Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 104

Thread: Illegal to babysit your friend's child for free in Michigan

  1. #51
    “Hatred is the coward's revenge..."
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    19,996
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by justthinking View Post
    That's a silly argument. Yes, when I was a health unit coordinator the doctors and nurses had to be licensed. That doesn't mean they knew a lick about how to do my job--any more than I knew a lick about how to do their job.
    You are now presenting a strawman that has nothing to do with anything.

    If someone is required to be licensed to do a particular job, do you think it is fine for UNlicensed people to do that same job just because there are people willing to hire them illegally?

    That is the question, and so far no one will answer it. Strawmen about competency and how many jobs you've held where you didn't need a license have zero to do with my question.

  2. #52
    “Hatred is the coward's revenge..."
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    19,996
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by faithhopelovely View Post
    Ya know... if they want to be asses about it I would prob work out a deal where she pays me but I'd give it back to her in cash or something. Only because it's so freaking stupid. I'd rather see free babysitting than kids left home alone.
    As to the OP, I don't think they care about payment. They are requiring her to get licensed with the state. In the case of the OP, I think it is a badly written law and needs to be changed, because she was NOT providing "child care" as any sort of a business.

  3. #53
    Member WQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    20,398
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    Two sorts - "small family" and "large family" with "large family" being required to have licenses

    http://nccic.acf.hhs.gov/statedata/s...cfm?state=Ohio

    So again, do you think it is fine for a home-based day care with 15 children to operate without a license just because the parents involved do not care that it is illegally operated?
    What do you mean by "again?" When did you specify 15 children earlier? I admit I skim, so maybe I missed that. Anyway, I've always been talking about situations where you decide you trust someone to watch your kid in their home. I mentioned, in my first post in this thread, that one advantage of this would be your child exposed to fewer other children and their germs, so I think I was clear on what I meant.

    I think 15 children in most homes would probably break some fire codes. I certainly don't think it sounds safe. To do that would require bringing in a lot of other adults... at which point, I think it should be licensed so that background checks, training, health and safety, etc can be regulated. There should probably be a rule that you can't have X number of children that aren't yours in your home for regular child care. But, below "X" I think it should be left to the parent's discretion.

    I don't think there should be any rules about someone watching a couple of kids in their homes to make a little extra money. It's one of the few things that a low-income SAHM can do to make a bit of money and it's often the only affordable option for working moms. And, it does have some real advantages. Many people would not feel comfortable leaving an infant or toddler in a commercial day care with a whole lot of strangers, exposed to the germs of a dozen or more other kids. I know that if I had to leave my baby with someone, I'd rather it were in the home of someone I trusted than a commercial day care.

  4. #54
    Inactive Member faithhopelovely's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    18,435
    Rep Power
    0
    Oh wait... yeah, sorry! It's not just about the payment. Sorry about that. Coffee isn't consumed yet

    I don't know then. I don't think friends should have to be licensed in order to watch other friend's kids for a small period of time. JT... you better get licensed before you keep an eye on Jonas for me! You gonna be in handcuffs!


    Crystal
    mommy to Hannah 5/99, Malachi 10/26/00, Chloe 10/20/03 and baby Jonas 10/19/06

  5. #55
    “Hatred is the coward's revenge..."
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    19,996
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by justthinking View Post
    Private in home care does not need to be licensed here unless they are receiving state payments for some of the kids. Center-based care should be licensed because there are so many more variables due to the large number of kids, parents, and teachers involved.
    Quote Originally Posted by faithhopelovely View Post
    I think it varies by state maybe? I know that I had to have my sewing business registered and obtain a business license. Was a huge PITA...
    It does vary by state, and in Florida - where Kendall lives - home-based child care facilities of the sort she spoke about ARE required to be licensed. WOG and WQ apparently think Kendall has no cause for complaint regarding UNlicensed illegal child care providers since the parents are willing to hire that unlicensed someone illegally.

  6. #56
    not in a binder
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    29,463
    Rep Power
    185508
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    You are now presenting a strawman that has nothing to do with anything.
    No, I'm responding to the post in which you claimed:

    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post

    You've ignored the fact that some sort of license is required for basically every job that a person can get paid to do.

  7. #57
    Member WQ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    20,398
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven View Post
    It does vary by state, and in Florida - where Kendall lives - home-based child care facilities of the sort she spoke about ARE required to be licensed. WOG and WQ apparently think Kendall has no cause for complaint regarding UNlicensed illegal child care providers since the parents are willing to hire that unlicensed someone illegally.
    If Kendal is competing with people watching 15 kids in an unlicensed child care center, I think she has a valid reason to complain. If she's unhappy that someone is paying their neighbour a bit of money to watch their kid, I am not sympathetic. Even if it's illegal, I think it's a stupid law.

    I would rather pay the nice neighbour lady to watch my baby than pay Kendall to watch my baby because I don't like the idea of my baby in a large commercial daycare facility. Even if that's not really logical, that's how I feel about it.

  8. #58
    “Hatred is the coward's revenge..."
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    19,996
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by justthinking View Post
    No, I'm responding to the post in which you claimed:
    As I said:
    If someone is required to be licensed to do a particular job, do you think it is fine for UNlicensed people to do that same job just because there are people willing to hire them illegally?

    That is the question...

  9. #59
    Shrieking Violet Sprockey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Libya
    Posts
    79,546
    Rep Power
    397988
    Quote Originally Posted by WQ View Post
    No, I think there should be licensed child care facilities because some people want that. Some people want to know that a facility has met certain professional standards. In Cincinnati, the two sorts of child care co-exist side-by-side very well.

    I'm not arguing that people break the law. I'm arguing that laws prohibiting people from making their own private child care arrangements are stupid.
    Agree

  10. #60
    “Hatred is the coward's revenge..."
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    19,996
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by faithhopelovely View Post
    Oh wait... yeah, sorry! It's not just about the payment. Sorry about that. Coffee isn't consumed yet

    I don't know then. I don't think friends should have to be licensed in order to watch other friend's kids for a small period of time. JT... you better get licensed before you keep an eye on Jonas for me! You gonna be in handcuffs!
    I agree 100% that friends watching each other's children should not require licenses. That is why I was so outraged by the OP and the similar situation in England.

    But Kendall derailed my thread ( ) and we now have two completely different issues under discussion.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •