Author Topic: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad  (Read 16789 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Bexx27

  • Striving to meet the minimum requirements of social acceptability
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1898
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #105 on: October 11, 2013, 01:10:31 PM »
And as usual we see a lot of insistence that the parents must be failing the child and making excuses.   I am not surprised.  It must be comforting to believe that good parents always produce well-behaved kids.

Who said that? I certainly haven't. This is what I mean by 'there's a difference between fault and responsibility'. It is not the parents' *fault* that the child is like he is, but, at this age anyway, he and the results of his behaviour *is* their responsibility.

ETA: ...in the same way that any parent of any kid, differing needs or not, is responsible for the actions of their children until such an age as they can be deemed responsible themselves. If a kid kicked his football through your window and broke it, his/her parents would be responsible for paying for the damage, unless he/she was old enough to have a job and pay for it him/herself. The ADHD thing is actually a bit of a red herring in this discussion.

I think it's comments like those below -- which do seem to imply that the parents are making excuses and/or not getting Herman the proper help -- that turnip is responding to. Most people on the thread are not saying this, however.

The child deliberately broke the laptop? I'd say they parents should pay.   Sometimes you can't just keep using conditions as excuses.

Parents should pay 100% and they need to get help for that child. Now!

Even somebody paid to watch a child.is going to havr to go to the bathroom or otherwise look away.at some point. And a nanny is going to have little to no say as to.how theADHD is treated, how bad behavior is disciplined, etc. Since the final authority falls back on the parents do does the final responsibility.


With disorders like autism and especially ADHD, there is a tendency of some parents to use it as an excuse.

How far you go in life depends on your being tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of the weak and strong. Because someday in life you will have been all of these. -George Washington Carver

alis

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 240
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #106 on: October 11, 2013, 01:22:38 PM »
Yes Bexx, and I say that as a mother of a child with a similar disorder, not as some judgemental person who doesn't have a clue. I wasn't speaking about the parents in the OP, obviously they feel it was unacceptable since they replaced the iPad, but there are some people that try to excuse such actions as ADHD or Autism and my point is that these excuses (rather than explanations and subsequent required discipline accordingly) doesn't help "us" (the parents of children with these disorders), if anything it just hurts more. Just because "our" children behave abnormally in some situations does not mean that it should be excused or in any way treated as a natural event because of it. A child with ADHD or Autism has challenges but unless they are so far into a spectrum that they are not conscious of the world around them, it means that they may actually require further discipline than a "normal" child, not less or handholding.

I do very much AGREE with those comments you highlighted (and not just my own), and I suspect any mother like me who has a child with ADHD or autism will as well. Sometimes people like to speak up for "us" and "we" don't necessarily agree with soft approaches, because laymen sometimes don't understand that these kids are still "normal".
« Last Edit: October 11, 2013, 01:24:09 PM by alis »

Bexx27

  • Striving to meet the minimum requirements of social acceptability
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1898
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #107 on: October 11, 2013, 01:32:31 PM »
Yes Bexx, and I say that as a mother of a child with a similar disorder, not as some judgemental person who doesn't have a clue. I wasn't speaking about the parents in the OP, obviously they feel it was unacceptable since they replaced the iPad, but there are some people that try to excuse such actions as ADHD or Autism and my point is that these excuses (rather than explanations and subsequent required discipline accordingly) doesn't help "us" (the parents of children with these disorders), if anything it just hurts more. Just because "our" children behave abnormally in some situations does not mean that it should be excused or in any way treated as a natural event because of it. A child with ADHD or Autism has challenges but unless they are so far into a spectrum that they are not conscious of the world around them, it means that they may actually require further discipline than a "normal" child, not less or handholding.

I do very much AGREE with those comments you highlighted (and not just my own), and I suspect any mother like me who has a child with ADHD or autism will as well. Sometimes people like to speak up for "us" and "we" don't necessarily agree with soft approaches, because laymen sometimes don't understand that these kids are still "normal".

But the argument is not about "hard" or "soft" approaches to discipline. It's people saying that the parents are making excuses or doing something wrong, when there is absolutely no reason to believe that.
How far you go in life depends on your being tender with the young, compassionate with the aged, sympathetic with the striving and tolerant of the weak and strong. Because someday in life you will have been all of these. -George Washington Carver

turnip

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 607
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #108 on: October 11, 2013, 01:56:04 PM »
Well, my only point is that ADHD is not an excuse for such actions. It is not. I have a son with autism and while his autism may explain some of the strange and difficult things he does, it does not absolve him from discipline for such actions. If anything, it is other parents or people with only brief laymen's knowledge of conditions like autism and ADHD that try to give him a free pass for certain behaviour, when in reality, that actually makes it more difficult for him to be corrected. For example, when my son gets angry and pushes down another kid who tries to touch his toy (he is not a wee toddler), and I try to discipline him, people say "oh it's okay, I know he will be like that..." well no, it's NOT okay and no, it's not an excuse for his outbursts, he must not be labeled "the autistic kid who is going to be violent if you upset his perfect world alignment"

Everyone is having a different discussion.  The question was never "should the child be disciplined?"    No one has suggested that the child should be coddled because he may or may not have a condition.

