RTE Primetime Investigation into creches

[Purple]

This is yet another example of the inability of the state to regulate and enforce.
It's the same in almost every other area where the state interacts with the private sector. The solution is proper regulation, not more ineffective regulation or inefficient state provision.
The state needs to do its job properly.

 

[Betsy Og]

Couldn't happen due to restrictions on filming children, plus how can it be guaranteed that only I will be able to view my child when rooms are shared with other children.

Maybe if all agree to it (or maybe its just OAP). I'm no expert on the subject - but this paranoia about children in photos and video - presumably if the kids are not in a state of undress then is it really of interest to paedophiles??? I'm the father of 2 young boys but isnt the main thing keeping them in safe environments, giving no opportunity to those of ill intent, rather than putting a sharia style cloak over them??

 

[Latrade]

I don't think that's fair. The voiceover stressed on several occasions throughout the programme that their journalist had seen plenty of good practice and excellent care. They also made it clear that they selected creches that had already been the subject of complaints. I thought it was as balanced as it could be, given how emotive the subject matter was.

It's hard to find balance with such a subject, and I'm not defending the company's involved (as I said three years ago I refused to send my child to those companies). However, I disgaree as I felt it played on the emotive subject in a very tabloid manner rather than a proper journalistic manner.

Even just the text information it provided next to little cute baby faces, reconstructions of parents leaving happy children into the creche before another example of abuse shatters the happy, touching moment, or children wandering lonely down the road (all that was missing was the end theme to the Incredible Hulk). It was awful, awful tabloid journalism, which if it were a satire like The Day Today would have been a slick well put together take down of TV investigative journalism. Instead it deliberately played (and in my opinion preyed) on parents fears and concerns.

All we saw was the journalist challenging or questioning the staff involved. Did any other staff? We don't know, we assume they were happy or accepted this because it was never mentioned. We have no idea of timescale, was this over one day, a couple of days or systematic and daily?

That kind of context makes a difference. But, it got viewers and it's got people talking a thousands of parents across the land distressed, so it achieved its goal (and ad revenue) I guess.

The problem for me is much of the issues of most concern probably wouldn't have been nor will be picked up in any inspection or audit, so I can't really blame the HSE as all inspections present a snapshot and behaviour will be massively different when an inpsector is around.

However, maybe one positive to come from this is that parents will be much more picky and selective about where they send their kids and really research places. There weren't that many surprises in the programme for me as there have been many concerned stories and opinions given on internet forums for years about those companies. Why parents still chose to send their children there is completely beyond me. I may chose to ignore some bad reviews on Trip Advisor when picking a hotel, but not for a creche I'm going to spend the best part of €1000 per month to have my child spend all day in.

What I'd like is something similar to the good public information we have on restaurants from the FSA. Let's have something similar available for creches too.

 

[Latrade]

Maybe if all agree to it (or maybe its just OAP). I'm no expert on the subject - but this paranoia about children in photos and video - presumably if the kids are not in a state of undress then is it really of interest to paedophiles??? I'm the father of 2 young boys but isnt the main thing keeping them in safe environments, giving no opportunity to those of ill intent, rather than putting a sharia style cloak over them??

I agree with the perhaps very strictly applied rules about filming. But it would just take one parent objecting to their child being recorded to mean no one can be recorded. Plus I'm not sure employers would be happy with their staff watching a live stream of their child at creche all day.

If parents want 100% guaranteed control over their child's wellbeing, then don't put them into creche, stay at home with them. Live video isn't practical or the answer, the answer is more public information available for when selecting a creche and parents researching and carefully selecting a creche rather than (in some cases I know) picking the one that's most convinient for them.

 

[liaconn]

It's hard to find balance with such a subject, and I'm not defending the company's involved (as I said three years ago I refused to send my child to those companies). However, I disgaree as I felt it played on the emotive subject in a very tabloid manner rather than a proper journalistic manner.

Even just the text information it provided next to little cute baby faces, reconstructions of parents leaving happy children into the creche before another example of abuse shatters the happy, touching moment, or children wandering lonely down the road (all that was missing was the end theme to the Incredible Hulk). It was awful, awful tabloid journalism, which if it were a satire like The Day Today would have been a slick well put together take down of TV investigative journalism. Instead it deliberately played (and in my opinion preyed) on parents fears and concerns.

