Do any of you in home care providers have cameras? Pros and cons of having cameras for parents to view children during care?

I currently do not have cameras never really considered it and I dont feel a need for them, but a parent brought it up and it made me wonder how home providers feel about cameras and how many actually have them.

Reply

There are many threads you can search on this. I would never do it. My dck's deserve privacy and confidentiality. I would never allow this or consider it. This parent has a trust issue and can choose centers who have this available to them just as easily. My number one reason is the kids that aren't theirs are none of their business.

The cost would be extreme as well. Me being kinda smart a*% would probably laugh and say "NOPE!" And that would be the end of any communication from me about the subject.

Reply

As a home provider I would never, ever place cameras in my home. I wouldn't want any risk of them being on after hours or anything funky. It feels really invasive of my home and my own family.

But as a parent, I would absolutely never, ever send my child to a daycare without cameras. It's my personal preference and one of reasons I decided to stay home. I just couldn't stomach the thought of being completely out if touch with my children.

So I understand the parent's desire but as a home provider I'd suggest they go to a center of the cameras are s deal breaker

Reply

Other threads about cameras.
https://www.daycare.com/forum/tags.php?tag=camera

I have cameras in my home. I have 6 inside and 6 outside.

I would NEVER allow a parent to view them. It would be a direct violation of privacy for other children/families.

I have them for liability reasons and to protect myself.

This is a good example of why I would never allow parents to view or have access to video feeds.

Reply

I'm still thinking about that aspect of cameras, and as a male, the risk of trouble could be worse, so maybe I should consider that too. Recordings obviously would have to be time/date stamped, but then I heard of a case where someone used recordings to prove innocence and the judge said recording can be tampered with.

Reply

Parents trust what they can see. The providers that have cameras let their parents know up front that the cameras are in the school. In the world that we live in today most parents want, and rightfully so, desire to see that their children are safe throughout the day. Sure, providers can decide not to accept the change that is coming to child care provider's locations, but in our current world every person and every business cannot be instantly trusted. Cameras in the facility provide something a mere word can't.

Reply

Do these cameras record every day? And if so how do you store the video and how long can you keep the stored video?

Reply

I have a Night Owl system

My cameras have record options so I can set them to continuously record, record only during certain hours/days or record only when motion or activity within the camera view occurs.

The system records directly to a DVR that has storage capabilities but how much or length of time that is savable depends on how many cameras I have recording and resolution/clarity settings etc.

As for storage, the packaging says "User video is never transmitted to our server nor any third party server, EVER. Once setup is complete, your cameras and smartphone operate as peer-to-peer devices.

Night Owl HD App also allows you to easily play back video from multiple cameras in one screen on your smart device. Plus, you have the ability to play back up to 1 year of video footage without ever having to touch the DVR again. Our intuitive app can even store the video or picture directly onto your smart device."

Reply

all camera access has to be given to state inspectors and parents if cameras are in the home during hours of operation whether public or in-home. You can restrict the access of the cameras to parents and state employees before or after your hours of operations. By having cameras as long as parents are informed of their presence it by no means is a violation or breach to any other child's privacy or your own IF they're set up in common areas and not private areas like washrooms, bathrooms, changing areas, and areas that are not used or accessible during business hours. Cameras cannot be used to monitor children while in other areas of the home or center, and ratio must always be kept. If you do not allow parents to view them that is one thing, but you have to inform them of the presence of camera security systems or it can call for a lawsuit due to the breach of their child's privacy. You also absolutely have to give access to state inspectors/ attendees. Or we can revoke your license and/or fine you. Any employees must be aware / contracts must state the presence as well. Just like family contracts. you also have to have signs/ notice of personal/ private or family accessible cameras being in use and present in the home/ center.

happy reading!

Reply

Where did I say I don't notify parents of the presence of cameras?

Where did I say or indicate that I wouldn’t allow law enforcement or licensing to view them?

Please don’t make assumptions as to how I manage cameras in my facility.
I am well versed in the laws that apply to my practices.

Reply

Who is “we”?

Reply

As a parent I would never send my kid to a daycare WITH cameras that other parents can access. I don't want random people gawking at my kids. Too many weirdos out there and I'd have no control over who gets to "monitor" my kid. Nope.

