Live-in nanny refuses to leave after being fired

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is not a nanny. I am so frustrated by this. As though this lady is a forecast of what other parents will have to deal with. I am usually on the side of MBs on this forum. But this? This is fear based garbage and sensationalist.

Exactly. Anytime the press thinks they can get away with the word "nanny" in their headlines, they've got guaranteed success.

So pathetic that they believe any warm body can be a nanny.

What do you think makes someone a nanny or not? If you care for kids on a schedule you are a nanny.

Lol.

It's not like any random schlub calling themselves a doctor or a police officer. A nanny doesn't have any qualifying body or anything, you are overthinking what makes someone a nanny and trying to add more weight to the title than it deserves. Being a nanny isn't that hard and to be a nanny all you need to do is care for kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is not a nanny. I am so frustrated by this. As though this lady is a forecast of what other parents will have to deal with. I am usually on the side of MBs on this forum. But this? This is fear based garbage and sensationalist.

PP, I'm a nanny who really insists on the distinction between nannying, babysitting, and housekeeping so we are probably in agreement - but what makes you say she isn't a nanny? I skimmed the article and haven't done any additional research but if she's been caring for people's children in their homes on a regular basis...why isn't she a (n extremely litigious) nanny? I may have missed something and am genuinely curious because OMG WHAT A NIGHTMARE for that family.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is not a nanny. I am so frustrated by this. As though this lady is a forecast of what other parents will have to deal with. I am usually on the side of MBs on this forum. But this? This is fear based garbage and sensationalist.

Exactly. Anytime the press thinks they can get away with the word "nanny" in their headlines, they've got guaranteed success.

So pathetic that they believe any warm body can be a nanny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is not a nanny. I am so frustrated by this. As though this lady is a forecast of what other parents will have to deal with. I am usually on the side of MBs on this forum. But this? This is fear based garbage and sensationalist.

PP, I'm a nanny who really insists on the distinction between nannying, babysitting, and housekeeping so we are probably in agreement - but what makes you say she isn't a nanny? I skimmed the article and haven't done any additional research but if she's been caring for people's children in their homes on a regular basis...why isn't she a (n extremely litigious) nanny? I may have missed something and am genuinely curious because OMG WHAT A NIGHTMARE for that family.

The absurd posters on here feel that if you aren't making $20 an hour minimum and working 60 hours a week you aren't a nanny, you are just a babysitter and being taken advantage of oh and are stupid.

[Anonymous]

if impersonates an officer, we don't say that they wore the uniform and made stops or arrests therefore they are an officer, just a really bad one. This woman is a con artist. She is not a nanny who happens to be a really bad one. She was never a nanny. Just like if someone pulls a Ponzi scheme that fact that they fooled many people does not make them an investment banker. I am sorry so many people fell for this woman's scheme. But she is clearly a con artist and not a nanny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:if impersonates an officer, we don't say that they wore the uniform and made stops or arrests therefore they are an officer, just a really bad one. This woman is a con artist. She is not a nanny who happens to be a really bad one. She was never a nanny. Just like if someone pulls a Ponzi scheme that fact that they fooled many people does not make them an investment banker. I am sorry so many people fell for this woman's scheme. But she is clearly a con artist and not a nanny.

Exactly. But her legal history seems to be a family estate fight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is not a nanny. I am so frustrated by this. As though this lady is a forecast of what other parents will have to deal with. I am usually on the side of MBs on this forum. But this? This is fear based garbage and sensationalist.

PP, I'm a nanny who really insists on the distinction between nannying, babysitting, and housekeeping so we are probably in agreement - but what makes you say she isn't a nanny? I skimmed the article and haven't done any additional research but if she's been caring for people's children in their homes on a regular basis...why isn't she a (n extremely litigious) nanny? I may have missed something and am genuinely curious because OMG WHAT A NIGHTMARE for that family.

The absurd posters on here feel that if you aren't making $20 an hour minimum and working 60 hours a week you aren't a nanny, you are just a babysitter and being taken advantage of oh and are stupid.

Your post is 100% wrong. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:if impersonates an officer, we don't say that they wore the uniform and made stops or arrests therefore they are an officer, just a really bad one. This woman is a con artist. She is not a nanny who happens to be a really bad one. She was never a nanny. Just like if someone pulls a Ponzi scheme that fact that they fooled many people does not make them an investment banker. I am sorry so many people fell for this woman's scheme. But she is clearly a con artist and not a nanny.

