People still not aware of the childminding rules?

I also get very annoyed when people are doing it for cash in hand, regularly, and not being registered but although I'm a childminder myself, I actually think it's crazy to have such strict rules about helping out with friends children on odd occasions (I think there is quite a difference between the two).

The mum of an old mindee has taken ds1 out with them on an outing for the day when I didn't have mindee during school holidays. I didn't pay her of course but said I'd be happy to do the same some time (when childminding numbers permit). Now I suppose that if I then do this, it's classed as 'reward' and therefore illegal but they are very very rare odd occasions where we're doing it so our little ones have a friend to enjoy the outing with.

I also think a lot of parents who don't know much about childminding, don't actually know about these rules anyway. I certainly didn't until I was registering as a childminder 3 and half years ago!

As for person who sued her 'friend' in that situation - how disgusting and sad

Just wandering back over to the payment issue - the wording in the Children Act is:

"a person acts as a child minder if he looks after one or more children under the age of eight, for reward"

There are then exemptions such as for relatives, for less than two hours a day, it's in the child's own home, etc. Reward has been interpreted as money or "payment in kind". No one is going to look at a bottle of wine as "payment" for having someone's kids for a morning!

The payment in kind bit is mostly aimed at picking up people who exchange childcare. For example I'll have your kid on Mondays and Tuesdays while you work, and you have mine on Wednesdays and Thursdays in exchange. That isn't just doing a favour - that's a long running informal childcare arrangement.

what ever is said on her i cant and dont belive it is illegal for a child to go and play at a friends house and for the child to the go back to play at the same friends house. (or even at a different friends house) (wether its for fun or to help mum out while she has her hair cut / goes to Dr / goes shopping, or any other scenario!)

I just CANT imaine MPs and the memebers of the house of lords passing a LAW that makes children being cared for at a friends house illegal....

at a friends they are not being educated... they are just playing as almost all children do

People are aware but choose to ignore it. If one of my trusted friends was to mind ds I would choose to ignore it too.

I regularly look after friends children, normally when their childminder is ill etc.

I don't accept payment for it, but quite often my friends will then drop off a bunch of flowers or a bottle of wine, or if I have had them alot, one friend takes me out to the pics or something.

If I said 'sorry, but i can't accept your gift as it would constitute payment, and I am not registered so can't be paid', they would think I was nuts, and probably be offended.

most childminders are young mothers tho

or mothers of yopung children or both

of course - but their application of it can be less black and white than it sounds, iyswim

the law of course rarely is black and white

HappyMummyOfOne I have been doing this job for almost 30 years, I do not have children at home, my child is 30 and married and a Father himself.

I have a Degree in Early years education, and a NNEB and as well as working a 50 hour week with the children I do training and paper work at weekends and evenings.

I do this job as it WAS my career of choice, as it is for a great many CMs.

Well I think the OFSTED line is that if you make it a grey area, then you risk lots of people doing childminding services and then claiming just to be doing a friend a favour when asked why they don't pay taxes/have insurance etc etc.

It is a profession, and a vital one, and as such has to be regulated like any other.

I suspect that in a case where someone genuinely was just doing a friend a favour, they wouldn't prosecute, even assuming they heard about it. But if someone is providing childminding services for money, OFSTED need the law behind them to come down hard on lack of insurance etc.

They need the law to be black and white to avoid people taking advantage of a grey area, iyswim.

Quite, Zippi

im a libertarian so i am in favour of less law rather than more

and i think the piecemeal knee jerk way that some of this child care legislation has been put together is prety poor

i would like to see a policy brought forward for dismantling some of the crappy laws that take away from the community

Great, let's now indulge in CM-bashing, shall we HappyMummy?

"The reason, it is illegal to regularly look after children without being registered is because it is not safe!

Does your Friend have Insurance, first Aid, child protection, do you have a contract, so that you know that she will definitely have your child when she says she will, not change her mind at 7.30 in the morning when you have to be at work for 8, all these things do and have happened with unregistered Childcare."

A childminder has no guarantee of being safe either, they may have insurance but it doesnt stop accidents happening. Its simply there to financially protect the minder not the child.

Friends may not have insurance, first aid, child protection etc but then neither do 99.9% of mothers!

As for hours changing, I see posts on here re childminders wanting to change hours, not willing to be flexible, cutting days down or giving notice all the time so not a really valid argument.

I would much rather use a friend than a minder. I would know the friend and have built up a trust with them. Minders are usually childminders for the fact that they wish to earn money whilst staying home with their own children. I would imagine a very high percentage have their own children so its not necessarily their first choice of work.

Friends and families will always have other peoples children, its lovely to be able help out each other. Quite daft to say it cant be for more than 2 hours at a time.

i think trust is the operative word here

id rather lkeave a child with a person i trusted than someone who was insured

i am learning to climb i want to trust the person on the ground holding the rope...it doesnt matter to me whether im insured or they are..i want to know that they are paying attention and taking care of me and value my life the same as their own

well quite zippy. If something serious happened to my child my child would be my priority, not the £££ I might make from the experience.

I really can't understand this whole blame/claim culture we live in. Fine if it's something where suing will bring someon to account, ie in the case of a hospital messing up surgery/birth etc and those responsible needing to be brought to account and made to face up to their actions, but everything is fair game now. Child falls off a climbing frame we can sue the one looking after them/the councel/manufacturer of the climbing frame but apparently not accept that a child could just fall off a climbing frame because that is what children do sometimes.

and insurance isnt al;ways all that

insurance companies are very careful to not pay out if they can avoid it

it can take many years to get a settlement at all

not to be relied upon

life is a risky business you cant always blame or claim

and there is a stroing argument that insurance makes people complacent ..rather a careful parent/friend than someone insured up to the hilt

Ripeberry, I appreciate that it was me that sparked this for you.
I wasn't meaning to be offensive.
I do have the greatest of respect for CM.
And what they actually have to go through to get registered in the first place.

well my ds broke his nose and his colar bone in school both during sports and it never occurred to me to sue

nor should it tbh

She sued a friend knowing she had no insurance? What a cow.

It's a sad day when its risky to look after someone's kid in case you get sued.

I'm definitely not having anaphylactic kids to tea (discussion from earlier in the week) without someone signing a disclaimer form.

zippy my MIL was chair of governors at a school where a child fell off a climbing frame (at a time when she shouldn't have been on it) and two years later after the child had left school the parents sued the school. they lost.

actually I've just re-read the op:

"Just really annoys me as we have to do SO MUCH now this EYFS is coming in and potential customers are just doing everyting ad-hoc.". potential customers. so actually this is more about the people who are using their friends and not paying the op to do the same think their friends can do for free.

Childminding is a job like any other.

You are busting a gut because you wish to earn money. Let's not pretend that you have the interests of the children in mind - you don't agree with people looking after their friends' children because it takes away your "potential customers".

if your child has an accidnet in school you dont sue the school either

at least i have never have