Childcare: Have the inspectorates gone mad?

The Government is to review the meaning of childcare for 'reward' in the Childcare Act 2006 following Ofsted's ban on two working mothers from taking turns to look after each other's children.

The mothers in question are detective constables Leanne Shepherd from Milton Keynes and Lucy Jarrett from Birmingham, who work for Thames Valley Police. And the nature of their lawlessness? They looked after each others' children.

The close friends' private arrangement allowed them both to return to part-time jobs. However, they were reported to the education watchdog Ofsted who found their informal deal broke the law.

No money changed hands in the arrangement but according to Ofsted,' the supply of services or goods and, in some cases, reciprocal arrangements can also constitute reward' and 'a person must be registered as a childminder if care is provided for more than two hours a day or takes place for more than 14 days a year.'

What may seem like a harmless and convenient babysitting arrangement is in the eyes of the law illegal, unregistered childminding. Totally unaware of this and keen to return to work, this blanket system, there to protect children and parents, appears to be hindering these two families from earning their daily bread.

The Minister for Children, Schools and Families Vernon Coaker said the Childcare Act 2006 was in place "to ensure the safety and wellbeing of all children" but the government needed to make sure it did not "penalise hard-working families".

He added: “My department is speaking to Ofsted about the interpretation of the word 'reward' in this particular case.”

But whilst this case may have forced Ofsted to go back to the drawing board – it is two police women after all – this story is only a small part of a bigger issue. There are many instances of the fine line between necessary child protection and a system which punishes innocent acts of care.

These even extend into sports and games where parents have to jump through hoops before being allowed to innocently coach their children and their children’s friends. Thus a criminal records check (CRB check) has to be made on helpful amateurs who are usually related as parents to members of the football, cricket, rugby teams they manage. At the same time the managers have often known each other for years.

The question is, are we allowing government too much control over our personal relations? Are we guilty, through fear of crime of failing to trust each other and our instincts? After all, over the decades actual instances of child abuse have scarcely risen, and most of the abuse lies within the family.

Do we need to ask ourselves whether ‘worry’ is getting in the way of people interacting in perfectly normal ways over their own activities and their children’s? Should Ofsted be told they are plain wrong in this interpretation?