State to mom: Stop baby-sitting neighbors' kids

[CunningStunts]

Welcome to the Brave New World, where you will soon need a permit to have sex and higher level cognitive processing will soon be outlawed.... it's already non-existent in Washington.

 

[MILF Man]

Welcome to the Brave New World, where you will soon need a permit to have sex and higher level cognitive processing will soon be outlawed.... it's already non-existent in Washington.

That's change you can believe in!

 

[titsrock]

How old is this law? It may have been put into effect as a protection against child labor. We don't need babysitters putting kids to work, do we?

WHat happens if there's an accident and one of the children has to go to the hospital? Do the parents sue this samaritan?

Sometimes laws are meant to protect us from the unthinkable situation...ya know.

If she wants to offer free child care, why don't the parents split the cost of her certification? WHat's wrong with that?

Sometimes good people take advantage "of the system" too..

 

[Will E Worm]

If she wants to offer free child care, why don't the parents split the cost of her certification? WHat's wrong with that?

Because this isn't show me your papers Germany. :hatsoff:

The state needs to stay out of things that are not any of their business.

 

[meesterperfect]

If she wants to offer free child care, why don't the parents split the cost of her certification? WHat's wrong with that?

..

man you just love big GOV running our lives, telling us everything we can and cant do.
certification? pay for it? bullshit tits, c'mon.
whats next having your granma certified to watch the grandkids?

I believe adults are still capable of making decisions without supervision and taxation from the machine.

 

[Boothbabe]

The state needs to stay out of things that are not any of their business.

i never thought it would happen but for once I completely agree with you :o

 

[titsrock]

Because this isn't show me your papers Germany. :hatsoff:

The state needs to stay out of things that are not any of their business.

It's interesting that you use that for your example of gov't intervention. If people follow the rules, life would be less complicated, wouldn't it?

man you just love big GOV running our lives, telling us everything we can and cant do.
certification? pay for it? bullshit tits, c'mon.
whats next having your granma certified to watch the grandkids?

I believe adults are still capable of making decisions without supervision and taxation from the machine.

Grandma is family. Neigbors aren't. Most parents outsource their childcare anyway....

The state of MI is within rights. If this law is overturned...well, good luck with background checks on your neighbors.

This law seems beneficial for the safety of kids and for the assurance of parents.

 

[Will E Worm]

i never thought it would happen but for once I completely agree with you :o

We agreed on not having a boss but an employer.

Probably other things as well.

It's interesting that you use that for your example of gov't intervention. If people follow the rules, life would be less complicated, wouldn't it?

Yes, if they would leave people alone and stay out of personal affairs then it would be so much better. They are public servants and they need to follow the legal Constitutional laws that are already in place.

The state doesn't have a claim to people's children.

That's why people call them, "your children."

Also, it would be much better if they just followed the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and burned the "Patriot" Act live on television.

Because I will never follow it.

 

[D-rock]

I hate to defend Michigan, because usually it doesn't deserve it. In this case however I really think it's more a case of a badly worded law that even most politicians weren't familiar with combined with a lack for foresight and the future consequences it might have when it was created and put through, probably quickly, some time ago, like a lot of laws are. I don't think it was created for the big brother nanny state stuff some people think it might have been, and most people think it's stupid to not be able to watch over the kids of somebody that is your neighbor and your friend, especially in a situation like that.

 

[JacknCoke]

Patience, Will E., patience! Obama's working as hard as he can to correct that!

ahhh hahahahaha

 

[meesterperfect]

It's interesting that you use that for your example of gov't intervention. If people follow the rules, life would be less complicated, wouldn't it?




Grandma is family. Neigbors aren't. Most parents outsource their childcare anyway....

The state of MI is within rights. If this law is overturned...well, good luck with background checks on your neighbors.

This law seems beneficial for the safety of kids and for the assurance of parents.