Reply

Old post but my experience with cameras, as a Director:

We used it to monitor what happened in a situation, or sometimes to ensure employees followed protocol. I knew if they lied when they said they washed hands after changing a kid's diaper. An employee who was promoted to lead wobbler teacher before my time simply because of a vacancy really pissed me off with her nastyness. She never washed hands, put food on the floor for the kids to eat, sat on her phone, didnt lesson plan, nada. And when I could not do anything about it...yay corporate...I decided I did not want to fight an uphill battle and it went on my list of reasons to leave center childcare -and I did leave.
3 of 4 centers I worked at with cameras.
1st: private daycare, camera only for admin staff to review as needed, not to watch over staff. It was also used if there was a break in-the vans often did.
Once in a blue moon a parent viewed it but we did not make habit of searching video for a parent. Aint nobody got time for that.

2nd: high end childcare, they had cameras that parents could see if the child was in that class-no other classroom. It allowed outside camera access at their child's designated playground time. I (as ass't director) had the camera as did the director|owners, in our offices. However the director grilled it in we had to monitor staff and call them up immediately for violation. I was not comfortable with that so I barely did.
3rd: big non profit corporation, very well known. Only admin had access and we could not let parents see. I was told to keep it up and use it for observations of kids and staff, but I could choose when to immediately call out or not-severity of situation. We never let parents access due to "confidentiality" but really....it is not. They could be in the room just the same.

I see its benefits so there is proof when there is something big. Or it can make employees more on guard-yet I have had staff who didnt care. But, it does create for mistrust, lack of privacy if something messes up, and it opens things for parents to demand the provider to watch playback to find out when 2 year old Johnny got hit at some point in a 10 hour span and not get why that demand is ridiculous.
If you're alone you don't need cameras for yourself just parents so you have to decide is it a) worth cost b) worth privacy issues inn event of malfunction and c) get all parents on board with it and maintain boundaries on what is viewed or not

Reply

Many of you are aware that we had a situation some years ago, with a father who liked to drop by and spend time. After I became uncomfortable with how often he was here, we found out he was a registered child sex offender and was abusing his own daughter...but also having a "great time" hanging out with her and all her little buddies.

After that, we went to a no parents in the playroom policy. Parents have instant access to THEIR child, but nobody else's.

I can only imagine the "fun" that dad would have had if he could have sat behind his computer desk and watched the kids all day on camera.

I wonder if the parents who think it's awesome to watch their Snowflake on camera have stopped to think that Buster's dad is also having fun watching Snowflake all day?

My kids are all grown....but I would never have left them in a facility that let strangers watch them.

Reply

For a while, I had been planning to use cameras, but only because being male, parents might feel safer. I then thought about the privacy of the children and decided, no cameras. When I start up, I'm just going to let parents know about my open door policy.

Reply

I have had cameras on my 2nd floor in each bedroom for naptime use only since I moved. They all have timers to come on just at that time. I can monitor the children for my reassurance and their safety. Could not manage without them.

Reply

One of many reason that I decided to open a family daycare is because I didnt like being on camera when I was a nanny. The family that I worked for snuck the cameras up after I began working for them. I had nothing to hide, but felt like they must not trust me, which made me feel extremely anxious throughout the day. After working for them for a few months the dad sent me a nasty text asking why one of his children had bruises on her face & neck I was dumbfounded & asked if he was sure it wasnt just blue marker? Needless to say, her "bruises" washed right off & while he apologized, for me the damage had been done.

IMO if I feel like a parent doesnt trust me to take care of their child, then they are not right for my program. So if I were to ever have cameras, it would be to cover my hide-never for a parent to view.

Reply

and

Reply

We have multiple cameras inside and out. Parents are allowed to watch via an app and it is universally loved by all parents. We do not record sound nor can parents listen in. That would be one step too far. It is part of our contract with the families and not one has had a problem.

It is not about whether or not the parents trust you, it is to protect the children and to provide answers to how that bump happened or any other kind of event that a parent should know about. It is nice to be trusted, but not everybody will believe you. So the protection goes both ways. The childcare providers have protection against bogus accusations, which happens all the time. If you read all of the parent comments on Yelp or my home page, you would realize how important accountability is to these people. If you can take your dog to a doggie daycare and watch your dog play, why can't you do that with your child?

We are a few weeks away from launching the company and we are planning on franchising it so that as many kids can be monitored by their families as soon as possible. We will also be paying the daycare providers over $2500.00 per year to be part of our program.

If this business, in home daycare, didn't have such a negative stigma attached, there would no need for monitoring. But is does and frankly, if you read the papers or do the research, you will find appalling crimes committed on a daily basis because nobody is watch the people watching our children.

I own my in home daycare, and I cannot imagine not granting access to the people that are not only giving me their child, but they are also paying all of my bills with the enrollment. I owe the the right to see what goes on here.

Times are changing and this industry is going to as well. I am committed to making that happen, nationwide.

