Page 14 | Just because I'm there doesn't mean I'm free childcare

StormingNorman · 06/10/2024 17:54

Justice4Friend · 06/10/2024 17:21

The OP was helping her own kid with an activity - she had a choice either leave her kid or go and attend to the 8 year old even though she wasn't asked.
Even if she was aware no one leaves their own kid for someone else's.

Show quote history

Again, missing my point. I am not suggesting the OP should have done anything differently except let the friend know she wasn’t keeping an eye on her daughter.

StormingNorman · 06/10/2024 17:58

I do t think you’re understanding the nuance. It’s like we’re having parallel conversations.

I haven’t suggested at any point she should have been looking after the girl. I’m saying that she should have been clear that she wasn’t.

InterIgnis · 06/10/2024 18:03

StormingNorman · 06/10/2024 17:58

I do t think you’re understanding the nuance. It’s like we’re having parallel conversations.

I haven’t suggested at any point she should have been looking after the girl. I’m saying that she should have been clear that she wasn’t.

It wasn’t on her to make it clear that she wasn’t. The onus was on the mother to make sure the child was supervised - lack of statement from OP, someone who is in no way responsible for the child, cannot be assumed to be consent. That the mother chose to assume it did is her fuck up, nothing to do with OP who owed her not a word.

BruFord · 06/10/2024 18:08

Your update that the child is already being monitored by SS doesn’t surprise me at all, it completely explains why SS got involved so quickly. Poor child. 💐

I hope this is a wake-up call to her Mum that her child is more important than 20-minute cigarette breaks.

GreyCarpet · 06/10/2024 18:23

StormingNorman · 06/10/2024 17:58

I do t think you’re understanding the nuance. It’s like we’re having parallel conversations.

I haven’t suggested at any point she should have been looking after the girl. I’m saying that she should have been clear that she wasn’t.

But why?

Do you let other strangers knpw you aren't looking after their children either? Or about other things ypu aren't going to do for them?

If the OP had told her she wasn't looking after the child, when she hadn't been asked to, that would mean that there was an implicit expectation that she should have.

As others have said, your child is your own responsibility. If you need someone else to watch them for a few minutes, you need to ensure you've asked them and that they have agreed. You can't just walk of and assume they will. It's not their responsibility to tell you that they're not.

That the family is already known to SS indicates that this isn't the only area of parenting where this mother is failing.

None of that is the OP's responsibility to address so why would this be?

Basically, if you don't think there was any expectation/responsibility on behalf of the OP to provide childcare, it makes no sense that you think she should also have told her that she wasn't providing that childcare.

Justice4Friend · 06/10/2024 21:29

StormingNorman · 06/10/2024 17:54

Again, missing my point. I am not suggesting the OP should have done anything differently except let the friend know she wasn’t keeping an eye on her daughter.

Show quote history

You know, sometimes people need to learn a lesson and there is collateral damage, whichever way you look at this the OP was right.
If this is what it takes for the skank cigarette priortising mum to parent then so be it.

EliflurtleAndTheInfiniteMadness · 07/10/2024 04:44

StormingNorman · 04/10/2024 18:48

Fair point that it wasn’t her responsibility but she was put in that situation. When we are put in situations, however unfairly, we need to find the most appropriate way out.

I would not have let a mum walk off assuming I was keeping an eye on their child when I wasn’t. Why not communicate?

Show quote history

Why would you assume an 8 year old needed minding in that environment? If I said to the people I was with I'm off to grab a drink or go to the loo and they said I'm not watching your child, I'd be saying no one asked you to, if my kid wasn't fine on their own I would have asked. She isn't a toddler, at this age it's a reasonable assumption that if her mum wanders off without saying anything then her kid doesn't need minding.

EliflurtleAndTheInfiniteMadness · 07/10/2024 04:54

itsmeits · 06/10/2024 10:04

Update
My mum has had a tough word with my sister. Sister has apologised to her for the way she has spoken to me and trying to put her in the middle of a non family issue - will be a few days before I get the apologie.
Mum has said her behaviour isn't justified in the slightest, after an explanation mum now sees why the reaction was as it was from her and friend - shes been told still uncalled for.

Sisters friend is already under SS and being monitored. DD is at risk of going into the system.
Mums advice to her was not to encourage friend to drink on school nights with the child out with then.
This explains the reaction and them trying to pass the book. Still doesn't justify the things that were said. It does explain why SS were so interested if they already have her on file.

Feel bad for the little girl in all of this 😕 hope that the right decisions are made for her, and mum engages in whatever support they offer them.

The mum was aware of all this and she still didnt priortise her DD. That says it all really. If any decent mum was under SS they'd be sticking super close to their kid, doing everything by the book and making sure nothing happened that could trigger their kid going into care.

