Parents Secretly Recording Daycare: Logged Out

[Willow]

They wouldn't be recording just me, they would be recording the childcare.

I guess it would be like a child that has a cell phone that takes pictures. I have parents that absolutely don't want their child photographed. If a child is taking pictures with their cell phone and I don't know it (they can be sneaky) and then somehow those pictures get in a facebook or whatever and the parents find out that it was taken at childcare-that could cost me a client.

Same with a parent recording the childcare without permission (we have to have permission forms for photo/videos). There is no agreement for that so I could again lose a client because of something that was done with out their permission.

Your personal policies or a parents personal preferences won't trump what is law.

No matter how reasonable or logical they may be.


You may lose business if something goes wonky, but that doesn't negate a civil liberty.

Kind of like my house and business "laws" state that if you smack your kid in my home at drop off or pick up you're out, but it's not against actual law for a parent to spank a kid. The most we'd have the power to do is terminate our existing contracts. I couldn't like, take a parent to court and charge them myself with abuse.

Same would go for if a third party did something you were unaware of, like unknowingly photograph the kid of a parent who doesn't want that. They can't go after your for beans. Or the third party. Only people who know and consent not to photograph their children can be held responsible if they do so themselves.

(Please don't shoot the messenger!)

[Country Kids]

Except as otherwise provided in ORS 133.724 (Order for interception of communications) or 133.726 (Interception of oral communication without order) or subsections (2) to (7) of this section, a person may not:

(c) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained

This is what I found for my state

[Willow]

Except as otherwise provided in ORS 133.724 (Order for interception of communications) or 133.726 (Interception of oral communication without order) or subsections (2) to (7) of this section, a person may not:

(c) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained

This is what I found for my state

Your state then is one of the (*only*) 12 that are required to have all parties consents.


OP's state may very well not be a part of those 12. Odds are, it's not.

[Country Kids]

Your state then is one of the (*only*) 12 that are required to have all parties consents.


OP's state may very well not be a part of those 12. Odds are, it's not.

Well, I guess I know that in my state this would be totally illegal and wouldn't be a wise choice for a parent to do.

So I guess nanny cams would be totally against the law here.

That totally explains why there are "You are being recorded" signs in so many business here. You've been warned so you can't say you didn't know.

[Willow]

Well, I guess I know that in my state this would be totally illegal and wouldn't be a wise choice for a parent to do.

So I guess nanny cams would be totally against the law here.

That totally explains why there are "You are being recorded" signs in so many business here. You've been warned so you can't say you didn't know.

I wonder if a provider in one of those states wanted to put up cameras if they'd simply have to display a similar sign and that would keep them legal?

[Blackcat31]

Tom Copeland wrote a blog entry about parents recoding the daycare provider

http://www.tomcopelandblog.com/2012/06/what-to-do-when-a-parent-secretly-video-tapes-you.html

[MarinaVanessa]

Well from what I've gathered in most staes cameras without audio are ok to be placed anywhere that privacy isn't expected ... someone elses home doesn't fit that description but you as a provider can install cameras in your own home for daycare as long as there is no audio without asking for consent and of course not in the bathroom. Also the camera must be obviously visible for it to be legal meaning no hidden cameras.

Audio apparently is different whether it's only audio or video with audio and you need consent. Any Nanny Cam which also records sound must be compliant with the Federal & State Laws. It the following states, you must gain the consent of ALL those being recorded: Washington, Montana, Florida, Nevada, California, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, Oregon, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Delaware and Louisiana.

So if it were a recording device then it would fall mainly on what state you live in to find out whether or not this is legal.

[Willow]

Audio apparently is different whether it's only audio or video with audio and you need consent. Any Nanny Cam which also records sound must be compliant with the Federal & State Laws. It the following states, you must gain the consent of ALL those being recorded: Washington, Montana, Florida, Nevada, California, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Illinois, Hawaii, Oregon, Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Delaware and Louisiana.

Can you tell me where you found that, I'm bored and curious

The only states I found to have two party consent laws were:
California
Connecticut
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Massachusetts
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire
Pennsylvania &
Washington

(Hawaii is also in general a one-party state, but requires two-party consent if the recording device is installed in a private place)


I never found anything about Oregon, Louisiana or Delaware being included in that two/all party list.

[HappyHearts]

while I agree with you, its not always that cut or dry. we have been at points in our life where it is literally pay check to pay check. losing one child would mean either our house foreclosed on or our car repossesed. i hate for anyone to be that close with finances because I know how that feels....to keep kids that arent meshing well because you cannot find a replacement and literally, will be homeless if you cannot bring in income. please dont be too hard on the OP or others that have a hard time with these decisions. Maybe you have never been in that unfortunate scenario but other people are/have.

Oh no, I certainly didn't mean for my post to come across as if I was being too hard on the OP, I do apologize to the OP and anyone else who read it as such.

I have been in the same position, living paycheck to paycheck, so I certainly understand the OP's situation. I guess I was just trying to say if I was really worried that someone was secretly video taping me and my daycare, choosing between keeping them and always stressing if I'm being recorded, (which frankly freaks me out, even though I have nothing to worry about), I personally would term. Dealing with a behavioral problem, whether it was the parents or the child, to me, would be much easier to keep, but feeling like I was being recorded, I personally couldn't handle the thought of that.

