Questions about someone childminding unregistered. . .

[bestfriendswithbenefits]

I know someone who looks after their neice for two whole days a week. As a blood relative, I'm assuming this is legal? She's recently started looking after another little girl ( aged 2 ) for someone else, but is, as far as I'm aware, not registered. She's getting paid to mind them both. How can I find out if she's registered? And if she's not, should I do anything about it? Who do I report it to? Am I just being a sticky beak? I know she is aware of childminding regulations, so it's not just a mistake on her part. thanks.

As well as the less than two hours a day exemption, you also don't need to register if you provide care for "14 days or fewer" from particular premises. So that should cover the odd favour for a friend day. If someone cares for your child one day a week that is a regular arrangement and not an odd favour here and there.

Ofsted will not automatically prosecute an unregistered childminder because they do not have the legal power to do so. They will issue a legal notice saying you must not provide care from certain premises without registering, and then if you continue they can prosecute you for breach of this notice. This can be contrasted with an unregistered nursery for example, where it is automatically illegal and the owners can go to court straight away.

It is worth noting that Ofsted Inspectors have a power of entry to any premises where they have cause to believe childcare is being provided. So they can just turn up on the doorstep and insist on looking around to check if someone is childminding. And you don't have to give your name if you want to tell Ofsted of any concerns you have - they will take calls anonymously.

Whether registered or unregistered any person with common sense knows not to let a child near a pond without supervison and they would not let them on a frozen pond.

It seems now for people to get their point across they are being silly and implying that anybody unregistered is irrisponsible.

Maybe the OP would like to update us on the current situation and contribute her views.

A baby died this past week, whilst in the care of it's grandmother. Tragic accident or preventable? At this stage it is unknown but common sense would be not to let a dog near a baby... but it happened and a baby has died.
Accidents happen, some are preventable... such a children falling into ponds.

I don't feel that anyone is saying that someone unregistered is automatically irresponsible... all some of us are saying is that they are breaking a law of the land.

I am always amazed at the pious reverence stupid people have for The Law, when we have a GOvernment that is formulating new fuckwitted unethical laws on a daily basis. All laws should be questioned: if you think a law is wrong then complain about it, campaign against it, oh, and break it as often as necessary.

As a shiftworker who is married to another shiftworker, we found it VERY difficult when trying to find a registered CM for our DC. We work 12hr shifts, starting at 6am and obviously ending at 6pm (sometimes has been 8pm though without notice) or 6pm ending 6am, working differing days and nights each week on a 4 week and 9 week rota. After checking the lists given by my local authority, not a single CM was able to offer the cover needed. It was and still is a nightmare !!
CM's need to be more flexible (and work out cheaper for longer hours) in order that every responsible parent CAN use a registered CM.

Nannynick, it sounds as though you would like everyone to be assessed and regulated, parents, grandparents, friends, extended family Mind you, I rather suspect that the current government would like to do the same thing

Having thought about this, I expect a large proportion of parents aren't even aware that this sort of arrangement is illegal (probably because it is patently illogical and ridiculous)

P.S. We even looked at CM's who took overnighters, but no-one could take an under 1 year old overnight!!!! Maybe we shouldn't bother working at all, or maybe we were being irresponsible becoming parents .
Maybe we should consult our employer about us only working on days the CM's are available !! This would have to involve us NOT working any weekends, bank holidays or Christmas day, New Years eve etc, etc, etc !

'CM's need to be more flexible (and work out cheaper for longer hours) in order that every responsible parent CAN use a registered CM. '

shiftworker, I work from 7am to 7pm to cater for commuting parents. I certainly couldn't work more than that. I think a 12 hour day is more than long enough for me, this does not include all my paperwork, courses etc. I go on etc. Plus I have my own family to think of too.

If you need really long cover (ie: more than 12 hours straight) would it not be a good idea to use two CMs then, back to back?

Sorry JenniPenni, not entirely sure how you suggest I can get my DC's from one CM to another when we're at work for a full 12hour shift, not including delayed finish or travel time !! Unfortunately any families where BOTH parents work long shifts for an essential, community based employer are somewhat stuffed. Would we have any chance of BOTH CM's having the same holiday dates ? the same sickness ? How about BOTH agreeing to cover Christmas day and the other bank holidays and weekends ??
We're not trying to be difficult, but its not easy ! Someone has to do our job !!!

Forgot to say, to actually start my shift at 6am, I need to leave home at 5.15am, therefore need to drop off the DC's at 5am and if I finished on time, would pick up at about 7pm (traffic allowing). EVERY shift would definitely be over 12 hours and no CM's want my two DC's at 5am .