All we saw was the journalist challenging or questioning the staff involved. Did any other staff? We don't know, we assume they were happy or accepted this because it was never mentioned. We have no idea of timescale, was this over one day, a couple of days or systematic and daily?

That kind of context makes a difference. But, it got viewers and it's got people talking a thousands of parents across the land distressed, so it achieved its goal (and ad revenue) I guess.

The problem for me is much of the issues of most concern probably wouldn't have been nor will be picked up in any inspection or audit, so I can't really blame the HSE as all inspections present a snapshot and behaviour will be massively different when an inpsector is around.

However, maybe one positive to come from this is that parents will be much more picky and selective about where they send their kids and really research places. There weren't that many surprises in the programme for me as there have been many concerned stories and opinions given on internet forums for years about those companies. Why parents still chose to send their children there is completely beyond me. I may chose to ignore some bad reviews on Trip Advisor when picking a hotel, but not for a creche I'm going to spend the best part of €1000 per month to have my child spend all day in.

What I'd like is something similar to the good public information we have on restaurants from the FSA. Let's have something similar available for creches too.

I'd agree with you if what we subsequently saw was a few minor infringements that had been blown up out of all proportion - as per typical tabloid journalism.
But that wasn't the case here. Very few of those incidents could be explained away as 'she was just in bad form that day. Normally she's lovely', or 'The manager was just out of the room for a minute but usually untrained staff are highly supervised'. It was obvious that some of those childcare workers had no training, skills or aptitude whatsoever for the important job they were doing and that they were working unsupervised and unmonitored for a lot of the time. I honestly don't think any of the reconstructions could, in any way, make what we saw last night any worse.

I really think that calling it 'tabloid journalism' is unfair. Hopefully this programme, like the Leas Cross one, will propel the Government into long overdue action due to pressure from an outraged public. That is what public service broadcasting is all about.

 

[Latrade]

I'd agree with you if what we subsequently saw was a few minor infringements that had been blown up out of all proportion - as per typical tabloid journalism.
But that wasn't the case here. Very few of those incidents could be explained away as 'she was just in bad form that day. Normally she's lovely', or 'The manager was just out of the room for a minute but usually untrained staff are highly supervised'. It was obvious that some of those childcare workers had no training, skills or aptitude whatsoever for the important job they were doing and that they were working unsupervised and unmonitored for a lot of the time. I honestly don't think any of the reconstructions could, in any way, make what we saw last night any worse.

I really think that calling it 'tabloid journalism' is unfair. Hopefully this programme, like the Leas Cross one, will propel the Government into long overdue action due to pressure from an outraged public. That is what public service broadcasting is all about.

The footage was indeed upsetting, so much so that it didn't need the other stuff they added (like the happy reconstructions or all the happy cute babies for their presentation of images). So the only reason they were added was to completely play on emotions.

Again, the behaviour and actions were dispicable, but how it was edited was to add to the emotion. when trying to get a child to sleep, the total footage was about thirty seconds, however, this was edited to give the impression it went on much longer. What we don't know (as it's subject to criminal investigation) is the whether that was a one off incident (yes one is enough) of about thirty seconds recorded over a day, week, month?

None of this is to excuse the creche, its management or its employees, but I really objected to this was presented and in my opinion how the programme deliberately set itself up in a very tabloid in an emotionally exploitative way. It would have been as impactful, as upsetting without the editing and additions. In my opinion, the fluff was only added for crass emotionally explotative reasons. It really did bring to mind a Chris Morris satire.

And I hope it does bring about change, I hope it has lifted a certain parental apathy I've seen about creche selection. I know parents who have had concerns over their creche (staffing numbers, staff turnover etc) and still send their child there.

 

[liaconn]

I take your point, but I think calling it 'tabloid journalism' is a step too far.

Anyway, we digress. The issue here is about creches being run first and foremost as profit making ventures by business men and women who have absolutely no interest whatsoever in childcare, children's welfare, education or any of the other areas which should be central to this type of work. Instead they just want to make as much money as possible and, as a result, are breaching regulations re staff:children ratios and in some cases hiring young, untrained and often poorly educated or not very bright staff who are not in a position to demand decent salaries and who are ill equipped to take on this challenging work.
Obviously, there are also many highly skilled, properly trained staff working in creches who love children and are brilliant at looking after them and developing them emotionally and educationally. It is unfair on them to have their work demeaned by some of the things we saw last night.

