X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

but you still can't make it the total respoinsibility of the rest of
society to pick up where bad parents leave off, need to get back to
the root cause or we are always going to have problems.

I think wanting a safe environment with the people you pay to leave your
kids with is a far cry from anything you are talking about IMO. Kids don't
go a beat people up because they had poisonous plants removed from their DCC
when they were younger ;)

Even if your kids know not to eat plants, toddlers tend to have a lack of
judgment at the best of times and may still eat a plant. My eldest (nearly
3) wouldn't eat plants, well I Highly doubt it. But my youngest (nearly 1)
will shove anything in his mouth no matter how many times we say no. By
putting things in their mouth they are exploring the world. I doubt you can
hinder a instinct like that until they just grow out of it.

--
Leanne
----------------------
Don't demand respect as a parent.
Demand civility and insist on honesty.
Respect is something you must earn.

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

In article ,
Chookie wrote:

In article ,
eggs wrote:

Thanks! We only want shade in the summer as we have a high wall at the
back that shades us for much of the day in the winter, so one of these
sounds good. I think I like the idea of a fruiting plant and I love
Mulberries (hadn't even thought of that!). Off to google mulberry trees

Er, you do have somewhere else to hang your washing, I hope?

We use a tragic system of those little "clotheslines" they sell at the
supermarket, strung from fence to tree and move them around with the
seasons due to shadowing from nearby buildings. DS eventually cuts them
down to use the string for one of his projects and I have to buy another
one. In the winter we have to use a dryer as there isn't a long enough
period of sunlight to get the clothes dry in one day (shade from about
11am).

eggs.

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"eggs" wrote in message news:seggleto-
How far north of the border are you?
Bris-Vegas ... by the bay and ~ 15 minutes drive from the Gateway Bridge and
with very simple directions to get here.

Kettles on....(or perhaps I should say the bubbly is chillin)
A

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"Ms Leebee" wrote in message
...
FlowerGirl wrote:
Note: X-posted to aus.family and aus.gardens.

... so our C&K centre has to sign a doc saying that there are no
poisonous plants on the premises .. and as a botanist (with a very
different area of specialty) they've turned to me for guidance.

Well.
From what I understand, we just have to sign off that there are no
poisonous plants on the place....the problem is that there doesn't
seem to be an official list of plants that we can sign off against,
..... and pretty much any plant could kill you if you eat the wrong
bit, don't prepare it properly or you just eat enough of it.

snip

Interesting, on many levels.

I hope you are not personally held accountable if you sign off and some
kid
eats a weed grown from bird poop
( I really can't see how they can monitor this - ESP. without a list to
tick off, and as you say ... everything in moderation .. heh ;)

I remember that the C&K have parents sign some sort of legal thingy saying
that they can't sue members of the P&C.... and as I'm not actually signing
the form, just pointing out what plants are iffy.

Without a list, how does the non-Botanist/average Jane know her poison
from
her delicious treat ?

The web site alley mentioned has a good list of the really bad ones which
are probably the only real dangers. I have an old version of the booklet
which is quite informative too.
Duranta (sheena's gold) is a plant that heaps of people use as hedges here
.... I hate the thing anyway as its a *weed* but the berries are quite
poisonous.
I think kidsafe also have information on this which is useful.

Amanda

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"len garden" wrote in message
...
g'day amanda,
:) hi Len

i understand that but if you have oleander there i would strongly
recommend to remove it, but having said that as far as i am aware
there are no recorded severe illnesses or death from someone consuming
oleander sap that is the toxic bit.

Yes - not so common anymore in Australia, but there are recorded illnesses
and deaths from not just the sap but also the seeds of both the common and
the yellow oleander (different genus). According to the Toxic Exposure
Surveillance System (TESS) in 2002 there were 847 known human poisonings in
the United States related to Oleander (Watson 2003) ... rare enough but
still recorded.


maybe some of the plants of concern could be fenced so the kids can't
get to them?

Ah now see the fence would cost too much money for a C&K who are non-profit.
I do agree that we need to teach kids about the wonders of plants ... so why
not use plants that aren't so likely to cause serious illness.

