Ok how about "actually has governance" or "better-structured governance". The reality is that the organizations provided have something. While the service you has does not... Well, it has an angry sole owner who doesn't like you.
Subsidized daycare is governized. I guess it just has a very special owner.
Any examples of this happening with the above organizations that I provided? In the private home daycare situation yes, this is a reality but, in a larger structured organization with governance... The probability of this happening is way lower. You are protected way better from this kind of nonsense with an actual organization of professionals...
Subsidized daycare isn't private. It has structures and governance. But you are right, it is at home and isn't a large organization with real professionals - based on my own personal experience with it.
Again, you are citing an example from your personal experience with a home daycare provider and not a properly trained and governed organization like the examples provided.
Subsidized daycare is governed by Ontario government - by the city.
Again, re-read my posting. How do the organizations that I provided as examples (Mini-Skool) relate to your personal experience. What I was suggesting is that you move to a daycare that is actually governed... has properly trained professionals and is accountable to a larger governing body of professionals and experts. (e.g. Mini-Skool, Salvation Army, etc...)
I get completely what you are saying. I am in agreement of child's before school care provided AT THE SCHOOL (couple times a week when necessary). They h ave after school care at the school too. Much cheaper and better. Wouldn't you say so ? But isn't subsidized daycare supposed to be governed ?
I was not suggesting those... I was suggesting things like:
Mini-Skool Canada | Day Care Centres Located in Ontario. Mini-Skool Childcare Centre.
Again, read my post carefully...
Thanks.
Some would argue that welfare and other social services are for lazy neglectful parents... I don't get your argument? Parents that work use them. Parents that don't work outside the home use them.
What I meant was I feel some parents don't really give two craps about raising their kids and just toss them in daycare, and go to work. While there are many who one of the parents stays home to look after the kids, or alters their schedule to look after them when the other parent is working.
I take it you are an IT working making 80K+ per year working from home and that is why you are able to provide so much care to your child??
I do make good money and I can and do usually work from home.
Do you live in Timmins, Ontario? This is not how it works in any community south of Barrie, Ontario these days... Both parents are employed. Are you suggesting you are unemployed or have adjusted your work schedule and are that parent?
You are right, both parents do work, and that is why shared custody makes more sense .
There is no issue that the children’s time with both parents should be maximized as much as possible: see s. 16(10) of the Divorce Act. It is also true that shared custody is becoming increasingly frequent, especially in light of the fact that in today’s world both parents often work and equally share care of the children.
http://canlii.ca/t/gk996
I do indeed have a family oriented work .
To quote Statistics Canada:
https://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/75-006-x/2015001/article/14202-eng.htm
Also statistically which parent are you?
That site is down atm. Each family law case turns into it's own facts. If majority of people in Ontario leased a car does that mean that we should all lease cars ?
I am the parent who has a work-life balance that allows me to look after (and spend time) with our child when she is not in school.
The lower educated and older than the other parent one?
I have 5 years of education over the other parent.
The statistics don't support your argument:
Child care in Canada
Can't read that link, SO I can't comment on that.
But, your lawyer could bring forward a motion to have the daycare changed to a more reputable and accountable service provider. That is what I am saying to you. Why stick with a crappy one when you can bring forward a change that makes things better for the child? Why sit around complaining about it? Act on the opportunity to imrpove the child's situation!
Because the court isn't going to entertain it at this time. OCL is investigating. But we will see if we need to cross motion against mom's $20/month daycare cross motion to get right of first refusal - or leave it as a trial issue - and look into using school before program then.
Lastly (and most importantly), mom isn't even working when child is at daycare. We don't need daycare. It was not discussed or agreed to, creates unnecessary costs, and places restrictions on my access which interfere with my relationship with our child. i.e., If I get half the summer, then child care subsidy is in jeopardy and possibly terminated. Mom uses that to limit my access (and my relationship) with our child. Daycare is not needed, period.
Sorry I am not a follower. There are many intelligent people I know who at least one of the partners has work arrangements that allows them to look after their kids. I'm not one of those people who get's a the new Gas rewards credit card because 70% of Canadians have it, or leases a car because 80% of Canadians do it, or drinks beer because many Canadian's do it , or use daycare because whatever the percentage of Canadians that do it do.
If you see somebody jumping off a bridge, do you go do exactly what they did too ?