 

[DB74]

I don't really see how "the programme deliberately set itself up in a very tabloid in an emotionally exploitative way"

Seeing young children being slammed into a mat on a floor is an upsetting viewing experience, as is seeing them being strapped into chair unnecessarily for over 2 hours, as is seeing them being force-fed, as is seeing them punished by being strapped into a chair or made to stand behind a closed door at 18 mths of age.

What would you prefer them to have shown - Nothing?

How they chose to edit the other aspects of the programme doesn't take away from the footage that was shot in the creches in question.

 

[Ceist Beag]

I don't really see how "the programme deliberately set itself up in a very tabloid in an emotionally exploitative way"

Seeing young children being slammed into a mat on a floor is an upsetting viewing experience, as is seeing them being strapped into chair unnecessarily for over 2 hours, as is seeing them being force-fed, as is seeing them punished by being strapped into a chair or made to stand behind a closed door at 18 mths of age.

What would you prefer them to have shown - Nothing?

How they chose to edit the other aspects of the programme don't take away from the footage that was shot in the creche's in question.

Agreed DB74. For me the show highlighted a number of issues with the current system.

1. The HSE reports seem to be ignored in that any creche found in breach of regulations faces no consequences, so much so that they even continue to receive funding
2. Staff are not adequately trained for the job
3. Employers face difficulties when staff leave as it can take at least 8 weeks to have new staff members Garda vetted
4. It is quite easy for employers to take on untrained and/or unvetted staff
5. The current structure is flawed in that creches are run as businesses rather than services meaning employers can put profit before anything else

As Purple pointed out, the state must accept a lot of responsibility here in allowing unscrupulous employers operate in this manner. There should be consequences for those in breach of regulations and the state should also help employers to ensure staff are adequately trained for the job. It has been said many times before but the Scandinavian childcare model is one we should be trying to learn from where the state is much more involved.

 

[Latrade]

I don't really see how "the programme deliberately set itself up in a very tabloid in an emotionally exploitative way"

Seeing young children being slammed into a mat on a floor is an upsetting viewing experience, as is seeing them being strapped into chair unnecessarily for over 2 hours, as is seeing them being force-fed, as is seeing them punished by being strapped into a chair or made to stand behind a closed door at 18 mths of age.

What would you prefer them to have shown - Nothing?

How they chose to edit the other aspects of the programme don't take away from the footage that was shot in the creche's in question.

Nope, my comments on the presentation of the programme has nothing to do with the issues it raised. I disliked the programme not because of the hidden footage, but how it chose to edit the footgae without context (that is tabloid journalism and not investigative journalism) and how it chose stock footage and reconstructions of deliberately tacky and cheesy images/footage in order to play even further on the emotions of the audience. It was, in my opinion, very poor and cynical television which given the footage they had and the topic at hand did not warrant that level of fluff.

It angered me because the evidence that had was awful and was distressing, but it should have been presented in context (such as a timings, occurrences, etc) and should have just been presented in a factual way. Unfortunately as an audience we aren't permitted to just view footage and make our own minds up without editors trying to further manipulate the emotional response. It was as if they had employed the editors of the X-Factor.

However, as I thought I'd made clear, my issues with the quality of the programming does not detract from my shared anger at what was found. I just prefer that when such investigative journalism takes place it is only fair that findings and footage is provided in the context of all the other hours of footage they have.

 

[Latrade]

Agreed DB74. For me the show highlighted a number of issues with the current system.

1. The HSE reports seem to be ignored in that any creche found in breach of regulations faces no consequences, so much so that they even continue to receive funding
2. Staff are not adequately trained for the job
3. Employers face difficulties when staff leave as it can take at least 8 weeks to have new staff members Garda vetted
4. It is quite easy for employers to take on untrained and/or unvetted staff
5. The current structure is flawed in that creches are run as businesses rather than services meaning employers can put profit before anything else

As Purple pointed out, the state must accept a lot of responsibility here in allowing unscrupulous employers operate in this manner. There should be consequences for those in breach of regulations and the state should also help employers to ensure staff are adequately trained for the job. It has been said many times before but the Scandinavian childcare model is one we should be trying to learn from where the state is much more involved.

