To not want sil to provide childcare

[Wadewilson]

I'm fully prepared to be told iabu, and possibly a bit snobby but that's why I'm asking.

Sil has a part time job during the day that she absolutely hates. She only gets £200/ month for it, but they need that extra money so she can't quit.
I'm due to go back to work after mat leave soon, and local nurseries are about £800/month. DH has suggested instead of that, speaking to his sister and offering her 300-400/month to provide childcare. Cheaper for us than nursery, and she could quit the job she hates and have more money.

The issue is, I dont want her to. I love sil, she's like an actual sister to me and I love spending time with her. But, her children spend almost 24/7 on phones and tablets (they are 2 and 6). If they are playing with toys rather than tablets they are told to be quiet and just go on the tablet instead of making noise. They are also fed convenience foods all the time. Constantly having chocolate, sweets, ice lollies. Actual meals are things like potato waffles with beans and sausage from a tin, frozen pizzas, that sort of thing. The nearest I've seen her children have to a home cooked meal is spag bol from a can. We are there quite a lot, so see a good range of their meals. We've also been away with them before, and all the children will eat is things like burgers and pizzas and chicken nuggets.
I know I sound really snobby and awful by saying that, but that isn't what we eat and definitely not what I want dc to eat. When i was growing up it was all home cooked food, vegetables, proper meals. That's what we eat now, and thats what i want dc to grow up eating. I know i cant force dc to like vegetables and things, but if vegetables and home cooked food is normal there is more chance of them liking it.

Aibu by thinking that? And aibu for not wanting her to provide childcare?
And do people have any other options? We could afford the 800 for nursery, but it would make things tight, and dh is insistent about not paying it and giving his sister money instead.

Stimmyplil £400 a month isn't enough to be taxed on. Will be cash in hand. Which is why you can't compare it to a nanny job.

You won't get tax credits unless she is a registered childminder.
it is illegal to be paid for childcare provision unless you are registered.
She'd have to have insurance and her home suitable for the business.

its illegal because they are paying her

No doubt she'll pick up benifits as well

She would be employed over 48 hours a week which is illegal

She won't have any employment rights such as sick pay annual leave pension etc

No different to any other cash in hand being tax fraud

I think people are missing the point here by labouring the point that it’s illegal.

People like OP’s DH and his sister do not give a shiny shit that it’s illegal!

The DH is just thinking about the money he’s saving.

The SIL is jumping for joy at being able to stay at home and increase her monthly income by £200.

Yes, many people would be completely put off the idea by the very mention that something is illegal or prohibited, and think critically about the results of not having insurance etc, but just as many people just wouldn’t give a shit.

Even telling both of them that it’s an illegal arrangement will just cause to to think “Well who’s to know if I pay in cash each week and we deny it to anyone who asks?”

www.netmums.com/life/childcare-swaps-the-rules if caught she can be fined £5000 HMRC are more than capable of checking banks etc for regular sums of money OFSTED is not the type of organisation to be easily fooled - its not worth the risk

What is DH's attitude toward screen time? You will need at some point to say outright that you limit screen time to 30 mins a day or whatever and are worried it will cause friction between the kids when hers are allowed iPad etc and yours is not. And what about when she is sick? Since you want dc to go to nursery, staff members being sick would not be an issue, so DH must accept that he takes 100% of days off to care for your DC when your SIL can't have them, either when her kids are sick or when she is. Does she have space in her car for three child seats in case they want to go out? How will she cope financially if/when for whatever reason you need to terminate the agreement? What about her pension etc?

it is illegal to be paid for childcare provision unless you are registered.

This just isn't true! A large amount of nannies are NOT registered!!

But anyway, yes if your Dh is intending to not pay tax then that's disgraceful op.

I've not read the full thread, and I've nc and am being vague but this exact situation has happened in my family (is still happening) and is causing huge resentment between the parties (and I'm stuck in the middle ).

You have the carer who has difficulty in finding a job due to health issues. They cannot obtain jobs which are physically suitable due to lack of qualifications so the prospect of £100 per week plus the added bonus of staying at home was very appealing for the carer.

All was going fine until the child's 27 month review when it was noted that they were very behind in a number of skills as well as being very overweight. Parents were unhappy and began complaining to carer.

In some respects the above was the carer's fault. They fed the child crap and didn't provide an enriching environment. The child could easily spend m-f in the carer'ss house without seeing another soul other than those on the TV. There are no trips to playgroups/soft play etc even the park is a rare occurrence. The lack of socialisation is partly due to the carer's ill health, laziness and the view that the £100 is their money so why should they spend it on toddler classes/baby food/new toys etc?

However, imo, the parents are no better. They knew about the carer's ill health and parenting style. They could provide lunch and dinner but won't. They could pay for a toddler class and insist carer takes the child but they won't - they won't because they don't want to pay anymore money.

Parents then had a second child. They didn't discuss this with carer, they assumed carer would care for both children. This is important because, ultimately, if carer doesn't care for the children the mother would have to give up work because they couldn't afford normal childcare for one child let alone two. Of course, during mother's maternity leave they refused to pay carer because she wasn't providing any childcare. Carer is resentful about this.

Eldest child is now in nursery and carer cares for younger child all week and eldest child whilst not in nursery. Carer received the amazing pay rise of £50 a month to do this. Parents now complain about food/lack of stimulation but won't do anything to assist (such as provide more money, find another solution, buy new toys/books). The whole cycle is being repeated. Carer is now very reliant on this money which will one day end.

