Minder struck off

[PRINCESSDAISYFLOWER]

Hi Guys

One of the cm's that come to my cm group has just been struck off by ofsted, Abit of a long story but here goes

one of the mindees (x) was 5 yrs old when he started the parents sign all the permission forms including large garden play equipment.
so a good while later x was playing on a trampoline when he landed awkardly and unfortunatly broke his leg, it was a complete accident.

Parents went mad, and started a law suit against the cm. Even though they had signed the permission forms the manufactors guildlines on the trampoline was for over 6 yrs old so judge said the permission slip was void. And Ofsted struck her off. Its such a shame as she was an excellent cm all the kids love her and i just think its really sad

xxx

[Rubybubbles]

thats so sad


BUT if it say 6 then where did she stand


I am so glad I keep my foot down about letting hubby get the kids one:panic:

[Pipsqueak]

oh my.... :eek:

[littlepixies]

oh gosh how tragic"!!:panic: so something to put in your permssion form... i allow my child to join in on large trampoline even though stadards are for 6yrs and over..
cover our back then

[RachelE]

Thats awful.

I dont let my under 5's on, but must change it to under 6's now!

[PRINCESSDAISYFLOWER]

I think manufacturer guideline vary depending on the trampoline you have so i would check what yours says
x

[Hebs]

such a shame for the CM, but age guidelines are there for a reason.

bit harsh to make her reg void though :(

[sarah707]

It must have been a very upsetting time for her.

Please pass on my best wishes xx

[Alibali]

Goodness, you'd think a warning would have been sufficient. My permission forms states the ages that are recommended by manufacturers.

Poor woman, sending my best wishes for her.

[Nicki L]

Poor woman!! how horrible:eek:

I understand that she allowed the child on against manufacturers guidelines but surely it didnt warrant bein struck off?????

Can she not appeal this??

[Chatterbox Childcare]

I have an 8ft one and the guidelines just say 1 at a time

[balloon]

That seems very severe, poor minder, poor kiddie too.

That rather opens up a minefield though doesn't it? What if we are using a buggy for a child that slightly exceeds the weight limit and falls out, or a high chair and leave the room for 2 seconds (to for example see another child who has just fallen) does that mean we're all open to being struck off? :eek:

My slides are aged 2 and up and 3 and up, I'd best stop the toddlers going on them...

[Carol]

Can't believe she has been struck off. Parents did sign consent form after all

such a shame for mindee, warning and trampoline ban would of been better.

Sending hugs to her

Carol

[helenlc]

I say Over 5s on my big trampoline but will have to check now what the guidelines say.

What about if our permission stated something along the lines of "The manufacturers of the trampoline say 6 and over but I believe children aged over 5 are able to use it and so therefore will be allowed on it one at a time".

If parents sign this, would this cover us?

I do think its rather harsh to strike her off. As someone else said, a warning about adhering to guidelines would have been sufficient.

[georgie456]

Fair enough, she didn't follow the manufacturers guidelines, but I find it really sad that the parents felt they had to sue her, despite giving written permission for their child to use the trampoline. I know that is the norm these days, but that is someone's career finished...

[Hebs]

i would also try and appeal it,

it is obvious that this child had been on the trampoline before, and i'm assuming the parents were perfectly happy

blame culture unfortunatly :(

[sweets]

poor woman! what a shame, she should def appeal.
I don't have a trampoline as garden not big enough but i too would've let a 5 year old on one that said 6 and over! what horrible parents for sueing her, when they knew perfectly well and had agreed to the LO going on it. He could just as easily broken his leg falling down a kerb or off a chair!

[Mouse]

That's such a shame for the minder, but I suppose we don't know the whole story. It does seem a bit extreme, so perhaps there's more to it? Hopefully she's getting good legal advice on an appeal.

It is going to make me think a bit more carefully about recommended ages. I have so many toys that are supposed to be for over 3s. but I'll let under 3s play with them if I think it's suitable. Perhaps I shouldn't?

[sweets]

That's such a shame for the minder, but I suppose we don't know the whole story. It does seem a bit extreme, so perhaps there's more to it? Hopefully she's getting good legal advice on an appeal.

It is going to make me think a bit more carefully about recommended ages. I have so many toys that are supposed to be for over 3s. but I'll let under 3s play with them if I think it's suitable. Perhaps I shouldn't?

if under 3's only played with toys for under 3's they would be very bored! everything decent is for over 3's and as long as they are supervised i wouldn't worry!

[FizzysFriends]

That's such a shame for the minder, but I suppose we don't know the whole story. It does seem a bit extreme, so perhaps there's more to it? Hopefully she's getting good legal advice on an appeal.

It is going to make me think a bit more carefully about recommended ages. I have so many toys that are supposed to be for over 3s. but I'll let under 3s play with them if I think it's suitable. Perhaps I shouldn't?

I agree, I think that may be there is more to it that meets the eye.

I would be totally gutted though if a parent sued me if their child had an accident.