Dennaes · 07/10/2024 08:36

OP, well handled by you.
Good you keep your distance from your sister.
She has zero loyalty to you and would happily throw shade on you and your family with SS to save the arse ofca friend who is already on the SS radar.

Treat her as hostile!

That poor child, I am glad she is rightly on their radar.

JediNinja · 07/10/2024 10:01

Even if they had asked you to keep an eye, it would be impossible to keep an eye on three kids at the same time, unless they are all three playing together at the same spot. And even if you were watching her from where you were, all you could do is check she wasn't leaving the room or with a stranger. There would have been no time to pick her up from the fall and if her mother were there watching, you said before that she told her not to swing in that spot. So she would have probably told her the same and in the couple of minutes that this seems to have happened, it would have happened anyway. She's crossed that it's another thing to add to SS monitoring but it's an accident, she could have fallen in a different way and just bruised but it fell in a way that the injury was worse.

In any case, leaving for up to 30 min... What the hell were you supposed to do? Grab her and keep her with you to watch your kids? Tell her she could only play if she was with your kids? You didn't even agree to looking after her! For me, "going for a cig" means if child asks, tell her mum is back in a minute. Also that she is confident that the child is sensible, as she disappears for that long and not just the 5 min that a quick cig might take. And that if anything happens, mum will be at the designated smoking spot to be found.

The fact that no one could find them for such a long time, when I assume people would looking around frantically, means they weren't where they were supposed to be and had delegated all duties to you, just because you were there.

billybear · 07/10/2024 13:05

never heard such bull shit in my life, her child her problem, sit else where next time,

HiEarthlings · 07/10/2024 23:49

AnonymousBleep · 04/10/2024 09:41

Yeah that was my thought. My daughter broke her arm falling off her skateboard at roughly that age and there was no whiff of SS involvement. There must be more to this for it to be reported to SS (by whom?).

Anyway, no, obviously you're not responsible for someone else's kid unless they've explicitly asked you and you've agreed.

Show quote history

Things have obviously changed in the last 20 years or so, then! My 2 year old fell off the sofa and broke her collar bone. I had SS at my door within hours of the hospital visit! She had never before, nor ever again afterwards, had to attend A&E, nor had had any involvement with SS...

AnonymousBleep · 08/10/2024 10:36

HiEarthlings · 07/10/2024 23:49

Things have obviously changed in the last 20 years or so, then! My 2 year old fell off the sofa and broke her collar bone. I had SS at my door within hours of the hospital visit! She had never before, nor ever again afterwards, had to attend A&E, nor had had any involvement with SS...

Show quote history

Gosh, really? My daughter is 13 now so this was about 5 years ago. No SS involvement. Maybe it's a bit of a postcode lottery?

Lovelysummerdays · 08/10/2024 10:56

HiEarthlings · 07/10/2024 23:49

Things have obviously changed in the last 20 years or so, then! My 2 year old fell off the sofa and broke her collar bone. I had SS at my door within hours of the hospital visit! She had never before, nor ever again afterwards, had to attend A&E, nor had had any involvement with SS...

Show quote history

I think there is a big difference depending on the age of the child. I have been in A &E a fair few times and never heard anything but dc have always been 5+ and able to tell them what happened. Fell on trampoline, came off bike, slipped over at school, fell over a rock etc.

I think when they are younger it’s trickier and a judgement might need to be made on safety of home environment. I know my friend got a visit from ss when her Dd just turned 3 sort of slipped off her chair and broke her wrist. They were really nice and agreed it was just one of those things but children breaking bones at home without a solid explanation raises a red flag. I’m sure your two year old had gotten on and off the sofa many times without incident so it’s unusual. Children do break bones in unusual ways though. So it’s areal balancing act.

Justus6 · 09/10/2024 12:49

itsmeits · 04/10/2024 07:13

I go out once a week and take my DDs with me 7 and 13. It's a social evening thing, the girls love it, there are different activities on.
My sister has started coming fine no issue with that. Her mate is now coming with her DD 8
This is where the issue is. They swan off for 15-30 min cig breaks and leave the child unattended. Going for a cig is the announcement and off they pop.
Last night child of sisters friend was messing about and has hurt themselves, mum nowhere to be seen for over 20mins.
I am being blamed for not watching the child 😳
Apparently announcing I'm going for a cig is que for me to watch her child - never have either said can you watch DD while I nip out. Plus I don't know this child, met her a few times that's it.
When this happened I should have been sat with/watching her DD not participating in an activity my DDs wanted to do.

My sister is trying to rip me a new one and her friend has threatened to report me to SS for neglect, as it was my neglect (according to them) that has caused this hospital visit and her to be reported to SS.

