The law is an ass.

that is rubbish if it is 4% of victims abused by the family then it is not a so common you are far more likely it will be either a stranger or a family friend

thedelboy wrote:that is rubbish if it is 4% of victims abused by the family then it is not a so common you are far more likely it will be either a stranger or a family friend

thats not what i said

4% of the population have been abused

the vast majority by a relative

most commonly a brother

Joshua wrote:4% of people have been sexually abused by a relative - the most likely is a brother

sexual assaults by strangers are very rare

family is the problem

that is exactly what you have said 4%of people have been sexually abused by a relative

thedelboy wrote:no we have not "OP" the ban is in place ,and also who can afford to pay £500 pm for child minding when they are working part time? this frigging nanny state is using double standards ie single parents to go back to work but you can not leave your child with family or friends! this is a pure example of one department fucking another by being too heavy handed and what the hell good is ofsted?? all I have seen from them is cock up after cock up

Any idea what the Childcare Tax Credit is for?

Is it for Childcare? If someone works part-time in the evening and many hundreds of thousands do they are not banned from leaving their children with friends and family. Therefore they are not banned.

thedelboy wrote:

Joshua wrote:4% of people have been sexually abused by a relative - the most likely is a brother

sexual assaults by strangers are very rare

family is the problem

that is exactly what you have said 4%of people have been sexually abused by a relative

2.6million is about 4% of the current 65mill ish population figure

My daughter has finished a course and is going to go back to work part time ...my 6 year old grandson will be staying with me and his nan and the law can go fuck itself and should it come and fuck me ...I'll make sure it's all over the headlines.

with you on that one Jack, I have my granchildren frequently for a week end , mind I have had a crb check and came up clean; the reason for the crb was I was doing voluntary work with vulnerable people(drug addicts and alcoholics)

this is hard work

about 4% of the popualation have been abused

i think it is 95% of the time by a relative if i remember right

thedelboy wrote:with you on that one Jack, I have my granchildren frequently for a week end , mind I have had a crb check and came up clean; the reason for the crb was I was doing voluntary work with vulnerable people(drug addicts and alcoholics)

As far as the family are concerned the six year old will be safest and happiest with us ...I don't give a fuck what the figures say and I dont believe them anyway.
The state will want to wipe my fucking arse next.

yuck too much info Jack

thedelboy wrote:yuck too much info Jack

That check you del me old china means you aint been cuaght or your not that kind of guy.
That piece of paper can't stop you abusing can it?

the paper means Jack shit mate, its just a scam to get money out of you! It is the government saying stuff you if you dont get one, even when you have one it does not stop someone commiting an offence later it does not show if you have allready commited an offence but have not been caught!! If they wanted to do a proper check the authorities would have to talk to every child you have ever been in contact with

thedelboy wrote:the paper means Jack shit mate, its just a scam to get money out of you! It is the government saying stuff you if you dont get one, even when you have one it does not stop someone commiting an offence later it does not show if you have allready commited an offence but have not been caught!! If they wanted to do a proper check the authorities would have to talk to every child you have ever been in contact with

I can't believe how many people want to hand so much of their lives over to a bunch of idiots in suits ...idiots that most of the time people are slagging off.

I have been suprised as well. I am presuming we are an average cross section of society here, (give or take)......Yet quite a few, even the females here, are in favour of the State telling us whats best for our own kids.

I understand the concerns that children need responsible people to care for them. Of course they do. But the familys who are not providing that, will be lacking in many other ways also.
You cant penalise the whole of society, treating them like morons, because a minority are lacking in sense.

This case which has highlighted this ridiculous law, has prompted the government to think about changing it.... GOOD. At least they listen to the people who pay their wages once in a while.

...and you can't trust the whole of society either, just because a few parents organise safe childcare (though to me good parenting would be to look after their own children') I'll wait and see if the rules are relaxed but it will be a hollow victory imo and a step backwards.
Individual personal cases make bad law.
These rules are in place as an attempt to control the worst of childcare arrangements and perhaps are doing so, does anyone care about that!? I just hope that as a result of the change, if and when, that some kid doesn't appear in the news, to whom harm has come from their parents 'mate' with a hidden conviction! - or an unsuitable caring environment.

S yl, I didn't understand what you meant by 'even the females here'?

Tytonidae wrote:...and you can't trust the whole of society either, just because a few parents organise safe childcare (though to me good parenting would be to look after their own children') I'll wait and see if the rules are relaxed but it will be a hollow victory imo and a step backwards.
Individual personal cases make bad law.
These rules are in place as an attempt to control the worst of childcare arrangements and perhaps are doing so, does anyone care about that!? I just hope that as a result of the change, if and when, that some kid doesn't appear in the news, to whom harm has come from their parents 'mate' with a hidden conviction! - or an unsuitable caring environment.

S yl, I didn't understand what you meant by 'even the females here'?

The perverts will do it anyway, law or no law.

Very quick reply, I will come back to it later, if you like Ty, we can discuss more.

Just scrolled back, there appear to be just 3 females here, giving viewpoints. You, Tuscaany and me. Y ou and T agree with the law on this, as it stands, I definately do not.

I do agree on one point. In an ideal world parents SHOULD look after their own offspring. I did, and would again. I regard it as the most fulfilling 'job' I have ever done. I honestly do believe that the lack of a mother being the hub of the family, home cooked meals, warm house on returning home from school, ect, ect, Is one of the main breakdowns of the family.

I also am very aware though, that that way of life, is fast becoming a rarity in this country nowadays.
I dont blame the mothers either, if food is to be put on the table, and the mortgage is to be paid, in many young households two wages are needed.

To get back to this case. These women did exactly what I, and millions others have done. They have trusted family friends, who they know far better than strangers at a nursery, to look after their children. I know today, of mothers who do the same. A member of my family has done it for years. Some make this arrangment, to nip out for a few hours, some do it, long term, so they can work and not rely on state handouts.

An acquantance of mine has given up the idea of going back to work, because childcare for her 2 children, is an unbelievable £150pw.
she would'nt earn that, going back to her job part time.

Just to get back to when my own son was small. He was diagnosed hyperactive, (before anyone had much idea of how to treat it) I was advised, when he was 3, to enrol him in a nursery, so he could mix with other kid more. After 2 weeks, I unenrolled him. He suffered more cuts and bruises in those 2 weeks, than what he had in 3 years of being looked after at home.

See you later. :wavingsmily:

I bet Harold Shipman would have had a pice of paper saying he was a good guy.
How many nurses and nannies have abused and murdered?
How many old folks homes both private and state are suspect?
How many coppers are thugs and killers?
How many politicians are heavy drinkers ...class A drug users?
How many judges are kiddy fiddlers?
I could go on.
Fuck your pieces of paper.

I'm beging to think this unbelievable handing over of power responsibility freedom and self respect is some new disease ...or maybe it's the chemicals in the water.

Turning it around then. No checks. Any convicted pedophile or criminal abuser, can set up a creche, a daycare centre, a babysitting service, a scout club, an after school soccer team, childrens taxi service and look after their mates kids for as many hours as the 'parent' desires! They've served their time, carry on as usual!
..or to a lesser degree, babysit for prolonged periods in an unfit environment - uncovered pond, dangerous dog, bad electrics, unhygenic...
Isn't this the logical conclusion of these objections?

The age old argument, because we can't do everything, lets do nothing..

Tytonidae wrote:Turning it around then. No checks. Any convicted pedophile or criminal abuser, can set up a creche, a daycare centre, a babysitting service, a scout club, an after school soccer team, childrens taxi service and look after their mates kids for as many hours as the 'parent' desires! They've served their time, carry on as usual!
..or to a lesser degree, babysit for prolonged periods in an unfit environment - uncovered pond, dangerous dog, bad electrics, unhygenic...
Isn't this the logical conclusion of these objections?

The age old argument, because we can't do everything, lets do nothing..

That is ridiculous and extreme in the extreme ...they may all be like that on your street but not mine.
No one has suggested anything so dumb.