The Nanny State: Interfearing or Protective?

I am watching The Big Issues on BBC1 & the topic is "Does the state interfear too much on child care?"
Anyway,on it are 2 women with children & they are friends & work collegues. Because they work different shift's,they look after each others children.Anyway,they were ordered to stop & had to then put their children into registered childcare.
These women are Police Officers. (Detective Constables) & are already CRB checked!
Surely it is better,especially in light of the recent cases, to have your children looked after by a trusted friend than an unkown.
Are the policymakers being too abusive in their powers & undermining parenting?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007zpll

(it's not on IPlayer yet but it's Series 2 Episode 36)

 

We live in a country where the Chimps are running the zoo

 

We live in a country where the government is obsessed with spin, the media with apportioning blame and the population with avoiding personal responsibility.

Look at what happens everytime Social Services act. If they take a kid away, it's likened to moonlight raids by the Gestapo and they're damned for interfering in the right of parents to raise their kids their way. When they don't take the kid away (because they had their fingers burned in the press last time they did) and it turns out the parents' way of raising them was to beat them to death for being in the wrong place at the wrong time, then the media bandwagon rolls and the lynch mobs are out demanding scalps.

We need to make up our minds whether we want our child-rearing actions observed to prevent abuse or whether we want our privacy with the risk of dead kids.

 

The State has nationalized children and wants to turn the rest of us into drones.

New Labour forget that 1984 was a warning, not a blueprint.

 

Only because we let it. It's only when populations don't provide clear direction on how they want governed and then fail to keep a firm eye on their government that it gets to make shit up for itself.

A failure of democracy is ultimately a failure of the electorate.

 

The case of the two police officers is a very odd one and the crux of the matter is what constitutes 'reward' in the eyes of the law.
As these two were operating a reciprocal arrangement, the law saw that they were both gaining by 'receiving' something in return for childcare, namely 'the ability to earn a living'.
Its a grey area which I doubt many thought of when the law came about and could`ve been sorted with a bit of common sense. It would be far simpler to class reward as money or goods received directly for the service offered.
The trouble with this government and UK organisations in general is that instead of investigating existing rules or laws and adapting them to suit, there is a tendency to start over and invent new ones which may seem simpler but quite often clash with existing ones, and also tend to 'muddy the waters' somewhat.

 

A perfect example being B'Liar passing a law making it illegal to let off a nuke in the UK without a licence from the Home Sec. That will show Bin Laden!


Of course, the fact that Bin Laden could have been charged with murder seems to have passed them by.

 

These two selfish feckers are robbing someone of a job! Have they no shame?

Disgusted. How very DARE they! Haven't they seen the unemployment figures?