Jump to content

Recommended Posts

My friend has just had a baby and her partner's been made redundant. They are trying to get creative about jobs for him. He loves being a Dad, and I suggested childminding, but my friend thinks people still aren't ready yet to leave their little children with a man. What do local people think - is there a market for it?

Medusa, I support your opinion. And I am sure even if it's not "publicly conventional or politically correct to express this No" , some others parents might have that reluctance to have a man as a childminder or nanny.


I know it's not fair to put All the men working around children in the same "clich?" of potential pedophile , because to be honest , HERE is the principle parents fear about having a man ,alone, in charge of their children.


I would never have any doubt on the efficiency and motivation of a man to be great, fun , caring and educationnal with children and I am completely sure that a big part of them could be much better than some women doing the same job!

However I can't remove from my memory if we look at back into the news, over the last 10 years, the too numerous horrible stories of children abused, where men have been recognized guilty of the crime...and quite often, it has been men who were working around children ...and Sorry if I shock some of you (it's NOT my intention at all), but I can't pretend it's not a reality of our society that men are more often involved in children crime than women... and I don't want to put my child volountary in a risky situation to pretend to be in accordance of the well public though. Sorry to be direct I can't be hypocritical on that subject.


I agree with some of you who think that you can't be sure to not expose your child away of any danger.I have in mind that When it's your destiny , accident can happenned also to people who are more cautious than the average of population, BUT never mind, I prefer to be careful anyway!


But perhaps it's because I am french and in France we had so terrible children abuses crime stories over the last 10 years with teachers , husband of childminders/sports and children club coach/ priest/ children camps entertainers. As a daughter of a dad Police officer and a mum Judge for family/children, I've been rised a bit too much in the behaviour to be careful of the human nature... It is also true, according to them and their experience, that the major part of children sexual abuses are committed by members of the close family or friends of the family rather than by strangers!

I reckon that I've heard less sad stories in the UK since we arrived two years ago (even if we have this terrible one with that poor April at the moment)... so perhaps you have less crazy guys here... I tend to feel, a bit naively, more in safety here than in France.


If it's a man working at a nursery or in a school, it would be COMPLETELY FINE for me as he works among a team and I believe that everybody has an eye en each other whoever the team is masculin/feminin or both...for a nanny at home or chilminder, I would prefer not taking any risk by precautionnary principle.


Finally, I think that your friend should folow his dream, and if it's to work with children, it's honourable and brave to him, and he should not care about what people thing about it. Furthemore, as we could see on that thread, hopefully for him, a lot of parents would agree to employ a man as a childminder or nanny, and I totally respect their opinion. I just couldn't do it for my family, but it's just about my opinion on the subject. So I sincerely wish him the best in his new career.

There would be a greater chance of your child coming to harm whilst in the care of any nanny, male or female, than there would of you hiring a paedophile. What a very very sad society we live in.


Overall the positive responses here are great, but the fact that two people wouldn't consider leaving their child with a man saddens me.


Lets not forget these men would have to go through the same legal checks as any woman.


Will you be looking for schools with only female teachers?

I don't disagree that as for as profiling is concerned, the male sex presents a higher hazzard for abuse. However, for risk assessment to be valid, you would have to run separate risk assessments for each individual regardless of sex. And let's not forget that there have been cases of nursery workers (both men and women) convicted of abuse, and in some cases covering the abuse for each other.


Personally, I would typically look for a woman because that's comfortable for me. My personal experience has been that women are better at the kind of multitasking and forward planning that childcare requires than are men in general. Nevertheless, if someone recommended a man to me for childcare, and I saw that he excelled in these areas, then I would definitely consider him.


I also have male friends who have been nursery workers and primary school school teachers, and I have known them to be amazing at their jobs.

My son's kindergarten had a male teacher and all the kids (boys and girls) thought he was the best teacher ever. He was really into woodcraft, totally alternative, encouraged the little ones to be very independent and was as gentle as could be. He was an incredible role model for the children, and an excellent counterpoint for the female teachers.