And this woman is a friend, big difference?

i think youre saying people in the US are just too stupid to make their own decisions, so they need THE GOV to help them make decisions. (while taking their money of course).
this also seems to be the pov of many politicians and czars. , especially in the democratic party.
how egotistical.
I'd like to grab two of them by the neck and smash their heads together (not you tits) real hard, just to hear the sound it makes.
So if a woman doing favors for another family is licensed and certified and pays THE GOV the child will be safer?
C'MOM TITS!
or......maybe this will be another avenue for child abusers to go , "hey, I'm licensed and certified".
GOV interference in personal matters, I dont think that was the plan.

 

[titsrock]

i think youre saying people in the US are just too stupid to make their own decisions, so they need THE GOV to help them make decisions. (while taking their money of course).
this also seems to be the pov of many politicians and czars. , especially in the democratic party.
how egotistical.

I prefer to use this Star Trek phrase to answer you: The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.:hatsoff:

If Dems are egotistical, Repubs are sinister. I'll take egotistical.

Yes, if they would leave people alone and stay out of personal affairs then it would be so much better. They are public servants and they need to follow the legal Constitutional laws that are already in place.

The state doesn't have a claim to people's children.

That's why people call them, "your children."

Also, it would be much better if they just followed the Constitution and Bill of Rights, and burned the "Patriot" Act live on television.

Because I will never follow it.

Everything is a chest-thumping "by gawd I won't do this...by gawd I won't do that" with you. You do realize that the State, in this case, is the State of Michigan, not the Federal Gov't? In some cases, the State of Michigan DOES have rights to CLAIM CHILDREN. Have you ever read about parental abuse and Social Services "rescuing kids from drug/alcohol/violent homes"? Should people do nothing and hope these problems go away?:dunno: MI Dept of Human Services

I suspect the spirit of this child care law was to prevent situations from deteriorating toward abuse.

Even the most ardent Loonatarian believes in the authority of the State of Residence to lay out laws for citizens to obey. Otherwise society descends into Survival of the Fittest Anarchy.

 

[daddysal]

It doesn't surprise me if the parents are the ones complaining. Just look at the news!

Exactly what I was thinking.
How else would this story break?

 

[om3ga]

What kind of fucking shithead wants to fine a woman for helping out her neighbors? This is just another example of the fucked up state of things in the US. We let crack addicts have kids that they will not care for, yet when a woman tries to look out for the kids in her community we throw the book at her? :wtf:

Story

Oddly enough, a similar thing happened over here recently:

Thames Valley Police Detective Constable Leanne Shepherd and DC Lucy Jarrett gave birth within a few months of each other and, because they share a job, they thought it made sense to share childcare as well.

For the past two and a half years, the women, both 32, have been looking after each others' daughters. While one worked a twice-weekly, ten hour shift at Aylesbury Police Station in Buckinghamshire, the other would look after the children.

But they were reported to [UK education watchdog] Ofsted by someone thought to be a neighbour, and an investigation was launched.

DC Shepherd was visited by an Ofsted inspector who accused her of operating an "illegal childminding business".

The women fell foul of new legislation that prevents anyone from gaining a "reward" for looking after someone's children for more than two hours away from the child's home, unless they register with Ofsted and follow the normal childminder rules, including undertaking first aid training and even follow the "nappy curriculum" for under-fives.

Full story:
Friends ordered to stop looking after each other's children

 

[Will E Worm]

Titsrock,

I know it's the State of Michigan.

They have no true claim to anyone's children. I could see children being given to family members until the parents get their act together if they are violent or whatever the situation is, but the state has no right just to take children away and give them to another family.

Giving the state or any governing body too much power always leads to bigger government and more unconstitutional laws.

No one has to follow unconstitutional laws.
More people need to learn this and stop following blindly.

 

[gunslingingbird]

Oddly enough, a similar thing happened over here recently:



Full story:
Friends ordered to stop looking after each other's children

I'm not sure if it's reassuring to know that we're not the only ones that lack common sense, or if I should be concerned because it's a growing trend. :dunno: