Unfortunately, with the waitllists as they are in the city for both daycare and subsidy, not everyone can afford to bypass such types of daycares. It's sad, but sometimes, it's reality.
Printable View
Unfortunately, with the waitllists as they are in the city for both daycare and subsidy, not everyone can afford to bypass such types of daycares. It's sad, but sometimes, it's reality.
I think the main message is that if you can't afford quality care then having children is not an option. Think and plan for this before having kids.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandbox Sally
I was wondering about the house too, kinda looks abandoned. And look at all those garbage bags. And where would you put 27 kids.Quote:
Originally Posted by cfred
somthing doesn't sound right. It says the food inspectors where there before for another issue. Why would they go to the house unless something happened before. Maybe they were under a companie like wee watch but claimed unliscensed???
Were they actually operating a daycare centre as in several adult "teachers" and different kids in different rooms. That would account for the 27 kids and what parent is going to question if it is "licensed" when they walk in they just assume stuff like that potentially.
also the area looks like a subdivision, wouldn't the neighbours be annoyed by all the comings and going of 27 kids, the vehicles and where to park. I know my back up provider got called on when she started having lots of kids and the neighbours started to get annoyed with all the vehicles, she had 11 kids in her basement not including her own (they were at school)
I completely agree! Where were all the other parents? How can you NOT know that there are that many kids? A couple over I can see not knowing but how can you not have clued in?
I just saw the news this morning and apparently this SAME provider was busted back in Nov 2012 for being caught with a total of 7 kids.
I think this theory makes the most sense. Neighbours wouldn't bat an eyelid if they just assumed it was a centre operated out of a residential home. With so little information available all one can do is speculate but it doesn't really get us any closer to the truth. I think Playfelt has probably hit the nail on the head.Quote:
Originally Posted by playfelt
It also explains the food inspectors going in. momofnerds wrote...In a daycare centre, Health inspectors regularly go in and it has nothing to do with a "possible" situation, but just the standard annual inspection that is required. If an inspector goes in and other flags are raised, they would likely report it to their supervisor who would let the necessary department know. If they had been in previously and things were not legal, it would already have been shut down. Again really makes me think that this place was operating as a centre. It may have even been licensed and the reporting newspaper labelled it as unlicensed simply due to lack of information. We all know how the media likes to fill in the blanks any way they like.Quote:
It says the food inspectors where there before for another issue. Why would they go to the house unless something happened before.
I'd be interested in finding out the "true story" of what has gone down here. Aside from everything and regardless of the circumstances, it is a truly sad day for the child's family and my thoughts are with them.
And that was late into the day. There were most likely more kids that left before then. 50 arrivals and departures a day! Think about that. You would have to hire a full time receiver and get em out the door guy. My neighbors would flip with that kind of trafficQuote:
Originally Posted by momofnerds
"Unlicensed" to the media who does not understand the true meaning of the terms could simply have been used for a place that did not meet the requirements of licensing - ie not able to be licensed which we all know is not the same thing as those of us that are private unlicensed providers.