Originally Posted by
bunyip
I think it's an excellent article in terms of it's central point, but a lousy piece of journalism. Heck, some parts of the article are just plain badly-written. (Like that sentence.) But I don't think that means there's anything to cheer about in these latest regime proposals.
I use a triple buggy, but I wouldn't want to get a 4th in there too, or have too many others to watch. Even if I could, I don't think many responsible parents would want me to try. I've asked at a 2 major baby and child shops about how many child seats they would consider safe to fit in a car. Answer: 2. Legally, they could fit more, but don't recommend it. My friend's dh is a fireman and he is petrified at the sight of vehicles with more than 2 child seats, cos he knows the brigade could not expect to rescue more than 2 from a car fire.
No, I don't get the nappy argument either. :confused:
I have howver provided care for a child who can take up to 3 hours to eat lunch. I've done it as ad hoc/emergency and feel priviledged to have been trusted with him. His usual CM has this every single day of her working life. She won't be looking to fill her coffers by boosting her numbers. She won't even charge the mum extra like all th other local CMs who tried it on when mum was desperate for someone to care for her lovely but, yes, rather demanding little chap.
Maybe "More Great Childcare" should've concentrated a bit more on the "great care" and a bit less on the "more child(ren)"
:(