The problem with the "breach of regulations" is what was, can be or will be observed during an inspection. From the brief information provided in the programme, the issues that had been identified during inspections did not relate to the issues shown in the footage. Not to say the breaches were minor, but they weren't related to the actions and mistreatment by the staff, if I remember correctly, they were concerns about arrangements more than staff behaviour. Would those ever be identified in an audit or inspection of any kind? In my experience, no. Were those breaches identified in inspections enough to justify the closure of a creche? I don't know as the programme didn't provide that information. As I state earlier in my issues with the programme itself, it listed all the Giraffe premises that had breaches identified under various sections, but without the detail of what they were or how serious they were.


However, I do think that results of inspections should be more readily available for parents who are making decisions. If we are to have a private industry (which actually in the main does work and provides a good and caring service for parents) then we should have full disclosure or a version of it so that parents can choose which creche they send their child to.

We know and can find out if the local chipper has ever had a bad report from a food hygiene view, we know if the local beach has too much litter on it, but we don't know if a creche we pay €1000 to each month may have concerns raised against it.

 

[Sunny]

Nope, my comments on the presentation of the programme has nothing to do with the issues it raised. I disliked the programme not because of the hidden footage, but how it chose to edit the footgae without context (that is tabloid journalism and not investigative journalism) and how it chose stock footage and reconstructions of deliberately tacky and cheesy images/footage in order to play even further on the emotions of the audience. It was, in my opinion, very poor and cynical television which given the footage they had and the topic at hand did not warrant that level of fluff.

It angered me because the evidence that had was awful and was distressing, but it should have been presented in context (such as a timings, occurrences, etc) and should have just been presented in a factual way. Unfortunately as an audience we aren't permitted to just view footage and make our own minds up without editors trying to further manipulate the emotional response. It was as if they had employed the editors of the X-Factor.

However, as I thought I'd made clear, my issues with the quality of the programming does not detract from my shared anger at what was found. I just prefer that when such investigative journalism takes place it is only fair that findings and footage is provided in the context of all the other hours of footage they have.

Fine if you think Irish viewers are idiots and can't see through the editing like you. Nobody thinks these events happened every hour of every day and everyone realises that there are probably hours of footage showing happy children and great staff. Doesn't change the fact that these events occurred. Be like me being caught by CCTV stealing in work and then giving out that my employer is not using all the footage of me working and not stealing so people aren't getting the full story.

 

[Latrade]

Fine if you think Irish viewers are idiots and can't see through the editing like you. Nobody thinks these events happened every hour of every day and everyone realises that there are probably hours of footage showing happy children and great staff. Doesn't change the fact that these events occurred. Be like me being caught by CCTV stealing in work and then giving out that my employer is not using all the footage of me working and not stealing so people aren't getting the full story.

Not even remotely what I said or am saying. I just thought the actual putting together of the programme was awful, I thought it took an already distressing topic and deliberately tried to manipulate emotions further through editing and how it was presented. And I thought that crass and tabloid.

And that's it.

Now, moving on.

 

[Sunny]

Well at least our Minister of Justice will be breathing a sigh of relief that there is a new story.

 

[thedaras]

A couple of points I would like to make.
I don't get how any parent leaves a baby in a crèche for up to ten hours a day.
I don't get why anyone is expected to look after five or six toddlers for ten hours a day.
I don't get why they are paid so little.

I don't buy the "more training".
I do buy,the person who is into this type of job and then training.

If you take my sister in law ,who is a teacher of children in fifth class,she starts at 8:30 and finishes at 2:30,she is paid well,has a proper break,and has lots of holidays,now compare that to screaming toddlers ,perhaps five or six,for up to ten hours every day,and getting paid a minimum wage and very little holiday time,there is no comparison.

Ok,she has gone to college for three years so deserves more pay,fair enough,but honestly it seems to me,that those who are looking after the most vulnerable of all,are treated the worst,and paid the lowest.

I have heard many union reps speak of the difficult task of nurses for example ,that they have to clean an adults privates for example,and yet the ones who need to do this with several children ,day in day out,seem to be ignored.