Reply

I have no words.

Reply

Wow. Just wow.
Nothing like a little fear mongering to sell a product.

Reply

Would you do us the favor and actually DO the research?

Start here:

Perpetrator Relationship
Victim data were analyzed by relationship of (duplicate count) victims to their perpetrators. Four-fifths (81.2%) of victims were maltreated by a parent either acting alone or with someone else. Nearly two-fifths (36.8%) of victims were maltreated by their mother acting alone. One-fifth (19.0%) of victims were maltreated by their father acting alone. One-fifth (18.9%) of victims were maltreated by both parents. Thirteen percent (12.8%) of victims were maltreated by a perpetrator who was not a parent of the child. (See exhibit 3–H and related notes.)

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/sites/default...11.pdf#page=80


Read the entire thing if you are TRULY concerned about the children. Pay special attention to the data regarding who actually injures and kills children. You will see study after study that child care providers are a mere blip on the radar.


Exhibit 3–H Victims by Perpetrator Relationship, 2011 (duplicate count)
Perpetrator Relationship
Relationship Number PERCENTAGE


Mother (number) 253,107 PERCENTAGE 36.8

Father (number) 130,670 PERCENTAGE 19.0

Mother and Father(number) 129,793 PERCENTAGE 18.9

Mother and Other (number) 38,927 PERCENTAGE 5.7

Partner of Parent (Male) (number)16,734 PERCENTAGE 2.4

Relative (Male) (number) 19,905 PERCENTAGE 2.8


Child Daycare Provider(number) 2,474 PERCENTAGE 0.4

You will find appalling crimes committed on a daily basis because nobody is watching the parents.

Start with cameras at home... then we will agree with your premise.

Reply

Could you please provide details on the business below? Very progressive. I'm interested.
Thanks D

Reply

Trust is a complex thing. It isn't black and white, it isn't yes or no.

People drop their kids off at daycare or school all the time to be watched by people whom they barely know. Would they trust these same people to look after a suitcase filled with $10 million in cash? Probably not. And yet, those parents care more about their kids than they would care about that $10 million.
Trust is another word for confidence. It can vary by degrees. You take a risk when you rely on someone else to do an important task for you. The confidence you have in someone doing something for you depends on the risk involved. How well do you know that person? How competent are they? How important is this task? How many ways might something go wrong?

By having cameras monitoring what is happening to their children, parents are able to reduce the risk of harm being done to their children. First, people behave differently when they know the are being observed. A provider who was thinking of harming a child might reconsider if the odds of being caught is higher. And if harm does happen, having evidence of it can prevent further harm from being done.

Audio recording of an area can be difficult, particularly with the low quality microphones that are typically pieced together with cameras. When you are present in a room and hear something with your own ears, your brain filters out what sounds are unimportant and focuses on those it believes to be useful. It ignores white noise, it cancels out echos, it adjusts the perceived volume of things you're looking at. Microphones don't do that. They record everything equally, and play it back exactly as it was recorded.
Audio also tends to convey less information than video, so I don't think it's likely to be more intrusive than video. But that also means it's less likely to be useful. Combined with the difficulty of getting a quality recording, it tends to not be of high importance to people looking for surveillance solutions.

It's disingenuous to suggest that the respondent isn't concerned about the children merely because he/she didn't propose a solution to protect every child in every situation.

The data you provided says that many daycare providers actually harm children.

A blip is not nothing. Four tenths of one percent of a huge number is still a big number. And statistics are numbers; they don't tell the experience of the individuals included. Do you imagine the victims and families of those children abused in daycare would be comforted by being told that what happened to them is just "a mere blip on the radar?" Is improving the safety of a child in daycare not worth considering because abuse only happens to a couple thousand of them a year?

Does the respondent have it within his/her power to do something meaningful about child abuse outside of daycare?

How many other companies? What is the correct number of companies that there should be who offer this?

Do you have stats on this, too?

First, no, cameras are not only valuable after an incident. It's true that cameras are not crystal balls, and can only record what has happened. But people tend to behave differently if they think they are being observed. And there truly are a lot of studies showing this. It's referred to as the observer effect or Hawthorne effect. It's the reason why even conspicuously-placed fake cameras can improve security. People tend to behave better when they know someone might catch them doing wrong.

Second, no, cameras don't need someone constantly monitoring them to be useful. Most security cameras are not monitored live. They record the video to media, which is usually viewed only after some other evidence of an incident is discovered. Being able to view that recording allows corrective action to be taken.