It is a great pity that men are being increasingly driven from traditional roles guiding and leading young children as primary school teachers and scout masters by attitudes and illogical (the odds are diminishingly small) thinking as has been expressed here.


If the OP's friend does decide to be a childminder, perhaps his maleness could be his USP and he could play up to it. Of course a woman can be sporty and woodsy, but the cliche might work...

I would love a male nanny/teacher for my sons - already my eldest at 3.5 thinks that daddys go to work and mummys look after children at home and at nursery....really! As others have said I think it would give them a very positive role model. However (for absolutely no reason that I can articulate) I might not for a much younger baby...I'm not sure why...

Sorry Otta to bring you sadness...I didn't mean.


But it's the freedom to each of us to have our own opinion on any subject of society ...and it's so great not to have a unique though which mean we are still in a democratic system, whatever is the side of thinking on the subject!Personnally I WOULD BE SAD IF EVERYBODY WOULD THINK THE SAME AS MY OPINIONS :) ....and for sure you would be much more than me.

We also couldn't give rise to argument and Forum/debates would not exist anymore


I didn't say that I am against men childminder or nanny but just explained why I wouldn't choose this option for my children.But I am completely fine and agree with the "men 's right" to do that kind of jobs, as equal of women of course!

To answer your question, In my post, I said that I would consider/accept to have a man worker at my son's nursery or as teacher when he will be older. But If I had the choice between two profile, same level of qualification and recomandation, I would prefer to go for the women nanny/childminder first.


I find all the post really interesting and Right in the reflexion...I understand and respect absolutely all of them.

However, I still prefer to keep my precautionary principle for my children, time they are so vulnerable as babies/toddlers.

If you say this:


"I don't want to put my child volountary in a risky situation"


it surely implies some evaluation of nature and likelihood of the risks. If you let your child cross the road, ride a bike, ride a horse, go swimming, try new food, or play sport (for example) then you are exposing them to risk, including the risk of death or serious injury. Most of us are comfortable with most of these things because we understand that the risk is small and can be made smaller by taking proper precautions. To suggest that employing a male nanny or childminder is somehow inherently too risky to be a sensible choice is obviously nonsense.


Of course, everybody has the complete freedom to believe nonsensical things, and, more importantly, to make choices (at least as far as choosing childcare is concerned) based not just on rational analysis but also on gut feel, prejudice, or anything else they want. Just don't try and dress it up as 'being careful'.


PS - "the precautionary principle" has a specific meaning that explicitly includes a scientific assessment of the relevant risk - it doesn't just mean not doing what you subjectively think might be harmful.

Thanks DaveR for respecting my nosensical thinking :)

I will sleep less stupid thanks to your light!


I didn't try anything...just to say I understood Medusa opinion, but as you "cleverly" point with your PS explanation of the english expression "precautionary principle", I am not english native speaker so perhaps my words and english knowledge/grammar weren't the best ones to express properly my opinion...

But I deserve credit of speaking the language of the country where I will live, just for few years.


As a food industry engineer, I know a bit about "principes de pr?cautions" and the rules of implementation/publication but...in french speaking of course.


I will stop here the discussion as throughtout a few numbers of the answer, I can clearly observe that not to have a " well political way to think" is not accepted and tend to be turned a into personnal judgment.