Successive governments pass irresponsible legislation such as the relaxing of the licensing laws which means we now have 24 hour drinking and all the trouble that brings. Therefore I don't trust them to legislate sensibly on childcare.

I would never use a CM. They are allowed to look after too many kids. I needed someone to look after dd for a couple of days whilst I did a course. I went to see my friend's CM - she had a great big slobbering dog in her kitchen and was grilling some nasty looking burgers for her charges! DH took a couple of day's holiday instead.

If I need to leave DD with someone I'd rather pay a trusted friend than a stranger - registered or not.

shiftworker, I see your dilemma!

But I am sure you realise that a CM cannot cover such long hours, she is only one person. Not a magician.

I work a '12 hour shift' to cover my parents commute, and that is long enough for me, I would never work longer than that, I have a family and a life of my own.

Surely you can see that the hours you need would be just too long for anyone? It's not a case of flexibility, it's a case of incredibly LONG hours.

NellieKnott - once again, a huge shame you've had such an experience and this has clouded your view of ALL CMs. I have 4 children in a lovely bright, spacious, clean home, with no animals, and I cook halthy fresh meals. I am always full and have a waiting list.

I think whatever your personal experiences are, it's unfair to think all people run their business/home like that. If other people read this they'd think CMs were ALL lazy (did not work long hours), were only in it for the money (hey, we need to make a living too, but I love my kids and they're the reason I continue to do it!) and were unhygienic and knew nothing of nutrition ;)

"he rules are there to help prevent that sort of accident occurring." Bullshit. Most of the childminders I know have dogs. there is nothing in law that prevents that. A child could be killed while with a family friend or with a childminder. The registration isn't going too stop the child from befalling a terrible accident, all it's going to do is prevent the person looking after the child potentially losing everything.

In fact the reality is that registration isn't there to protect the child at all - it is there to protect the childminder.

wannabe, what have you got against childminders!

Hav you had a bad experience with one?

How does registration protect the childminder? Registration creates hassle, creates mountains of paperwork, courses to attend, all sorts of stuff. Childcarers don't want all that... they want to be able to do what they do best, which is care for children... not paperwork.

I actually agree with you that childminders should not have dogs - but the law doesn't agree with us. The law considers that it is up to the parents who use that CM's service to decide if they wish to send their child to a CM who has a dog, or to another one who does not.

'In fact the reality is that registration isn't there to protect the child at all - it is there to protect the childminder. hmm '

You know absolutely nothing of what we do to be so embittered, which is a shame. It really is. You've obviously had a horrible experience. A huge shame.

So do tell me how registration/insurance is going to stop children from coming to harm.

I am sure there are some good childminders out there, but I am equally sure that they are in the minority.

I have never used a childminder, but based on my own observations:

There was the one who was also a friend and who I would have trusted with my child, who my sister was in fact thinking of asking to look after her dc when she went back to work. Until she came to my house to visit, with her charge, a 8 month old baby, asleep in the car. When she got out she said that baby had been miserable and she was glad she was asleep, she then came into my house and left the baby asleep in the car on my drive. She checked on her maybe every half hour or so. And the car was not visible from my lounge. After that there was just no way I would ever have had her look after my child, and my sister chose a nursery instead.

Then there was the one whose charge attended the same preschool as my ds. She was regularly known to leave her other two charges, both of whom were about a year old, in her car while she dropped the other one off at preschool, again car not visible, or she would give her charge to another mother to drop off. And on occasions she arranged for other mother to pick her charge up from preschool (without parental knowledge) because she had to tend to her own children. One of her children attended ballet or some such, and all the other children had to go as well and wait around for the hour or so it took for her daughter to have her class. Hardly indicative of a stimulating environment?

And then there was the one who took her charges to starbucks while she met up with a friend. And whose charge got out of the shop (down an escalator and out the door) and was almost hit on a main road, yet she didn?t feel the need to tell the parents.

And the ones who have boxes of arts/crafts that they bring out only for ofsted inspections?

I do know one childminder I consider to be a good cm and who I would trust with my ds. But I know her as a friend rather than a cm iyswim, I?m afraid that the numerous bad cm?s out there would prevent me from ever using someone I didn?t know personally.

Because reality is that when you leave your child with a cm, you have absolutely no idea what is happening with that child. Especially if it is a baby who cannot speak for themselves. At least in a nursery there is more than one person responsible for the child?s welfare.

The whole point of registration is to ensure that certain standards are met. The bar may be set lower than us as parents would expect as reasonable, in which case it is down to the individual parent to assess the suitability of care in each case. But what it is designed to do is to set a MINIMUM requirement. Logic then goes that the better care provided, the more custom a CM will get.

