Childminder who is a recovering alcoholic

[connedbird]

Would I be unreasonable to make Ofsted aware of a person who has recently registered as a childminder but who has also recently been referred to AA following a recent mid day alcohol abuse episode which resulted in her children being temporarily removed by the police?

She has a sponsor and is attending AA meetings/ following 12 steps, so is by all accounts happily getting her life on track. Social services have deemed her suitable to continue looking after her own children on the understanding that she continues with AA and doesn't drink around the children. Also that she leaves her partner due to DV from both sides which she has done.

So, I don't want to be a bitch... but having left my own children with childminders from babies, I feel like it would be something I'd want to know that Ofsted had had the chance to assess before my children were left with a minder.

Wondering if I should even stick my nose in... maybe my own concerns about leaving my pfb DD when she was small are clouding my judgement.

Would SS have made Ofsted aware anyway?

What are your thoughts??

Well then that was child abuse and have been reported
and dealt with.

One person abuses as a teacher so would you home school?

Are all doctors murderers like harold shipman are all nursery workers abusers like Vanessa George all nurses killers like beverley Allet

Your argument doesn't make sense.

It isn't an argument, it's a personal feeling. I feel that my child would be at more risk with a childminder, therefore I choose not to use one.

I think this debate has become personal
Because when posters say they wouldn't trust
any cm as they are generally unqualified potential child abusers are extremely fucking insulting, upsetting ignorant crap.

I think you're choosing to get upset to be honest with you - I wouldn't dream of saying I think all childminders are abusers. It's a worry that if abuse was taking place, it would be too easy to do.

Some people choose not to travel by plane as they are scared of flying: doesn't mean they think all pilots are poor at their jobs. Feelings are stronger than facts.

Parents have an absolute right to choose the setting they like of course.
However
It's very important to be vigilant in any setting and not allow your ignorant prejudice to lull you into a false sense of security.

That is risky.

It has not become personal. Many people wouldn't trust a childminder not because they think they are abusers but they are not happy with the lone working aspect and the potential for risk.

Nobody said anybody's husband was an abuser and I can understand why the presence of husbands/family members/friends is not a great indicator of impartial other adults so not much of a reassurance to potential customers.

There is a huge huge difference between considering potential risks about total strangers you may employ or purchase a service from and calling someone an abuser

But your argument isn't supported by facts and data.

Still no point in carrying this on.

I now fling down to finish off my playroom prior to advertising my setting again.

Really missed my littlies and can't wait to start up again.

It's a fantastic job.

Getting paid for playing, picnics in the sunshine and splashing through puddles and kicking leaves, sledging in the snow and painting and cooking., pretending to be a fairy and a superhero and getting cuddles and a i love you body

Brilliant.

thebody
there do some to be a core group of people who hold CM's in complete disdain.
Do you think a lot of it is resentment / jealously? Let's face it, I agree with your last post, most of the time the job is fab!

I don't hold all cm in complete disdain just the ones in our area who are a shambles.
They are surly, don't take the kids on, scowl and talk to each other ignoring the dc.
Yes they take them to the park but don't interact.
jealous? As I have spent over 20 years raising my own dc and doing similar activities, that are listed above, I don't need other peoples children to enjoy myself and play all day.
Maybe some people could be jealous but I think its probably just personal taste that a cm is no substitute for a good parent, whatever the setting.

We can't say whether neglect or abuse are more common in any type of childcare setting because we only know about the cases that get reported. There is really no point in arguing about it.

Needasockamnesty I'd prefer it if you backed up the original claim I challenged you on instead of trying to divert from it with a bizarre personal attack on me.

Presumably you, too, can't find anywhere where we have said that all childminders are good because we are (I'm outstanding, actually, but that's beside the point).

To answer your question, no I'm not accusing the Op of lying. I don't think she interpreted my comments in that way either or she'd have picked me up on it. I apologise to her if she felt that I disbelieved her because that's not at all what I intended.

adsy I think it's just. Mumsnet thing to be honest.

