Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: GMR Sep 21 2009, 11:27 AM

Looking after children.

I was talking to somebody today who looks after children (they've been doing it for years). They told me that if they were going to do it now they wouldn't bother. Too much paperwork, too much bureaucracy, too many checks, where years ago it was easier. Also she was telling me that she had to go on a first Aid Course and it cost her £130 (which was a two day course). The last time she went it was just £50. She is also made to go on other courses because the council/ the law requires it; all of this she has to pay out of her own pocket. She doesn't earn that much in the first place.

She also told me that they are crying out for more child minders. Police checks she understands - even though it will not stop a child being abused - but all the rest, is it necessary? Aren't we throwing the baby out with the bath water? Because it is so expensive and bureaucratic it is turning people away. Is all this crap necessary just to protect children; even though there is no guarantee it will protect children? If we are turning people away from this profession shouldn't we re-look at it again to see if we could simplify things, make it less expensive and at the same time make sure that everyone is police checked.

Posted by: Darren Sep 21 2009, 11:50 AM

The question should be "Are you happy leaving your children with someone who has not been checked and doesn't know or can demonstrate basic first aid?"

Posted by: Iommi Sep 21 2009, 11:56 AM

I believe First Aid should be on the school curriculum.

Posted by: Darren Sep 21 2009, 12:04 PM

So do I, but sadly it's not.

Posted by: Chesapeake Sep 21 2009, 01:36 PM

Quite agree.

There is no way I would place my children with someone who would not go on these courses at the very least. I understand totally that the initial outlay for a First Aid course is expensive (it does last for 3 years though) and the paperwork is time-consuming but if you expect people to pay you for looking after their precious prince or princess then please show the comitment to the job and the childs wellfare that is expected. If you are just doing the job (childminding) for the money then you should not be doing it at all!

Posted by: Iommi Sep 21 2009, 04:03 PM

I wonder how many parents are skilled in First Aid and are clear to raise kids.

Posted by: lordtup Sep 21 2009, 04:25 PM

It does appear that we are becoming paranoid over the whole child care issue .
I have every sympathy with parent's concern , but it is a very tiny percentage of child care centres that have a problem .
It is doubtful that the bureaucracy involved will weed out the rotten apples ( sorry about the mixed metaphor ) but it will add to the operating costs which will have to be met .

Thankfully my family live abroad so the matter is somewhat removed from my immediate vision , but I would put faith in my ability to judge people at first sight and act accordingly if my granddaughter was going to be left with someone who I was not happy about .

Maybe we should place more trust in the fact that there are a lot of genuine people out there who just want to do their job ,and ignore the scaremongering of the tabloid press who see paedophiles round every .

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Sep 21 2009, 04:27 PM

Good point.

Posted by: Sarah Sep 21 2009, 04:35 PM

Exactly, and a few less soap boxes wouldn't hurt.

Posted by: Bartholomew Sep 21 2009, 05:19 PM

When it comes to the cost of working being more than the remuneration, then it would require those doing it have a private income. This is getting close to the truth for many who are involved in childcare. Whether you like it or not, the vast majority of people work as much for the money as the enjoyment and this is as true in childcare as it is anywhere else.
A First Aid course is not the only cost, there are many others that require not only money but time (try looking at the college courses and see how much time and effort these require) in order to do a job that has become a minefield of bureaucracy and frustration topped with low pay.

Posted by: Branston Pickle Sep 21 2009, 05:44 PM

The problem is, that while the first aid courses are a good thing, Ofsted have introduced a lot of unnecessary and pointless things, such as the Early Years Foundation Stage. This (I think) requires childminders to have to plan exactly what they do all day, as well as monitor each childs "development" and say how the planned activities help to aid that childs "development". This all requires a large amount of time and paperwork to be spent on something rather pointless, and it is this, and other things like it that are putting a lot of people of childminding.

Posted by: GMR Sep 21 2009, 05:55 PM

I think people do show 'commitment' when they look after other people's children, but that doesn't mean they should be screwed to the ground and made to pay excessive amounts. People do wish to do this job but because of bureaucracy and the expense on top it is hard for some.







