Printable View
Has anyone had experience with parents that are on assistance for Childcare? I have a new family starting that is fully covered so the government will pay me the full monthly rate instead of the parents.
I'm a bit worried because I can't claim subsidy for more then 2 weeks out of the year that child is absent. In my policy it states fee is due regardless so I'm worried the parents will not afford to pay out of pocket. Can anyone share good or bad parent experiences regarding subsidy?
My rates are higher than subsidy pays, so parents have a parent portion that they are expected to pay. I personally haven't had a problem with not being able to claim their amount. I do include subsidy policies in the contract including parent portions and missed days being the parents financial responsibility because I can't claim for those days. If parents think this may be out of reach for them, then it is up to us to decide before the contract is signed if we can accept the risk of the loss of income.
But right now, I currently have 3 children that are subsidized and all is good! :)
I've dealt with two subsidized families and I have to say that it's been a nightmare dealing with the parents. I don't nearly get enough pay for these children to put up with their parents. They are constantly dropping off their children when they are not working and are on holidays. What's wrong with them? Don't they want to be with their kids?
do you have to go through an agency , or can you keep the client as private?
I have a private client that just told me she aplied for subsidy . i not sure yet if she'll get it . but i'm just wondering how it works . i am enrolled with an home childcare agency and i've had in the past a subsidyzed client with them but never had to deal with it privatly. any advise? do i have to pass this client to the agency and will it be easier as well?
thanks for your time:)
I wouldn't ever take subsidy clients. It goes against what I believe with respect to having kids and paying for them.
Besides, I don't want a parent to suddenly sob-story we with their reason for non-payment because their subsidy didn't come through etc.
I did it twice and will never do it again. Both the parents sent them every day even though they did not work. In the end both were terminated for nonpayment.
I don't want to generalize but my experience was not a good one.
I just have to comment on this. If we don't subsidize daycare for those who cannot afford it, would you be happy to pay for the whole family to be on welfare so that the parents can stay home with the kids? Or would you rather see them living on the streets? Or, if, as it seems you suggest, people who cannot afford daycare do not have kids, how are we going to solve the problem we are already facing in this country due to labour shortages and lack of population growth? Furthermore, it is possible and actually happens quite often, that parents have good jobs and plan their families and then one parent loses a job and has to settle for something lower paying etc...bad things happen to good people. Should we say, too bad, you shouldn't have had kids if you couldn't afford the daycare? And aside from all this, I don't think that subsidized parents are any more likely than non-subsidized parents to not pay since they are actually getting a portion paid making it more manageable. As for those who mentioned people on subsidies leaving their kids in care when not working...that happens all the time with non-subsidized parents and has more to do with parental decisions than money! I get frustrated with generalizations of this type. I actually wanted to go with an agency because I wanted to be able to take people with subsidies, but decided against it because of the lower wages for me and the age restrictions. Otherwise, I would absolutely accept people on subsidies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy Trickett
Yes, yes and yes.... pretty much everything you said about the WHY of my not agreeing with subsidy are true.Quote:
Originally Posted by kangaroomama
I'm okay with admitting that.
I know LOTS of moms and dads on subsidy who send their kids to daycare on their days off. Why should I pay for daycare when it's not needed?? Sure, clients of mine do that but THEY are the ones footing the bill for it - it's different.
I don't agree with it because I think we live in a time of entitlement. I think a lot of families simply have two working parents to afford bigger homes and the latest and greatest that they don't necessarily NEED but just WANT. Well, sorry, but I shouldn't have to pay for your daycare so you can drive a bigger SUV or have a bigger TV.
You know, 60 years ago only one parent worked and people stayed home and actually raised their own kids. They had what they needed to live, they were fed, they were clothed and they spent a lot of time with their kids. But we have moved so far away from that. We have created a society where where we THINK we need two incomes and that comes at the expense of the taxpayer and the kids.
I have no problem if two parents want to work because I am all for CHOICE. But, when you make CHOICES you should make them with the consideration that you can AFFORD those choices.
I hate our social welfare system. I also think we should get rid of universal health (sick) care, daycare subsidy, and pare down welfare.
Very well said Judy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy Trickett
The 2 families I had were both on "social assistance" I know for a fact they were scamming the system AND none of them worked. So I took care of their kids all day so they could go hang out with friends,go to internet cafes,go shopping etc.
I have a SERIOUS issue with this. One of them often tried to bring me her child when she was sick even.
So I made a personal choice only to accept families who work from now on.
