Childminder says she can't provide hot dinner as needs hygiene inspection

Scarfmaker, I dont think ofsted are saying that we have to have two sinks, its that we have to register with the Food Standards Agency, and their recommendation is that we have the two sinks. But I know that the ncma (and maybe ofsted?) are trying to get the FSA to re look at the regulations with regards to childminding as some of them are so obviously ridiculous.

Never heard anything like it - I don't think theres anything in Ofsted regs that say about having to have two sinks etc. or even about going on food hygiene courses - although I have been on one - but it wasn't compulsory where I am (South-East London).

Think things are going a bit too far now.

ahhh

katy that makes sense .. thank you for the clarification

I can see both sides of this argument so shall take myself off to bed

I would agree - however the legal age f responsibility in this country is 18 & that is what the insurance co would use

Unfortunately I imagine that a 16yo mum would find it difficult to get insurance in their own name (I could be wrong about that tho')

Do you not sometimes think that all the hoops you have to jump through and pay for courses, etc is just another way for the gov to make money though?

Oh yes, and there is a new scheme for 2009 which requires anyone caring for a child who is not their own (as far as I am aware, details are a little sketchy at present) to register with yet another government body. Needless to say, there is cost involved - £64.

This is very interesting, and I'm enjoying hearing all the issues- Katy thanks for answering my question.

However, I would probably consider leaving a small child with it's 16 year old sibling on occasion as taking reasonable care. After all, there are younger mothers than 16 out there!

Cupofteaplease - your child is legally under your care when the au pair is looking after them

If something goes wrong no-one would be held legally accountable accept you

If a child is hurt/harmed while in someone elses care (nursery/school/youth club/guides/childminder) that person can be legally held accountable - therefore they need to take 'reasonable care' of them which is a legislative responsibility - they often have insurance & they are now required to have CRB checks

But if you leave your younger child with a 16yo (maybe even your own 16yo) and the house burns down (thankfully no-one is hurt) the insurance company may not pay out because the responsible person (eg you) didn't take reasonable care

It is all to do with child protection & the children's act

so if I leave my child with my mum from 1pm till 5pm.. thats technically negelect

that doesnt seem right to me

Do you not sometimes think that all the hoops you have to jump through and pay for courses, etc is just another way for the gov to make money though?

As a child I always used to be left with someone in the village who was willing to have me. My mum paid them, I was under 8. I don't think there was such a thing as registered childminders then.

Certainly no insurance, or first aid certs, food safety certs, etc. At least my "CM" has the first aid cert. Oh, and also the requisite black doll thats needed for the Ofsted inspection.

Well I for one shudder at the idea of leaving my child with someone who has the sort of temperament cmx2 is displaying on here. However many pieces of paper she's got. Better a trusted and known friend who has experience as a childminder and knows what she's doing, whether she's registered this week or not. No-brainer.

I'm equally curious frasersmummy.

Also, my children are with an au pair in the morning, and in nursery or with the CM in the afternoon. So effectively, the general opinion on here is that I'm neglectful until lunchtime (as my AP isn't registered with Ofsted or insured), but a good parent after lunch!

I agree that childminders being registered is safest for all involved, but I feel slightly uncomfortable when people start implying that anything else would be neglectful or harmful to the children, when in the majority of cases, this just isn't the case.

BTW I can't find anything on the internet that says I'm breaking the law by using an unregistered childminder. Only that she is.

'reward' is the difference

what is the difference between leaving your child with a cm that has unregistered in these kind of circumstances and leaving your child with a friend for the evening??

None to my knowledge. The Childcare Act 2006 applies regardless of if the person doing the caring is a friend of not. The difference would be the time of day... care between 6pm and 2am is unregulated.

But why is my dd any less safe in the last 6 months than how she was in the previous 3 years? She's moving back to her previous home in the next few weeks as her ex-dh is moving out so will be re- registering then.

She cares a lot about the safety of my child and I wouldn't leave dd there if I didn't think she did.

I really think you ought to stop getting your knickers in a twist. How DARE you say I should be prosecuted for neglect. There is nothing neglectful about leaving my dd with a safe, competent adult who has been an excellent registered childminder for years and years. You don't know her or me so I really think your comments are out of order. You have no idea what she's like or the situation.

Look further afield? Mmmmm ok, 10 miles away, meaning dd would have to move from the village school. Don't think so.

You've obviously got a bee in your bonnet about protecting the status of registered childminders. Fair enough. I do agree that some form of registration is needed to try and make sure that total fuckwits don't become childminders. But I also think its not the be all and end all - I've met one other registered CM in the village who no way would I leave my dd with even if she did have spaces as she's a total muppet. Now I think if I left my dd with her then that would be neglectful.

Hmmmm, but "childminding" is a verb as well as a professional title - hence people say "registered childminder". She's minding stripey's child, is she not?

nannys are not self employed thats the difference

Can I ask a daft question

what is the difference between leaving your child with a cm that has unregistered in these kind of circumstances and leaving your child with a friend for the evening??

why does the law allow one and not the other ??

I am not stirring.. I am curious

No because it is your choice

Realistically you can leave your child with anyone in your home - if anything goes wrong it is likely that you will be the one prosecuted (neglect?)

However a professional advertising a professional service needs to be legit

Littleducks - nannies can have insurance, it is valid when caring for a child at the child's home or while on outings.
Au-Pairs to my knowledge can't get insurance, but could call themselves a nanny and get nanny insurance I expect.

But she would still be a teacher not an imposter (potential criminal)

I am talking about people lying about what they are

If SKSS's carer is calling hersef a childminding then it is lying, if she refers to herself as an ex-childminder then that is better

But a professional who has voluntarily de-registered/stopped can no longer call themselves by their title any more

i do appreciate your points but wrt the insurance thing if you employ a nanny isnt the insurance situation the same?

what about an au pair?

Childminding only applies between 2am and 6pm... so anyone can care for a child between 6pm and 2am totally legally. If the care is provided at the child's own home, again it is unregulated. Does seem a little strange that some things are regulated, while others are not.
While rules may exist, I am sure there are many who don't follow them, in the same way there are many people who drive over the speed limit, many people who take class A and B drugs.

i dont care about ANY excuses, there are non if you leave your child with someone who has no insurance etc you are breaking the law and should be prosecuted for neglect. she should also be reported. if she cared that much she would have found a way to continue working. does her landlord know she is running a business from the property? many landlords state in their contracts that it is not allowed. so what if there are no cms with vacancies locally you should have looked further a field. your child is not safe and is at risk.

but hey who cares about the law and the safety of your child. she blatantly flouts the law in this way what else is she doing that you dont know about committing benefit fraud??

there are many excellent cms who are working incredibly hard to meet all requirements and someone like this gives all us hard working cms a very bad name. i would ask would you leave a young child with someone who cares so little but hey you do so you are just as bad if not worse than she is.