stimulating environment than, a childwho would be with a basic chilminder.

Anyone good at paperwork can make any situation "look good" but lack of it does not mean chilminder any less effective in assisting child development.

Eg .. different age group but I work with vulnerable adults in day facility and have been able to tell without being told when someone moved from one registered place that ticked all the boxes to one where actually they did more for physically and mentally... .the difference in demeanour can be dramatic. Same with children.

I would kinda like the idea of basic and plus... though basic does not necessarily mean less quality !

NomDeClavier Sat 27-Apr-13 09:03:50

Startail you aren't systematically caring for other people's children and you don't have an obligation to report any suspicion of abuse, so there's no real reason why you should have done safeguarding.

As for the first aid, many parent do choose to take a course just for peace of mind. I don't see why it's unreasonable to expect someone who is being paid to care for children to have done one, or to expect them to have appropriate insurance. Your house insurance probably covers guests injuring themselves but the minute someone starts paying they aren't a guest and most, if not all policies, exclude claims related to business.

I think a 2 tier system would work - many people are put off CMing not because of the first aid and insurance aspect but because of the endless EYFS requirements and turning their homes into mini nurseries. However to be fair you'd also need to allow nannies to register on the higher tier if they choose without the restrictions on their working environment because it's their employer's home (as long as they've done a risk assessment).

The only way to cut out unregistered minding altogether is to require all childcarers to register - that way you'll know if someone cares for a child for more than 2 hours, more than a certain number of times a year and is paid for it they should be registered.

Play dates truly are a private arrangement. Childcare can't truly be said to be any more - there's too much expectation for those involved to actively safeguard the welfare of children.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now