Also, because they were on social assistance, they only had to pay 10$ a week and somehow they still could not manage that.
I too have known people who have used and abused the system and gotten far more out of government assistance than they probably should have. I alos agree that if you have a child, that they are your financial responsibility. However, and this is a BIG however, what we would end up doing by not offering subsidized daycare to people who need it would simply compound the problems that we already have. People would stay home and collect welfare cheques rather than work and put their kids in daycare, or they would put expenses on credit cards and later declare bankrupcy, or they would put their kids in a warehouse type daycare that is cheap but also overcrowded and completely unstimulation for the kids. I read a study once that found for every $1 that the government (or other organizations) spends on improving the education and development of children under the age of 5, we end up saving $6 in later social programs, jails, foster homes, etc. I find it nauseating that parents would have the gov pay for childcare so that they can sleep, drink, spend time with friends, whatever. But on the other hand, I would much prefer that child be with me in a safe and nurturing environment than warehoused somewhere, or left alone, or worse. It comes to a point where it's not about punishing the parents anymore, it's about helping the kids. Just my opinion.
This is a good debate to have, so I hope everyone understands that I am not attacking Judy (I respect and agree with much of what she posts about daycare and her considerable experience), but simply want to bring this discussion up so we can all have our say. So, to respond, if you believe that we should get rid of publicly funded health care, then I guess that if one of your children is diagnosed with cancer for example, you would not mind paying the thousands or perhaps hundreds of thousands to pay for treatment and then if you ended up losing everything (your home, savings, etc) because of these massive bills, you would also not mind that there is no social assistance available to help you out because we have scrapped that as well. I do know that people abuse the system...some people will abuse any system. However, there are many more people who genuinely need help so that they don't end up on the streets raising there kids in a way that will almost certainly lead to crime...which you will no dount later complain about. Then we will need lareger prisons to lock them all up...and you won't mind paying for that because it's better than paying for welfare, health care...or heaven forbid, daycare! I don't agree that most people work because they want more things....I believe most parents work because they have to in order to support their families as the cost of living is high and the cost of raising children is high...much higher than in our grandparents' generation. Yes, we are a society of consumers and it has gotten out of hand, but in order to put a roof over your kids' heads and provide food and post-secondary education etc, most families need to have two parents working and not all moms are cut-out for being daycare providers nor have the set-up for it as we on this forum do. And it's a good thing they don't because we'd all be out of work as well! Also, if, as you suggest, one parent stays home to raise the kids (I do think this is good for the kids if a family can manage it, don't get me wrong) that cuts out almost half of our labour force. We are already facing a labour shortage...so if half of parents stay home and furthermore, many people do not have children at all because of a lack of government support, we are going to be in serious trouble!
well put Waterloo day mom!
I lived in the United States for a LONG time. So, unlike most Canadians who think NON-Universal health care is a bad thing I actually have FIRST hand experience with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by kangaroomama
I have been on both side of the fence and I would take the U.S. way in a heartbeat.
You know, in the U.S. they give you very little welfare and most of it is paid DIRECTLY to your housing corporation. Wanna buy groceries....fine... .you get a debit card type thing. Wanna buy milk and eggs...fine...it goes through the scanner at the cash register. BUT, when you buy chips and pop the cashiers system flags it and you have to PAY for it with CASH instead of your food stamps card. It is VERY difficult to abuse the welfare system in the states. And, as a result people actually WORK for a living.
I worked with MANY Mexicans who didn't have a single dime when they moved to that country and because they were HARD workers they managed to feed and house their families with NO government assistance - NONE! So, yes, it CAN be done.
Non-Universal health care?? Here's the thing - if you have a JOB then you 99% of the time will have HEALTH care because of that job. No job - no health care. And this is why more people actually KEEP their jobs. It's win-win for everyone.
I just don't believe that those who sit on welfare or use the system at LENGTH (as in year after year or, in many cases, generations) really WANT to work. You know, when I lived in the states I had a very high management job. EVERY day, when I went to lunch and stopped at a traffic light some vagrant would approach my car for change. And EVERY single day I gave at least ONE person my business card and told them, "You come see me - I WILL give you a job". And do you wanna know how many people after years and years and YEARS of me giving out those cards ever came to see me about a job???? NOT ONE!
My opinions are not just born from ignorance; they are born of experience.