On another tack I'm reminded of a story about my dear FIL ... on a visit to
Brisbane, he was concerned about all the oleander planted between the north
and south-bound lanes of the Gateway Motorway. DH pointed out that any kid
that managed to negotiate 2 lanes of 100km/hr traffic to get to them would
hopefully also be lucky enough not to start eating the hedges!

Amanda

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

In article ,
"FlowerGirl" wrote:

"eggs" wrote in message news:seggleto-
How far north of the border are you?
Bris-Vegas ... by the bay and ~ 15 minutes drive from the Gateway Bridge and
with very simple directions to get here.

Kettles on....(or perhaps I should say the bubbly is chillin)
A

Hmmmm. My trip up the coast will only be a flying stop for a wedding.
I might be up for a border run in the July holidays. I've always wanted
a tree with an actual pedigree ...

eggs.

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

g'day amanda,

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 04:15:31 GMT, "FlowerGirl"
wrote:


"len garden" wrote in message
.. .
snipped

With all due respect Len, its a very different world today than when you
were small or when your own kids were small.
Just think of the reidiculous insurance claims for a start.
AND I do know of kids from my Dad's era who died from plant poisoning
(castor bean no less), so its not really a generational thing.

i wasn't saying kids or anyone never suffered even fataly, but you
still can't cotton woll them with any more guarantees that something
won't happen, it still comes back to parenting. just recently now we
ahve ahd 2 deaths involving contained water one in a pool with the
obligatory required fence the otehr in a horse trough in the middle of
a horse enclosure (these unfortunate people sadly also lost another
child 3 years ago the same way).

and not that long ago another child who apparently had an epileptic
fit in a pool swimming unsupervised.

you still can't get away from making poarents responsible and take
away the road to litigation. litigation is not saving paind or death
sad to say.

snipped

I see you point Len, but bare in mind, people take a lot of offence if their
parenting skills are questioned.
Childcare was probably not a major option in your young day - its a necesary
thing in today's world and a parent has a right to expect that the
environment is safe if they are paying for a person to caer for their child
in that environment.

of course i would expect subjective parents to take offense what other
defense ahve they got for not being objective and that does not take
from the debate, just because someone doesn't like the truth under the
morale "if the shoe fits wear it" then they beter get their act into
gear and become responsible then there may be some hope that some of
those unfortunate incidences will cease.

all that is ahppening amanda is the regulators are bringing in
bamdaides in an effort to save trauma, lets get back to the difficult
course of "cause & effect" and find the real cause to issues not
target and effect and try and fix it from that end.

take pool fences just this summer there have been at least 4 deaths
still and that is only the ones we here about, so pool fences aren't
working because they are a band aide, without too much trouble at all
these pool incicences can all be bouhgt home to bad parenting.

snipped

Again Len - not wanting to have a go at you, but do you perhaps think that
a) there are considerably more cars on the road now than back in the olden
days? and b) that kids still did stupid things back then but it might not
have made the evening news. From what I know from my parents and
grandparents era, it wasn't uncommon to have had a sibling die from an
accident of some sort .... or an illness that hadn't been described.

i know that amanda but the regulator doesn't seem to know that neither
do the educators or the parents or the standard of road safety
education would be elevated at the same level as the road traffic and
population grows. not wait for something to hapen then band aid it.

don't where you r parents/grandparents lived but i was a kid and we
lost none of our friends to accidents or poisonings.

if i was amanda i wouldn't be too keen on signing off on anything like
that nowadays it smells of scapegoating.

Sorry - its the kindy that has to sign off, and I'm not officially offering
an expert opinion so I'm not signing.

Its interesting to get this "generational" discussion though.

Amanda

thanks for the cross post i have never been in this sort of discussion
before, we as grandparents & parents would hate to lose any of our
children/grandchildren to any of those preventable accicents that is
why we are so high on proactivity and prevention. this wait until the
horse has bolted before closing the gate system we seem to have is
reactive and so far isn't preventive long term because the real causes
are treated as sacred cows. we are not allowed to point the finger at
bad parenting.

i am not highlighting those with special needs they need special
circumstances, the cases i have mentioned apart from one where totaly
preventable if the parents where dispatching their responsibilities
responsibly.

my heart goes out to the grandparents (my status) and the parents of
that family that lost 2 toddlers in 3 years in same like circumstances
on the same property.

please forgive my typo's
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len & bev

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

g'day chris,

it is still the parents responsibility to ascertain they are not for
the sake of convenience leaving their children in a less than
desirable situation, there are many pressures on modern parents for
both to work for the families betterment.

maybe a safer option for families if families became more extended and
grandparents took on the child care duties for their married siblings,
might be subsidy money better spent than try and regulate a profit
making industry that may just have its priorities wrong.

the ceo of one such child care group proundlu lauds his status from
this profit making venture by flaunting his ferarri cars.

think outside the square maybe?