Just in case any one should say that I'm bringing the public sector into this ,let me be crystal clear,a cleaning lady in the local supermarket would have a less difficult job,A taxi driver ,Etc,but I'm trying to compare similar jobs and teachers and nurses would be an example.

Does anyone believe that this is a suitable environment for a baby ? I was just as worried if not more worried by how many children were so compliment,isn't that telling us something?

I get why parents who send their kids to crèches ,feel the need to defend them,what else can they do,the other option is admitting its not a great idea,and what parent wants to admit that ,when they need to justify it.

The parents who choose this option,are in the main making a lifestyle choice.reason being this practice was happening during the boom years when both parents didn't have to work.

Perhaps now they have no choice but to work,but if you didn't have to work ,why would you ..

Parents should be able to leave their kids in safe hands,but you always take a chance.

Most parents who look after several toddlers at home will tell you how difficult it is,yet we expect everyone else to get on with them,not to give out to them etc etc.

I would rather that person be me,their mother.

Do I have a solution..maybe..
Mothers or fathers who choose to stay at home be allowed to leave their employment,get an allowance equal to the difference in what they earn and what they would pay a crèche,my guess is that's not a lot in most cases.and it would be capped.
This in effect would mean more jobs would become available,more parents who don't want to leave their children can be with them,and this should happen until school starting age.

Most child are workers seem to me to be early school leavers,in my experience they are also young girls and we all know how hard it is to look after one toddler never mind several screaming ones.

Parents are paying a lot and it should go without saying that their children are treated with care,I wouldn't like to be a parent who has no choice but to leave a baby into a crèche for ten hours a day,but would absolutely hate myself if I left them their because of my need to be in the workforce.

In the meantime while we wait for etopia,I would try limit as much as possible the amount of time they spend there,I would hope that some assessment of suitability of child care workers comes into force and should they pass that , they get the best training,I also would hope that they get properly paid for what has to be a very difficult job.
But mostly I hope children get the chance to be at home ,safe,with a caring ,less worried,less stressed .parent.
Reading over my post,I think I come across as being on the side of those who work in crèches,and I am,for everyone's peace of mind ,things need to change.
I also feel very sad for the poor babies and toddlers who have no choice in any of this.
I feel sad for the poor parents who have no choice in the matter.
I feel disgusted by the treatment of the little kids,and I believe any parent who leaves their child into someone's care should be comfortable and secure in the knowledge that their child will be cared for.
No amount of training will give anyone a heart.

 

[DaveD]

A couple of points I would like to make.
I don't get how any parent leaves a baby in a crèche for up to ten hours a day.
I don't get why anyone is expected to look after five or six toddlers for ten hours a day.
I don't get why they are paid so little.

I don't buy the "more training".
I do buy,the person who is into this type of job and then training.

If you take my sister in law ,who is a teacher of children in fifth class,she starts at 8:30 and finishes at 2:30,she is paid well,has a proper break,and has lots of holidays,now compare that to screaming toddlers ,perhaps five or six,for up to ten hours every day,and getting paid a minimum wage and very little holiday time,there is no comparison.

Ok,she has gone to college for three years so deserves more pay,fair enough,but honestly it seems to me,that those who are looking after the most vulnerable of all,are treated the worst,and paid the lowest.

I have heard many union reps speak of the difficult task of nurses for example ,that they have to clean an adults privates for example,and yet the ones who need to do this with several children ,day in day out,seem to be ignored.

Just in case any one should say that I'm bringing the public sector into this ,let me be crystal clear,a cleaning lady in the local supermarket would have a less difficult job,A taxi driver ,Etc,but I'm trying to compare similar jobs and teachers and nurses would be an example.

Does anyone believe that this is a suitable environment for a baby ? I was just as worried if not more worried by how many children were so compliment,isn't that telling us something?

I get why parents who send their kids to crèches ,feel the need to defend them,what else can they do,the other option is admitting its not a great idea,and what parent wants to admit that ,when they need to justify it.

The parents who choose this option,are in the main making a lifestyle choice.reason being this practice was happening during the boom years when both parents didn't have to work.

Perhaps now they have no choice but to work,but if you didn't have to work ,why would you ..

Parents should be able to leave their kids in safe hands,but you always take a chance.