I also had the unfortunate situation of a loved one falling VERY ill (spent 7 days in ICU) while living there. And you know what?? The REASON he literally nearly lost his LIFE was because OUR system, here in Canada, is so screwed up that he was on a waiting list. Yes, he came to visit us and nearly DIED from the same damn ailment that we Canadians did NOT have enough in our Health (sick) care coffers to take care of! And you know what?? Within TWENTY-FOUR hours of his arrival to the ER in the states he got a CAT scan, and MRI, and a surgery where they flew in the BEST surgeon in that field from Massachusettes. He lived BECAUSE of the way they handle medical care in the United States, not despite it. If that had happened to him while in Canada I have NO doubt he would have died.
I've BTDT. I KNOW how both systems work. And I will take the U.S. system of every man for himself any day of the week.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy Trickett
as a current US resident, this may have been the way it was in the past but now, if a family is on food assistance they get an allotted amount on a card every month and it can be used for all food crap food and healthy food alike. Those benefits cannot be used for alcohol though.
There is another program called WIC- "women infants and children" that has coupons for specific products on each and those benefits can only be used for the specific products- this program covers things such as eggs, milk, cheese, carrots, and beans and allows very little room for flexibility.
There are millions of people bilking the system now. It gets depressing and makes it harder for those who are in genuine need to get help
Thank Goodness others feel the same....it especially ticks me off that they all wear designer clothes, get their nails done weekly, and drive cars of the year. I dont understand why it is not harder for parents to get assistance, these days it seems like even people who make more then 50k are still eligible. Don't get me wrong there are people that are deserving of assistance, but if the goverment was a little more responsible with its money maybe our taxes would'nt be so high.
As well I dont like the baggage that tends to come with the families, they always seem to be the ones that make my day the hardest, early show up, late pick up ect. I now only take on full paying clients.
You could have them pay up front, Like on Monday morning, and If they dont have the money hey dont get the care. I have learned the hard way, and wont take on families if they dont agree to it.
Amen!!!!! Having to have been on disability for almost 8 years due to trying to manage a chronic pain among other things, I often get, why did you go back to work? The question is Why Not. The amount of abuse of social assistance abuse in all of its finger shows up on everyone of our pay checks. If people were made to work for what they get, then they would get themselves a job, instead of scrubing toliets at a local mall, or picking trash in a local park, as people in the staes have to do. Unfortunally the mentality know is, If I get fired I can always live on welfare. The same applies to families that abuse assistance for childcare. If they can not afford childcare, why not stay home with your children, and watch your neighbors children instead.
As someone who has needed and used assistance for a legitimate reason, I would think that you would be a little bit more understanding about this issue. There are people who abuse it, absolutely, but what would you have done if you could not have gotten disability when you needed it? And when you say, if you can't afford childcare you should stay home and watch other kids...I really have to disagree strongly here because people who go into childcare just because they can't afford daycare and not because they have the patience, etc that is required for the job, are those that you hear about in the news who have shaken a child to death or let a child drown, etc. This is in no way good for our society or for the children who will be our future. Quebec recognized that children who have a good start to life do much better in school...that is why they started the subsidized care for all (although there are still issues with not enough spaces). I think we have to always be thinking about the children and the good of our society in general when we talk about these issues. Is it better for the kids (who have no choice) to say, well their parents shouldn't have had them if they couldn't afford them, and then leave them with no health care, welfare, food banks, daycare....to live in squalid conditions and most likely grow up angry and under educated to turn to crime? I fail to see how this benefits society.Quote:
Originally Posted by katherine mowat
I think it is easy to say "every man for himself" is best when you are born into privelege as I hazard to guess you have been. By privelege, I mean, white middle class English speaking etc. I agree that many immigrants here and in the US are much harder workers than anyone born here and that is why they can make something out of nothing and succeed. But how many people are falling through the cracks because they don't have the help when it is needed? What about those who have been laid off and have no insurance and then get sick...should we say "too bad...you should be working?" I do not disagree at all that many people are lazy and abuse the system...my point is that there are also many who really need help and helping them betters our society. Kids who have a good start in life with access to food, health care, education, grow up to be contributers to society instead of angry criminals. So, why should we pay for other people's poor decisions etc? Because the kids are our future and the more we invest in them, the brighter our future as a society is. I cannot believe anyone would say that the US way is better...crime is higher, poverty is higher, violence is higher and there are vast ghettos full of angry disillusioned youth. Is that better? Really? Well, I suppose as long as you are not living in the ghetto you can close your eyes to the problems and go about your rosy life, but I do not believe this will lead to a better future for anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Judy Trickett
1) I don't have a job that includes medical benefits (luckily my husband does) but as a single person if I would not be able to continue working this job as I would have to pay medical expenses out of pocket
2) I don't agree that the cost of living is in proportion to what it was when our grandparents were growing up. We live in modest house, I drive an 18yr old car, and almost everything inside the house is used, and mostly gifts. My husband makes a good salary but nowhere near enough for me to be able to stay home with my kids if I were not taking in other kids as well. I do daycare from home so that we can pay the mortgage.
