2 Next
Topic: This angers me
no photo
Wed 09/30/09 09:57 AM
That is so far beyound contemptible! ... Ridiculously messed up, supremely sickening!!!

Grrrr ... grumble

adj4u's photo
Wed 09/30/09 12:54 PM
i think they should go after the neighbor for any and everything they can think of

and if they wont defuldge the accuser they are breaking the bill of rights

oh yeah they do not follow that very well any longer

adj4u's photo
Wed 09/30/09 12:56 PM
what ever happened to making sure the kids were safe

since when do they need a license to have a friend come over and visit b4 school

is there a law against kids visiting with each other now

daniel48706's photo
Wed 09/30/09 01:19 PM
if called into social services as a concern for childrens safety, then the identity of the person calling is not available to be released without a court order for the protection of the person calling. This is for in cases of REAL child abuse/neglect where the caller could be afraid of repercussions from the parent being investigated.

Been there, done that, got the judges order to release.



i think they should go after the neighbor for any and everything they can think of

and if they wont defuldge the accuser they are breaking the bill of rights

oh yeah they do not follow that very well any longer

talldub's photo
Wed 09/30/09 01:31 PM

Talk about busybodies!

State to mom: Stop baby-sitting neighbors' kids

AP – By JAMES PRICHARD, Associated Press Writer – Tue Sep 29, 7:23 pm ET

IRVING TOWNSHIP, Mich. – Each day before the school bus comes to pick up the neighborhood's children, Lisa Snyder did a favor for three of her fellow moms, welcoming their children into her home for about an hour before they left for school.

Regulators who oversee child care, however, don't see it as charity. Days after the start of the new school year, Snyder received a letter from the Michigan Department of Human Services warning her that if she continued, she'd be violating a law aimed at the operators of unlicensed day care centers.

"I was freaked out. I was blown away," she said. "I got on the phone immediately, called my husband, then I called all the girls" — that is, the mothers whose kids she watches — "every one of them."

Snyder's predicament has led to a debate in Michigan about whether a law that says no one may care for unrelated children in their home for more than four weeks each calendar year unless they are licensed day-care providers needs to be changed. It also has irked parents who say they depend on such friendly offers to help them balance work and family.

On Tuesday, agency Director Ismael Ahmed said good neighbors should be allowed to help each other ensure their children are safe. Gov. Jennifer Granholm instructed Ahmed to work with the state Legislature to change the law, he said.

"Being a good neighbor means helping your neighbors who are in need," Ahmed said in a written statement. "This could be as simple as providing a cup of sugar, monitoring their house while they're on vacation or making sure their children are safe while they wait for the school bus."

Snyder learned that the agency was responding to a neighbor's complaint.

Granholm spokeswoman Liz Boyd said the agency was following standard procedure in its response. "But we feel this (law) really gets in the way of common sense," Boyd said.

"We want to protect kids, but the law needs to be reasonable," she said. "When the governor learned of this, she acted quickly and called the director personally to ask him to intervene."

State Rep. Brian Calley, R-Portland, said he was working to draft legislation that would exempt situations like Snyder's from coverage under Michigan's current day care regulations.

The bill will make it clear that people who aren't in business as day care providers don't need to be licensed, Calley said.

"These are just kids that wait for the bus every morning," he said. "This is not a day care."

Snyder, 35, lives in a rural subdivision in Barry County's Irving Township about 25 miles southeast of Grand Rapids. Her tidy, comfortable three-bedroom home is a designated school bus stop. The three neighbor children she watched — plus Snyder's first-grader, Grace — attend school about six miles away in Middleville.

Snyder said she started watching the other children this school year to help her friends; they often baby-sit for each other during evenings and weekends.

After receiving the state agency's letter, she said she called the agency and tried to explain that she wasn't running a day care center or accepting money from her friends.

Under state law, no one may care for unrelated children in their home for more than four weeks each calendar year unless they are licensed day-care providers. Snyder said she stopped watching the other children immediately after receiving the letter, which was well within the four-week period.

"I've lived in this community for 35 years and everyone I know has done some form of this," said Francie Brummel, 42, who would drop off her second-grade son, Colson, before heading to her job as deputy treasurer of the nearby city of Hastings.

Other moms say they regularly deal with similar situations.

Amy Cowan, 34, of Grosse Pointe Farms, a Detroit suburb, said she often takes turns with her sister, neighbor and friend watching each other's children.

"The worst part of this whole thing, with the state of the economy ... two parents have to work," said Cowan, a corporate sales representative with a 5-year-old son and 11-month-old daughter. "When you throw in the fact that the state is getting involved, it gives women a hard time for going back to work.

"I applaud the lady who takes in her neighbors' kids while they're waiting for the bus. She's enabling her peers to go to work and get a paycheck. The state should be thankful for that."

Amy Maciaszek, 42, of McHenry, Ill., who works in direct sales, said she believes the state agency was "trying to be overprotective."

"I think it does take a village and that's the best way," said Maciaszek, who has a 6-year-old boy and twin 3-year-old daughters. "Unfortunately you do have to be careful about that. These mothers are trying to do the right thing."


Note the bold sentence in the story. What the hell ever happened to people minding their own damn business??

I hear what you're saying, in the context of this story, but I'd rather people look out for each other than turn a blind eye to something unusual going on.

