nannyde 03:50 AM 05-29-2010
momma2girls 04:30 AM 05-29-2010
nannyde 05:32 AM 05-29-2010
KCCI really dropped the ball on this. They didn't even discuss that the child shouldn't have been on the equipment in the first place. 18 month old children should not be ON equipment with that high of a fall zone. It's not designed for babies and toddlers.
Secondly the child should have never been on the equipment unsupervised. It is obvous from the providers own words that she wasn't spotting this baby on the equipment.
Thirdly: It is the providers responsiblility to CHECK the temperature of ALL outdoor equipment before a child plays on it or near it. That means checking the temp of it with your bare hands and your bare feet for surfacing. You should always place your hand on it for at least five seconds to test the exterior temperature.
Fourth: Plastic DOES heat up. Any slick surface can heat up in direct sunlight. Simple rule of thumb... if it is slick it can heat up.
Fifth: The Mom doesn't even GET that her provider is first and foremost responsible for this. She doesn't understand the four points above. She doesn't get it NOW but she will soon enough when the Department of Human Services intervenes with a child neglect investigation.
This is a perfect example of providers believing if the parent says or thinks what they did is okay then it's okay. This parent has NO clue that she doesn't have a thing to say about whether or not this will be a founded case of child neglect with possible criminal charges. The parent and provider are sitting side by side on the tape discussing the danger of the hot slide.... with the parent being none the wiser that the provider was RESPONSIBLE to not allow the child on equipment not safety approved for her age, not allow the child to climb without direct proximal supervision and "spotting", and not allowed to allow children on equipment without assessing FULLY the safety of the equipment BEFORE allowing a child on it.
Parents can not give you permission to do the wrong thing. Parents can't forgive you for doing the wrong thing and keep the insurer of the child, DHS or the County Attorney from filing charges on you.
The provider and parents are a team now but they won't be in a few weeks. Once the parent "buys a vowel" she will figure out that the provider shouldn't have had the kid on there in the first place and is required by law to CAREFULLY supervise all children all the time. If she couldn't manage her "group" of children at the park and give them the supervision they needed then she shouldn't have stepped foot into the park.
The DHS and County Attorney need to shut this provider down TO-DAY. The parents of the other children in care (if there are) must be notified that pending a full investigation that this provider can not provide child care services. The investigation will be pretty darn easy since the provider herself stated ON TAPE she was not in close proximity to the child and allowed the child to climb on equipment that is not designed for that age group.
well the spokesperson for the park wouldn't comment due to pending investigation. I would assume they were investigating the daycare provider right?
nannyde 08:39 AM 05-29-2010
Originally Posted by gbcc:
well the spokesperson for the park wouldn't comment due to pending investigation. I would assume they were investigating the daycare provider right?
Parks Department is interested in whether or not the equipment meets safety standards. They can't possibly eliminate every stupid thing somebody is going to do on City property.
My guess is the Parks Department will insist a DHS investigation begin. They won't take a stand until their buddies at the DHS and the Polk County District Attorney's office has their way with the Provider.
Crystal 09:53 AM 05-29-2010
I completely agree Nanny that there needs to be some accountability on the providers part....she certainly was neglectful.
I don't know that it warrants her being closed down though. Sure, a validated complaint goes in her public file for parents to check prior to enrolling children, and if there is ever another incident of neglect documented and proven, then she should be closed. Honestly though, who among us feels the temperarture of any playground equipment, every time we get ready to use it, with our bare hands AND feet? And who would ever think that the temperature of a slide would get to 163 degrees and cause burns like that? Sure, you realize they get hot, but not THAT hot.
It certainly is also the responsibility of the parks department to ensure that equipment they provide to the public, unsupervised by the parks dept. themselves, is safe for the people who are most likely to use it, and that would be small children.
I also think there needs to be some accountability on the manufactuer of the slide if there was no clear, written warning provided when the equipment was released for sale.
Sad situation. I hope the little girl fully recovers.
momma2girls 12:49 PM 05-29-2010
Originally Posted by nannyde:
Parks Department is interested in whether or not the equipment meets safety standards. They can't possibly eliminate every stupid thing somebody is going to do on City property.
My guess is the Parks Department will insist a DHS investigation begin. They won't take a stand until their buddies at the DHS and the Polk County District Attorney's office has their way with the Provider.
