To think my cousin should not have to register with Ofsted to look after my child?

[nappyaddict]

Close relatives are supposed to be exempt from registration. In this they include siblings (half or full), aunts and uncles, grandparents and step versions of all of these. So why are cousins not included!! It doesn't make any sense to me.

If there is a legal reason- i.e she is claiming benefits/ JSA/ it would go above a taxable allowance I can understand the problem I wouldnt want to do anything that could potentially get her into trouble/ illegal. However! if your cousin was to look after your child - FOR FREE, but you were to gift her a holiday/large present for her birthday every year - Who would know?

Nope she doesn't receive any benefits or anything so she wouldn't get into trouble for that but she could get into trouble with ofsted apparently.

Did they say why a cousin wasn't classed as a relative?

Nope they said:

"In response to your enquiry, cousins are not considered relatives in the Childcare Act 2006. In the Childcare Act a relative is defined as in relation to a child, meaning a grandparent, aunt, uncle, brother or sister, whether of the full blood or half blood or by marriage or civil partnership.

Therefore if you are caring for cousins you will not meet the exemption from compulsory registration outlined in point 3 of 'Registration not required' and therefore will need to register with us if you care for under eights and do not meet any other exemption criteria."

How ridiculous

I'm not surprised you're feeling miffed.

"surely it is logical that if your aunt and uncle are classed as close relatives then your cousin is aswell? "

your uncle and aunt aren't considered a close relative, they're talking about the child's uncle or aunt, ie your siblings.

(but it is kind of ridiculous, I agree. However I guess they have to draw the line somewhere)

I know that SD but if it was DS' cousin looking after him, it would make no difference even though their mum and dad (ie DS' aunt and uncle) would be fine to.

But they do have to draw the line somewhere. If a cousin is OK, why not a second-cousin? Why not a second cousin once removed...?

Why not a second cousin once removed if that's what the parent decided was best for their child and family.

I don't think I fully understand why parents can't use unregistered childcare if that's what they think is best.

Reality - if it is illegal, that is ridiculous.

Most people who have friends and family look after their child, don't make them sit in their own house all day. And sometimes, especially for friends, you give a little thank you (I don't for the most part, as it happens, but on occasion, if its for a full day, i'll give a bottle of wine or something.) How can anyone say that giving thank you gifts is illegal?