Mr_Music's photo
Wed 09/30/09 04:27 PM
Good point, Andy. Perhaps I should've been more specific. I'm certainly not suggesting people turn a blind eye to illegal activities, but this is quite different. This is completely innocent, and no different than if a child had their little friend over to play after school. In this case, it's three children before school, but I digress. It's neighbor helping neighbor, as communities should be, but there's always gotta be that one person who tries to throw a monkey wrench into the gears.

no photo
Wed 09/30/09 04:37 PM

Good point, Andy. Perhaps I should've been more specific. I'm certainly not suggesting people turn a blind eye to illegal activities, but this is quite different. This is completely innocent, and no different than if a child had their little friend over to play after school. In this case, it's three children before school, but I digress. It's neighbor helping neighbor, as communities should be, but there's always gotta be that one person who tries to throw a monkey wrench into the gears.


In this situation, I agree with you!

warmachine's photo
Wed 09/30/09 04:51 PM
Gotta love the Tyranny imposed by the good ole nanny state.

TxsGal3333's photo
Wed 09/30/09 05:08 PM
Wow and I thought I had heard it all I say find a big tree and a good strong rope for the nosy neighbor :thumbsup:

s1owhand's photo
Wed 09/30/09 05:11 PM
"OH C'MON!" surprised :laughing:

no photo
Wed 09/30/09 06:51 PM
I think one has to be a bit naive to take care of someone else's kids in their home, with out thinking of the possible problems that can and do happen. I lived in a neighborhood one time where one of the neighbors took care of a couple of the kids after school until the parents got home.

Something happened to one of the children in the home and the parents of that child sued their kindly neighbor and so called friend. The women has never even allowed a neighbor kid on her property after that.

We don't want government butting in but we are the first to call when kids are in danger. Guess we better make up our minds what we want and who is held responsible for parents that don't think before making such agreements.

Mr_Music's photo
Thu 10/01/09 01:12 AM
And THAT'S where the B.S. factor comes in. People are far too "sue-happy" these days. Sh** happens. Kids fall down and scrape their knees and such. That's what kids DO! However, people have become so acclimated to distrust and over-coddling of their kids that kids are not even allowed to be kids anymore.

And it all started way-back-when because somebody got a wild hair up their *** and had to go gum up the works. It's never been the same since.

When I was a kid, and I was over at a friend's house and happened to fall off my bike or whatever, I'd get back up and dust nyself off and keep playing. My parents would NEVER have even THOUGHT about something so ridiculous as suing my friend's parents because of it! And if a neighbor had seen the incident happen, they would've certainly been more concerned about my well-being instead of sticking their nose in by contacting authorities about the fact that I was even there!

Bottom line, it's ridiculous, and it's an outrage.

markumX's photo
Thu 10/01/09 02:14 AM
we'll see if it's an outrage when one of the kids get molested or worse murdered by a friend of the sitter's family which happened in my state. same situation, the mother trusted the people their kid was with. I have to side with the state on this one.

Mr_Music's photo
Thu 10/01/09 06:09 AM
Did you even read the article? huh There's no babysitting involved! It's three other neighborhood kids waiting for the bus at another's house!

Paranoia runs rampant.

msharmony's photo
Thu 10/01/09 06:25 AM

I think one has to be a bit naive to take care of someone else's kids in their home, with out thinking of the possible problems that can and do happen. I lived in a neighborhood one time where one of the neighbors took care of a couple of the kids after school until the parents got home.

Something happened to one of the children in the home and the parents of that child sued their kindly neighbor and so called friend. The women has never even allowed a neighbor kid on her property after that.

We don't want government butting in but we are the first to call when kids are in danger. Guess we better make up our minds what we want and who is held responsible for parents that don't think before making such agreements.


This is a very litigious society,and that is an unfortunate extreme. I would not use one extreme to justify another though. There is a balance that people should strive for. We cant say,,dont complain if a cop harasses you because, after all, if you are in trouble you expect the cops to help. It is their JOB to help. and it is our job as neighbors and citizens to care about each other. If I were to assume this neighbor made the report out of concern, I could applaud her. However, reading the ENTIRE situation, it seems she was just being a busybody. The government should not be telling neighbors who they can and cant have on their property,,child or not, so long as there is no monetary gain.

Drivinmenutz's photo
Thu 10/01/09 10:30 AM

neighbor should just mind own business.mad :angry: can't stand nosey neighbors.:angry:


The GOVERNMENT should mind it's own business. I can't stand a nosy government...:wink:

Drivinmenutz's photo
Thu 10/01/09 10:33 AM

we'll see if it's an outrage when one of the kids get molested or worse murdered by a friend of the sitter's family which happened in my state. same situation, the mother trusted the people their kid was with. I have to side with the state on this one.


Ummm....what the eff is the difference between an unliscenced friend and a licensed stranger?

You do realize that you are implying that parents are no longer responsible enough to decide who watches their kids...

Do you think that parents should be forced to give up their kids at birth, and let uncle sam raise them?

Dragoness's photo
Thu 10/01/09 10:35 AM
The law was created to protect children from being in possibly unsafe homes where there were no state safeguards. I understand why the law was created. They did not put into consideration situations like this one.

So now they will have to change the law.

Which is a good thing.

I do have to wonder about the reporting neighbor though. Did the neighbor have a concern for the children? Does the neighbor do daycare and feels they are missing out on business? One does have to wonder.

Drivinmenutz's photo
Thu 10/01/09 10:40 AM

The law was created to protect children from being in possibly unsafe homes where there were no state safeguards. I understand why the law was created. They did not put into consideration situations like this one.

So now they will have to change the law.

Which is a good thing.

I do have to wonder about the reporting neighbor though. Did the neighbor have a concern for the children? Does the neighbor do daycare and feels they are missing out on business? One does have to wonder.


Yet another example of a business uses laws to sanction an unfair advantage...

You are right, the law needs to change.

2 Next