I also agree that people do it, and should do it, because of the love of the job rather than the love of the money but that doesn't mean that they are rich enough to accept the disproportionate fees blindly.

Posted by: GMR Sep 21 2009, 05:56 PM

The problem isn't doing the 'basic' first aid but the disproportionate fees for doing it; compared to what they get for child minding.

Posted by: Darren Sep 21 2009, 08:07 PM

Looking at St John (a charity), the 16 hour is £90. For that, it covers:

•Communication and casualty care.
•Managing an incident.
•Looking after yourself and the casualty.
•Adult, child and infant resuscitation.
•Treatment of severe bleeding, chest pain and an unconscious casualty.
•Treatment of choking in adults, children and infants.
•Treatment of fainting, bites and stings, sprains and strains.
•Treatment of asthma, head injuries, chest pains and shock.
•Treatment of severe bleeding and severe burns.
•Recognition and treatment for meningitis, poisons, seizures and stroke.
•Bone, muscle and joint injuries.
•Casualty management - outdoors.
•Emergencies in public.
•Conditions relating to extremes of temperature.
•Recognition and treatment of low blood sugar.
•Role of the first aider in a group setting.

These are essential skills that will be needed for the care and welfare of children left in your care.

Hardly being short changed there. A 4-day HSE course is about £250 and covers only a few bits more.

Posted by: GMR Sep 21 2009, 08:14 PM

According to the person concerned they had to do it through Newbury College and it had to be a recognised qualification (recognised by the council). If she could have done it cheaper she would have.

Posted by: Darren Sep 21 2009, 08:23 PM

West Berk Council say:

"Childminders are required to have completed a basic training course and a 12 hour paediatric first aid course. St Johns, Red Cross etc. run specific courses for childminders to comply with the OFSTED requirements."

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=7338

£90 is still very cheap for the skill you gain from it.

Posted by: GMR Sep 21 2009, 08:28 PM

I know she said it was a 2 day course so there might have been something else she had to do. Next time I see her I'll ask.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 21 2009, 09:11 PM

I wonder how many parents would pass, yet they are considered able.

Posted by: blackdog Sep 21 2009, 09:11 PM

And three years later its another £90 to gain those same skills again.

And three years later ....

After a few courses they should change their career and teach first aid courses - it probably pays better.

Posted by: GMR Sep 21 2009, 10:15 PM

Good point; doctors don't retake their qualification. It is just a money grabbing exercise.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 21 2009, 10:37 PM

Having said that, repetition is the mother of learning. In an emergency, one doesn't have the time to do revision.

Posted by: On the edge Sep 22 2009, 06:36 AM

It could also be protection of vested interests. For instance - we are very short of Dentists, NHS ones in particular, and have been for quite some time. Apparently won't work NHS because one way or another money too low. So, why don't we train more dentists? Difficulty is Dentists professional body will only permit a fixed number of new ones to qualify each year. Its called upholding professional standards if you are top draw or restrictive practices if you are bottom!

Posted by: Chesapeake Sep 22 2009, 07:10 AM

The First Aid courses change all the time due to continual changes in the best methods for CPR etc etc... If you are a "First Aider" at work you will notice these changes every time you have to re-take your qualification.

Doctors unlike First Aiders go through years and years of training in order to gain their qualifications. They will tell you, if you ask, that they do not know everything and are being continually updated and trained on new methods, drugs and equipment.

The responsibilties of both jobs are miles apart. Hardly a good comparison I think?!

Posted by: Chesapeake Sep 22 2009, 07:16 AM

A lot of parents are not considered able and that is why Social Services get involved! We hear about some stories when they reach the news but unfortunately that is a fraction of the tragedies that are actually happening every day and probably in your very own streets.

Posted by: Iommi Sep 22 2009, 07:28 AM

The point I make is that there is NO formal training in child care required to be a parent.

Posted by: Bloggo Sep 22 2009, 07:41 AM

Quite right however there are too many parents who don't have and don't care about basic parenting skills that are fundamental in bringing up children.
Perhaps this should be treated as a priority too.

