Skip to main content

State to mom: Stop baby-sitting neighbors' kids

What really caught my eye about this story is that there are two separate, but very similar incidents that have both recently occurred in the U.S. and the U.K. where the state thinks it can get off telling parents they can't babysit each others children.

In Michigan, a woman has been threatened by the state for babysitting her neighbor's children:

Each day before the school bus comes to pick up the neighborhood's children, Lisa Snyder did a favor for three of her fellow moms, welcoming their children into her home for about an hour before they left for school.

Regulators who oversee child care, however, don't see it as charity. Days after the start of the new school year, Snyder received a letter from the Michigan Department of Human Services warning her that if she continued, she'd be violating a law aimed at the operators of unlicensed day care centers.

In England, two women (who happen to be police officers) were told by the state that they were breaking the law by babysitting each others children without registering with the government. A spokesman for the government said:

"Generally, mothers who look after each other's children are not providing childminding for which registration is required, as exemptions apply to them, for example because the care is for less than two hours or it takes place on less than 14 days in a year.

Where such arrangements are regular and for longer periods, then registration is usually required."

Seriously? The Michigan case has prompted state lawmakers to introduce legislation allowing parents to babysit their neighbors kids without a license from the state. That's right- they're going to pass a law to give Michigan residents permission to babysit each others kids, as if they need permission from the government to do so.

Why not instead, repeal the bad law that makes their perfectly legal, normal, and healthy behavior a crime? Lawmakers are always interested in passing new laws, never repealing old, bad laws. and this is a textbook example. It's even more interesting to see it happen at virtually the same time in two different English-speaking countries.

I think England's Mr. de Havilland had it right this Monday when he decried "the utter derangement of British political culture" by saying of this recent incident with the two policewomen babysitting each others kids:

When two working women who look after each other's children are told they are breaking the law by doing so because they are not registered with the state to do that, the only sane and moral thing to do is to break the law and to urge as many other people as possible to do the same.

I very much agree and like the sound of that! Cases like this provide perfect opportunities for some active, and peaceful civil disobedience. And with the utterly deranged bills that legislators on both sides of the pond have in the works, we may need all the practice in civil disobedience that we can get!

Popular posts from this blog

Barack Obama Tattoos

With Barack Obama's approval ratings still at a solid 62%, I became suddenly curious to know how popular the 44th U.S. President really is. Are people so enamoured with President Obama that I could do a quick Google search and turn up some photos of people with permanent tattoos of Obama inked into their very skin? Oh yeah. It's that bad. Below are ten examples of Barack Obama tattoos (some decent, some pretty awful). PS: As a control, I decided to Google "bush tattoos." I found only two examples in the first couple pages, and they were decidedly anti-Bush. I also learned to never, ever Google "bush tattoos" again. Seriously. Don't. There are some gross tattoos out there. In the interests of full disclosure, I must admit that I am not a fan of President Obama . But I've got to say that the tattoos above aren't nearly as bad as this: Editor's note: The pictures are linked to their respective sources. To view the source pages, simply click

Legal Marijuana On The Michigan Ballot for 2018

A Michigan ballot initiative to legalize recreational marijuana received enough valid signatures to qualify for a vote in November. When the required number of ballot signatures was certified by the State Board of Canvassers, the 4-0 decision of the board was met by cheers from supporters of the initiative who were present, the Detroit Free Press reports . Rick Thompson, a board member of the Michigan National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML), put this ballot initiative in perspective as a matter of the State of Michigan safeguarding its own sovereignty and protecting its own citizens from an intrusive federal policy: "The people of Michigan deserve this. They earned it. We've faced many trials and tribulations. We've had so many stop and go signs from the federal government. That's why states have to take the reins on the issue and really be the crucibles of democracy that they've always been intended to be." Indeed the last time

Roll With The Changes

REO Speedwagon
–––As Featured On–––