The question comes down to how much responsibility the _nanny_ has for his behavior.  She is aware he has behavior problems.  She has been hired to care for him.  She is ( presumably ) familiar with his outbursts.  Whatever can or should be done regarding his behavior is a bit besides the point, the question is whether or not the nanny should bear any of the burden. 

And I think if this is within the realm of 'normal' behavior for this child and if she took responsibility for him knowing that this sort of behavior should be watched out for, than she does bear some responsibility.  Like I said - if it happened once, if it was a nanny I knew and loved and trusted, than I would replace the iPad happily confident that she'd just had a bit of bad luck.   


Virg

  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 5886
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #109 on: October 11, 2013, 02:42:26 PM »
TootsNYC wrote:

"And if my child had epilepsy and broke something, I'd pay for it.  Especially if it were my nanny."

Agreed, but the repair costs for a nanny can be pretty exorbitant.

Virg

MariaE

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 4748
  • So many books, so little time
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #110 on: October 11, 2013, 03:38:42 PM »
TootsNYC wrote:

"And if my child had epilepsy and broke something, I'd pay for it.  Especially if it were my nanny."

Agreed, but the repair costs for a nanny can be pretty exorbitant.

Virg

*snerk*
 
Dane by birth, Kiwi by choice

Winterlight

  • On the internet, no one can tell you're a dog- arf.
  • Super Hero!
  • ****
  • Posts: 10013
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #111 on: October 12, 2013, 07:59:01 PM »
TootsNYC wrote:

"And if my child had epilepsy and broke something, I'd pay for it.  Especially if it were my nanny."

Agreed, but the repair costs for a nanny can be pretty exorbitant.

Virg

And if the 4yo is breaking the nanny, you might need an upgrade.
If wisdom’s ways you wisely seek,
Five things observe with care,
To whom you speak,
Of whom you speak,
And how, and when, and where.
Caroline Lake Ingalls

Jocelyn

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3260
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #112 on: October 12, 2013, 10:20:27 PM »
I'm concerned about the point of view that if the nanny is in charge, she is responsible for any damage the child does.

If the nanny takes the child out in public, and he damages something, would we expect her to pay for it?
 Suppose she takes him to a children's matinee, and he throws a Coke on another patron, who wants his clothes dry-cleaned. Would the nanny be expected to pay for that? Should she be expected to predict that giving him refreshments would lead to him throwing them?
Suppose he took off his shoe and threw it at her plasma TV. Would she be responsible for paying for the TV?
If she were babysitting him in his home, and he throws something and breaks it, would she be responsible for reimbursing the parents for their property?
I think you'd have to be paying a nanny a lot more than most nannies make, if you were going to expect her to assume financial liability for any and all damage the child does while in her custody. As someone pointed out, it's impossible to watch a child every minute, without being the sort of controlling person that would probably infuriate most 4 year olds (never leaving them alone, making them accompany you to the bathroom, stand next to you while you prepare meals, etc.).

TootsNYC

  • A Pillar of the Forum
  • *****
  • Posts: 31734
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #113 on: October 12, 2013, 10:25:55 PM »
The other thing is, the nanny is your agent, so what she does is "as if you are doing it." If I understand how "agency" works most of the time. That's one reason why you so carefully choose a nanny (or other agent).

miranova

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2427
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #114 on: October 13, 2013, 09:26:49 AM »

I think you'd have to be paying a nanny a lot more than most nannies make, if you were going to expect her to assume financial liability for any and all damage the child does while in her custody.

I have to agree with this.  There is no way I would nanny for someone who expected me to personally cover deliberate destruction to my property by their child.  I guess if you feel strongly about it, you can take the stance that the nanny shouldn't have left it out so she should pay for it, but then you'd better be prepared to find a new nanny every time your child does these things because I just don't see many nannies being willing to take on that kind of liability on an ongoing basis.

White Lotus

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 491
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #115 on: October 13, 2013, 01:47:20 PM »
My kid, my responsibility to pay for damages.  Nanny probably brings the iPad everywhere, to do course work, or read, or whatever, when she is not directly needed for childcare, like during naps, or quiet solo play, or Tube Time.  It isn't good for children to give them no time without direct adult interaction.  This is exactly what a SAHP would do, including leaving the iPad on a coffee table.  I can hardly blame a nanny for what could easily have happened were I doing the job personally.  And, at base: my kid, my responsibility.

turnip

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 607
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #116 on: October 13, 2013, 04:54:03 PM »
I'm concerned about the point of view that if the nanny is in charge, she is responsible for any damage the child does.