A lot of people still need to be told by a trained technician to reboot their computers, modems, routers, etc when they experience problems. Setting up printers, programming DVRs, syncing an mp3 player... these are things that have gotten much easier to do since these devices were introduced to the market, and yet people are still paying for tech support to help them do it. I would be surprised if nobody was willing to pay for assistance setting up an IP camera and connecting it to a streaming service. You affirmed this yourself when you wrote, "Other companies do the same thing." Why would there be any companies at all doing this if everyone could just go buy a camera at a store?

Reply

Thank you, Small Batch for your insightful input. I would like to have a private convo with you to further discuss my new company and why I am doing this. You seem to get it, the motivation behind my plan. If you are interested in a chat, please email me,.

As for the rest of you who made comments, some aggressive, I do appreciate the feedback. I know that I would face the backlash from those who have their own vested interest. I am fine with that, I don't really care how harsh or closed minded you can be prior to hearing all of the details. Once we are ready to present it to the public, you will realize that the children are my priority. It will also provide security to the business owners regardless of whether or not you think its too big brother.

I will be advertising on this site and many others. This is coming and you can choose to participate, or not. That is the beauty of this country. Free choice. I am free to try and correct problems when they affect innocent children that are too young to advocate for themselves. Realize that you have 12 children who belong to other people and just because you work from you home does not give you a bigger right to privacy that a commercial center.

I will be absent for a couple of days due to a serious ankle injury, but I will be back and ready to answer your questions, or just listen to the naysayers.

Have a nice long holiday weekend.

Reply

Actually, yes, it does. This is my home.

And "this is coming"? Uh, ok.

Reply

It seems kind of fishy to me that "unregistered" seems to be promoting their business idea, as well as acting like another person (also unregistered) who approves of it?

As for the last post, I will leave it to the pros (nanny, BC, cat) to respond, as they will clearly obliterate your (lack of) argument. You say you run a daycare, ut somehow I doubt that.

Reply

Um, pretty sure this site isn't available for you to advertise on for free. Especially a product or service that most providers find ridiculous. So unless you've already gotten approval from the owner of this site, I'd tread lightly when stating how you will be using this site.

Of course, you can still open/start any type of business you want. That IS free choice but I will share with you right now that if you continue to "sell" your product/service in the same manner you presented it here, you will find yourself without many customers.

Don't under estimate the members of this forum or their reach into the child care community.

I "converse" daily with 1,000's (NOT an exaggeration) of other providers across the country (in home, center and in other roles in the early childhood field) and when I brought up this subject and the type of service you are trying to sell most were much harsher than any member here was.

You can probably sell the idea to parents but since they aren't the business owners....good luck with that. I wouldn't count on parents being persuasive for you as most of us have years and years of experience teaching parents who actually runs our businesses.

I also mentioned this concept to my licensor and according to her after speaking with DHS relayed to me that your biggest fight will be the state. My licensor said she would never approve the use of open video feeds or cameras for parents. It would create way too much work for them having to follow up on complaints that parents "think" they witnessed as well as dealing with privacy issues.

I wish you luck and am glad to see that you are not feeling detoured due to the responses you are getting here. It takes determination to continue moving forward when your entire marketing group does not agree with you.

Reply

Ummm isn't that what I said. They are useful AFTER an incident is discovered.

I actually was hired to watch two centers video cameras. That was my primary job for the centers. I had a jumbotron monitor and had just color video feed. I KNOW what watching cameras means. Do you know anyone in the country who has the job of watching daycare cameras? I had three decades of child care experience behind me and I had to teach myself to interpret what I was seeing so I could PREVENT accidents and abuse. Even with the staff KNOWING I was watching they worked their way around many things until I figured it out. I had the ability to call directly into the room and speak to them LIVE as it was happening... they still tried to beat the system.

They would go into closets with nothing in their hands and come out with nothing in their hands (talk on their cell phones they smuggled in their bras)

They would position the babies with the babies back to the cameras when they were feeding them.

They would rearrange the furniture in the room to block the view and then have their backs to the camera.

They would go to the wall right underneath the camera out of view. They would look at their room on camera and instantly see the blind spots... I would see them coming in and out of the blind spots.

They would FALL ASLEEP during nap time....

and on and on even though they knew they were being watched WITH a dedicated camera watcher. Of course we corrected things as they happened. We made them put the furniture in a position where I could see the best. We timed how long infants were in equipment and made calls to MAKE them take the infants who fell asleep in equipment out and put them to bed.

It was a work in progress every day... People don't just do the right thing because there are cameras. They learn in a couple of weeks how to beat them if they want to.

The ones who were corrected and didn't like the intrusion of being on camera and watched LEFT to go to a center where they just had cameras but no one watching or no cameras at all.