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 18:51:32 +1100, "Nina Pretty Ballerina"
wrote:

snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len & bev

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:58:47 GMT, len garden
wrote:


maybe a safer option for families if families became more extended and
grandparents took on the child care duties for their married siblings,

(I assume you mean married children, although they aren't the only
children that will be requiring childcare) That's fine for those who
chose to have their children at a young age, but it's not so good for
those who didn't have children before their late 30's/early 40's.
Their parents would be heading into their 70's and trying to look
after very active toddlers, which could be a recipe for disaster. The
next generation, those of us who had children later, could potentially
be nearly 80 before our first grandchildren are born.

Cheryl

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

there are a lot of grandparents out there who are more than capable of
looking after their offsprings offsprings.

just the gov' would have too many strings attached for it to work, so
we get the pleasuer of filling in the gaps for the gov' for nought
while the gov' subsudises profits into private franchises.

be proactive not reactive.

rearing children is a family matter prinarily and community/society
matter secondary, we seem to be putting all our eggs into the
secondary basket.

On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 07:49:53 +1000, Cheryl wrote:

snipped
With peace and brightest of blessings,

len & bev

--
"Be Content With What You Have And
May You Find Serenity and Tranquillity In
A World That You May Not Understand."

http://www.lensgarden.com.au/

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"FlowerGirl" writes:
(I also remember tutoring a poisonous plants class at uni and having a 19 yo
student pretend to eat a castor oil seed right after I emphasized that all
the plants were poisonous so to wear gloves, not touch their faces and to
wash their hands well and often. ... so I guess there's no accounting for
some.)

The giant-leafed weed we know as the castor oil plant and find growing on
disturbed wasteland -- is it that the self same plant from which castor
oil is commercially extracted?
--
John Savage (my news address is not valid for email)

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"len garden" wrote in message
...
g'day amanda,

On Sat, 24 Mar 2007 04:15:31 GMT, "FlowerGirl"
wrote:


"len garden" wrote in message
.. .
snipped

With all due respect Len, its a very different world today than when you
were small or when your own kids were small.
Just think of the reidiculous insurance claims for a start.
AND I do know of kids from my Dad's era who died from plant poisoning
(castor bean no less), so its not really a generational thing.

i wasn't saying kids or anyone never suffered even fataly, but you
still can't cotton woll them with any more guarantees that something
won't happen, it still comes back to parenting. just recently now we
ahve ahd 2 deaths involving contained water one in a pool with the
obligatory required fence the otehr in a horse trough in the middle of
a horse enclosure (these unfortunate people sadly also lost another
child 3 years ago the same way).

Which is a heartbreaking case ... but Len, I think you'll find the number of
backyard pool drownings has decreased since fencing became mandatory - and
sorry, but I don't think this is "cotton balling" children.


and not that long ago another child who apparently had an epileptic
fit in a pool swimming unsupervised.

you still can't get away from making poarents responsible and take
away the road to litigation. litigation is not saving paind or death
sad to say.

snipped

I see you point Len, but bare in mind, people take a lot of offence if
their
parenting skills are questioned.
Childcare was probably not a major option in your young day - its a
necesary
thing in today's world and a parent has a right to expect that the
environment is safe if they are paying for a person to caer for their
child
in that environment.

of course i would expect subjective parents to take offense what other
defense ahve they got for not being objective and that does not take
from the debate, just because someone doesn't like the truth under the
morale "if the shoe fits wear it" then they beter get their act into
gear and become responsible then there may be some hope that some of
those unfortunate incidences will cease.