Good continuation on the discussion!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The is very low water pressure in the middle of Friern Road this morning.
    • I think mostly those are related to the same "issues". In my experience, it's difficult using the pin when reporting problems, especially if you're on a mobile... There's two obvious leaks in that stretch and has been for sometime one of them apparently being sewer flooding 😱  
    • BBC Homepage Skip to content Accessibility Help EFor you Notifications More menu Search BBC                     BBC News Menu   UK England N. Ireland Scotland Alba Wales Cymru Isle of Man Guernsey Jersey Local News Vets under corporate pressure to increase revenue, BBC told   Image source,Getty Images ByRichard Bilton, BBC Panorama and Ben Milne, BBC News Published 2 hours ago Vets have told BBC Panorama they feel under increasing pressure to make money for the big companies that employ them - and worry about the costly financial impact on pet owners. Prices charged by UK vets rose by 63% between 2016 and 2023, external, and the government's competition regulator has questioned whether the pet-care market - as it stands - is giving customers value for money. One anonymous vet, who works for the UK's largest vet care provider, IVC Evidensia, said that the company has introduced a new monitoring system that could encourage vets to offer pet owners costly tests and treatment options. A spokesperson for IVC told Panorama: "The group's vets and vet nurses never prioritise revenue or transaction value over and above the welfare of the animal in their care." More than half of all UK households are thought to own a pet, external. Over the past few months, hundreds of pet owners have contacted BBC Your Voice with concerns about vet bills. One person said they had paid £5,600 for 18 hours of vet-care for their pet: "I would have paid anything to save him but felt afterwards we had been taken advantage of." Another described how their dog had undergone numerous blood tests and scans: "At the end of the treatment we were none the wiser about her illness and we were presented with a bill of £13,000."   Image caption, UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024, according to the CMA Mounting concerns over whether pet owners are receiving a fair deal prompted a formal investigation by government watchdog, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). In a provisional report, external at the end of last year, it identified several issues: Whether vet companies are being transparent about the ownership of individual practices and whether pet owners have enough information about pricing The concentration of vet practices and clinics in the hands of six companies - these now control 60% of the UK's pet-care market Whether this concentration has led to less market competition and allowed some vet care companies to make excess profits 'Hitting targets' A vet, who leads one of IVC's surgeries (and who does not want to be identified because they fear they could lose their job), has shared a new internal document with Panorama. The document uses a colour code to compare the company's UK-wide tests and treatment options and states that it is intended to help staff improve clinical care. It lists key performance indicators in categories that include average sales per patient, X-rays, ultrasound and lab tests. The vet is worried about the new policy: "We will have meetings every month, where one of the area teams will ask you how many blood tests, X-rays and ultrasounds you're doing." If a category is marked in green on the chart, the clinic would be judged to be among the company's top 25% of achievers in the UK. A red mark, on the other hand, would mean the clinic was in the bottom 25%. If this happens, the vet says, it might be asked to come up with a plan of action. The vet says this would create pressure to "upsell" services. Panorama: Why are vet bills so high? Are people being priced out of pet ownership by soaring bills? Watch on BBC iPlayer now or BBC One at 20:00 on Monday 12 January (22:40 in Northern Ireland) Watch on iPlayer For instance, the vet says, under the new model, IVC would prefer any animal with suspected osteoarthritis to potentially be X-rayed. With sedation, that could add £700 to a bill. While X-rays are sometimes necessary, the vet says, the signs of osteoarthritis - the thickening of joints, for instance - could be obvious to an experienced vet, who might prefer to prescribe a less expensive anti-inflammatory treatment. "Vets shouldn't have pressure to do an X-ray because it would play into whether they are getting green on the care framework for their clinic." IVC has told Panorama it is extremely proud of the work its clinical teams do and the data it collects is to "identify and close gaps in care for our patients". It says its vets have "clinical independence", and that prioritising revenue over care would be against the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons' (RCVS) code and IVC policy. Vets say they are under pressure to bring in more money per pet   Published 15 April 2025 Vets should be made to publish prices, watchdog says   Published 15 October 2025 The vet says a drive to increase revenue is undermining his profession. Panorama spoke to more than 30 vets in total who are currently working, or have worked, for some of the large veterinary groups. One recalls being told that not enough blood tests were being taken: "We were pushed to do more. I hated opening emails." Another says that when their small practice was sold to a large company, "it was crazy... It was all about hitting targets". Not all the big companies set targets or monitor staff in this way. The high cost of treatment UK pet owners spent £6.3bn on vet and other pet-care services in 2024 - equal to just over £365 per pet-owning household, according to the CMA. However, most pet owners in the UK do not have insurance, and bills can leave less-well-off families feeling helpless when treatment is needed. Many vets used not to display prices and pet owners often had no clear idea of what treatment would cost, but in the past two years that has improved, according to the CMA. Rob Jones has told Panorama that when his family dog, Betty, fell ill during the autumn of 2024 they took her to an emergency treatment centre, Vets Now, and she underwent an operation that cost almost £5,000. Twelve days later, Betty was still unwell, and Rob says he was advised that she could have a serious infection. He was told a diagnosis - and another operation - would cost between £5,000-£8,000.   