anyone else a bit suspicious about this nursery whistleblower doc?

[minouminou]

she doesn't half seem to be good at getting jobs
unless the buttons and mark warner jobs were 2 out of many she applied for

I think the real issue here is Ofsted reports and perhaps a wider issue in that we've all become very used to thinking something/someone is OK just because it's been rubber-stamped by some overworked official. I'm not saying nurseries/cms et al shouldn't be registered, but we should regard the reports as a side issue to our choices, not central to them.

For example, there are loads and loads of questions and observations one can make when visiting nurseries/CMs. We can see some things - for example, security arrangements, safety gates - for ourselves. And one thing we should always, always do is turn up unexpectedly and ask to be shown round. I know I can go round my wonderful CM any time and the kids will be happy. I went to one nursery without an appointment and was told I couldn't look round. Never went back. Why not ask to see keyworker CVs for yourself, for example? Or the accident book? Or Google the nursery for news reports of things that might have gone wrong in the past?

I know that there are no 100 per cent guarantees that a CM or a nursery is safe but I also think we should, in part, trust our instincts - along with all the other safeguards.

oblomov, that was a really bitchy post you wrote for nicetry

she is entitled to her opinions same as the rest of us

I have never paid much attention to Ofsted either. I don't think an Ofsted inspector would necessarily pick up on staff behaving badly to the children because they obviously would not if an inspector was around. I also think Ofsted would approve my cat as a childminder judging from the cm's I visited in my time. I am shocked that staff was not vetted properly. I thought that was a basic and it suprised me!

That was my point too Krang. Ofsted is only one of the factors.

Agree, krang.

I remember the first Daily Mail article on shit nurseries I saw around the time I had to use a nursery, I read with great concern. So as a parent, you look at the Ofsted report, you go round to the nursery, you see the key and other carers, chat to them, sit with dc in the room for the settling in. And I always, even to this day, 5 years after I read the article, still make it a point to turn up unannounced and peep into the room first at pick up. Like Fairymum, I can confidently give full marks to the nursery and my own judgment (as well as dcs', of course).

In fact, sometimes, the staff are so busy tending to the lively children, they don't even notice my presence for a few minutes after I enter the room.

I still have that newspaperclipping in my files somewhere. It is a pretty obvious thing to say, but I Do have my children's welfare at heart.

Yes Blueshoes, I agree. Why, I deliberatly send my ds to the shitiest nursery I can find, because I just don't care.
That is not us , is it ?

lol, Oblomov. If anyone believes that, then they must have serious issues about their own (different) choices.

I certainly will not be ignoring another poster just because you tell me to Oblomov How very bitchy schoolgirlish of you.

I certainly will not be ignoring another poster just because you tell me to Oblomov How very bitchy schoolgirlish of you.

I certainly will not be ignoring another poster just because you tell me to Oblomov How very bitchy schoolgirlish of you.

Did not mean to post that three times by the way. Not sure what happened.

Viggoswife, have you had a look at her posts ? If you had, you would understand.
Nothing bitchy or schoolgirl about it.

And I am not alone.

I thought that one (other than parents) consitent carer was better for babies and very young children but I thought recent research showed children did better with

First - Parents
Second - consistent Childminder/nanny type care
third - Grandparents or other family
Fourth - Nursery

However I did think the differences were quite slight (though am prepared to be corrected on that)

This is from someone who has used childcare since ds was a baby and not necessarily the ones at the top of this list.

This goes against the view that most people believe a member of the family provides the best care (second to parents)

Research can only show averages and likelihoods. the fact is that many nurseries are lovely places and children thrive in them, I know ds is in his one.

However given the needs of very small babies I think it is very hard for a nursery to provide what they need - not impossible, but very hard.

Also I am astonished how little settling in many parents do for their children. I spent three weeks in my ds's nursery. I stayed with him for 6 half sessions (of 4 hours each) and varous amounts of other times ranging from 1 hour to 3 hrs over that period.

I found that this gave me a really good idea of the nursery routine.

I also pop in unannounced regularly. I found that in the three weeks when I was there most days it was easy to see where the nursery might not be great and where it was fantastic.

Ds's nursery has it's faults (a bit scruffy round the edges, food could be improved etc) but in all the time I was there I never saw a member of staff raise their voice or speak rudely to a child. They even call each other Miss 'first name' and as an adult I noticed the odd strained 'Miss ... could you redirect xxx to sit down etc.' but that was it.

They modelled polite, enthusiastic and kind behaviour at all times. tbh it made me a bit ashamed of the exasperated way I sometimes speak to ds at home

The staff are all very well qualified and none of them have less than an NVQ - most of them have early years educational qualitfications.

At least half of the staff are similar in age to me (or older) and some have their own (mostly school age children).

All this was quite frankly in stark contrast to the other nurseries I had seen where the majority of staff seemed to be very very young and inexperienced.

Lazycow, I had not seen that reseacrh before. Where does that coem from ?

I agree with :
"They modelled polite, enthusiastic and kind behaviour at all times. tbh it made me a bit ashamed of the exasperated way I sometimes speak to ds at home "

At our nursery they have a lovely ethos. They have
lovely 'Golden rules' about treating eachother with respect.
They have the patience of saints. Puts me to shem when I sanp at ds with exasperation.

lazycow I remember that research too though I couldn't tell you where it came from. I just remember there being some discussion about the fact that grandparents weren't second to parents as I guess many people would have assumed they would be; I think it was ascribed partly to the generation gap and that grandparents can't always be as active as young children need their days to be.