Wait on a minute - I don't think you are actually being very objective in
your assumption that its the fault of "parents of today" and seemingly not
admitting any mistakes from previous generations.
I personally would have to say the standard of parenting in today's world is
actually an improvement on the mistakes made in the past myself. ... but
that's my opinion. ... and I myself have a mother who should be sainted as
the best mother of all time (she's my Mummy so I get to say it!) and a
father who I wouldn't trust to look after either of my children safely in a
pink fit, whilst otherwise being an OK Dad (he just doesn't *get* that 2
year olds don't think like adults).


all that is ahppening amanda is the regulators are bringing in
bamdaides in an effort to save trauma, lets get back to the difficult
course of "cause & effect" and find the real cause to issues not
target and effect and try and fix it from that end.

take pool fences just this summer there have been at least 4 deaths
still and that is only the ones we here about, so pool fences aren't
working because they are a band aide, without too much trouble at all
these pool incicences can all be bouhgt home to bad parenting.


Care to share some facts and figures here Len? From what I've read,
mandatory fencing has dramatically reduced the numbers drownings of toddlers
in the 0-5 y age bracket. Fencing does work when used properly and in
conjunction with parental supervision.
Nobody is saying that this means you don't need parental supervision, given
that a child can drown in under 2 minutes, that's not a large time span and
you also cannot convince me that parents in the past watched their children
24 hour a day without missing 2 minutes of each child's waking activities...
even as the most wonderful parent in the world, I must occasionally go to
the toilet and trust while I am there, that my 2.5 yo son has not caused
himself or his sister any harm. If I had an unfenced pool at my back door,
I think *that* would be bad parenting

I think you might also find that the number of backyard pools has increased
dramatically in the past 50 years as well and this would have implications
on the numbers of drownings you would expect.


snipped

Again Len - not wanting to have a go at you, but do you perhaps think
that
a) there are considerably more cars on the road now than back in the
olden
days? and b) that kids still did stupid things back then but it might not
have made the evening news. From what I know from my parents and
grandparents era, it wasn't uncommon to have had a sibling die from an
accident of some sort .... or an illness that hadn't been described.

i know that amanda but the regulator doesn't seem to know that neither
do the educators or the parents or the standard of road safety
education would be elevated at the same level as the road traffic and
population grows. not wait for something to hapen then band aid it.

Len - believe it or not, we do teach our children about road safety. It may
interest you to know that a child's field of vision is not as great as an
adult due to their different head shape. Adults have a lot more peripheral
vision.

...and while we are on road safety, let me tell you about the 60ish year old,
fit looking man who, whilst chatting on his mobile phone, stepped out in
front of my car last Friday when he decided to cross against the light, just
as my light went green ... there wasn't even a break in conversation as he
meandered across 4 lanes of traffic while we all politely waited for him! I
suspect he was so engrossed in his conversation that he failed to realise
that the red flashing stick-man on the light facing him meant he should
probably stop at the kerb.
:P


don't where you r parents/grandparents lived but i was a kid and we
lost none of our friends to accidents or poisonings.

Really... bully for your lot. Perhaps you didn't grow up on a farm or you
were just lucky.
Perhaps we could start with my father's cousin who died from castor bean
poisoning, another cousin who we now suspect died from an allergic reaction,
Dad's friend who died in a motorcycle accident, Grandma's cousin who died in
a farm accident, FIL's sister who died from malnutrition, and a friend's
great grandmother who drowned in the farm dam. My own DH grew up on a farm
and frankly had some fairly scary accidents as a child.... and his parents
were excellent parents.
All of these families were *good* families and good parents who had some
very unlucky circumstances (well - not FIL's parents - they were atrocious,
but he survived them and turned out to be one of the best fathers of his
generation).


if i was amanda i wouldn't be too keen on signing off on anything like
that nowadays it smells of scapegoating.

Sorry - its the kindy that has to sign off, and I'm not officially
offering
an expert opinion so I'm not signing.

Its interesting to get this "generational" discussion though.

Amanda

thanks for the cross post i have never been in this sort of discussion
before, we as grandparents & parents would hate to lose any of our
children/grandchildren to any of those preventable accicents that is
why we are so high on proactivity and prevention.

I agree - and this is absolutely no different to what we are doing as
"today's parents".