Should I have watched this child
YANBU you have your DDs she needs to step up
YABU she's a single mum provide free cig breaks child care for her

Let her report it to SS and advise that at no time dis you agree to look after the child. 100% mums fault and SS will tell her exactly this!

Butnothingsclear · 09/10/2024 12:54

StormingNorman · 06/10/2024 17:54

Again, missing my point. I am not suggesting the OP should have done anything differently except let the friend know she wasn’t keeping an eye on her daughter.

Show quote history

But she wasn’t asked to.

‘I am going out for a fag’
’I am not going to watch your child’

is a bit like

‘I am going for a bath’
’I am not going mow your lawn’

Mmhmmn · 09/10/2024 13:10

YANBU. Absolute CFs the pair of them. Revert to doing your own thing with your own DDs, they can do whatever. Their poor kids.

Somewhere deep inside you would think that they know it was their fault for being absent but some people are very wrong in the head and there's no understanding them.

Candystore22 · 09/10/2024 13:12

I’m sorry OP but your sister sounds totally bonkers. Has she always been like this? If so, I would be limiting my contact with her.

BobbyBiscuits · 09/10/2024 13:53

Absolutely flabbergasting and laughable the woman should try and report YOU to SS over her kid? Utterly bizarre. Just tell the friend good luck with that and block them both.
At best she should be worried about the kids health, and her own parenting skills, not placing the blame on you. And SS have much more important things to deal with than false malicious claims.

1HappyTraveller · 09/10/2024 14:15

itsmeits · 04/10/2024 07:58

I have just sent my sister the below

I have been attending this night for the last 2.5 years and 1.5 years with the girls. You and friend have been coming approximately 8 weeks. Every week you and friend have left 8Y unattended when you go for cigs. Not once was I asked to watch child just expected. I am sorry that child has been hurt, however I attend to participate with my children not look after others. If she wants a child free night out get a babysitter like the rest of us. Tell your friend i am happy to speak to SS on her behalf and explain the abysmal attitude I have seen her show over the last 8 weeks. I am also happy to explain to them what I do with my children while in attendance.
I'm not entertaining this any longer, I am not to blame for her failings. Have a good day I'm off to work now.

☝🏻 👌🏻

Doteycat · 09/10/2024 14:34

StormingNorman · 06/10/2024 17:58

I do t think you’re understanding the nuance. It’s like we’re having parallel conversations.

I haven’t suggested at any point she should have been looking after the girl. I’m saying that she should have been clear that she wasn’t.

Nope, not her responsibility.
Not even a little bit.
Plain ole wrong.

Honestly, Id be hard pushed to hear the end of her ranting over my laughing.
How utterly rediculous, I wouldnt even be taking it seriously.
Report me? report away lady, id so enjoy that conversation.

Bonbon249 · 09/10/2024 20:59

I would very firmly tell the mother 'Your child, your responsibility' and ask your sister where she was in all this? Then tell her, equally firmly, to Eff right off!

Mumofferal3 · 10/10/2024 07:39

StormingNorman · 04/10/2024 07:25

I’ve said you are being unreasonable because by your own admission you were not watching an eight rear old child when you knew nobody else was.

If you weren’t able to watch the child along with your own, you should have spoken up at the time. So when they announced they were going for a cig you say “I’m tied up with my DC at the moment, could you take yours with you”

Your post reads like you got the hump, behaved in a passive aggressive way and now it’s backfired because the child ended up in hospital.

Equally, the other mum is being unreasonable to expect you to look after her child…and to take such long fag breaks. It’s incredibly antisocial of them to leave you sat alone and with all the kids for so long.

Edited

Gaslighter!!

If the child's mother didn't make the OP aware, how was OP to know child needed looking after? And then to tgreaten with SS?

Op you are no unreasonable, that women is takig liberties. Most mother's wouldn't have SS called on them as OP has stated so she obv has form for this kind of thing.

Frazzled83 · 10/10/2024 08:12

Hmmm there’s more to this. People don’t get referred to social services from just a hospital visit. Kids have accidents all the time. Something would have been off while they triaged her that raised enough concern to trigger a referral.

In blunt terms - she’s full of shit 😂 and no, you’re not being unreasonable!

WhereYouLeftIt · 10/10/2024 10:46

Frazzled83 · 10/10/2024 08:12

Hmmm there’s more to this. People don’t get referred to social services from just a hospital visit. Kids have accidents all the time. Something would have been off while they triaged her that raised enough concern to trigger a referral.

In blunt terms - she’s full of shit 😂 and no, you’re not being unreasonable!

OP posted on 06/10/2024 10:04:

"Sisters friend is already under SS and being monitored. DD is at risk of going into the system. ... It does explain why SS were so interested if they already have her on file."