However I am just remembering this off the top of my head not saying I have the research neatly filed away or anything!

Message withdrawn

Agree, oblomov and lazycow, about nursery workers at my dcs' nursery modelling good behaviour. And I give full credit to their patience, something I won't hesitate to admit I could do with more of at times.

And that is one of the reasons I prefer to use a nursery over a cm or nanny. Not that a nursery or cm or nanny is inherently better or worse, but if you have a good nursery with loving ethos and sound management, the odd bad egg that gets through the recruitment process will be put straight by others in the room. The apathetic or neglectful carer can't get away with poor behaviour because their actions are all on show. Of course, if the ethos is bad, then take your child out.

I feel it is a good balance for my dcs and me to be exposed to others' style and values, rather than cooped up with me getting snappish because I blindly felt that no one (not even dh) could possibly do a better job than me, loving and enthusiastic mother to my dcs from my loins they sprang.

That research does not apply to me.
Infact it applies to a small proportion of working mums.
It says that p/t mums no negative effects at all, irrespective of when mum starts work.
Infatc it sayd it is f/t under 18 mths., effect samll.
Plus This is Steve Biddulph type theory. And not everyone agrees with him.

All that research is interesting, and worth filing away, along with the tens and hundreds of others than come up from time to time which contradict each other and focus of different things and outcomes.

The single most important factor as the a child turning out well is a stable loving home with supportive parents - I feel I can be quite dogmatic about this, even if I cannot quote any reports. So whatever childcare you use, even if you don't use any at all, if the home environment is happy and stable and parents caring, chances are, this child will reach its full potential. Of course, there are genetic factors that even good parenting/environment cannot overcome.

It seems that me that anyone who comes on mn and is prepared to debate these issues with a bunch of strangers is in all likelihood going to be doing the best by their child, whatever their choices. What you don't get represented on mn are the proverbial neglectful alcohol/drug-addicted, violent, emotionally abusive,what-have-you parents.

We are arguing about insignificant and negligible differences in outcomes because at the end of the day, we love our children and provide for them in the way that we think best. That is the best vaccine really.

blueshoes, I agree.
There awas a thread about parenting courses recently. And the conclusion was that most mn's would jump at the chance anyway. But that most of them wouldn't need it. Becasue we care. Becasue we are here discussing things, becasue we care. We don't always get it right. But we try. And we care.
It is the many other parents, who clearly don't give a s**t, that really need to take note.

Not sure it's worth looking at these sorts of research with anything other than interest, as the results are so varied. Better to know yourself, your family, your child and make decisions about childcare (if you go down that route) with care. But do you know what - I have never met anyone who did not put care and effort into their childcare arrangements, or if they weren't working out, changed them. I have yet to meet anyone who found a nursery or childminder, checked the last Ofsted and thought, OK that'll do.

But I'm also not sure why anyone would really belive that the majority of people who provide childcare are "highly qualified, strictly regulated and genuine caring people". We all know that childcare is a low paid job with few career prospects. There are of course highly qualified childcarers, but a)do they need to be (I mean if we think mums are the best, are any of us qualified?) and b)what do we mean about highly qualified? I don't think an NVQ really counts (useful though it may be). It means some training yes, but highly qualified? (I work in health and would assume post-graduate or specialist qualifications). As for caring, well it's like all jobs that involve personal care, some people do it because they really enjoy it, and some do it because it brings home the bacon. I can't see why anyone should assume that a nursery worker is any different from anyone else.

I have used a nanny, a nursery, a childminder, my husband (used!), and cared for the children myself. Oh and the children are at school now. I think they all had their ups and downs, but I certainly know that the time the children spent with me was NOT the best option! The children speak about all their carers with affection (dd particularly reminisces about nursery, and there are great hugs whenever we bump into her nursery teachers, even though she left three years ago now).

I am joining the party very late I know but agree with the fact that what's worst about this is the failure in Ofsted to protect a)children and b)parents.

Having said that and waded through nine pages of posts, I just want to add one comment. I think some of you are being a bit unfair about the ages of nursery employees. Lots of the girls working in DD's nursery are young, but they are dedicated, happy, energetic and creative. And the nursery has a very low turnover of staff. I think that if you turn up at the end of the day and the nursery staff are still cheery and full of little stories about things your child did today, and your little one is happy, the age of the people caring for them isn't relevant. Some younger women are brilliant with little ones, precisely because they don't have to deal with them at home!

Sorry been away from my desk, the research I was thinking of was this

www.familieschildrenchildcare.org/fccc_frames_home.html

this research does cover quite a wide remit though and my summary above is very simplified.

I completely agree though that research is interesting to read but in the end, a loving caring home counts for much more than anything else.

I personally went with a cm when ds was small and for the most part it worked fine but in the end the cm did struggle to cope when her circumstances changed. I decided to change ds's childcare when that happened which was quite stressful and had he been in a nursery there would have been more room for working with the nursery on improvements etc. As he was with a cm, when our relationship broke down I had no choice but to change childcare, with a nursery that is much less likely to have happened.