In RL my parents were lovely and supportive and like most cms I know we all had a waiting list and turned it's of people away.

I have never met these silly ignorant attitudes in RL
Thankfully.

pico then by your thinking absolutely no statistics for any crime are correct.

It's stating the obvious that one can only go on reported cases.

morethan your post says far more about you than the cms you hold in such contempt.

I think motethn posts where she/he says a cm is no substitute for a good parent

That's the nub right there. I think some parents on here seem to think a cm would somehow get too close or be too key In a child's life, too intense a relationship and so prefer the more general care of a nursery setting.

Thing is all good cms understand this and help the parent to see that a child usually is excited to come to the cms but equally excited to go home with the parent.

It's a completely normal worry. Most cms are parents themselves and although very fond of their mindees are equally happy to see them go home too. [ grin]

It's fine to feel insecure as a working parent, we all are, but to cover that by slagging off and demonising a whole profession is a tad silly.

the vast majority of child abuse takes place in the family home. Best not let the parents look after their children, eh?
this has taken a nonsense turn.
this isn't about whether childminders are better or worse than good nurseries or bad parents, it's about information which OP has which is unlikely to be picked up by the authorities for around another 18 months, based on what I read above re: registrations, and whether she has a moral / ethical duty to report it because of the impact it may have on some children. It may not have any impact, but it has the potential to.
Whether or not the woman is a good childminder under usual circumstances is irrelevant, we are talking about the unusual circumstance in which she relapses.
Pass the information over, and let Ofsted make their decision based on the full facts.

Respectfully ^^ that was said by every cm on here and pretty much every poster. Definatly report.

The thread did widen though and some daft sweeping statements did need to be challenged.

Needasockamnesty I'd prefer it if you backed up the original claim I challenged you on instead of trying to divert from it with a bizarre personal attack on me

It was not me you challenged that was a different poster one who said "this is why I won't use childminders,I have quite clearly stated I do use childminders (and nannies) because I don't like nurseries.

Personal attack? Nope just pointing out that you (and a handful of others)do this on almost all the threads about not ideal childminders and that your desire to challenge posters pretty much always ends up taking the thread away from the actual conversation that is usually about 1 childminder and turning it into a don't bash childminders one.

It would be utterly ridiculous to think that the registration process wheedles out all the unsuitable types just the same as it would be to assume that the probation period of any other job does or interview process does.

Would you leave any children of yours with a recently discovered alcoholic with DV issues whose not long had her own children removed knowing that this had all happened within the last few months?

Many people have concerns about all sorts of things that are not based on data or evidence I for one am so frightened of being eaten by a shark that I would not swim in any sea (even Bournemouth yet I know no self respecting shark would rock on up there) people get even more concerned about stuff when it comes to their kids,the lone worker CM v lots of eyes nurseries is a very very usual concern, I'm firmly in the if I wanted to leave my kids with a unqualified 16 yo I would ask a neighbours kid as opposed to pay a nursery camp but to someone in the other camp this would look daft.

Nothing can change the fact that the second you hand your child over to someone else it can be scary unless you source childcare from friends and family they are in essence strangers no matter what setting they work in.there is always a risk that your fears will happen. Yes it's very rare (that's why serious cp issues are newsworthy) but that does not mean it does not happen. It is completely ok for people to make their own assessment of the risks for their own children and mitigate concerns they have by using their own choices.

It's also not just about risks of a CP issue its different standards and priorities.

Thebody

Yes, definitely. I don't agree with childcare at all, my dc are better off with me every time. I believe a parent should be at home with a child if at all possible, otherwise I wouldn't have had children. I like to raise them myself, this is why I don't use childcare.

However, the cm in our area are like this, we see it on a daily basis and we as parents thank our lucky stars we choose for a parent to sah.

Other people don't see it like this of course, its their justification for using childcare and one they are entitled to choose.

We are all different.

unless you source childcare from friends and family they are in essence strangers no matter what setting they work in.there is always a risk that your fears will happen

but lots of people have pointed out that most abuse happens by family and friends ( said in the context that they wouldn't use a CM as the CM's family/ DH / friends would be there).
So that rules out childcare by family/ friends and childminders.