(sorry this is long!)

As others have said it’s illegal

She can’t look after at ownnhome as not a cm

She can’t at yours unless is employed by your dh / you

So needs nmw not £20 per day

”I think people are missing the point here by labouring the point that it’s illegal.

People like OP’s DH and his sister do not give a shiny shit that it’s illegal!

The DH is just thinking about the money he’s saving.

The SIL is jumping for joy at being able to stay at home and increase her monthly income by £200.”

Well yes, at the moment that would all be the case. While everyone’s happy and the chances of any relevant authorities finding out are small, then the fact the law is being broken seems like a minor detail.

But that is only a temporary situation. It would be naive to think this arrangement will continue swimmingly indefinitely, particularly given the apparent disconnect in parenting styles. And as soon as there is a disagreement between the parties, the unlawfulness of the arrangement becomes very relevant indeed, and gives the SIL huge ammunition to cause immense expense and inconvenience.

Surely if this idea was to ever start it would be a simple 'anonymous' call to the relevant authorities to put an end to it all.

stimmyplip it is illegal because they aren’t planning on paying her properly. They will give SIL £400 cash, unlike a nanny who will be paid NMW, sick pay, holiday and NI.

Do you remember relalise childminders are quite quick to notice family caring for babies and will report SIL - after all she's under cutting their teade

@Snoopychildminder obviously what they're planning on doing is illegal but a few people on here are saying it's illegal to be an unregistered childcarer. That's simply not true!

Why don't you do a combination of both?
This will help your SIL out and she could bring home her £200 a month and be at home with her children.

SIL remains happy, cousins get to play with each other and your child also gets nursery on the other days.

I'm assuming you'd also be able to claim part of your free hours once your child get to 2 years (with the nursery).

I thought family was allowed to look after children without being registered. You can't claim child care element of tax credits against it though.

God, notonyournelly, that sounds like a horrendous situation. Those poor kids.

When do you return to work OP? My nursery had a LONG waiting list and we had to put DS1 name down at the beginning of Mat leave to stand a chance if getting in.

I wouldn't be happy AT ALL with my son being left in this environment. If you do have to provide the nappies, wipes, food etc - ensure that it's DH getting it all ready. Why should you have the extra hassle.

My nursery provided everything including nappies, suncream etc. All l had to do was drop off and go.

Are you going to provide and fit a carseat in her car and a double pushchair as her child is still so young?

Will they then stay at hers, so risk of getting damaged or will you have the hassle of sorting that out at drop off and collection too.

The comments saying SIL would be better than nursery 'because she'll love the baby' seem to be driven by some ideological objection to paid childcare. It certainly isn't true that all aunts love their nephews and nieces, and even if she does love the baby that doesn't mean she's going to provide good care - she presumably loves her own children but doesn't pay them much attention. It seems not just naive but stupid to imagine that she might care more for this child which is not her own.

It is a clear fact that a good, engaged SAHM is better, on average, for a baby than nursery - I say this as someone whose own baby will start nursery at 9 months. That doesn't mean any SAHM is better than any nursery. It sounds like SIL's own kids would be better off in nursery than in her sole care, and OP's certainly would.

OP why don't you suggest to DH and SIL that you sit down - poss in her house when her kids are there - to talk about what you expect her to do and what she expects you to do.

Tell your DH you want proper meals and limited screen/tv time. Outings. Some structured play. SIL paying attention to your child as well as hers including talking and reading books. See if he gets on board. Look at free or chargeable things she could do with the three children and cost the latter out.

Either way, get to the meeting and talk to DH and SIL about it. Ask what she expects in return - eg, highchair, bowls, car seat, toys, books. Discuss what happens if she or her kids are sick.

And what happens if she's dobbed in for unregistered child minding. And will she discuss with you or DH at pick up what she plans for the next day?

Would she consider registering as a CM? it may be she has the potential but no one has ever suggested it to her .. and she might be converted to something that would benefit her, her kids and yours.

You need to tell her your expectations before she joyfully resigns from the job she hates.

Also, in the OP you refer to 'they' needing the money, so presumably SIL has a partner? Even if she doesn't think she's being a bit ripped off by this deal, he might well...

lisasimpsonsbff I did eye roll when I saw SIL will love your child nursery/CM won’t.
I would be really affronted if someone said that to me, I care incredibly deeply for the children I look after, and the quality of care they receive sounds better than the picture OP described. My little ones aren’t left to their own devices for starters

I have no doubt you provide much better care, snoopy. Some people seem determined to insist that paid childcare is always worse. There was a thread on here about children arriving at primary school unprepared and people kept saying that it was 'because so many parents have to work now' - despite the fact the original article was discussing nursery (for older toddlers) as the solution, not the cause.

Are you prepared to override your DH like he overrode you? Or is he the boss of you?

You don't want sil to provide childcare, as both parents need to agree, it's not going to happen then.
Unless you are happy to be overruled by a man who is obviously a crap parent and husband to suggest such a thing.
Anybody else who couldn't be with a man like this say I

Tell your DH you want proper meals and limited screen/tv time. Outings. Some structured play. SIL paying attention to your child as well as hers including talking and reading books. See if he gets on board. Look at free or chargeable things she could do with the three children and cost the latter out

Why is it down to OP to do this?

If someone is paid to care for your child the above is the minimum expectation.

It's actually the bare bones of parenting