... to feel disappointed with the childminder, or am I being over cautious?

[doitall]

Our childminder looks after a child related to her. Over the weekend this child was very ill with a fever, and was taken to hospital. The child was discharged and is better - but still recovering.

Called this morning to find that this child is at the childminder today. Is it unreasonable to feel a bit cross about this? It puts me in a really difficult position. Being self-employed if my DS is ill, I have to take time out unpaid (and have to work evenings / weekends to catch-up). I have no-one else to look after him. Therefore I don't want to put him in a situation where there is an ill / recovering child.

At the last minute, by complete chance, a friend stepped in to take care of DS today, and I have not sent DS to the childminder. My childminder's view was he could catch anything at any of the places that they visit on a daily basis - which I agree with, but this would be knowingly placing him somewhere where he would catch a bug.

Overly cautious? Unreasonable?

YANBU

My sister is a childminder. She would never take an ill child, and when her own kids are ill she has to cancel her clients.

I think there may even be some ofsted rule about this.

what do her policies say? would she take your child in the same circumstances?
tbh, I don't think we know enough to make a judgment. is the child contagious? do you know? if the child is contagious, then no, she should either not look after the child or offer you an alternative

My childminder will take sick children as long as they do not have d and v bugs. It suits me as I generally think they need to be exposed to bugs before they start school otherwise they are always off sick.

As to whether the child is contagious? Well... no one knows what was wrong. One of those unspecified virus's - so in my book the child could still be contagious.

I agree that kids are exposed to all sorts day in day out, and that - of course - helps build immunity. But, being self-employed I want to limit illness to a minimum, as if I don't work, I don't get paid!

Message withdrawn

There is no guarantee that children won't get ill. When they go to school i found that they get more illness!
But it does seem to calm down once they reach 6yrs old.
Just make sure you have a back-up plan, even if it means taking time off work.
The same applies to nurseries, ill kids need their parents...end of.

YANBU , i would have done exactly the same as you , i used to be a play school teacher & would not allow sick children to attend , kids pick up SO many illnesses from each other , you might need to sort out childcare for your little one for tomorrow also just to be on the safe side

yabu

the child had a fever, so a high temp

you dont mention spots or S&D so one would assume with a bit of calpol the child will be fine and not contagious

the cm was happy to have your child, and you didnt want her to, so i dont think she was in the wrong

i also assume that you will pay her for today as she was avaiable to care for your child

I agree with Blonds, your CM is s/emp also therefore why would she care for a sick and contagious child if that child may infect others she cared for therefore being a possibility that several mindees may be absent in which case she wouldn't get any pay.

If your CM has offered to care for your child and you choose not to take the care you are still obliged to pay.

Most CM's look at individual cases on merit I often have LO with D or a bit of a temp because they are teething not infectious if I sent them home each time I would have lots of time spare and no customers.

Whereas I respect your position as s/emp and your need to work I think you should trust the CM judgement not to knowingly put your child at risk of infection. Or are their other issues that give you concern, which is why youre a bit about this situation?

why thank you athomenotworking

great minds eh

sorry shine

we ALL have great minds

DOITALL it may be worth checking your local netmums/NJ to see if any nannys in your area work part time, and want extra work

and then keep a list of numbers/nannys who are dont work that day for emergencys?

This is not about paying / not paying. She will be paid whatever. Even when my (or others in her care) become sick we still have to pay.

Also - as I stated the related child has a non specified virus of some sort. So therefore the child is highly likely to be contagious. To say that because it's not a rash, or S&D, it's all OK is rather naive (Calpol, by the way, does nothing but lower a temperature - it does not limit a virus).

The issue here is about sick children being in childcare and putting others at risk. I kind of get the feeling that many people feel it's fine to do so. Sorry - but I don't!

i agree with you doitall ,

Then why are you askin if you are so sure of yourself?

guess it depends what it says in your contract with the cm - ie she will accept/look after children as long as doesnt have S&D or spots (theses seem to be the 2main reasons why cm wont have their mindees)

no medicine will cure a virus - but as the child in question had a fever ie high temp then calpol/neuofren will help but obv not cure

What a bizarre thread!

OP: AIBU?

Lots of MNers: Yup.

OP: No I'm not. And stop telling me I am.

Lunacy.

PS- I agree with Lots of MNers. YABU.

you did say in your op

overly cautious? Unreasonable?

most of us say unreasonable

you did ask, and you did ask in iabu - and we told you

Atworknotworking - My CM still gets paid if any mindees are off sick. Is that not common practice? (Genuine question, btw!)

Doitall - it is frustrating, especially if you take care not to send your DS when they've been ill, but as long as the CM would take your child in the same circumstances then I think it's fair enough.

No - not a bizzare thread at all.

I asked this AIBU question because it's a grey area (as are all AIBUs).

Having read the threads I disagree not with being labelled YABU, but with the logic behind some of the responses. Once posting a AIBU, is it not possible to disagree with some of the posts?

Depending on what it was, the child may not be contagious now, but was so before the virus erupted and made it so unwell...so, therefore might be to late to worry about contagiousnous, tbh...

SWEET APRIL depends on the contract you have, CM's are either yep you pay or no you don't. Generally when children are young I find they pick up lots of stuff, colds, sniffles, tummy upsets not to mention the teething stage which usually comes with a bit of earache, sore bot and sometimes D, thats why I look at each case individually, if I have any doubts that a child may be contagious then I will not care for them and I get mightily pissed off when parents bring them when they have spent the night throwing up .

Personally I give 3 free sick days per year, after that I charge full fee, unless it is an illness that could potentially last for some time, in which case I would suspend care and re-start when needed.

With viral infections I'm always told by GP that they resolve themselves and that give calpol or whatever and carry on as normal, I've even been told a couple of times that they are not infectious so not sure how they get them, but the point I'm making here in this case is that if your CM is prepared to look after this child then you should have trust in her judgement, frankly I would worry if a parent didn't trust me on a decision like this and for me would damage the relationship.