Petition to No.10 regarding Childcare arrangements!

Broken_hearted

Insane all the years I worked I relied on family and friends to help out. Thats what people do they help eachouther.

Mutantk

This is ridiculous - I was planning to look after my friends baby and went down the route of doing it properly by registering with ofsted...however when I went to pre-register was told that you CANNOT register if it is purely for the purpose of solely caring for one child. They will only register you as a child minder if you plan to have a business in which you look after or at some stage will look after more than the one child. Whole system needs looking at, I'm all for child protection but think that if a Nan for example wants to leave work to look after a grandchild why shouldn't she be allowed to register and be paid for what she is doing - surely better in most cases for the baby to be cared for by a relative. Why should a Nan not be paid when a child minder would be...the Nan could be at work earning but she is instead caring for the child - infact this probably sounds extreme and I'm sure I'll get a big reaction for saying this - but why not pay the mother to stay at home and look after her own child instead of working to pay another to do it...probably because government receiving tax on two earnings instead of one that way....
To put it simply, my husband and I have 4 young children by choice which we can afford but I still work evenings to pay for other than the basics because I have to. We don't and have never received any benefits except the family allowance that EVERYONE gets. Now I (like most I'm sure) devote my day to bringing my children up well, to be well-behaved, good mannered, taught right from wrong, taught respect, I cook fresh, home cooked meals everyday and teach them to be healthy and to exercise. I plan all sorts of activities from games, to arts and crafts, cooking, gardening, visits etc so my point is that I'm working full time to do all this so that as adults my children will hopefully become honest, hardworking, respectful members of society and I think that this is an honest, worthwhile contribution to the world and why should I not be paid for doing it? Why should tax payers work to pay me? Obviously arguments that they shouldn't...but maybe society today would be a safer, more respectful place with less crime if parents had the chance to stay at home with their children if only they could afford to.
Sorry if I've gone off subject but this worthwhile thread looks like having the right crowd of people to have an interesting discussion/debate on the matter and I have of course signed the petition. I haven't said anything to be provocative or to judge others or criticise so please be polite and let's see what the reaction is...

iamana1ias

Mutantk wrote: »

- infact this probably sounds extreme and I'm sure I'll get a big reaction for saying this - but why not pay the mother to stay at home and look after her own child instead of working to pay another to do it...probably because government receiving tax on two earnings instead of one that way....

Because we non-breeding tax payers are already paying for your kids. You choose to have them so why the hell should I pay you to look after them as well?? :mad:

amilotte

This is the most unreasonable thing I have heard in a while!! How stupid - this is taking the 'Nanny state' to the extreme.

What next, will I have to be registered to invite my DD's friends to play as that ends up being over 2 hours at a time - crazy!

SandC

iamana1ias wrote: »

Because we non-breeding tax payers are already paying for your kids. You choose to have them so why the hell should I pay you to look after them as well?? :mad:

I have to agree with you there. I do not mind government subsidised childcare but would draw the line at paying mothers or fathers to stay at home.

pelirocco

iamana1ias wrote: »

Because we non-breeding tax payers are already paying for your kids. You choose to have them so why the hell should I pay you to look after them as well?? :mad:

Because when those children grow up they will be paying for your pensions , your healthcare and wiping your backside when you become too infirm to do it yourself .

Children are an investment for 'everyones' future

sooz

amilotte wrote: »

What next, will I have to be registered to invite my DD's friends to play as that ends up being over 2 hours at a time - crazy!

No - just make sure all playdates are exactly 1 hour & 59 mins

MrsTinks

Actually the reason is not just to "stop people doing each other a favour" it's also for the childrens protection... leaving a child with someone that is not regulated and checked on and doesn't have relevant training to care for other peoples children is probably in 99.9% of cases not a problem and the child is safe and nothing will ever happen... but what about the 0.1% of cases... we bash them for missing things like the recent cases brought to light in the media - but what we will never know is the amount of cases that might be missed if rules like this were abolished.

Another point is that if you are not registered as a childminder then IF something happened to the child you were looking after in addition to yours then you would have NO protection in the case of accusations or if the child was injured even if it wasn't neglect.

Should the system be looked at? Yes more than likely Should it be a priority given the state of the country at the moment? I don't think so...

A kneejerk reaction to ONE case-scenario with a narked off pair of women because the world doesn't understand that THEY are an exception to the rules of the country is not going to get my signature or support I'm afraid...

onlyroz

The media has created this frenzy whereby anybody who touches a child, for whatever reason, is immediately branded a !!!!!phile. The government have happily jumped on this frenzy which has resulted in this absurd situation where anybody who has to look at a child as part of their job must pay to undertake all manner of criminal record checks. I can also imagine a date in the future where we'll have to have such checks before we're allowed to spend time with our own children.

minxwolf

I have signed it, i hate red tape. Yes children need to be safe, but this should start way before a woman has a child. This ties to sex education that is inadequate , and given too young at school. Im not a hippie but more time needs to be put into the emmotional side of sex, the dangers to a woman including operations and mental health problems. There should be an option where a woman should be able to have a private contract with the other woman only. Set out their own guidelines, witnesses by a member of authority. Then the rest is down to them to keep this contract of care. A caring mum will only trust their baby to another caring mum.