[PRINCESSDAISYFLOWER]

Ofsted said apparently because the parents won the court case (they sued her ) that they had no other option but to take away her registration

We have all said she should fight it but she is devistated and just broken, she said she cant handle the stress.

3 hours after it happened 3 police officers turned up on her doorstep and really grilled her about it. Obviously i dont know what goes on behind closed door but she is known very well in the local community she has minded children from so many different families and i can honestly say i have never heard a bad word against her.

[Mouse]

if under 3's only played with toys for under 3's they would be very bored! everything decent is for over 3's and as long as they are supervised i wouldn't worry!


Well, that's what I thought! I wouldn't give them anything that was obviously unsuitable, so I'll continue to use my common sense!
Fortunately all the injuries to my mindees tend to happen when they are with their parents, not me!

[wendywu]

What a twisted world we live in today.

We read on here of minders just being warned about doing quite dangerous things.

This poor woman is struck off because of an accident. So that means all the children who have been in her care have got to be taken away split up from their friends and placed with someone they dont know. Very sad.:(

[Deb]

You can legislate against discretion - this is really harsh and has made me quite cross. I am angry at the parents too - money grabbing :censored: 's.

[The Juggler]

that is so out of order. if parents were so against going against manufacturers recommended age, why did they sign permission form. Presumably they had seen the trampoline!

[ORKSIE]

I have parental permission for my trampoline, the kids love it, and its good for them. So maybe I shouldnt let em on it even with permission! Will check his out:)

[Clever Clogs]

What a horrible situation. It's things like that that worries me cause accidents do happen. I am going to redo my trampoline policy I think to state the manufacturers guidelines now and up to the parents if they want their child to use it. Sometimes I wish I didn't have a trampoline cos as soon as one is on it the others want on too and causes arguments - particularly with my own children and her friends. Hope she gets through this and hopefully can get it appealed and the wee one ok.
Tracey

[helenlc]

Sometimes I wish I didn't have a trampoline cos as soon as one is on it the others want on too and causes arguments - particularly with my own children and her friends.

I have a 10' by 7' rectangular trampoline that I let over 5s go on. Otherwise I have one of those little ones with the handle for younger ones. Ofsted loved this option.

But realistically if a child had to go on the little one til their 6th birthday they would be landing on the floor every time they jumped!!

I understand that there are manufacturers guidelines and yes perhaps the childminder should have adhered to these (But how many of us do ie with toys for under 3 as had been discussed) BUT the parents signed and gave THEIR PERMISSION for the child to use the trampoline. I cant believe that they would sue when they had given permission.

So where does that leave us with our other permissions? If parents can go to court and win a case even though they had given PERMISSION for their child to do something whilst in the care of a childminder?

[Pipsqueak]

.

So where does that leave us with our other permissions? If parents can go to court and win a case even though they had given PERMISSION for their child to do something whilst in the care of a childminder?


Excellent point

[RedDragon]

Shame the Childminder in question isn't a member of this forum -we could all offer her support and see what could be done.

[uf353432]

I think this is awful - especially if this is the full facts - and quite worrying really.

At sign up I specifically talk to my parents about the tramp and have it writted on my tramp policy and permission form:

Please note: my liability insurance only covers the use of the trampoline if it is used in accordance with the manufacturer’s recommendation. The manufacturer of my trampoline advises no more than one child, over the age of 6 yrs. If your child is under 6 yrs old and you sign the permission form, you accept that your child is not covered on my insurance. The permission form also allows you to give your consent if you are happy for your child to go on the trampoline with other children of a similar age. If you grant permission for this, once again you accept that your child is not covered on my insurance.



All my parents have signed for their child to go on the trampoline regardless of age - and I wouldn't expect them to sue me if a child hurt themselves. I can watch them, I can discourage them being too rowdy on it - but I can't make them land the right way every time.

[flora]

what a sad world we live in.

i can undertand the paretns being upset about the leg and wanting someone to "pay" fro it but to literally sue :angry: i personally think that's dispicable.

as sadi there may be more than meets the eye but for good ness sake.

i have a tramp and i let all mine on it, i can't remember if there is an age range on it but it does say one at a time, if all ine are being sensible then i let them on together.

if they get too rough and boisterous then i limit them, surely it's just commmon sense. :panic:

send the cm our love and support, i hope she gets over this in time :thumbsup:

[chewy sweets]

That seems really harsh!! :( Especially if she's a good CM and never had any complaints against her in the past. That's really awful!:panic:

[Daftbat]

This sounds really harsh to me. I understand that insurance companies may not want to pay out for a public liability case if something isn't used to the manufacturers guidelines but to strike a minder off they would surely have had to assume that the health and safety of the children was not being met at all!

The fact that she took permissions from parents shows intent of care and i would have thought a strong warning would have been sufficient.

[Tired]

This is scary really, makes you re-evaluate everything you do with the children.

However, uf353432 I would be very very careful. Just because the parents are understand that you are not covered by insurance does not protect you.