Most parents who look after several toddlers at home will tell you how difficult it is,yet we expect everyone else to get on with them,not to give out to them etc etc.

I would rather that person be me,their mother.

Do I have a solution..maybe..
Mothers or fathers who choose to stay at home be allowed to leave their employment,get an allowance equal to the difference in what they earn and what they would pay a crèche,my guess is that's not a lot in most cases.and it would be capped.
This in effect would mean more jobs would become available,more parents who don't want to leave their children can be with them,and this should happen until school starting age.

Most child are workers seem to me to be early school leavers,in my experience they are also young girls and we all know how hard it is to look after one toddler never mind several screaming ones.

Parents are paying a lot and it should go without saying that their children are treated with care,I wouldn't like to be a parent who has no choice but to leave a baby into a crèche for ten hours a day,but would absolutely hate myself if I left them their because of my need to be in the workforce.

In the meantime while we wait for etopia,I would try limit as much as possible the amount of time they spend there,I would hope that some assessment of suitability of child care workers comes into force and should they pass that , they get the best training,I also would hope that they get properly paid for what has to be a very difficult job.
But mostly I hope children get the chance to be at home ,safe,with a caring ,less worried,less stressed .parent.
Reading over my post,I think I come across as being on the side of those who work in crèches,and I am,for everyone's peace of mind ,things need to change.
I also feel very sad for the poor babies and toddlers who have no choice in any of this.
I feel sad for the poor parents who have no choice in the matter.
I feel disgusted by the treatment of the little kids,and I believe any parent who leaves their child into someone's care should be comfortable and secure in the knowledge that their child will be cared for.
No amount of training will give anyone a heart.

Very well said.

 

[Delboy]

I don't get how any parent leaves a baby in a crèche for up to ten hours a day.

The parents who choose this option,are in the main making a lifestyle choice.reason being this practice was happening during the boom years when both parents didn't have to work.

I doubt it's a lifestyle choice for the majority of families...it's out of necessity due to large mortgages, debts etc

Mothers or fathers who choose to stay at home be allowed to leave their employment,get an allowance equal to the difference in what they earn and what they would pay a crèche,my guess is that's not a lot in most cases.and it would be capped.
This in effect would mean more jobs would become available,more parents who don't want to leave their children can be with them,and this should happen until school starting age.

that last line smacks of the ban on women working in the CS/PS when they got married which only was done away with in 1973 upon joining the EU.
Most people 'choosing' to stay at home would inevitably be the Mother....so what you have outlined here will land you in a lot of bother from the feminist lobbies

I agree that it's mad to have a kid 10 hours a day in a creche. We try and keep our kids to a short week but that's not possible every week. And the days they are in are long days.
But not every employer is flexible,not everyone has family nearby that can help, not everyone can afford to take a hit on their pay to have shorter hours for their kids.
Thats the harsh reality of where we are today as a country

 

[Purple]

A couple of points I would like to make.
I don't get how any parent leaves a baby in a crèche for up to ten hours a day.
I don't get why anyone is expected to look after five or six toddlers for ten hours a day.
I don't get why they are paid so little.

The market dictates the rates. If the required level of training was higher then there would be more competition for the qualified labour so pay rates would increase. This would of course increase the cost of childcare.

I don't buy the "more training".
I do buy,the person who is into this type of job and then training.

I agree.

If you take my sister in law ,who is a teacher of children in fifth class,she starts at 8:30 and finishes at 2:30,she is paid well,has a proper break,and has lots of holidays,now compare that to screaming toddlers ,perhaps five or six,for up to ten hours every day,and getting paid a minimum wage and very little holiday time,there is no comparison.

Your sister in law is in charge of between 20 and 30 kids on her own and has to teach them. A childcare employee in a crèche is in charge of 4-6 kids and will not be on duty 10 hours a day, or if they are they are breaking the law.

Ok,she has gone to college for three years so deserves more pay,fair enough,but honestly it seems to me,that those who are looking after the most vulnerable of all,are treated the worst,and paid the lowest.

Nobody deserves to get paid more simply because of their qualifications. They get paid more if their qualifications make their labour more valuable.

I have heard many union reps speak of the difficult task of nurses for example ,that they have to clean an adults privates for example,and yet the ones who need to do this with several children ,day in day out,seem to be ignored.