Posted by: Chesapeake Sep 22 2009, 09:13 AM

I couldn't agree more. The trouble is that the mistakes that have been made in the past are instrumental in the way that things are handled today. Social Services have got too soft in the handling of children at risk. Yes, the best place for a child is at home with it's parents, but sometimes that is not the case and that child would have a far better chance in life with Foster Parents.

We should be looking at more education (from an early age) in how to be a good parent. Parents should be parents, not friends, to their children and they should be educated in the rights and wrongs of bringing up children. Gone are the days when families took pride in their homes and the manners of their children and educated their children in their social responsibilities. We need to replace that culture and rid our lives of the new culture of allowing children to do what they want when they want because it is easier. Raising a child is the most difficult job in the world to get right.

I have had bad experiences in the past with child minders and nurserys and I welcome the new imposed rules, restrictions and paperwork. I know that it is a bind for the people who have to abide by it but it gives me a feeling of security in the care that I place my child in. I can quite clearly see that my childs day is more structured and he will get more out of his time there than just sitting in a room full of toys.That can't be a bad thing surely. I would be happy to pay more for my child care and I am sure that most people would if it meant that those who carry out the job of looking after their children are qualified to do so and are monitored. People on lower wages would not be badly affected by price rises as Tax Credits would make up most of the difference.

Posted by: dannyboy Sep 22 2009, 09:18 AM

true. Things change though when you start charging money for doing something.

You don't need a hygine certificate in your home kitchen. Yet a restaurant / cafe does. Maybe we should just start trusting cafe/restaurant owners to be clean & hygenic & not bother inspecting them.

Posted by: TallDarkAndHandsome Sep 22 2009, 09:21 AM

How many of you have been on courses and then forgotton everything that you learnt on the course because you do not use the skills you have learnt in an every day manner?

Be honest.......

Posted by: GMR Sep 22 2009, 09:36 AM

Whether it is a good comparison on not is beside the point. The point is that Child Minders don't get a lot of money (more so if you only do it part time) and to be charged exorbitant amounts of money is wrong; and on a regular basis. It is ok if you are a solicitor or work for the government as they either pay for it or you can afford it yourself. As you said; most do it for the love of the job, or they should do, rather than the money so making them jump through hoops is wrong. It never used to be like that; are kids any more safer nowadays? I don't think so. Recently it was reported in the news that a nursery nurse was taking pictures of children (even though she had jumped through all the hoops she was meant to jump through).

If the government/ council want people to be child minders and they are on a low wage then maybe they should shoulder the over the top fees.

Posted by: Chesapeake Sep 23 2009, 12:39 PM

[If the government/ council want people to be child minders and they are on a low wage then maybe they should shoulder the over the top fees.

[/quote]

They already do, it's called Working Tax Credits.

Posted by: Andy Sep 23 2009, 02:31 PM

The going rate is up to £6, with the average being £3.26 per hour and up to 6 children under the age of 8..

£3.26 x 6 x 8 hours = £156.48 per day

£156.48 x 5 = £782.40 per week

ie £40,684.80 per annum

So there's very good money to be made!!!

Posted by: Rachel Sep 23 2009, 03:38 PM

Shame on you Andy! If you think being paid 40K a year for looking after SIX children under 8, 8 hours a day for 52 weeks a year is GOOD MONEY, I'd like to see you try it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm not a betting person, but I doubt many people would take up the challenge just to keep that number of children happy & safe.....let alone do first aid courses, Ofsted paperwork etc etc.
The truth of it is this. Most parents (I hope) would list their children as their number 1 priority, & they'd like their children cared for as well as they would or better. They'll go out to work to earn a decent wage, would pay a cleaner £8-10 an hour, but the person who does the most important job in life in the parents absence? She gets a fiver an hour if she's lucky.
Sorry to be so sharp Andy, but this really needs to be said for all those childminders out there who do stirling work AND enable others to earn a good wage & keep the country working....Well done all of you!

Posted by: Andy Sep 23 2009, 03:56 PM

Shame on me, wtf are you talking about, I've only put some data on here which I got directly from the National Childminding Association's own website and many of them charge a damn sight more that the national average I've used as an example.

