At the very beginning of the report it lists definitions for terms in the report and under child it mentions the age 13Quote:
Originally Posted by Isawitfirst
“child” means a person who is younger than 13 years old; (“enfant”)
Printable View
At the very beginning of the report it lists definitions for terms in the report and under child it mentions the age 13Quote:
Originally Posted by Isawitfirst
“child” means a person who is younger than 13 years old; (“enfant”)
But the bill specifically says for home daycare providers that the maximum is 5 children including their own under the age of 6 not 10 or 13. The bill just states that where the word child is used it is refeeing to a child under 13.Quote:
Originally Posted by playfelt
I spoke with my mom of the 10 year old tonight and she knew nothing about it so was a total shock to her. I promised to send her the pdf by email for her to look at. Timeline is also a big factor in all of this. There will be some that would be over in kids in January but not in February if a child had a birthday. A lot of things say effective immediately but the rules aren't rigidly enforced right away and there are only warnings not fines to help people adjust so we can only hope.
I just can't see it going down asap. They need to give parents time to find alternate care. I wouldn't inform anyone till all the ducks are in a row.
Which means they have removed the privilege of having school kids over age 10 as well as your allowed daycare kids ie 5 kids + any over 10Quote:
Originally Posted by bright sparks
They have also effectively removed most of them anyways because schools are to provide care for those gr 1 and up. The scrambling families will be those going back after mat leave with infants and those with school age kids till more spaces are created. Even though agency care can take one more most homes already have their 2 under 2.
I don't think there is any talk of giving parents time to find alternate care, because the reality is, many parents won't be able to... and when some of us start terminating Jan 6th, it will put all the other parents into a panic as well. What we need is for the parents to panic NOW before it is passed, so they can protest, not just wait until is a done deal and they are terminated.
As a few people have mentioned their concerns about children aged 10 and whether they would have to terminate them, let me clarify what the bill says, I quote...
Children of the provider
(5) For the purposes of counting children at a premises under paragraphs 1 and 2 of subsection (3), a child care provider’s own children who are at the premises shall be counted unless they are six years old or older.
This very clearly translates to me as providers children under 6 are counted.
I can not find any reference to the oldest child we can take on within our 5 cap.
I can't find it either.Quote:
Originally Posted by bright sparks
I understand, although this needs to be clearly defined in the bill versus no mention at all for us to just come to our own conclusions. For those with their own children 6 yrs and older, it at least solves their issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by playfelt
where does it say that this will take effect jan 6 when we don't even know the whole deal. I have read everything and so far everything is just in proposal, there are no dates except that they "want" to try to do this before the end of the year.