Is this wrong or is it just me?

It's just you, you overthinking loon.

this smacks of that person who posted the other wierd thread the other day and has done sevferal times in the past, they just keep name-changing!!

Get a life!!!!!

You do get weird people kicking round at Halloween....

look, as long as your child is well looked after whilst you aren't taken care of him/her then please be happy that your child will be happy(WHO HASN'T GOT A PAST???) xx

think this is over the top!!!!!

how do you know anyway? is it on the nursey prospectus... i also had sex under 16!! yes bad i know.. are you suggesting the girl is a danger to children.. obviously the boy isnt employed by the nursery...

dont understand..how strange!!! good on the girl to continue her education/ training.. my lovely mil and fil had their first child at 16.... had 5 more and married for 50 years... not always a disaster..

do i spy troll

Interesting first post!!!!!!!!

I'm going to give my first

I'm another one who thinks the OP is bonkers (to put it politely).

Huh? [hbiscuit]

You sound like the person who sacked me for having the audacity to apply for a nanny job when I had been in care.

wouldn't bother me and I would be interested to know why it would bother you!

Agree with all the others

it is none of your business !!!

Good for the girl in the fact that she has got a job and she and her partner are still together and trying to support their child

many of my friends had sex before they were 16 and 2 got pregnant and all are nannys or work with children in a nursery

she perhaps made a mistake as a child and sounds like she has sorted her life around
why shouldnt she be given a chance and her past history really has nothing to do with her job anyway

sounds like you are trying to stir trouble for her

I would be more happy leaving my children with somebody that had a child. The fact she chose to keep this baby and made it work
and not sat at home claiming benefits gives
her even more credit.

What is the problem?

i would say its absoutely nothing, nowt, nada, zip, zilch to do with you OP.

The same goes for the Nursery, nothing to do with them.

Wondering why you feel its your business anyway.

lalalalalal lelouloulouelelele lalaleleloullalal tra tra lalalala!

Am I speaking your language?

Bonkers!

If the person had an unspent criminal conviction for statutory rape (which in this case would only apply to the bloke) then an employer could opt not to employ them (they'd probably have had to sign the sex offenders register anyway which would bar them from working with children). I struggle to see how they could take any position on the girl who has not done anything wrong in the eyes of the law. That's assuming they ever knew about it in the first place, which I can't see how any employer would unless they knew the girl beforehand. Weird.

Would it be legal for an employer to refuse to employ someone due to them having had under age sex? Hmm... I doubt it. Anyone an employment law specialist... do you know? Any relevant case law?

So if this girl was very young when she had sex with this man
and if this man was very much older than her
and if this girl was therefore a victim of abuse

YOU
want her barred from working with children becaus she is a VICTIM not an abuser?

That is awful.

But it sounds as if they girl had an relationship with someone a bit older than her, got pregnant and the relationship stood the test of time.

Isnt that good?

AND if this man happened to fancy 15 year old girls why would that be a worry to a nursery where presumably the children are a lot younger than 15.

I do not think its ok for older men to have sex with underage girls btw. I do not think a 15 year old is nearly 16 so its fine for a 40 year old to have sex with her. But that does not sound like what you are talking about.

Colditz - Is it really not statutory rape if the girl is over 13? I thought a girl couldn't consent until 16?

*Sorry for the hijack

OP - You are crackers!

OP I do hope you havent mentioned this concern to anyone in RL. Because whatever their polite reaction to your face they will think you are really odd.

I think the OP has an enemy and is looking for ways to screw her up.

perhaps you could spell out the moral ambiguity to us

I'm not seeing it, truly I'm not

1. It's her life
2. She's in a stable relationship
3. There are plenty of MNers with bigger age gaps
4. She's the one in the job, not him. In a nursery he won't come into contact with children as her partner!
5. I think it would be discrimination against teenaged mothers if she were disqualified from doing it

Now if it were as a CM, where the partner was around, or as a nanny then I might understand your POV but it's a nursery! What are you worried about? She's going to pass on her promiscuous habits to the children she looks after?!