Again, I am so sorry if I came across the wrong way. I do sympathize with the OP.

[MarinaVanessa]

Can you tell me where you found that, I'm bored and curious

The only states I found to have two party consent laws were:
California
Connecticut
Florida
Illinois
Maryland
Massachusetts
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire
Pennsylvania &
Washington

(Hawaii is also in general a one-party state, but requires two-party consent if the recording device is installed in a private place)


I never found anything about Oregon, Louisiana or Delaware being included in that two/all party list.

I found two websites that mentioned these states and here's one

http://www.ugolog.com/pages/are-nanny-cams-legal

The other one I'm having trouble finding.

Keep in mind that the states that I listed aren't for video ... just for audio whether it's audio in video form or just audio. In some of the states you can still have video recordings without consent, it just can't have audio to go with it.

[MarinaVanessa]

Here's another website that mentions two party consent on audio from a security camera company:

They list these states:
States with "Two party Consent" for audio recording

California - Two Party
Connecticut - Two Party
Delaware - Two Party
Florida - Two Party
Hawaii - Two Party
Illinois - Two Party
Kansas - Two Party
Maryland - Two Party
Massachusetts - Two Party
Michigan - Two Party
Montana - Two Party
Nevada - Two Party
New Hampshire - Two Party
Pennsylvania - Two Party
Utah - Two Party
Washington - Two Party

And I did find this from an Attorney's Website:

"A general rule is that if the people engaged in the conversation can reasonably expect their conversation to remain private, then the statute protects that conversation....in one case, bugging a private house with a hidden microphone violated state law because the residents inside reasonably expected their conversations to remain private.

Twelve states require, under most circumstances, the consent of all parties to a conversation. Those jurisdictions are California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington."

So as you can see there is some difference in the information.

Here is another little something that I found interesting about one-party audio recording laws from another legal website:

"Federal law permits recording telephone calls and in-person conversations with the consent of at least one of the parties. See 18 U.S.C. 2511(2)(d). This is called a "one-party consent" law. Under a one-party consent law, you can record a phone call or conversation so long as you are a party to the conversation. ... Regardless of whether state or federal law governs the situation, it is almost always illegal to record a phone call or private conversation to which you are not a party, do not have consent from at least one party, and could not naturally overhear. In addition, federal and many state laws do not permit you to surreptitiously place a bug or recording device on a person or telephone, in a home, office or restaurant to secretly record a conversation between two people who have not consented."

[clep]

easy fix, don't allow toys in your house.

I do not allow outside toys in my day home except for Thursdays when they bring something for show and share. It goes in their cubbies until show and share time though so they don't play with it during the day.

Myself, I would term this particular family. Not so much due to the suspicion of the recording device, but because of the daily uneasy feeling you have.

I have always termed if I felt I needed to even if I needed the money.

[canadiancare]

I also never understand parents who would continue to send a child to a centre that gave them bad vibes. If it would have to go to the point of recording my child wouldn't be there anymore.

EDIT to add- not accusing the OP just making a statement of fact.

[Bkind]

something elese to think about i read most replies on this but.....

1. i would terminate money isn't everything although it sure does help but no way to work daily

2. I would also take the high road with that said yes although we have nothing to hide but we do have an obligation to protect the other children and any mental, emotional or health conditions they may have. and I would explain this information is not legally something that should be made available to others without prior written consent from their parents b/c it violates hippa laws and with that said there is no long a trust here and I will have to let you go to protect the interest other the other children!!!!!!

3.We don't do this business so others can no our other families triumph and tragedies or even their personal goals or home/family information that could be given out over a phone call or conversation at the door that could have been taking place while this device was on. Parents come to our home and confined in us. what if one did this and this device was taken home and listen to and that parent with that device slips and says something to the other parent we should have only known ,,,now this other parent has lost trust in you this as we know can be very important in our business and possibly intervening and keep someone safe or out of harms way when we should if necessary

[Unregistered]

Legality

There are a handful of states that legally require that all parties be privy to the audio recording, but it is less than around 10 I think. Most states are a "one-party" state, meaning only one party has to be aware of the recording. Now this could go either way, you could say well the parent isn't a party to the conversation so therefore they can not be recording. But it could also be argued that the child is a minor therefore the parent can give the consent on behalf of the child, and since the child is a part of the recording it is OK.

I see the point about the other parents being upset because their child is being recorded without their consent.

As a parent I will do anything to insure that my child is being taken care of. It is so easy for a provider to show good face to the parent and as soon as the parent leaves turn into a mean person. I mean how is a six month old supposed to tell you that their daycare provider is abusing or neglecting them? They can't. All I'm saying is if a retailer can send in secret shoppers to retail stores, or hidden TV camera crews take an "inside look" at places like tanning salons. Why the heck can't we do the same to the people that are taking care of the most important persons in our lives. Especially such vulnerable individuals.

I understand why you would be offended and I think it is great that you have nothing to hide. I guess I just understand parents that would choose to do something like this, just to make sure their child is being well taken care of.