You said "But people tend to behave differently if they think they are being observed. And there truly are a lot of studies showing this. It's referred to as the observer effect or Hawthorne effect."

Hawthorne this... just a small sampling... All of these workers knew they were in rooms with cameras. Pay attention to the worker in the first one really closely. Some of these cases the workers were employees for YEARS and on camera. Some months... but the truth is that the workers get used to the cameras very quickly and they know how to work around them or they know they have a low likelihood of the video ever being watched.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGIt9wY2gpc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98_uScXl93A

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmTecRray1U

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ie5BL9uOv18

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLk7G_6JhnM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAiMSy3oTjs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RlWHnhU2yI0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_dyLSnjIzU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKxQjZDZ5Lc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWZlgxm-RlA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UI_aJI-GFdY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vs-P7YvCWEQ

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBhUBnmOUmE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGf3wZ1-uPA

Reply

Not to be unkind, but I do not have an interest in your company or product. I don't know what you mean by "get it." I get the value of surveillance systems and I get the value of making a buck. Other than that, I am not sure what you mean. Best of luck to you though.

What you wrote seems contradictory, even from one sentence to the next. But I tried to interpret it charitably.

You wrote:

Why would cameras be both useless unless someone is monitoring them in real-time, and only useful later on after something has happened? Are they only useful in real-time, or are they only useful later on?

And, how might they be both useful only after an incident, and be nothing more than parent-pleasers? Are they useful at all, or are they not?

So you're saying that they did indeed change their behavior because they knew they were being watched.

Had they thought they were not being watched (or forgot that they were), they would not have sneaked into closets or rearranged furniture, or otherwise deliberately placed themselves in blind spots.

They were thinking, "I cannot do this here, because I am being watched. But if I could find a way to not be watched, then I can do this."


I didn't say they would. I said their behavior tends to change when they know they are being observed. If they don't know about the camera, then they believe they are not being observed, and their behavior will not change. If they know about the camera but believe no one will ever look at the footage, then they believe they aren't being observed, and their behavior will not change.

And the ones who were corrected and didn't leave? Either you fired them, or you allowed them to continue doing prohibited things.... or they changed their behavior because they knew they were being watched.

If they think that they will not appear on the video or that the video will not be watched, then they think they are not being observed, and so they will not change their behavior. They have to think they are being observed. It's not about the camera. It's about the observation... which is something for which a camera may be useful.

Lastly, those links you provided all underscore the value of cameras in a daycare. It sickens me to watch them, but I am at least glad there was clear evidence available showing what exactly happened to those children. Young children are typically unable to clearly explain what happened to them, if they are able to explain anything at all. At least those kids had those videos to speak for them.

Reply

I can't be the only one starting to find this comical.

Reply

You're not. I do rather enjoy reading some of the responses though. Why don't we have a mic drop emoji?

Reply

giphy.gif
No words except this...

Reply

I have several cameras in my daycare and they all record. I have three inside the house and three outside. I do not allow the parents access to the cameras on a daily basis, but I do record all activities to cover myself on a business aspect as well as a provider.

While I don't think it's necessary, I had a background in law, and it's just that part of me why I do it. I do feel, however, that it gives the parents a little reassurance knowing that I'm confident enough in what I do and that I'm not afraid of what I do to record the activities and provide them, if requested, to the parents. I recently had a child who I had to terminate from my daycare because of his continued violence toward my kids and the other child here. While I would tell the child's parents of his actions, my concerns, and my efforts at helping this child; the stories were always turned around by the child itself making it sound like it wasn't the child's fault. Upon termination, the parents indicated to me that their child was taken advantage of and my decision for termination was, how would you say, without merit. I then pulled the camera information out and the parents were literally left speechless.

Please don't get me wrong, that's not at all my intent with the cameras, but I think it not only helped me, but hopefully helped the parents understand that "real" issue or problem at hand.

Please note though...cameras are expensive, and the cost for recording can be equally expensive.!.

Reply

I have pretty much the same set up.
I have more than 3 inside and more than 3 outside.
I have them basically for the same reason.

I stop at parent access though.

I would NEVER allow parents access to video.

I don't believe they have a right to another child's privacy.
I don't feel parents are qualified to interpret a snippet of footage and acurately understand.

Licensing and/or the law can view footage any time my practices or actions threaten a child's, a familiy's or my own safety.

Reply

NO... I do littles only, and it's my private home; other parents don't need access to me changing diapers, private conversations etc either. Never happening... now outside, yes I have the Ring system for security

Reply