Image caption, Betty's owners were told an operation on her would cost £12,000 However, on the morning of the operation, Rob was told this price had risen to £12,000. When he complained, he was quoted a new figure - £10,000. "That was the absolute point where I lost faith in them," he says. "It was like, I don't believe that you've got our interests or Betty's interests at heart." The family decided to put Betty to sleep. Rob did not know at the time that both his local vet, and the emergency centre, branded Vets Now, where Betty was treated, were both owned by the same company - IVC. He was happy with the treatment but complained about the sudden price increase and later received an apology from Vets Now. It offered him £3,755.59 as a "goodwill gesture".   Image caption, Rob Jones says he lost faith in the vets treating his pet dog Betty Vets Now told us its staff care passionately for the animals they treat: "In complex cases, prices can vary depending on what the vet discovers during a consultation, during the treatment, and depending on how the patient responds. "We have reviewed our processes and implemented a number of changes to ensure that conversations about pricing are as clear as possible." Value for money? Independent vet practices have been a popular acquisition for corporate investors in recent years, according to Dr David Reader from the University of Glasgow. He has made a detailed study of the industry. Pet care has been seen as attractive, he says, because of the opportunities "to find efficiencies, to consolidate, set up regional hubs, but also to maximise profits". Six large veterinary groups (sometimes referred to as LVGs) now control 60% of the UK pet care market - up from 10% a decade ago, according to the CMA, external. They are: Linnaeus, which owns 180 practices Medivet, which has 363 Vet Partners with 375 practices CVS Group, which has 387 practices Pets at Home, which has 445 practices under the name Vets for Pets IVC Evidensia, which has 900 practices When the CMA announced its provisional findings last autumn, it said there was not enough competition or informed choice in the market. It estimated the combined cost of this to UK pet owners amounted to £900m between 2020-2024. Corporate vets dispute the £900m figure. They say their prices are competitive and made freely available, and reflect their huge investment in the industry, not to mention rising costs, particularly of drugs. The corporate vets also say customers value their services highly and that they comply with the RCVS guidelines.   Image caption, A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with the service they receive from vets A CMA survey suggests pet owners are happy with their vets - both corporate and independent - when it comes to quality of service. But, with the exception of Pets at Home, customer satisfaction on cost is much lower for the big companies. "I think that large veterinary corporations, particularly where they're owned by private equity companies, are more concerned about profits than professionals who own veterinary businesses," says Suzy Hudson-Cooke from the British Veterinary Union, which is part of Unite. Proposals for change The CMA's final report on the vet industry is expected by the spring but no date has been set for publication. In its provisional report, it proposed improved transparency on pricing and vet ownership. Companies would have to reveal if vet practices were part of a chain, and whether they had business connections with hospitals, out-of-hours surgeries, online pharmacies and even crematoria. IVC, CVS and Vet Partners all have connected businesses and would have to be more transparent about their services in the future. Pets at Home does not buy practices - it works in partnership with individual vets, as does Medivet. These companies have consistently made clear in their branding who owns their practices. The big companies say they support moves to make the industry more transparent so long as they don't put too high a burden on vets. David Reader says the CMA proposals could have gone further. "There's good reason to think that once this investigation is concluded, some of the larger veterinary groups will continue with their acquisition strategies." The CMA says its proposals would "improve competition by helping pet owners choose the right vet, the right treatment, and the right way to buy medicine - without confusion or unnecessary cost". For Rob Jones, however, it is probably too late. "I honestly wouldn't get another pet," he says. "I think it's so expensive now and the risk financially is so great.             Food Terms of Use About the BBC Privacy Policy Cookies Accessibility Help Parental Guidance Contact the BBC Make an editorial complaint BBC emails for you Copyright © 2026 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read about our approach to external linking.
    • What does the area with the blue dotted lines and the crossed out water drop mean? No water in this area? So many leaks in the area.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...