Do you live in Des Moines?My husband and myself just spent last weekend in Des Moines- I am in Cedar Rapids.
momma2girls 07:39 AM 05-30-2010
Nannede- This whole article was in our morning paper. Thanks so much for sharing!!
nannyde 08:41 AM 05-30-2010
Originally Posted by nannyde:
Nah she's not being rational about it. She's already contacted the city and has made a legal "claim". She just doens't GET that the provider is at fault yet. She will as soon as the City and the DHS let her know.
This is a really good learning experience for providers. Never believe that just because the parent isn't upset at you when something first happens that your libility ends with the parents take on an accident. The parent doesn't have a thing to say about what the DHS will do or the County Attorney will do as far as filing charges. If anything, legal action against the City will force the hands of the City to at least disperse accountability financially. The Provider will be first in line.
Originally Posted by Iowa daycare:
Nannede- This whole article was in our morning paper. Thanks so much for sharing!!
do you have a link
In reading that article I'm not sure that the daycare provider was HER daycare provider.
"I ran over there and she was on there for less than a minute and I went over and by the time I got over to her she actually lost it and went down and that's how she got the burn on her stomach," said Kerry Welch, a day-care provider who helped Madyson."
A daycare provider, not necessarily HER daycare provider. The article goes on to say:
"Her baby sitter took her to the hospital, where Madyson was met by her mom"
Her babysitter may be a 16 year old for all we know...
nannyde 09:09 AM 05-30-2010
Originally Posted by jen:
In reading that article I'm not sure that the daycare provider was HER daycare provider.
"I ran over there and she was on there for less than a minute and I went over and by the time I got over to her she actually lost it and went down and that's how she got the burn on her stomach," said Kerry Welch, a day-care provider who helped Madyson."
A daycare provider, not necessarily HER daycare provider. The article goes on to say:
"Her baby sitter took her to the hospital, where Madyson was met by her mom"
Her babysitter may be a 16 year old for all we know...
Yeah see they changed that around a few times from the teaser they did on the newscast... to the newscast.. to the six o'clock version of the newscast... to the online video of it.... to the online news report of it. It IS impossible to tell. The first promo they did a few hours before the news stated that "hear what Madyson's Mom and babysitter" had to say.
I wrote a post about that in their comments section.
Considering their ONLY angle was the slide and the slides hotness it would make sense that they only discussed what the provider did in reference to the hottness. Who knows though.
Your theory might be right too.. if the provider was a minor they wouldn't have brought up the name.
They were evasive about a lot of it or they just have crappy reporting. They just said she was playing at the park.. didn't say she was at the park with her day care provider. The only hint she was with the day care provider was them saying the day care provider helped and and her day care provider took her to the hospital.
fctjc1979 09:15 AM 05-30-2010
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/23738507/detail.html
Here's another article on on the same story. I think it makes it more clear that the woman interviewed is the babysitter. I still don't think that the burns themselves make this provider irresponsible. I usually check equipment for temperature but I can understand why not everyone would think about diong this. There is an expectation that equipment built specifically for children would be safe for children to play on. I am concerned, however, that a child this young was on equipment this high without a spotter.
nannyde 09:46 AM 05-30-2010
Originally Posted by fctjc1979:
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/23738507/detail.html
Here's another article on on the same story. I think it makes it more clear that the woman interviewed is the babysitter. I still don't think that the burns themselves make this provider irresponsible. I usually check equipment for temperature but I can understand why not everyone would think about diong this. There is an expectation that equipment built specifically for children would be safe for children to play on. I am concerned, however, that a child this young was on equipment this high without a spotter.
This is why this is a good topic. Providers can't assume something is safe. A good rule of thumb in caring for kids is to check first. When you are feeding a bottle.. check the temp.. When you are serving milk... check the milk by smelling and tasting it.. when you are serving hot food.. stir it and then TASTE it. When you are walking the kids down the sidewalk.. check ahead to make sure there is nothing that blocking the sidewalk that they can trip on. And on and on...
We have to do these thngs to keep the kids safe. It's our job to question any surface they come into contact with whether they are touching it, walking over it, ingesting it.. whatever.
momma2girls 05:47 AM 05-31-2010
Originally Posted by nannyde:
do you have a link
I will see if it is online for everyone to see here as well. I hope it is.
MarinaVanessa 08:54 AM 05-31-2010
I agree that the child should have never been on that slide but must agree with Crystal that I'm not sure that she would get shut down because if this. If she is in fact the child's "childcare provider" and is registered or licensed then for sure she would get a citation and licensing will be up her rear for a good long time. She may have to take some extra training or re-take the prventative safety class (if she is required to do it in the first place).