....and I must admit I had thought this conversation might have lead to a few
more suggestions of plants to watch out for and not so much a discussion of
values and parenting whe nI cross-posted it! It is interesting though.

this wait until the
horse has bolted before closing the gate system we seem to have is
reactive and so far isn't preventive long term because the real causes
are treated as sacred cows. we are not allowed to point the finger at
bad parenting.

Only if you are equally pointing it in your own generation's direction.
There will always be "good" and "bad" parents ... and what one person thinks
is "good parenting" may be totally unthinkable to another parent in a
different generation.
Goodness knows how often I've smiled an nodded my way through "parenting
advice" from well-meaning grannies who suggest things they think would help,
but which could actually harm my kids.


i am not highlighting those with special needs they need special
circumstances, the cases i have mentioned apart from one where totaly
preventable if the parents where dispatching their responsibilities
responsibly.

....and since special needs children are included in the same schools and
centres as "normal" kids, we need to make sure they are safe as well as the
"normal" kids. If a centre hangs out its shingle and charges a fee to care
for children, one could reasonably expect it to have a safe environment and
have qualified child carers available for the children so that the parent
can expect that their child is safe while there.
..... much like one expects a hire car not to have serious and potentially
dangerous mechanical defects, charter boats not to have leaky hulls and
surgeons to have some sort of qualification in medicine, and some idea of
what they are doing before performing operations.


my heart goes out to the grandparents (my status) and the parents of
that family that lost 2 toddlers in 3 years in same like circumstances
on the same property.

Yes indeed - a very sad story.
Amanda

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"len garden" wrote in message
...
there are a lot of grandparents out there who are more than capable of
looking after their offsprings offsprings.

Yes - but what if a) they are working themselves, b) live too far away, c)
are completely incompetent / untrustworthy as child carers or d) not
remotely interested in taking care of 1 or more children for 9-10 hours a
day, for up to 5 days a week?.

just the gov' would have too many strings attached for it to work, so
we get the pleasuer of filling in the gaps for the gov' for nought
while the gov' subsudises profits into private franchises.

Some grandparents don't see it as a "pleasure" I'm afraid. ...and its a 5
day a week full time job.

Having said that, I'm grateful that Mum looks afer my son 1 day a week while
I go in to the office ... but that suits us both at the moment.


be proactive not reactive.

rearing children is a family matter prinarily and community/society
matter secondary, we seem to be putting all our eggs into the
secondary basket.

Many parents would love to have a parent at home with the children full time
.... but since mortgages have skyrocketed in the last 30 years along with
many other things, many families simply cannot afford this luxury.
Also - since its mostly mothers who do the staying at home bit anyway, we do
tend to have slightly better careers than our forebears and some of us feel
the need to continue with our chosen work as well as have children. Its not
an "all-or-nothing" choice.
Amanda

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"len garden" wrote in message
...
g'day chris,

it is still the parents responsibility to ascertain they are not for
the sake of convenience leaving their children in a less than
desirable situation, there are many pressures on modern parents for
both to work for the families betterment.


Len - do you really think you could walk into a childcare centre (or
somebody's house for that matter) and find every single thing that could
cause harm to a toddler? Its not as easy as you would think.
Amanda

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

there are a lot of grandparents out there who are more than capable of
looking after their offsprings offsprings.

why should my parents be responsible for watching my kids? If I want to go
out and make money I shoulds expect to pay someone for their time. (although
I know a few peoples parents who are happy with that kind of arrangment,
most are not) And if I pay for a service, I expect it to be a safe thing.

Most peoples parents are at an age where they are ready to have fun, travel
and do what they want.. not be stuck down with more kids.

--
Leanne
----------------------
Don't demand respect as a parent.
Demand civility and insist on honesty.
Respect is something you must earn.

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

In article ,
len garden wrote:

rearing children is a family matter prinarily and community/society
matter secondary, we seem to be putting all our eggs into the
secondary basket.

I'd disagree with that. Try going in to Sydney CBD with a 2yo in a stroller.
You find out exactly how much time hasn't been devoted to making it easy to
get round. At least DS2 will be out of his stroller in a year or two. If I
were a wheelchair person, I'd be out the front of the Town Hall with a
placard. And if our society is so child-friendly, where's the decent
maternity leave (to hark back to another thread), and the jobs that allow you
to pick the kids up from school?

