Another fatal incident at nursery

To be assuming that someone higher paid or more qualified wouldn’t make this mistake is ridiculous- even with the highest most consistent training allergies are a minefield

My comment was in relation to nursery workers who have openly admitted that they work there to do minimum hours in order to top up their UC. They also work there because they put their own children in the nursery so they can keep an eye on them.

I haven’t mentioned childminders in any of my posts because the threads is about nursery and nursery workers.

Agree. A very good reason for being a childminder in fact.
That women who stay at home with DC are admirable and this should be encouraged by the benefits and tax system (for those who wish to do it, obv) if part of what I have been saying.
@BluntPlumHam - it is pretty nasty to say that a woman who uses childminding to enable her to stay at home with her own child is in some way reprehensible.

The nursery sector is just so low-paid that, as some people have pointed out, people would just avoid going into it altogether if there is even the slightest possibility of ending up with a criminal record or a prison sentence, just through a one in a million incident that could happen because of things that are essentially out of the hands of the individual concerned: inadequate staffing ratios; having to accept too many children with extra needs where the provision is inadequate to safely cope with them; a catastrophic series of events on any given day that is out of an individual's hands which they know means the setting is operating with more risk than usual but what choice do they have?

The fewer people that go into it the higher the salaries will need to be to fund it. And if there just isnt' the money there to fund those salaries then the ultimate outcome will be that highly allergic children sadly become liabilities to childcare settings and one that a standad nursery would just not be willing, OR ABLE, to take on.

And you'd end up with the ultimate in "othering" - specialised childcare settings for allergic children, which cost more to run because the supervision ratios are much better and the staff are allergy specialists etc.

Well, that was your choice. I much preferred more focussed individual attention on mine when they were tiny than what they get in a nursery.

I used to run a village playgroup. Myself and my colleague were both trained but then we relied on one parent helper per session - so just 3 adults looking after 24 kids on busy mornings. We had one child with an allergy but Mum was openly worried about them having shared food so she provided their childs food and drink without issue. Then we had another parent register but on reading their forms, it turned out that their child was type 1 diabetic and would need their BS monitoring and insulin given as needed. They reassured us that one of the nurses from the local surgery would come in and teach us how to use their insulin etc. I was absolutely terrified as my Dad was an insulin dependent diabetic and I knew 1st hand how scary him having a hypo was. So I said that I felt too concerned to have direct responsibility for this child so the child could attend if the parent did too, and it caused all sorts of havoc as the parent went to the local authority etc. But I wasn't having that on my shoulders for the pittance that I was paid. The village school had a nightmare with the poor child when they started as their diabetes was the brittle variety.

Staying at home with your own children should be applauded, not denigrated.

Most mothers do work part time.

But why do the women need to do the unpaid work? DH and I share the housework and childcare equally, and have equal careers.

True. Though I am of the opinion that women should stand up and point out that the unpaid work they do is not only valuable but that the world couldn't run without. Apparently women went on strike in Denmark one Friday - did none of the things they usually did that no-one noticed and it caused some chaos and some great discomfort. Not sure it changed much, though.

Why just the mother? Ideally both parents would alter their working patterns rather than women ending up with a big economic disadvantage

I didn't say they should. I said that not tying the money for childcare to commercial outlets would benefit them e.g. a mother could work p/t.

And those people definitely shouldn't be judged for going out to work! And earning the money needed to feed and house our children is part and parcel of being their parent.

I do know this. But you are fortunate and most people cannot afford a cleaner and do not have the opportunity to work a compressed four day week nor have 6 - 8 weeks holiday they can take in the summer. Most people are juggling a f/t job that may just about cover childcare with a bit over, 28 days holiday a year and jobs, not careers - they would certainly benefit from having the money provided for outsourced childcare allowing one parent to stay at home at least p/t.
I have two DC and 4 step-DGC. I still parent them - they range between 22 to 46 (also have a step-DS who tends to look after me - well he certainly organises me and to my benefit).
NB I stayed at home till my DS was 9 and my DD 5. I did not use a childminder until I took a masters so that I could return to work (p/t) but I did send them to playschool 4/5 mornings a week! I wrote my novel in that time - mind I did not finish it and only looked at it again during lockdown (when it was already more than 20 years in my past).