If the nanny takes the child out in public, and he damages something, would we expect her to pay for it?
 Suppose she takes him to a children's matinee, and he throws a Coke on another patron, who wants his clothes dry-cleaned. Would the nanny be expected to pay for that? Should she be expected to predict that giving him refreshments would lead to him throwing them?
Suppose he took off his shoe and threw it at her plasma TV. Would she be responsible for paying for the TV?
If she were babysitting him in his home, and he throws something and breaks it, would she be responsible for reimbursing the parents for their property?
I think you'd have to be paying a nanny a lot more than most nannies make, if you were going to expect her to assume financial liability for any and all damage the child does while in her custody. As someone pointed out, it's impossible to watch a child every minute, without being the sort of controlling person that would probably infuriate most 4 year olds (never leaving them alone, making them accompany you to the bathroom, stand next to you while you prepare meals, etc.).

It is not my view that if the nanny is in charge, she is responsible for anything the child does.

It _is_ my view that if the nanny is in charge, she is responsible for taking reasonable precautions to make sure my child is kept from things that my child could damage, or could damage my child.  Let's move away from the OP and assume the nanny is in charge of a typical 18 month old.  If she has assumed responsibility, assured the parents that she is experienced and capable of taking care of an 18 month old child, and then takes the child to her home, I would assume that she has taken the precaution of removing any glasses, vases, , scissors, small choking hazards, etc.   These are all standard precautions for taking care of a child at that age and development level, and if I arrived at her house to discover her outraged that my child had knocked over her precariously balanced Ming vase, I'd think the nanny had been a bit careless, and I don't think I'd offer to fork over a pile of money to replace it.

I think the question comes down to whether or not the iPad could have and should have clearly been kept away from this child.   Now in terms of 'could', iPads are small and easily movable, so I don't think there's any reason that it _had_ to be within reach of the child.  ( If the child had smashed their large-screen TV, I'd consider that the parent's responsibility as the nanny can hardly have been expected to re-decorate her house prior to the child's arrival ).

So should the nanny have known better?  We just don't know from the information in the OP.   If this is a child who frequently acts out, breaks things, destroys things, and the nanny has full knowledge of that, then she does bear some of the burden of trying to keep these sort of events from happening.  That would be - I assume - part of her job description, and part of the reason she was hired.   

Amara

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2409
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #117 on: October 13, 2013, 05:48:18 PM »
Having no children I can't add to the discussion on that. However, in reading the post just above mine I had the thought that perhaps the nanny had "child-proofed" her house (mostly) and that the iPad was one of those things that was so familiar in its place she didn't really see it when she saw it. By that, I mean she may have overlooked it when (if) she was making her place safer because it's one of those things that is so common you know it's there but you no longer really see it.

drzim

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 649
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #118 on: October 13, 2013, 07:02:31 PM »
I have been going back and forth on this one, but ultimately I think the parents should pay.  The bottom line is that the parents are financially responsible for the kid, full stop.  It doesn't matter who is watching him.  If he does damage, the parents should pay.  The only exception might be gross negligence on the part of the nanny...meaning if she deliberately left him alone for an extended period of time  playing hopscotch in a room full of breakables....but I doubt that this is relevant to the original situation.

I was always taught to pay for something if I broke it....it didn't matter if it was out of place or if I was careless or not.  I broke it, I pay.  Kids who don't have money to pay are covered by their parents.

My friend was in a minor car accident the other day.  The other car had parked badly (crooked), and backing out, my friend accidentally hit the car.  Common sense would say "Park properly and you won't get hit" however, when it comes down to it, my friend had to pay because she was responsible for hitting the car.  The fact that the car was parked badly is irrelevant.  It's not an excuse that would change the liability of the accident.

The same thing can be said for this situation.  Just because the nanny was somewhat irresponsible and left her iPad out, it doesn't change the fact that the boy broke it.  Since he cannot pay, his parents should.


perpetua

  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2212
Re: S/O damaged laptop: The nanny and the damaged ipad
« Reply #119 on: October 14, 2013, 02:45:26 AM »

It is not my view that if the nanny is in charge, she is responsible for anything the child does.

It _is_ my view that if the nanny is in charge, she is responsible for taking reasonable precautions to make sure my child is kept from things that my child could damage, or could damage my child.  Let's move away from the OP and assume the nanny is in charge of a typical 18 month old.  If she has assumed responsibility, assured the parents that she is experienced and capable of taking care of an 18 month old child, and then takes the child to her home, I would assume that she has taken the precaution of removing any glasses, vases, , scissors, small choking hazards, etc.   These are all standard precautions for taking care of a child at that age and development level, and if I arrived at her house to discover her outraged that my child had knocked over her precariously balanced Ming vase, I'd think the nanny had been a bit careless, and I don't think I'd offer to fork over a pile of money to replace it.

But this child isn't 18 months old. This child is 4. At 4, he should have some idea that you don't pick things up and deliberately throw them, especially not expensive things. This is in no way comparable to removing choking hazards from the vicinity of a toddler.