Getting off my soapbox before things get out of control...

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"Parenthood is like the modern stone washing process for denim jeans. You may
start out crisp, neat and tough, but you end up pale, limp and wrinkled."
Kerry Cue

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

Chookie wrote:
In article ,
len garden wrote:

rearing children is a family matter prinarily and community/society
matter secondary, we seem to be putting all our eggs into the
secondary basket.

I'd disagree with that. Try going in to Sydney CBD with a 2yo in a
stroller. You find out exactly how much time hasn't been devoted to
making it easy to get round. At least DS2 will be out of his
stroller in a year or two. If I were a wheelchair person, I'd be out
the front of the Town Hall with a placard. And if our society is so
child-friendly, where's the decent maternity leave (to hark back to
another thread), and the jobs that allow you to pick the kids up from
school?

Getting off my soapbox before things get out of control...

OK I will admit I came in late and can't be bothered going back through all
the posts but...
Why do you think employers should bear the cost of work place disruption,
that maternity leave causes, ditto with allowing people to knock off work to
pick up the kids?

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

In article ,
"Barbara" wrote:

Chookie wrote:
In article ,
len garden wrote:

rearing children is a family matter prinarily and community/society
matter secondary, we seem to be putting all our eggs into the
secondary basket.

I'd disagree with that. Try going in to Sydney CBD with a 2yo in a
stroller. You find out exactly how much time hasn't been devoted to
making it easy to get round. At least DS2 will be out of his
stroller in a year or two. If I were a wheelchair person, I'd be out
the front of the Town Hall with a placard. And if our society is so
child-friendly, where's the decent maternity leave (to hark back to
another thread), and the jobs that allow you to pick the kids up from
school?

Getting off my soapbox before things get out of control...

OK I will admit I came in late and can't be bothered going back through all
the posts but...
Why do you think employers should bear the cost of work place disruption,
that maternity leave causes, ditto with allowing people to knock off work to
pick up the kids?

What's wrong with shifting hours (where possible) so that people can
pick up their kids? There are plenty of jobs out there where it would
be completely feasible for folks to start work at 7am and stop at 3pm so
they can go pick their kids up from school. In fact, I wouldn't be
surprised if people got more work done if the working day was staggered
so everyone didn't start and finish at the same time. I bet there'd be
a lot of people (including those who don't have kids) who would like a
staggered start/end time option for their jobs.

eggs.

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:33:54 +1000, eggs
wrote:

What's wrong with shifting hours (where possible) so that people can
pick up their kids? There are plenty of jobs out there where it would
be completely feasible for folks to start work at 7am and stop at 3pm so
they can go pick their kids up from school. In fact, I wouldn't be
surprised if people got more work done if the working day was staggered
so everyone didn't start and finish at the same time. I bet there'd be
a lot of people (including those who don't have kids) who would like a
staggered start/end time option for their jobs.

You're right. I have some friends who don't have kids (and never will
have kids), who like to start work at 7.30am so they can knock off
around 4-4.30pm and miss all the traffic. A boss I used to have would
start work at 9.30-10am and work through to 6pm so she could miss the
traffic. Before I had children I used to work from 7.30am to 3.30pm
at a defence force base and it was perfect, plus since we had flex
time I could work to 4pm, leave earlier than most people and take a
day off once a month. Flex time with set core hours is a great idea
if the company can swing it.

Cheryl

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

In article ,
"Leanne" wrote:

there are a lot of grandparents out there who are more than capable of
looking after their offsprings offsprings.

why should my parents be responsible for watching my kids? [...]

Most peoples parents are at an age where they are ready to have fun, travel
and do what they want.. not be stuck down with more kids.

It's interesting how the view on this has changed. Once upon a time the
family was the smallest economic unit -- all the members of the family
believed it was their duty to support each other. The oldies cared for the
littlies, but were themselves cared for if they became feeble. This was
before the age of the SKINs, though!

