Saturday, September 26, 2009

Michigan's Babysitting Gestapo

MIDDLEVILLE, MI - A West Michigan woman says the state is threatening her with fines and possibly jail time for babysitting her neighbors' children. Lisa Snyder of Middleville (pictured above) says her neighborhood school bus stop is right in front of her home. It arrives after her neighbors need to be at work, so she watches three of their children for 15-40 minutes until the bus comes.

The Department of Human Services received a complaint that Snyder was operating an illegal child care home. DHS contacted Snyder and told her to get licensed, stop watching her neighbors' kids, or face the consequences.

"It's ridiculous." says Snyder. "We are friends helping friends!" She added that she accepts no money for babysitting. Mindy Rose, who leaves her 5-year-old with Snyder, agrees. "She's a friend... I trust her."

HT: Jonathan Turley

MP: What happened to all of that talk about how "It Takes A Village" to raise a child?


At 9/26/2009 3:30 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Probably some union worker complained.

At 9/26/2009 4:15 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The licensing came about because of child abuse in such homes. The state sets a number above which you need the license. If you abolish this requirement then we will have abuse stories come up from some caregivers. (Such as bad conditions at home etc). The state is in a damned if you do damned if you don't bind here. If the primary interest is the child then it comes down on the right side. Few child care homes are unionized yet and many licensed homes provide the before and after school watching service.

At 9/26/2009 4:29 PM, Blogger Shawn said...

anon 2 - wrong.

w/o state licensing, you'll simply have other (varied and more effective) assurance-providing institutions emerge.

Parents demand assurance, especially in the care of their little ones, and it will be supplied.

There is no quandary here, simply a statist mentality.

At 9/26/2009 4:31 PM, Blogger Shawn said...

more here on supply and demand of assurance:

At 9/26/2009 5:41 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well the law says if you take care of an unrelated child in your home for free you need a license. Since MI has Initiative what needs to happen is that those who want to change the law do propose a change (note the appears to be such a movement).
Of course assume the kids were in the house and a fire occured leading to injury, you would never hear the end of it either.
Interesting the law exempts extended family from these requirements.
If the initiative passes or fails we will know what the majority wants.

At 9/26/2009 6:16 PM, Anonymous Dr. T said...

MP: "What happened to all of that talk about how "It Takes A Village" to raise a child?"

It takes a village full of government bureaucrat idiots to raise a child in a nannystate.

In this situation, the parents preferred that their neighbor and friend watch their kids in her home instead of making the kids wait outside for 15-40 minutes. That doesn't mean her home is a day care center.

Besides, baby sitter licensure is about as effective at protecting a child as TSA confiscation of scissors and six ounce tubes of toothpaste is at protecting passenger jets from hijackings. Licensed day care centers can have just as many abusive workers as unlicensed ones.

At 9/26/2009 10:00 PM, Blogger The Dude said...

"If the initiative passes or fails we will know what the majority wants."

And why, exactly, is it "the majority's" business who watches your children before school?

At 9/26/2009 10:32 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The state needs to build shelters at each bus stop location and hire a government worker to watch the children until the bus comes. Doesn't MI know how to "create" jobs?

At 9/27/2009 12:09 AM, Blogger Cabodog said...

A prime example of government bureaucrats having too much time on their hands.

At 9/27/2009 12:42 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The law as written is clear have even one child in your home who is not yours and not related to you and you need to have a license. Following the link leads to comments which suspect that a competitor called the state. They are in a bind because the law is so clear. Now one way to fix is to exempt unpaid care, but how many kids do you limit the exemption to?
If residents of MI don't like the law then move to amend it, thru initiative if need be, and there is such a campaign.
Likley the law is wrong but its not clear that absent a legislative change it can be changed.

At 9/27/2009 6:14 AM, Blogger KO said...

Anonymous said...

The law as written is clear have even one child in your home who is not yours and not related to you and you need to have a license.

This is idiotic. It means anyone having a birthday party or just a child's friend over to play would have to have a daycare license.

At 9/27/2009 6:53 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MP: "What happened to all of that talk about how "It Takes A Village" to raise a child?"

It does take a village, but only the state is competent enough to license the appropriate villagers under state guidelines.

At 9/27/2009 9:41 AM, Blogger bob wright said...

This is asinine, nanny state bull*!#%

I don't need a license to have my neighbor's kids come over to wait for the school bus. Period.

Do I need a license to have the neighborhood kids come over for my child's birthday party or to swim in my pool?

I shouldn't have to fight the state or pass an initiative to do what families have done for centuries.

Common sense is dead.

Anon 5:41pm says "Well the law says...."

This is an example of a bunch of politicians passing a law and then exhibiting no common sense in the application of the law.

At 9/27/2009 10:12 AM, Blogger Disco Prime said...

Didn't Michael Moore display the evils of these capitalist tools with his latest movie? Yeah, sure, a "baby sitting" service "under the table". Next thing you will see is that she is selling "fuses" to Iran and stainless steel to Venezuela.

Sure, it always begins this way. Remember Anrew Carnegie started his stint merely "sweeping the floors".

Note to self: Avoid doing business in Michigan.

At 9/27/2009 2:33 PM, Blogger The Dude said...

Something similar is going on in Britain also.

At 9/27/2009 9:06 PM, Anonymous サクラ Shill said...

Common sense is dead.
~~bob wright~

We are spending trillions of monetary stimulant simply because our senile politicians have no *common sense*. They don't know the difference between monetary and fiscal policy. We need big tax relief for working class people not flopping charity towards the billionaire's insurance conglomerates.

Forget the higher math and number set theory, Just do the sensible things.

For a change

At 9/28/2009 7:19 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am happy to see that the state of Michigan has solved all its major problems. It is now time to just 'dot the Is' so all will be perfect.

At 9/28/2009 8:13 AM, Blogger Singularity said...

They must be run by ACORN.

At 9/30/2009 10:54 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Big Brother in the living room? Sure, an some "concerned neighbor making a living out of a "day Care" most likely to have been the complaint. Common Sense is dead within this inane society of litigations not of laws.

I am certainly happy to see a state agency berefit of any application of common sense. It would be better to leave the kids to roam the streets and complain about vandalism or worse taking place.

Of course it was for our betterment so we are told the legislation was passed but in the end who and what is really benefitting? Society, children I don't think so...

At 9/30/2009 11:05 AM, Blogger kamel said...

What happened to "safe houses". I would be glad to have a safe house in the 2.5 miles my child has to ride his bike to get to school. I believe the people of Michigan need to contact the congressman and have this outdated law removed or revised to match the situations the laws were designed for. Not a safe house that a child voluntarily goes into while waiting for the parents.I would think the State of Michigan would like to have safe houses so the children would not be kidnapped and or murdered or tortured. Should someone be concerned about this particular house than have the Child Protective Service do a well check at a time when these children are there. This is a voluntary deal Both sets of parents have to agree that the children are going to this house from a certain time to the appointed time to go home. How about a "safe House" certificate. That way any child of any age when left at home knows this is a place I will be safe.

At 9/30/2009 2:10 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

To add to this the Main Steam Media have picked up this story (Today and Yahoo) they have gotten the states governors attention, and she has told the head of the child services agency to figure out how to fix the law to exempt this type of thing.
If you push until you get the attention of the MSM you can often get action.


Post a Comment

<< Home