Babies and dogs

[Bellyo]

I'm looking after a beautiful baby who I adore and we've devoloped a great relationship with, unfortunately, I was out with the baby's father and while he was on the phone I took the 10 month old infant to go to look at a dog. I asked the dogs owner a little bit about the dog- the name, to which they told me and said, 'she's a big sofite'. I lowered myself to the same level as baby and dog, and while holding his hands, I allowed the baby to have close contact with the dog, the dog was a bull terrier. At this point the father saw the situation and pulled his child away. He was very distressed citing that I had put his child in a dangerous situation. The family are really upset because they feel scared about what could have happened, and don't feel comfortable about leaving me alone while they go to work. They still want me to continue having a relationship with the child though.

Are you a childminder, nanny or something else? As a childminder, I have a pet policy and permission form so know whether or not pets are a problem. If you are a nanny and don't have policies like us, I'd have expected them to have told you about their thing with dogs if they have a problem with it?! Surely they know that now you know you don't want their baby to be in contact with dogs, that you'll make sure this doesn't happen?

I'm not really sure what you're asking, Bellyo.

Are you still looking after the child? Have you explained exactlly what happened - it sound like the father didn't know you had spoken to the owner.

As a childminder I would never risk introducing a mindee to someones dog that I didn't know even if I did ask . Its just not worth the risk definately not at face level.
That is my opinion and i'm sure people will disagree. I love dogs and we often go to the park and we can watch them running about.
I think dad overreacted a bit as obviously nothing happened all he had to do was ask you not to do it again as they don't feel comfortable with it.
Can you clear the air with the parents and just say you understand their point of view and reasure them it won't happen again.

Agree with Dan and I've (on MANY occasion) told mindees that whilst with me they can't go and stroke a dog because it looks cute, just in case as I don't know that dog. But I'm also interested to hear whether OP was over told not to (if a nanny) or asked permission when signing contracts (if a CM).

There is no contract, as they are long term friends- I have known the baby's father for about 15 years, and as yet, I'm not paid. I've been building up a relationship with the child, and also her mother, who I only met this year. Its my friend- the father who is really devasted about this incident, as in his eys, its common sense not to bring a child and a pet so close to each other, especially unknown. So far, he doesn't want to talk to me- he's obviously too upset as I have broken his trust. I've been really upset too. His partner is letting me still see the child, though I've been reigned in- I ask to go out where normally, its not an issue. Guess this is going to be expected.
I guess I'm asking whether I did a stupid thing, that I should have known better about. In my opinion I felt in control of the situation, but he saw differently. Anyway, I'm looking elsewhere for work.
Thank you all very much for your valid comment, much appreciated!

Tbh yes I think you did. Pets, especially other people's, and children, especially other people's, should always be handled with care. I'd never introduce a child who wasn't mine to a pet who wasn't mine or allow them to get close without me holding them securely/touch them.

Infants especially can do silly things to animals unintentionally because they don't know any better and a safe situation that's completely under control can get out of hand in seconds with disastrous consequences.

I'm really sorry this has messed things up with you and the parents though - you obviously have quite a bond with the child and it sounds like they now need to find alternative childcare. If you are still going to work fir them you need a contract and insurance which would cover you if, heaven forbid, anything happened. If the dog had bitten and the parents sued in this situation you wouldn't have had any support or financial aid if damages were awarded.

Some parents just don't see what the fuss is about re. dogs-at-park, and when i've asked their views they've been confused as to why i asked, believing benefits greatly outweigh risks and why wouldn't you introduce them if 'safe'; the vast majority of these meetings do go fine and the child can get loads from it(a 'common sense' weighted toward benefit). What the OP did wouldn't be such a big deal for many people IF the situation was judged as safe (as it could be for such risk) by themselves or someone they trusted.

The dad seems to have his common sense weighted towards risk. It does seem we are all expected to be clones with regard to our risk-benefit ('common sense') balance over everything instead of recognising it as dependent on
person/culture/zeightgeist/daily mail etc.

Actually i thought getting down to dog's height is considered less threatening/risky than bending over one e.g. what might be imagined as safer for an older child to do alone.

Nannies have to get to know with experience how to dance forcefully or cautiously around a minefield of parental world views and anticipate subtle, contradictory and often highly personal views. We can't get it spot on everytime and unexpeted incongruities would be especially foregrounded if involving a long term friend or relative. Finding alternative childcare would no doubt be only finding alternative oversights by someone they know less well.

Having ranted though, as a nanny i try (at first) to assume parents aren't happy with all identifyable risks. Although a risk would always be the same for the child its about who emotionally and legally can authorise it.