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"Parenthood is like the modern stone washing process for denim jeans. You may
start out crisp, neat and tough, but you end up pale, limp and wrinkled."
Kerry Cue

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 09:33:54 +1000, eggs
wrote:

What's wrong with shifting hours (where possible) so that people can
pick up their kids? There are plenty of jobs out there where it would
be completely feasible for folks to start work at 7am and stop at 3pm so
they can go pick their kids up from school. In fact, I wouldn't be
surprised if people got more work done if the working day was staggered
so everyone didn't start and finish at the same time. I bet there'd be
a lot of people (including those who don't have kids) who would like a
staggered start/end time option for their jobs.

You're right. I have some friends who don't have kids (and never will
have kids), who like to start work at 7.30am so they can knock off
around 4-4.30pm and miss all the traffic. A boss I used to have would
start work at 9.30-10am and work through to 6pm so she could miss the
traffic. Before I had children I used to work from 7.30am to 3.30pm
at a defence force base and it was perfect, plus since we had flex
time I could work to 4pm, leave earlier than most people and take a
day off once a month. Flex time with set core hours is a great idea
if the company can swing it.

Cheryl

I have flex time with core hours and it is so fantastic. Before kids, I
used to do 7:30 - 3:30 with shorter lunch break so I could have the
occasional flexi day (I accumulated much more flexi time than I took
though) - gave you heaps of time to do a full day's work and do lots of
other things in the afternoon. When Angus was in childcare which didnt open
until 8:00, I started at 8:30 so I could drop him off and be there by 8:30.
Now they are both at school, I am mostly starting at 8:00 and knocking off
at 4:00. All flexible though so if we need to meet a deadline or jobs get
moved due to rain or something, then I can rearrange, stay later, start
earlier or whatever. Flexitime works out great for me and my employer but
my particular kind of job allows that flexibility. More employers should
consider it though as it could be win-win for everyone.

cheers
Leah

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

In article ,
"Barbara" wrote:

OK I will admit I came in late and can't be bothered going back through all
the posts but...
Why do you think employers should bear the cost of work place disruption,
that maternity leave causes, ditto with allowing people to knock off work to
pick up the kids?

I think you need to go back to the other thread.

Let me tell you a little story. There was once an engineering firm on
Sydney's Northern Beaches which (at some point) had one of those annoying
employees who take a lot of private calls, fiddled his flextime, came in late
and was generally a pain. Of course the correct way to deal with such a
person is to confront him and punish him, but this firm didn't. Instead they
instituted policies like: no personal phone calls or e-mail under any
circumstances, and they ditched flextime. A friend of ours got a job there.
He said he'd never ever seen an engineering firm where the engineers all left
on the dot of 5pm -- generally engineers love their jobs and happily put in
lots of hours when necessary -- but because they were being treated like
naughty little kids (when none of them had done anything wong in the first
place), they bundied off with the enthusiasm of process workers. Moral: treat
your employees fairly and well, and you'll get not just good work, but
excellence and enthusiasm.

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"Parenthood is like the modern stone washing process for denim jeans. You may
start out crisp, neat and tough, but you end up pale, limp and wrinkled."
Kerry Cue

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

Chookie wrote:
Moral: treat
your employees fairly and well, and you'll get not just good work, but
excellence and enthusiasm.


X-theory Vs Y-theory management.

X-theory (treat employees like they are lazy and stupid) is a
self-fulfilling prophecy.


--
That's_ the message; "Donut sit behind leaning cats that have just
farted you blind"!

Dr HotSalt in A.R.K.

X-post: Poisonous plants and childcare
 

"Cheryl" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 18:58:47 GMT, len garden
wrote:


maybe a safer option for families if families became more extended and
grandparents took on the child care duties for their married siblings,

(I assume you mean married children, although they aren't the only
children that will be requiring childcare) That's fine for those who
chose to have their children at a young age, but it's not so good for
those who didn't have children before their late 30's/early 40's.
Their parents would be heading into their 70's and trying to look
after very active toddlers, which could be a recipe for disaster. The
next generation, those of us who had children later, could potentially
be nearly 80 before our first grandchildren are born.

Coming in late on this thread - this is us. DH and I are in our 40s, my
parents (the only close family we have in Melbourne) are in their 80s. While
they can do the occasional mind of their first and only GD for a few hours
they just don't have what it takes to look after P for any extended time.
They give in to her rather than deal with any battles.
I will be in my 60s when P is most likely to be a parent.

Liz

Liz