Home Daycare Sick Kid

[Unregistered]

Hi,

Our 16 month old goes to a home daycare whose provider also has a 16 month old. Our child is the only child she watches in addition to her own. Our provider's child has hand, foot and mouth disease. It's possible our child has already been infected but the provider asked if were going to keep our child home for the day and we said yes. My wife had to rearrange her schedule and cancel some clients because obviously we don't want to bring our child and get her infected if she hasn't been already. I assumed we wouldn't have to pay for the day but she told us because she is open we would still be required to pay. What are your thoughts on this? Should we still be required to pay?

[Cat Herder]

Typically: If she is able to separate her sick child from yours in another room, then she is able to open. If she is open, tuition is due.

[Unregistered]

Fair enough. So should I clarify with the provider that we can bring our child if she can promise to keep them separated? And if she can't then it's reasonable to expect she is closing and we shouldn't have to pay?

[Unregistered]

Obviously it's much easier to keep older kids away from each other than it is with two infants.

[Cat Herder]

Fair enough. So should I clarify with the provider that we can bring our child if she can promise to keep them separated? And if she can't then it's reasonable to expect she is closing and we shouldn't have to pay?

IMHO, that is completely within reason and to be expected. We must exclude our sick children the same as we expect of parents.

Sometimes that means closing, having a sub or our spouse taking over care of our child.

[Unregistered]

Thanks for your response! I'll mention it to her.

[Blackcat31]

Fair enough. So should I clarify with the provider that we can bring our child if she can promise to keep them separated? And if she can't then it's reasonable to expect she is closing and we shouldn't have to pay?

Please be aware however, that keeping them separated only minimizes the chances of your child getting the Hand Foot and Moth virus and that it is no guarantee that your child won't get it.

In actuality your child could have been the one to have spread it to the provider's child as HFM is contagious long after symptoms are gone and many children are carriers without symptoms.

Here is some good info about it.

https://www.hennepin.us/-/media/hennepinus/residents/health-medical/infectious-diseases-fact-sheets/hand-foot-mouth-disease-provider.pdf?la=en&hash=5659E07E7DD935EF753218AAB88B8F6E3B9D29E2

[Unregistered]

That's true. But as of yet our child hasn't shown any symptoms so we're going to do our best until then to keep her away. If she's providing the opportunity to keep them apart then it becomes our decision to either keep our child home or bring them and risk it. If we still decide to keep our child home after she's promised to keep them apart then I can understand her still expecting payment.

[Blackcat31]

That's true. But as of yet our child hasn't shown any symptoms so we're going to do our best until then to keep her away. If she's providing the opportunity to keep them apart then it becomes our decision to either keep our child home or bring them and risk it. If we still decide to keep our child home after she's promised to keep them apart then I can understand her still expecting payment.

Would she still allow your child to attend IF your child ultimately does get sick?

If not, will you still be required to pay?

Those are questions that should be addressed with the provider as well.

[LittleExplorers]

Have you reviewed your contract? She is giving you the option to attend. Even if she didn't, I would not assume you do not have to pay. I have sick days built into my contract so if you would be paying either way. Each provider is different though.

Also, IMO, there in not a way to 100% guarantee they will be completely separate unless someone else is caring for her little one.

[daycarediva]

Have you reviewed your contract? She is giving you the option to attend. Even if she didn't, I would not assume you do not have to pay. I have sick days built into my contract so if you would be paying either way. Each provider is different though.

Also, IMO, there in not a way to 100% guarantee they will be completely separate unless someone else is caring for her little one.

Even with the child there or even IN/OUT it's still exposure.

OP, your child is already exposed as the virus is present well before symptoms. I would keep him/her home just to be on the safe side. How long are you planning to do so? Most daycares exclude until the sores are healed over, and that can take a bit.

Do you have a contract?

[Unregistered]

Yes, there is a contract and it states that if she is closed then she would not expect payment. We're going to keep her out until she's due back in the middle of next week. Depending on how her child is and if our child has been infected. According to the contract, if our child is sick at all she would have to stay home and we would pay. I guess her definition of closing the daycare is vague. I would assume that if her child is contagious and she has to care for her then that would necessitate a closure.

[Blackcat31]

This is one thing I find myself at odds with when providers choose to stay open with their sick child and then give the parents the option of staying home or coming to care still but if they choose to stay home, they still have to pay.

Then later when the DCK gets sick, the provider excludes that child AND still charges for care.

I don't know.

I understand that providers have contracts and parents (usually) know full well what they signed on to but I still think it's kind of a less than fair deal with the client always being the one getting the short end of it.

Just my two cents.

[mommyneedsadayoff]

This is one thing I find myself at odds with when providers choose to stay open with their sick child and then give the parents the option of staying home or coming to care still but if they choose to stay home, they still have to pay.

Then later when the DCK gets sick, the provider excludes that child AND still charges for care.

I don't know.

I understand that providers have contracts and parents (usually) know full well what they signed on to but I still think it's kind of a less than fair deal with the client always being the one getting the short end of it.

Just my two cents.

I agree. I kind of feel like if a daycare kid couldn't come with the same symptoms or illness, then why should we make an exception for our own children. I know in some people's homes, they are able to keep them separate, but I don't think that really matters honestly. The parent, the siblings, the home , Etc. all carry the germs of the sick child, so separation is kind of an illusion of safety. it's not much of a choice for the parent, in my opinion.

[Snowmom]

I think providers who give families a "heads up" on any illnesses present (whether it's their children or other daycare children) do it as a courtesy because as a parent, we'd want to know. I don't think that should automatically translate to a free day.