3) I have spent a lot of time volunteering in areas of the GTA and of the world where they do not have the luxuries that we do. I don't want to go off on a long speech here, but I have seen 8yr olds who walk their younger siblings home to an empty house every evening. I have seen 9yr old girls start hanging out with teenage gangsters because she is so desperate for attention. There was even a story in the news recently about a 9mnth old baby left in their crib with a stack of diapers and jars of baby food (the mother figured the baby had all they needed and went away for a few days). Simply handing out free money is not the answer, Judy is absolutely right. But I have seen children change after having children's aid pay to send them to daycamp for a week. I have seen homeless teenages cry when they get new glasses to replace their old ones that were stolen. There are people out there who abuse the system (I even know some personally) but there are also people, especially children, who given just the littlest bit of nurturing and support and guidance can make drastic changes in their own lives. The system absolutely needs to be revamped, but that does not mean that there are people out there who need it and benefit from it.
Born our of privilege? Ha! No, nothing could be further from the truth! I grew up with parents who bilked the system for all it was worth. There were many times I ate Peanut butter sandwiches for a week straight but you could be sure my parents still has their weekly carton of cigarettes.Quote:
Originally Posted by kangaroomama
Privilege? No, I don't think so!
I got where I am now by the sweat of my brow. And this is one of the reasons I have such animosity for those that use the system and don't really "need" it. I worked hard - had a job since I was 14 yrs old. EVERYTHING I have is because I worked for it. And there were times an adults that hubby and I were going to school and working so hard and could not even afford to eat more than macaroni (for real!) but you know what - not ONCE did we use the "system". We sucked it up, spent nothing on what WE could not afford on our own. We lived through it and I think it made us better people because of it. We take nothing for granted and we realize that those who "have" probably worked damn hard for it.
ETA: Anyway, this thread is getting off on an NON-daycare tangent. So, out of respect for this forum and its intent I am done posting on this thread. I think everyone's opinions have been voiced and I agree to disagree. I don't want to turn daycare.com into drama-fest.:)
Whew.... everyone did a great job keeping things polite and respectful but this is clearly quite the controversial topic!
To address the ORIGINAL question, I am unable to accept subsidized families, as I am a 100% private facility. There is not any way for me to claim from the government for any type of income. I can and would accept a family that was on social assistance, and unless they told me specifically that their income was from that source, I would not actually know.
For me, this issue would not come down to how their bills are paid, and from what source, but ARE the bills being paid and do our values mesh/combine to create a good working relationship. If the fees aren't paid; no care. Bottom line. If I find out that you (or someone else) are/is paying me to watch your kid while you pick up guys at the mall or smoke/drink your face off; it's not going to work. Bottom line.
We have discussed this topic before; I am under the understanding that I am caring for your child so that you can work and provide benefit to your family. I am fine with you taking a day to run errands, go to appointments, etc. But if I become a way for you to "escape" your children on a constant basis, I will not continue to work with that type of family.
Without getting into too much detail; I believe that our social system does need a serious overhaul, but the answer is neither "Leave it alone, because it does help SOME people" nor is it "Scrap it!". It's somewhere in between. There are absolutely those out there who are circumventing the system to their own benefit. But I ABSOLUTELY agree with the poster that stated that we DO NOT live in the same economy as our grandparents, or even our parents. My husband works in the financial industry and can back this up with solid facts.
Why do most families have both parents work? Because they HAVE to! Did you know that in the 60s, a "good" income was 10k? That meant that mom stayed home, they had a car and a house, and were comfortable but not "rich". That figure doubled in the 70s to 20k, and again in the 80s. Following that trend, a "good" income should be what? Over 160k!!! The median income in Canada right now? Less than $50k. (37k, last I checked) Even allowing for some kind of slow down, we are nowhere near our former purchasing power when it comes to incomes.
Now, I do agree with Judy that our attitude toward wants vs needs has changed as well. That is a problem in itself. But many families, even without the 8 big flat screens and 2 brand new SUVs parked beside the boat and RV, would find it difficult without a dual income.
