legal reasons why you cannot leave a child with non relative regularly

[questionplease]

i remember reading that if you regularly leave a child with a non relative who is not a childminder or nanny, or nursery school, it is against the law, and you may be prosecuted. can someone clarify this for me please.

im a regular who has namechanged as i promised a friend in rl i would ask mnetters help, and if she reads this, then i will have outed myself.
tia

If it were about child protection, it would insist on registration for carers in the child's home as well surely?

Insurance, which pays out after the event, isn't really child protection.

2 issues - protecting the child - accidents/ins etc & child protection - forms of abuse

I hear I'm wanted

Childcare Act 2006 - 18 Meaning of Childcare
8(c) ?relative?, in relation to a child, means a grandparent, aunt, uncle, brother or sister, whether of the full blood or half blood or by marriage or civil partnership.

Thanks Nick

But carers in the child's own home, who are just as capable of abusing a child, and allowing accidents to happen, don't need to be registered.

This legislation is also possibly handy:
The Childcare (Exemptions from Registration) Order 2008

Because you 'control' that situation as employer - you cannot have the same level of control over a selfemployed person

I've only found one record of an unregistered childminder having been taken to court and fined. Fine was for £400. It happened in Scotland, in 2006. BBC Scotland News Report

TheFallenMadonna - Yes you are right, there is no compulsory registration for childcarers providing childcare in the child's own home. However, there is a voluntary registration scheme so that may in future be made compulsory. Currently our Government has decided that it is up to parents to choose suitable a childcare provider when that childcare is being provided in the home - though they do not make it possible for a parent to get a CRB check done (only get that if carer has come via an agency, or is registered on the voluntary scheme).

since when did we all become so obsessed with suing left right and centre for accidents? what made our country start down that road? is madness.

this is all about govt controlling black market economy and interfering wherever possible, particularly with traditionally working class child care arrangements (note exemptions for nannies and au pairs), but if you say it's 'for the children' and 'to prevent abuse' you can get away with more

Well, you control the environment more I agree, but the actions of the carer when you are not present? And an uncle is OK, but not a cousin?

Look, I'm not arguing that unregistered carers who look after a number of children are doing the right thing. I just think that someone like Hulababy shouldn't have to stress about making sure she doesn't accept a bottle of wine or return childcare favour for helping out her friend and looking after her godson.

yes, nannynick, good point there about govt refusing parents the right to run crb checks - is it really about protecting the child?? think not

EYFS has been introduced, and now means that Childminders have to educate children in their care. I do wonder if it's more about education than it is about child protection.

Thanks for that.

So if in a few months me and my cousin did decide to swap childcare as we thought may be a possibility I would have to look after her kids at hers and she would have to come here?

It just seems stupid, she is a blood relation and isn't counted but if i had a step brother he would be? or did i read that completely wrong?

Half brother yes, stepbrother no, I think.

nannynick - I've had two nannies who were not through agencies, and not registered on any form of scheme - both had crb checks. I didn;t get them done, admittedly, the nannies did. but that doesn;t make any difference surely?

So, can you clear up the difference beween childcare and regular playdate?

I take no reward for caring for my godson - no money, no reciprocal childcare (we do have a regular playdate with the older girls but that is less than 2 hours (just) and comes under playdate AFAIK), no cases of wine, etc. I do it because I want to. I want to be invovled in his life, he is adorable and we have a lovely bond as a result.

I'm starting this one up again as MN was being a sod last night and had to give up cos my posts kept getting lost.

So.. someone just tell me again please. How on earth could anyone prove that money was changing hands if all parties just stuck to the story that no money was changing hands? It would be very easy to keep paying your unregistered CM without ANYONE knowing about it, imho

Other CMs could report you left right and centre til the cows come home, but if you just say no money is being paid, who can prove otherwise?

And the stuff about accients and insurance etc is all a bit of poppycock really isn't it?

PuppyMonkey - nannynik says he can only find records of one unregistered CM going to ourt. There may be more, but obviously there are not lots - record not there. So, I guess lots do do what you say.

I'm a very part time childminder (one day a week, one child) and am getting increasingly fed up with having to jump through all of Ofsted's hoops.

I can completely see the arguement for CRB, first aid, saftety checks etc but am seriously considering looking after mindee in his home so I can be a susbstitute mummy (which is what his mum wants) and not a mini nursery.

I was thinking of just having him for free but it sounds like that won't work as if I get a bar of chocolate I'll be breaking the law.

yes but Riddo you might then have to become the family's 'employee' doncha know, with them paying tax and NI.

This is not to have a go, I'm very sympathetic with regards to your situation!

who was thinking of reporting some one earlier for having regular care of a child?

i used to take care of my friends dd several times a wekk for upto four hours at a time while my friend went to college.

she didnt get her form in on time to get her childcare paid and was not working due to fulltime college.

her dd was very shy and would never have settld for a stranger i had known her since she was a newborn.

would it have been better for the child or my friend if i had said "no i cant because there is a woman down the road who is a cm and she will get pissed off at losing business so you will have to either leave college or pay for childcare out of your benefit and live off potatos and little else untill you finish college"?

its upto parents which childcare they chose. id much rather my dds be looked after by some one i know and trust who is looking after them because a) they like me and b) they love my children and are doing it because they enjoy having them than some one who is getting paid for it and see's my child as part of thier business arrangement.

btw i dont look after my friends child any more as she eventually got her childcare vouchers sorted and took her to a cm because she was better able to take her to nursery than me as my own dd needed to be at her own nursery at the same time

but i do occassionally have her while mum pops out to the shops or has a night out.

i

hatwoman - a nanny may have a CRB check from various sources. For example, they may have registered with a nanny agency, or they may have been working in a nursery. CRB checks are not supposed to be transferable, but it is up to the employer if they want to accept a check that was not done themselves.

Hulababy - a playdate would usually not be 'regular' but more ad-hoc. The regulator would need to prove that it was 'regular' which they would do I suspect by camping outside a home and seeing how often certain people go in and out. Such a 'stake-out' I would suspect costs a lot of money to do, so I doubt they do that often, unless they have other concerns such as a person caring for a lot of children.

There used to be an exemption which would permit care for up to 5 days per year. The new exemptions includes a clause that may enable someone to provide care for up to 14 days a year (it isn't clear to me if it applies to childminding, rather than provision on non-domestic premises - it may not apply to childminding, but I do wonder if a court would take the 14-day rule it into account).

As with any law, people do choose to break laws. Some people drive above the speed limit for example. Some will get caught, others won't.

SSSBTS - Yes, I too feel that parents should be able to choose who provides childcare. But if there was no regulation at all, we could go back to having baby farms, where many many children were all being 'cared' for by one person.

The childminding rules have existed in one form or another since at least 1974. Before then there was regulation of some kind, but I can't currently locate a date for the first time childminding appeared in legislation. Anyone know when things changed... was it perhaps after World War II?

Found an old post of mine, where I had located some earlier legislation:

Nurseries and Childminding Regulation Act 1948

That Act started the ball rolling,
Health Services and Public Health Act 1968
was the Act which created Social Services, who at that time were given responsibility for regulating childminders.