The same principle applies to, for example, Nursing registration. It doesn't ensure that all the nurses are good, or brilliant, but simply that they have all practiced recently, done some level of training, and that there is a way of stopping them practicing if they are downright dangerous. Other than that, you will get bad and good nurses, with a few brilliant ones.

The point here is not that it 'shouldn't be illegal so let's ignore the law', but that it is illegal. By all means try and change the law, but to advocate breaking it? Not on.

Well the solution is all pretty simple really isn't it.

Given the registration requirements relate only to money, someone looking after someone else's child should just do it for no payment. That way they're not breaking the law. And if the parent wants to give payment they can always give a monetary gift for a different reason..

I have used childminders for over 8 yrs now.

Of the 6 that i have used, the first one was de-registered (or whatever the correct term is ) after a pretty scary incident and it came out that she was suffering from severe PND. No 5 is currently being looked at by OFSTED because of various issues including her going out and leaving the children in the care of her (at the time) 16 yr old dd with no notification to parents and instructions to the kids not to say anything.....

The rest of them have been absolutely wonderful. The only reason i have changed over the years (aside from the two wrong uns) is because of a house move or because the childminder has stopped minding children.
Each of those lovely women (and one man) gave an awful lot of their time to my dd and became a family friend as well as dd's minder.

If the two nutters had not been registered iwould have found it pretty much impossible to prevent any other child being put at risk.

I think it is fine to come to a private arrangement with a friend on an ad hoc basis if needs must, however, I wouldn't recommend anyone using an unregistered childminder after the experiences i have had.

Nurseries are no better. My nephew at age 18 months walked out of his nursery without the staff noticing. Fortunately a passer-by found him and returned him to the nursery.

Friends are no better either. Back in the 80's my older sister was with a friend in the back seat of the friends mums car. The mum concerned drove to a shop and parked the car outside, the shop was on a hill. The mum left the children in the car. The car rolled down the hill. Fortunately my sisters friend knew what a handbrake did and the car did stop before it got the road junction at the bottom of the hill.

Accidents will happen... by their very nature an accident is an accident, no one means for it to happen. However many accidents can be avoided by taking certain precautions. For instance over recent days the police/traffic authorities have been advising motorists not to drive in the snow/ice unless absolutely necessary... as less cars on the road will mean with luck less accidents.

Nursery and Childminder regulations are there to help prevent accidents and to maintain a Minimum Standard of safety. By knowing that a childcare facility is registered, parents who use that facility can be more confident that the facility does meet the Minimum Standard... alas it isn't always the case - the Minimum Standard is met on the day of inspection, but not maintained. However it does go some way to help parents (mostly women) to return to work, knowing that their children are being cared for in a reasonably safe environment.

There are often way around various bits of legislation. Loop holes exist and from time to time as legislation is updated those loop holes are filled, but others can be created. The 'for reward' part of childcare legislation is one such area... though it should be noted that it does not purely mean money, it does cover other things like boxes of chocolates, flowers etc.

Idrankthechristmasspirits I am impressed that after having a bad childminder, you continued to use childminders. The next 4 were wonderful which is great to here. From what you experienced 2 out of 6 were bad... yet they got though the initial registration system plus may have got through later inspections. It goes to show how even with the regulations in place, bad childminders can still slip through the net.

but to suggest that giving someone a box of chocolates to a friend for looking after your child is breaking the law is ridiculous.
No-one on this thread has suggested it's ok to recommend someone who is trading as a childminder but not registered. No-one has said that it is ok for childminders not to be registered.

We are talking about people who are looking after children as a favour to friends, and those friends paying them for doing so. Are people so short-sighted that they cannot see the difference?

I agree there is a difference between a friend caring for a child for a couple of hours, and a childminder caring for several children for many hours. However the law as it is currently has defined it as it does... if we want to see that changed, then we need to lobby our MPs to get them to ask questions in the House with regard to if the current law is workable and what changes could be made to it, to reflect our ever changing society.

The most recent change to the regulations is that the number of days on which childcare over 2 hours can occur has increased from 6 days to 14.

Maybe a better way would be to only regulate childcarers who care for children from more than one family (excluding their own children). That way parents could care for a friends child (or children). But that was how one of the previous laws was... and it got changed - so it didn't work, children must have still died/been neglected etc.

A line has to be drawn somewhere... but the question is where. Is the two hour rule too restrictive? Where would you draw the lines between a friend caring for a friends child, a childminder caring for multiple children of multiple parents, and a day care facilty. Where should the lines be drawn?