Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

news.yahoo.com: State to mom: Stop baby-sitting neighbors' kids


Thiebear

Recommended Posts

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090929/ap_on_re_us/us_baby_sitter_backlash_mich

RVING TOWNSHIP, Mich. – Each day before the school bus comes to pick up the neighborhood's children, Lisa Snyder did a favor for three of her fellow moms, welcoming their children into her home for about an hour before they left for school. Regulators who oversee child care, however, don't see it as charity. Days after the start of the new school year, Snyder received a letter from the Michigan Department of Human Services warning her that if she continued, she'd be violating a law aimed at the operators of unlicensed day care centers.

"I was freaked out. I was blown away," she said. "I got on the phone immediately, called my husband, then I called all the girls" — that is, the mothers whose kids she watches — "every one of them."

Snyder's predicament has led to a debate in Michigan about whether a law that says no one may care for unrelated children in their home for more than four weeks each calendar year unless they are licensed day-care providers needs to be changed. It also has irked parents who say they depend on such friendly offers to help them balance work and family.

Common sense is dead.. you can't have the lady that doesnt work watch your kids for an hour so they don't get stolen or hurt...

"It takes a bonded and certified village?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a law that says no one may care for unrelated children in their home for more than four weeks each calendar year

Lets see now 4 weeks. Umm, that's 8-12 hour(s) work per day x 22 work days in a month that's 176 hours the State allows before needing a permit (i e money) and schools usually in sessions for 180 days per school year and she only watches them 1 hour per day. Man she has it covered!!!! F the State.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's she have to do to get licensed?

If all she has to do is pass a background check to make sure she doesn't have a prior conviction for child abuse (and pay fifty bucks for the background check) then I'm not sure I mind.

If she has to carry a million dollars of liability insurance, have a state teacher's certificate, and a college degree in child psychology, then that's another matter.

Any folks in this thread got a proposal for how to write a law that allows what's going on, here, but doesn't allow Michael Jackson to open an after-school play land?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Id like to know how the state found out about it.

What makes it officially "caretaking" and just my kids friends hanging out playing?

From the article:

Snyder learned that the agency was responding to a neighbor's complaint.

My guess is that since this woman wasn't taking money for her services the state normally wouldn't care.

I suspect we are only hearing one side of the story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a link to what's required to run a Family Child Care (1-6 unrelated children) in the state of Michigan. (http://www.michigan.gov/dhs/0,1607,7-124-5455_49572-82366--,00.html)

It requires quite a few steps, but in general I agree with the requirements. Stuff like ensuring you are fit to care for children, the place where you are caring for them is fit for children, common sense stuff.

Here's a summary of some of things looked at:

R 400.1902 Caregiver and child care home family

(1) An applicant shall meet all of the following provisions:

(a) Be 18 years of age or older.

(B) Have a high school diploma, general educational development (GED) certificate, or equivalent. This subdivision applies only to applicants registered/licensed after the effective date of these rules.

© Reside in the child care home.

(d) Have proof of valid infant/child/adult cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), first aid, and blood-borne pathogen training.

(e) Attend an orientation provided by the department.

(2) An applicant or the caregiver shall be of responsible character and shall be suitable and able to meet the needs of children and provide for their care, supervision, and protection.

(3) All persons, including minors, residing in the child care home shall be of good moral character and be suitable to assure the welfare of children.

Makes sense to me, in general. Perhaps iffy for the case mentioned. It seems like the volunteering mother is already doing a pretty big favor. Jumping through hoops to make it official might be a bit much for one hour a day. I don't really know. Probably needs to be something that is relegated to a judgement call by someone at the local level. :whoknows:

What would be nice, is if this comes to the attention of a public servant who covers this particular bureaucracy (no baggage intended), that the public servant would take a particular interest in making the process as straightforward and easy for this volunteering mom as possible. I think that's the way this sort of scenario could be rescued.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's she have to do to get licensed?

If all she has to do is pass a background check to make sure she doesn't have a prior conviction for child abuse (and pay fifty bucks for the background check) then I'm not sure I mind.

If she has to carry a million dollars of liability insurance, have a state teacher's certificate, and a college degree in child psychology, then that's another matter.

Any folks in this thread got a proposal for how to write a law that allows what's going on, here, but doesn't allow Michael Jackson to open an after-school play land?

As has been said,if she isn't being paid it is none of the state's business.

Get the **** out of the parents business

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how do they determine the character described in 2 and 3? If you have a 3 year old (minor) in the home, how do they determine he/she is not a future serial killer? Do they collect references for the minors? Do they for the adults?

For #3 "All persons, including minors, ... should be suitable to assure the welfare of children." Doesn't that preclude having young children and running a daycare operation? How could a 3 year old residing in the home "assure the welfare of children"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Common sense isn't dead, decency is.

Reasonable people always must pay for those who would twist decency and abuse privilege.

Why are these laws in place? Is it because the lawmakers are just morons, or is it because there's so many scumbags out there?

For every thousand decent people who would be a perfectly good babysitter, there's one who would start a kiddie sex club like down in Texas last year, or leave the kids unattended while they went and got their meth hit, etc etc etc.

And it's those individuals who make it tougher on us all.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have alluded to, if she isn't charging for her help, it is none of the states business.

The comment from the state worker when asked what the kids are supposed to do if the weather is inclement while they wait outside for the bus was that they needed to buy an umbrella.

I think those state employees need to stand outside in the rain for an hour per day in Michigan, looking for a new job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So how do they determine the character described in 2 and 3? If you have a 3 year old (minor) in the home, how do they determine he/she is not a future serial killer? Do they collect references for the minors? Do they for the adults?

For #3 "All persons, including minors, ... should be suitable to assure the welfare of children." Doesn't that preclude having young children and running a daycare operation? How could a 3 year old residing in the home "assure the welfare of children"?

I agree it's pretty subjective. On the other hand, some subjective aspects can be a good thing. It allows the licensing agency to exercise judgement in granting and withholding a license. I'd think the possible good of allowing room for such judgement would outweigh the bad when it comes down to trying to evaluate whether a home and its caretakers will be suitable for taking in other children. I'd rather they reject 10 homes that would have been suitable, than license one that passed all the objective tests, but then proceeded to molest it's care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lets see now 4 weeks. Umm, that's 8-12 hour(s) work per day x 22 work days in a month that's 176 hours the State allows before needing a permit (i e money) and schools usually in sessions for 180 days per school year and she only watches them 1 hour per day. Man she has it covered!!!! F the State.

nice...i was about to do the math myself to see how the 1 hour a day worked out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As has been said,if she isn't being paid it is none of the state's business.

Get the **** out of the parents business

You seem to have missed my question. (I'm sure it was an accident.) I'll repeat it:

Any folks in this thread got a proposal for how to write a law that allows what's going on, here, but doesn't allow Michael Jackson to open an after-school play land?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any folks in this thread got a proposal for how to write a law that allows what's going on, here, but doesn't allow Michael Jackson to open an after-school play land?

If someone is running a business of this type it should be regulated and licensed.

If it's a volunteer organization (e.g. youth sports) they should do background checks that their volunteers are OK, or face liability.

If it's an unpaid agreement between friends, why does anyone need to get involved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...