Why has this thread gone off at a complete tangent?! the OP was asking for advice about a particular situation, not for views on whether or not childminders were inherently more risky settings than nurseries

Thebody - while that is correct - crime statistics aren't entirely accurate, we can be sure that some crime statistics are more accurate than others. Crimes against non-verbal and young children are likely to be significantly under-recorded due to the nature of the victims. There are other crimes that are significantly under reported for other reasons, but others which don't have as strong reasons for under-recording.

I wouldn't take the reports in the media for crimes against children in nurseries and CM as evidence to say that they were more prevalent in either setting. Noting that media reports are also different to crime stats.

but lots of people have pointed out that most abuse happens by family and friends ( said in the context that they wouldn't use a CM as the CM's family/ DH / friends would be there).
So that rules out childcare by family/ friends and childminders

Correct but I was not talking about abuse I was talking about people's perception of risk, the poster who made the comment about the CM's dh family and friends was obviously responding to the statement saying I have other people about my dh et al.

The childminders posting have jumped to the conclusion that she was accusing them of being abusers.

Some people (in fact many) perceive their family's to be safer under normal circumstances this is probably true one would assume if you were not abused in any way as a child then its rather unlikely your parents would start abusing your children unfortunately within families people's definition of abuse if they were abused can be rather different to the actual definitions of abuse.its one of the reasons why it's not ideal for family members to supervise required supervised contact.

An abuser is an abuser no matter what job they have or what relation they are to you or your child a childminder is no less likely to be one than any other drb checked employee is and all that shows is they haven't been convicted of anything.the same as no job protects you from being an alcoholic or involved in domestic abuse.

This op should absolutely be reporting this situation and everybody using any child care of any type should be mindful of risk and their perception of it.

And because you appear to think I'm childminder bashing I will again repeat that I use childminders (and a nanny)and have done on and off for over 20 years I work pretty much full time have never used a nursery and never would and there are no circumstances at all that I would ever use family or friends for childcare.

OP report your relative for everyone's sake .

I have always used childminders as childcare because i wanted them to be in a lovely cosy home like setting .

The people i know who have used nurseries , have done so because they don't want their children to be looked after in this way , they don't want their children to form any special bonds with anyone else because they actually feel a bit guilty leaving their children in a childcare setting at all .

Ineedasockamnesty I have challenged a few comments on this thread.
The one you've forgotten you made is this:

However it pisses me off that it seams you cannot have a discussion at all about inappropriate childminders without the 3/4 usual posters jumping in a telling you that because they are good they all must be.

I can't see that happening anywhere on this thread. I queried it. You replied by accusing me, personally, of derailing the thread, of turning up on most threads about the subject and derailing them into a defence of all childminders.

You further accuse me of jumping all over the Op and steadfastly refusing to keep on track - not only this Op, but most other Ops who post a concern about childminders. I see no evidence of that, either.

Not only is that a personal attack - you accuse me personally - but I can only think that either you've mistaken me for someone else or you've read completely different threads to me. I will challenge misconceptions and false information. I won't defend bad practice or defend all childminders regardless.

I answered the Op in my original post, as did most people. I queried whether this particular childminder was fully registered because it wasn't clear from the OP: OFSTED are automatically informed if a registered childminder is reported to the police - that's why I thought she may not have completed the registration process. I also suggested that she should report to be on the safe side but that OFSTED should already be aware.

It isn't derailing a thread to correct wrong information or to challenge statements. If someone posted that they would never use a dentist because they pull healthy teeth out with pliers, would you not expect that to be challenged?

By the way, your latest post claims:

The childminders posting have jumped to the conclusion that she was accusing them of being abusers.

Two or three of the childminders posting have mentioned abuse - there are several on the thread.
I have not mentioned abuse. I simply pointed out that it was wrong to assume that all childminders work alone and I asked what that particular poster was afraid my DH and I would do.