This topic is for discussing childcare options. If you want to advertise, please use your Local site.
All these unregistered people...(43 Posts)
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...
Yes I agree the paperwork does put some people off registering altogether when actually some (most?) parents would probably be happy with the basics as you say. Maybe a 'childminder' & 'childminder plus' approach would be more suitable ie everyone has basic 1st aid , safeguarding etc but only the 'plus' CM's need to cover eyfs
I think that's a fantastic idea lechat. Nannies don't need to do any of the paperwork, so why we can't have a 'nanny who works from their own home' type option I don't know.
You have answered your own question.
You want you child to be safe and happy..... Non of these unregistered ladies (refuse to call them childminders) will have paediatric first aid, insurance, have to have their homes checked, safeguarding or be up to date on current childcare needs and issues. You would have no rights to ensure everyone on the premises 16 or over is checked and as you would have no contract, no comeback if anything should go wrong or you are in dispute over hours, money or care arrangements.
DONT go for someone unregistered.
2 tier systems wouldn't work, as these women still wouldn't be bothered to do a first aid or get insurance or do safeguarding. If they can't be bothered to get registered to undertake the importance of looking after the most important thing in the world, what else can't they be bothered to do. You can be a basic childminder and not worry about too much paperwork as long as you aren't bothered about your OFSTED grading.
A local unregistered woman, was spouting off at the school gates about how one of her "charges" stupidly ran into the road while walking home from school, after shouting at her to stop. Accidents may happen, but she wouldn't be insured or have first aid knowledge if a child was injured. I know she does a secondary home job while children are there and doesn't pay tax or NI as you will have to if you start work.
Oh and with regards to nannies, they are still CRB checked, have insurance, most nannies now do training, have a proper contract and work from parents homes where parents already know it is safe. AND also will pay tax and NI.
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.
Please don't use an unregistered minder. If could be a disaster. If u can't get a registered minder a nanny would seem to be an option. I did this after a depressing fruitless search for a RCM and never regretted it. Just make sure u get genuine refs. If the women u speak of really cared about children's welfare they wouldn't care about the paperwork
Also unregistered minders should be reported to social services coz as far as I can remember they r breaking the law
' Non of these unregistered ladies (refuse to call them childminders) will have paediatric first aid, insurance, have to have their homes checked, safeguarding or be up to date on current childcare needs and issues'
How do you know this? Anyone can do a first aid course, you don't need to be registered to do one. They may not have their homes checked, but this doesn't mean they are unsafe. There are literally millions of parents bringing up their children in un-checked homes. I'm not sure what kind of childcare needs and issues you mean? Agree with you that they probably won't have insurance though.
'2 tier systems wouldn't work, as these women still wouldn't be bothered to do a first aid or get insurance or do safeguarding'
Yes it would if they implemented they system lechat suggests.
'Oh and with regards to nannies, they are still CRB checked, have insurance,'
Only the Ofsted registered ones and there is NO requirement for nannies to be registered with Ofsted. It is quite possible to be a nanny without being CRB checked or having insurance.
I am a registered CM and confess to providing toast at lunchtime, but it was alongside Irish stew. Keep looking OP, you will find the right person.
Outraged, its illegal, wrong and dangerous. I was not joking, when only 2 weeks ago this woman, was gossiping about how stupid the child was, she actually said, "she could have been killed". She has lots of other children and no one can pull her up, question her, ensure she is keeping it safe and LEGAL. She has been reported, but denied it to OFSTED she was minding and nothing else happened. As I said I also know she runs another business at home, regularly posting what she is doing on facebook, during the day. I am sure there are many well meaning people that do it, thinking its not a problem, but it is.
If you want to make money looking after other peoples children, register.
Its a totally different thing if you use family and swap arrangements with friends as they are not looking to make money and take on more children.
Looking after your own child, is a totally different.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be registered. I'm agreeing with lechat's suggestion that registration should be CRB, first aid, insurance, safety check and some basic training like it is for nannies. No requirement to be graded by Ofsted or to do any paperwork. Childminders who want to provide an enhanced service could apply for Childminder+ status.
People like the OP would be trusted to determine whether the person in question is doing a good job of looking after their child without government interference. It works for nannies, I don't understand why it wouldn't work for childminders.
Thanks everyone, don't worry I won't use someone unregistered but I love the childminder / childminder plus idea. The things that really matter to me with a 1yo are that she feels loved and well cared for, that she has a good diet and that she gets plenty of fresh air. I think I probably would be better off with a nanny but sadly I can't afford one!
You could try a nanny-share OP? Still more than a childminder probably, but about half the cost of a nanny. If you don't mind sharing with a family who have more than one child you could even be paying 1/3, which would probably be about the same as a childminder.
don't judge all childminders by these two Caitycat, and also don't assume you are getting something superior from a nanny just because you are paying more!! Sick of hearing people talk about childminders as the last option. All the childmindrs I know are very experienced childcarers who are dedicated to the children in their care.
The two you've seen don't sound great - don't know any cms personally who give only toast maybe she phrased it wrong? sounds odd... and i wouldn't have any carer for my dc with a dog but that's personal preference i guess.
keep looking at registered cms and please don't use someone unregistered for all the reasons RosieGirl has mentioned.
I would love to be an independent childminder. I would still ensure I had first aid training - to me it is a life skill and not just for working with children. I would still do lots of fabulous things with the children but I would have more energy and less stress because I wouldn't be worried whether I had the correct paperwork in place.
As for not being insured if a mindee ran in the road was killed - if my child was killed in a car crash I would not be thinking about compensation.
A nanny is not superior in terms of childcare. There are fantastic nannies and childminders. Good nannies and childminders. Not very good nannies and childminders. Terrible nannies and childminders.
A nanny does offer more in the way of 'extras' though. As well as providing an 'exclusive to you' service. That's why they're more expensive.
I haven't done safe guarding or paediatric first aid and my DCs and your DCs and all the friends DCs who come to play at my house and your house have done just fine.
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.
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 !
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.
'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.
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.
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.
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
Join the discussion
Please login first.