Of course regulations vary from state to state so some states may be more strict than others. For example, in our county a few years back we had a provider who had a crock-pot on and a toddler pulled on the cord and dumped some of it on herself and was also burned badly on her arm, hand and a leg I think. Maybe her side also if I remember correctly. She did get a violation (I can't remember what degree) and had to take some classes and Licensing was at her daycare at least 1-2 times a month (usually it's about 1 every year or two). She didn't get shut down but I know that the violation she received is serious enough that she was required to tell all of the other parents about it and any new clients she may sign up need to be notified. She now has to explain what happened to any potential clients of the incident and if she doesn't then it's a class A violation.
If the woman watching the little girl was just a person watching the child for the day or just a "babysitter", or not required to register or become licensed then unfortunately I doubt that anything serious would be done to her. Her parents may wise up and sue her civilly, because I agree that if you are taking care of a child she is your responsibility no matter what, but CPS involvement seems unlikely in this case. If it were the mother of the child that had been at the park instead I doubt that even then CPS would rush to her and interrogate her. The claim that is pending now on the park system sounds to me like the parent wants to sue the city and seems highly unlikely that she'll win but the city may just settle to keep their own costs down. It's sad how the system works.
nannyde 10:09 AM 05-31-2010
Originally Posted by MarinaVanessa:
I agree that the child should have never been on that slide but must agree with Crystal that I'm not sure that she would get shut down because if this. If she is in fact the child's "childcare provider" and is registered or licensed then for sure she would get a citation and licensing will be up her rear for a good long time. She may have to take some extra training or re-take the prventative safety class (if she is required to do it in the first place).
Of course regulations vary from state to state so some states may be more strict than others. For example, in our county a few years back we had a provider who had a crock-pot on and a toddler pulled on the cord and dumped some of it on herself and was also burned badly on her arm, hand and a leg I think. Maybe her side also if I remember correctly. She did get a violation (I can't remember what degree) and had to take some classes and Licensing was at her daycare at least 1-2 times a month (usually it's about 1 every year or two). She didn't get shut down but I know that the violation she received is serious enough that she was required to tell all of the other parents about it and any new clients she may sign up need to be notified. She now has to explain what happened to any potential clients of the incident and if she doesn't then it's a class A violation.
If the woman watching the little girl was just a person watching the child for the day or just a "babysitter", or not required to register or become licensed then unfortunately I doubt that anything serious would be done to her. Her parents may wise up and sue her civilly, because I agree that if you are taking care of a child she is your responsibility no matter what, but CPS involvement seems unlikely in this case. If it were the mother of the child that had been at the park instead I doubt that even then CPS would rush to her and interrogate her. The claim that is pending now on the park system sounds to me like the parent wants to sue the city and seems highly unlikely that she'll win but the city may just settle to keep their own costs down. It's sad how the system works.
As far as I can tell the "provider" who spoke on the tape is not registered. She may be but it's not on the DHS website yet or she may be unregistered. That is currently legal in my State. In 2013 it will be required to be registered.
The regulations for unregistered are IDENTICAL to registered with the exception of two major things: You can't have more than 5 kids including your own under five years old and no more than a total of three can be under two. You also do not have a signed consent that you will allow inspections. If an unregistered provider does anything wrong it usually IS child protective services that does the initial investigation because they do not need a court order to get into your house. They can EASILY get that if you refuse to be interviewed.
If she is unregistered this will most likely be investigated by child protective. They are the first line of defense for an unregistered provider where the DHS is the first for a registered. If anything, being unregistered will skip her past a regular inspection and put her in the seat next to the child protective.
I do feel this will be investigated and a founded case of neglect will be issued. I think she will be forbiden to do child care for ten years. I think she will be cited for not carefully supervising the child and putting her in harms way because of the equipment she had her on. She will also be cited for not checking the hot slide but being ON the equipment without proximal adult supervision will be the first and foremost charge.
Because the Mom is begining the legal process with the City this highly increases the providers chance of having intervention from the DHS and child protective. When they go to court for this they will have a founded case of child abuse on the provider alongside of a court order that she cease chld care for X number of years. This will be highly in their favor when they are looking at any type of percentage of damages.
nannyde 09:32 AM 05-30-2010