The insurance protects you, not them. They can still sue, and you would have to pay out of your own pocket.

I would advise you to change your policy, as it just admits that you are aware you have no insurance and are willing to take any financial penalty all by yourself, even if this might include loosing your home.

[brightstar]

It would teach the parent a lesson if other Childminders refused to take her kids on. Accidents happen.

[sunnysmile]

what a terrible shame but it just highlights again what a vulnerable position we are in doing this job.
I had a false complaint made against me a couple of months ago. Thankfully I could prove it was untrue as I could not physically manage what the complainant said I had. I said to the inspector though that we are in a horribly vulnerable position when it comes to proof and he said its the same in all jobs. I dont believe it is the same in all jobs if you get a vindictive person use your service you could be in huge trouble.
If this makes the news will we be the next target for someone looking make easy cash by sueing?

[mum26]

As has been said, this seems such a shame and a waste of a good childminder. Accidents happen and I am always worried that something will happen to a child whilst in my care. My own daughter suffered a bad
fracture at school in January, but my first thought was not who I could sue!!! If someone was negligent that would be a different matter but accidents, especially where children are around, do happen. We will all be wrapping children up completely in cotton wool soon to protect ourselves as much as them!

My heart goes out to the childminder and I hope she can find the strength to fight back. I know the manufacturer's guidelines were for over 6, but surely the parents' permission should count for something-how awful must they be to sign a permission form and then sue the childminder for something they had agreed to. I can quite understand that she doesn't want to do anymore - I am sure I would feel the same and give up childminding completely, but it is just so unfair.

Please send her my best wishes.

[mayberry]

That’s awful. she must be so upset, seems to be very severe
my thoughts go out to her

Dawn xxx

[mumof4]

How sad, I feel so sorry for the minder concerned. As said before, we are in such a vunerable position, scarey:(

[mabel]

my teenagers bought their own trampoline about 3 years ago,
I had a no mindees on the trampoline policy then, they are very dangerous
for little ones, my friend was a trampolinist, brilliant at it but an accident
at 18 years led to her being paralysed.
Mine often ask but it's always a no no !

Sad that a cm got her business closed through this though

[mummyroysof3]

i personally dont like trampalines, my sil bought her son one who is 4(same age as my son) and me and hubby agreed that he is not allowed on it unless me or hubby are supervising as its not fair to give someone else the responsability if he has an accident on it, though if parents gave permission then the minder really shouldnt have been stuck off if she was properly supervising

the enclosers on them seem to cause just as many accidents too from what ive heard, will not be getting one till the kids are alot older, if at all and will proberly not let mindees on it

charlotte x

[Chimps Childminding]

This is so sad, and it does make you wonder if permission sheets are worth the paper they are written on if the parents had signed and yet were still able to sue and she had her registration revoked :panic: !!!!!! Accidents happen to everyone, but unfortunately sueing (sp?) is now a sign of the times! :angry: Hope she is OK!

[zillervalley]

thats terrible,

ziller

[nannymcflea]

The word "guidelines" are just that, they are not rules set in stone. If the trampoline had said NOT TO BE USED BY UNDER 6'S then thats different but even so the parents had given permission. Does that mean that parental permission forms are actually completely null and void?

I may just have a chat with OFSTED on Monday as I have the day off and go through my permission forms to find out what would happen in specific cases.

[Pipsqueak]

Trampolines are no more dangerous than any other piece of equipment - like anything it carries a risk, its needs to be used properly and even then - like ANY other piece of equipment accidents can happen.
So many people shudder in horror at trampolines but I wonder how many of them let the kids then ride a bike/scooter without a helmet?
Under proper supervision and guidance, trampolines are as safe as anything else.
I had lessons when younger and learnt to respect the trampoline (odd saying I know), we had a trampoline in the garden a rectangular one with no safety netting and in all the years me, my sister, cousins, friends, not one came of or done themselves an injury.

[Mollymop]

I am glad I never purchased a trampoline, to be honest. I do actually think they are dangerous, you see how high you can jump? And what happens if you miss your landing or you land on the metal? But accidents happen with anything you use. It is very scarey that something as simple as thins can cause you to lose your career. I often let my 2 year old mindee play with certain 3+ toys and now I am concerned about doing this in future.

I think it is very harsh that they have struck her off without a warning, the world has gone mad!

[angiemog]

Oh dear how sad. It has now made me think about things in more detail... regardless of whether you have a permission form signed, may have a good relationship with parents what does that matter at the 'end of the day' we need to protect ourselves to save something like this happening to one of us again. x

[Minstrel]

How much of our equipement says not to leave a child unattended while using it.

For example highchairs say this, booster seats, pushchairs etc

And yet OFSTED prefer us putting a child in a highchair if we need to go upstairs.

I just dont get it!

Poor lady x

[Gizmo]

Poor lady what a shame.

I have a trampoline in my garden but I dont think I will let the kids on it when I am minding as I know my own girls always want to go on together and wouldnt like any kids to get injured on it.