They’d hardly say otherwise now, would they?

I get why parents who send their kids to crèches ,feel the need to defend them,what else can they do,the other option is admitting its not a great idea,and what parent wants to admit that ,when they need to justify it.

The parents who choose this option,are in the main making a lifestyle choice.reason being this practice was happening during the boom years when both parents didn't have to work.

Perhaps now they have no choice but to work,but if you didn't have to work ,why would you ..

Too many sweeting statements there. People leave their children with minders and in crèches for all sorts of reasons.

Do I have a solution..maybe..
Mothers or fathers who choose to stay at home be allowed to leave their employment,get an allowance equal to the difference in what they earn and what they would pay a crèche,my guess is that's not a lot in most cases.and it would be capped.
This in effect would mean more jobs would become available,more parents who don't want to leave their children can be with them,and this should happen until school starting age.

Most child are workers seem to me to be early school leavers,in my experience they are also young girls and we all know how hard it is to look after one toddler never mind several screaming ones.

Parents are paying a lot and it should go without saying that their children are treated with care,I wouldn't like to be a parent who has no choice but to leave a baby into a crèche for ten hours a day,but would absolutely hate myself if I left them their because of my need to be in the workforce.

So if I earn €150’000 a year and spend €12’000 a year on childcare I should be able to give up work and get paid the net difference to stay at home and mind my 4 children? The state already forks out hundreds of millions in children’s allowance, why should my fellow citizens have to pay for my choice to have 4 children?

In the meantime while we wait for etopia,I would try limit as much as possible the amount of time they spend there,I would hope that some assessment of suitability of child care workers comes into force and should they pass that , they get the best training,I also would hope that they get properly paid for what has to be a very difficult job.
But mostly I hope children get the chance to be at home ,safe,with a caring ,less worried,less stressed .parent.
Reading over my post,I think I come across as being on the side of those who work in crèches,and I am,for everyone's peace of mind ,things need to change.
I also feel very sad for the poor babies and toddlers who have no choice in any of this.
I feel sad for the poor parents who have no choice in the matter.
I feel disgusted by the treatment of the little kids,and I believe any parent who leaves their child into someone's care should be comfortable and secure in the knowledge that their child will be cared for.
No amount of training will give anyone a heart.

What about the thousands of parent s who would do a brutal job of looking after their own children, who have no idea how to help a child developmentally, who are stressed and abusive to their children when they see them and who have little interest in helping their children socialise and learn to play? Playing in important, until a child is 4 or 5 they will learn more through playing then they could ever learn through formal education. This isn’t a good V bad argument.

Let’s not pretend that the best crèches are as good for kids as them being minded by their mother or father because in many cases a mediocre crèche is better than the parental option. I’d suggest there are proportionately far more small children being physically and emotionally abused by their parents than by staff in crèches.

 

[liaconn]

Going off point a bit but 'Little Harvard'???????? I think that name alone would put me off the creche. Talk about trying to sell an image.

 

[Marion]

@ Fobs:

THey learned some nursery rhymes and ther numbers but mostly played in the attache playground rather than learned.

Play is excellent. It is underestimated.


The most horrific part of that programme for me was to see the children being flipped over in their cots and being strapped into chairs and being force fed.



@Purple

What about the thousands of parents who would do a brutal job of looking after their own children, who have no idea how to help a child developmentally, who are stressed and abusive to their children when they see them and who have little interest in helping their children

These childcare facilities are in the private sector and are in the business of making a profit with thousands of children in their care.

One cannot compare this with dysfunctional parenting.

@thedaras

Most child are workers seem to me to be early school leavers,in my experience they are also young girls and we all know how hard it is to look after one toddler never mind several screaming ones.

Most childcare students taking Level 5 and Level 6 where I work are not early-school leavers. They will, in the main, have Leaving certificate completed. There will be some who will be adult learners (over 23) - some without Leaving Certificate but they are generally in the minority. There will always be exceptions. I have taught Level 8 grads who undertake our QQI course to enable them to set up in practice as a reputable practitioner. Of course, attainment of a certificate does not mean suitability for the job.

I have never seen a male student in a Childcare class at level 5 or Level 6. They tend to opt for Healthcare, Social Studies, Nursing, or Advanced Community Care in the caring-studies programmes.


Marion