Obviously as you couldn't work out the economics from the aforementioned EXAMPLE, so let me explain....You can manipulate the figures by using different rates to have either less hours, less children or different rates to earn, what is still in effect, hardly a breadline salary as GMR had seemingly stated!!!

Nowhere have I said that the majority don't work hard and do a good job, but in the real world if they charged too more then they would get no work at all as it wouldn't prove viable to the parents to work at all.

Posted by: Sarah Sep 23 2009, 03:59 PM

6 children under 8, for 8 hours a day, and only one person to take care of them, I wouldn't do that for £350 a day.

Posted by: Rachel Sep 23 2009, 04:27 PM

I would appreciate the respect I afford you. There is no need for swearing or casting aspersions on my ability in mathematics. Figures can indeed be manipulated, minders can indeed earn more money if they care for more children (obviously) but there is nothing wrong with my maths. Look after 3 children for an hour, earn a tenner. Clean for an hour, earn a tenner. Work on a car for 15 minutes, earn a tenner. Offer legal advice for 10 minutes, earn a tenner. Play proffessional football for a nano second, earn a tenner. (sorry, don't really know the wage each of these jobs commands, not wishing to offend). Each & every one of these is a valid, valuable & honest way to make a living. NONE of them deserve the sort of "money for old rope" comment that comes across to me in your post.
And in the real world, if they could all afford to stick together & demand a rate worthy of their genuine hard work, the rest of us would have no choice, we'd have to pay up or give up work, then we'd be in a terrible mess, rest assured.

Posted by: Sarah Sep 23 2009, 04:56 PM

Your example might work in theory, but in practise I very much doubt it.

Child minders are not there just to keep the child safe, they also have to see to the toilet needs, supervise stimulating play, provide food and drink when needed, and also care for the emotional needs of their charges.

Three might be manageable alone, but only Mary Poppins could do this properly for six under eight children.

Posted by: GMR Sep 23 2009, 08:35 PM

You are presuming that the person I mentioned earns that much. In fact they do not.

Posted by: GMR Sep 23 2009, 08:40 PM

Tax credits are to help people keep their head above water... not turn them into millionaires. And not everybody gets tax credits either. Tax credits doesn’t also mean that they can or are happy to pay those exorbitant fees.

Posted by: Andy Sep 23 2009, 11:30 PM

Of course saying "Shame on you" and scowling with an angry face was an extremely respectful in your opening gambit, silly me for misunderstanding and taking offence.

And as you fail to grasp the simple economic fact that if they all stuck together and raised their rates, then it would not be worthwhile the parent continuing to work as they would not then earn enough to justify the expense of child minding, then there's no real point in discussing it with you further.





Quite a few primary and pre school teachers manage to do this every day and for a lot less money!!!

Posted by: Iommi Sep 24 2009, 07:37 AM

And fewer hours, plus school holidays, etc.

Posted by: Sarah Sep 24 2009, 07:42 AM

I think you'll find that in term time, children in the care of child minders are usually under four years old, so in need of a lot of supervision.

You'll also find that pre-school, reception and nursery teachers do not take a class alone, they have several assistants depending on the numbers in a class. They also have breaks when others supervise the children and canteen staff to provide meals, and as Iommi said work fewer hours.

Posted by: Rachel Sep 24 2009, 11:50 AM

[quote name='Andy' date='Sep 24 2009, 12:30 AM' post='9209']
Of course saying "Shame on you" and scowling with an angry face was an extremely respectful in your opening gambit, silly me for misunderstanding and taking offence.


And I appologised in the same post, giving my reason as defending the work of childminders & their renumeration.


And as you fail to grasp the simple economic fact that if they all stuck together and raised their rates, then it would not be worthwhile the parent continuing to work as they would not then earn enough to justify the expense of child minding, then there's no real point in discussing it with you further.

I grasp this point fully, thus my comment refering to what a mess the country would be in.





Quite a few primary and pre school teachers manage to do this every day and for a lot less money!!!

How well I know it. Glad you appreciate us