Exactly!

If you have to take a 4 year old into a public toilet with you they just turn around 😂

The ambulance arriving and leaving usually isn't instant! It takes some time to arrive and then they would usually treat/stabilise the child before leaving.
I have a childminder friend and my mum (DBS checked, first aid & safeguarding trained) both less than half a mile from my house so they are my emergency plan.
In the scenario that the ambulance arrived and needed to leave before a parent or emergency contact on the child could arrive, I would leave the other children with my emergency back ups.
It's possible that a child's parents and emergency contacts wouldn't be available and my emergency back ups wouldn't be available so in that pretty unlikely situation the child would be in the ambulance alone and parents would meet them at the hospital.

I would definitely suggest to parents that if their child has a serious medical condition, they arrange childcare that is within a short travelling distance of their workplace or near their emergency contact.

Most cms have emergency procedures in place to deal with this. Ask yours.

I work closely with 2 other cms and the other children could be dropped with them until parents arrive. Or actually the time that an ambulance arrived and stabilised the child and was ready to be taken to hospital, either the ill child's parents will have arrived to go with them or the other parents could collect so I was free.

Do you normally just hold on all day until the children go home?

Not sure why I am curious too now!

More importantly, what would you do if a child needed an ambulance? I guess they would go alone ?

Well when we go out and about sometimes there's no choice. I have a technique to protect my own privacy and dignity when using the loo if a child needs to be close. I would probably take the baby anyway, not the 4 yr old.

You're also hyper fixating on a really specific scenario which even in 16 years of childminding, I've maybe had to deal with once.

It's interesting everyone worrying about the toilet trips. But this is a thread about allergies and my much bigger worry with children with allergies was what on earth the childminder would do it my child had an allergic reaction. She can't leave the other children alone so presumably a tiny toddler /preschooler would have to be packed off in the ambulance alone.

People who use childminders and nurseries are still "bringing up their own children".

I worked compressed hours 4 days a week. DH did the same. Our children spent three days a week at nursery. Plus of course that wasn't every day week of the year, we took a good 6-8 weeks off with them as holidays. I imagine that's pretty standard.

Compare that to my SAHM friends, most of whom (if they were sensible and valued their mental health and relationship) still used either a grandparent, a gym crèche, a pre school or a nursery /child minder to give them a break for at least a few mornings a week.

plus we outsourced the housework to a cleaner /housekeeper, so when we were with the children we could really enjoy being with them

And oh my goodness parenting doesn't stop with the nursery years. And thanks to climbing the career ladder during that time I can dictate my own hours and prioritise working around my teenagers needs. And they are happy thriving confident and loving teenagers.

The childminder has to go to the loo. She (presume a she) will know whether any of the children in her care will hurt another, just as a child's mother will know whether her 3 year old will clunk the new baby with a brick when she goes out of the room. It's a risk. But the higher adult to child ratio of a childminding place is safer than a nursery where there is likely a high turn-over of staff and where instructions can get muddied or forgotten.
Best of all, bring up your own child. I know this is hard and that financially it can be a problem, which is why I advocate for funding aimed at childcare to go to parents to be used as they think fit, including helping a mother to stay at home with her child/children at least part-time. It isn't currently aimed this way as the money is aimed at getting women back to (preferably f/t) paid work (since this is the only work valued in a neo-liberal consumer individualistic society) and to encourage the childcare industry (nothing to do with education, here, despite talk of socialising children etc - the Sure Start system was better for that but the Tories axed it: it made no money).

You can't please everyone!

Yes but there is a difference between taking your own 4 year old to the toilet with you and a CM taking a child into the bathroom while they basically undress their bottom half and use the toilet in front of the child, isn't there? It wouldn't bother me if a CM did it but I'm sure it would bother other parents. Hence why I'm asking!