I actually disagree that this discussion is off topic for this forum. I am happy to end the discussion and agree to disagree as everyone has a right to their own opinions. However, I think this is absolutely relevant. If we are choosing clients based on stereotypes and assumptions, this affects the entire daycare industry. We do all have the right to choose clients as we see fit based on a good fit, but all I wish to do is make everyone think and really re-examine their own biases and assumptions and always put the children first as I know we all wish to do as daycare providers. I definitely do not see this discussion as a "drama-fest" as these are debates that need to be had. Thanks for everyone on both sides who participated in the discussion :)
I was on subsidy, and yes we took our son to daycare when we did not work...WhY because we HAD TO PAY for the days regardless of whether we used them or not, and as much as most wont say it sometimes on our days off WE WANT TIME ALONE OR TIME TO CATCH UP ON CHORES. And I think we are entitled to that once in a while....
AND JUST A SIDE NOTE NOT ALL PEOPLE ON THAT ARE LOWLIFE SYSTEM SUCKING BUMS.
IJS
Biggest issue for me was stability. Parents on subsidy, training grants, etc. were temporary and had to be thought of that way and yes I have replaced one or two over the years when something more stable came along because I needed the stability. I no longer work with an agency and I know things have changed in the 20 years since I did but even the agencies were strapped by the government rules so if the parent didn't pay them, there was no recourse and we didn't get paid. The agency did not take the financial hit our behalf they passed it down the line to us. Hoping that system has changed but doubt it - is it any wonder providers are reluctant to take any parent that does not present with a stable situation.
gingerbread11: I don't see anywhere in this thread where anyone said or even implied that "all people on that are lowlife system sucking bums". Just sayin.
Also, NO, you are not entitled to "time off" from your kids, whether the taxpayers are footing the bill or not.
This IS actually off topic now, but why on earth are so many people in such a hurry to get rid of their kids?? Am I the only persohn who'd rather spend a day with my family than having me time??
Nope! I LOVE spending time with my entire family - my hubby AND my kids any time I can get it! I never have ME days and I am quite fine with that, thanks. I'm sure there will be plenty of lonely, ME days when my kids are grown and gone and I realize just how quickly time passed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alphaghetti
Many of the people on subsidy are single parents. Those of us with a husband or support system from our parents or whatever do not always realize what it is like to be a single parent. My husband is military so I know both sides. The days when I can barely cope from being "on duty" day and night and still having to do my day job on top of it all and just wanting a stretch of more than 4 hours of sleep to catch up or wanting to go the store and dry on a new pair of pants without having a stroller and 3 kids in the change room with me.
Subsidy parents have government rules they need to follow too. If they don't take the child to daycare and sign them in for the day then they don't get paid money for that day of care which means the caregiver isn't going to get paid either. If the caregiver wants her full time wage she needs to care for the child all days so the government will give the parent the full amount. The person on subsidy needs to turn in her forms every month stating what was paid for care and is reimbursed the following month.
I think this thread is more mixed up than off topic. We have people talking about the same issue but not really the same situation just aspects of it.
Because as much as we hate to say it, WE WANT TO BE ALONE and if that makes me selfish then I guess I am oh well, I had my child knowing what my commitments were, but I have no problem saying that my husband deserves just as much attention if not more--because in the end if his parents are happy so is he.....
And playfelt is right if the caregiver wanted pay, then we took him....if she didn't mind a no pay day then we didn't.
Oh my goodness. Subsidy in Alberta is not for parents on welfare. You need to be working, it is based on your income and how many children you have. I find it totally opposite non subsidized parents bring there children everyday because they pay a higher monthly fee. They also tend to bring there children while ill due to having to pay higher bills. 99 percent oft families are subsidized and have never had a problem.
Yes exactly Carla thats how it was for me I was working and it was based on what I made-- and as I said even if I had the day off I still had to bring him...
In Alberta to qualify for full time subsidy you need to have 100 hours for daycare kids and 50 for osc kids. I guess it depends on which province you are in. I am all for parents working and getting subsidy would rather give a hand up then a hand out. If a parent is sitting at home and getting subsidy for there child that is different but if they are working and not sitting on ss then why not help them. As a paren and now as a daycare director I can see how a parent would need subsidy. I was 20 when I had my daughter going to school full time if it was not for daycare subsidy I would be sitting on welfare or working at McDonald's