Here, I will help you out.

How to tell if you are a cop: you went to the police academy, you passed the tests to become an officer, you are hired by a force and have a uniform and badge.

How to tell if you are a doctor: you went to medical school, you passed tests, you are licensed, you work at a hospital or clinic, you treat people.

How to tell if you are a nanny: you care for peoples kids on a set weekly schedule for anywhere from 4 to 100 hours a week. You may be paid or trade for room and board.

I hope this helps out some of you less than typical IQ posters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if impersonates an officer, we don't say that they wore the uniform and made stops or arrests therefore they are an officer, just a really bad one. This woman is a con artist. She is not a nanny who happens to be a really bad one. She was never a nanny. Just like if someone pulls a Ponzi scheme that fact that they fooled many people does not make them an investment banker. I am sorry so many people fell for this woman's scheme. But she is clearly a con artist and not a nanny.

Here, I will help you out.

How to tell if you are a cop: you went to the police academy, you passed the tests to become an officer, you are hired by a force and have a uniform and badge.

How to tell if you are a doctor: you went to medical school, you passed tests, you are licensed, you work at a hospital or clinic, you treat people.

How to tell if you are a nanny: you care for peoples kids on a set weekly schedule for anywhere from 4 to 100 hours a week. You may be paid or trade for room and board.

I hope this helps out some of you less than typical IQ posters.

+1000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if impersonates an officer, we don't say that they wore the uniform and made stops or arrests therefore they are an officer, just a really bad one. This woman is a con artist. She is not a nanny who happens to be a really bad one. She was never a nanny. Just like if someone pulls a Ponzi scheme that fact that they fooled many people does not make them an investment banker. I am sorry so many people fell for this woman's scheme. But she is clearly a con artist and not a nanny.

Here, I will help you out.

How to tell if you are a cop: you went to the police academy, you passed the tests to become an officer, you are hired by a force and have a uniform and badge.

How to tell if you are a doctor: you went to medical school, you passed tests, you are licensed, you work at a hospital or clinic, you treat people.

How to tell if you are a nanny: you care for peoples kids on a set weekly schedule for anywhere from 4 to 100 hours a week. You may be paid or trade for room and board.

I hope this helps out some of you less than typical IQ posters.

If you were a nanny, you'd know better, but I'll give you a hint: if she does anything you tell her to do, she more likely a sitter, not a nanny. You may read the post about some parent telling a "nanny" to keep a baby (who should be learning to crawl) on a little blanket. No. Just no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:if impersonates an officer, we don't say that they wore the uniform and made stops or arrests therefore they are an officer, just a really bad one. This woman is a con artist. She is not a nanny who happens to be a really bad one. She was never a nanny. Just like if someone pulls a Ponzi scheme that fact that they fooled many people does not make them an investment banker. I am sorry so many people fell for this woman's scheme. But she is clearly a con artist and not a nanny.

Here, I will help you out.

How to tell if you are a cop: you went to the police academy, you passed the tests to become an officer, you are hired by a force and have a uniform and badge.

How to tell if you are a doctor: you went to medical school, you passed tests, you are licensed, you work at a hospital or clinic, you treat people.

How to tell if you are a nanny: you care for peoples kids on a set weekly schedule for anywhere from 4 to 100 hours a week. You may be paid or trade for room and board.

I hope this helps out some of you less than typical IQ posters.

If you were a nanny, you'd know better, but I'll give you a hint: if she does anything you tell her to do, she more likely a sitter, not a nanny. You may read the post about some parent telling a "nanny" to keep a baby (who should be learning to crawl) on a little blanket. No. Just no.

*she's

[Anonymous]

Just read on wtop the nanny "disappeared" leaving all of her things behind.. Hummm....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just read on wtop the nanny "disappeared" leaving all of her things behind.. Hummm....

Hummm, what? You can speak up here.

[Anonymous]

Well from what I read more on this story today, June 27th apparently this family placed an ad on Craigslist and that is how they found this nanny. That, in my opinion was this family's FIRST mistake. What crazy family finds a live-in nanny on Craigslist, a free public website then moves this random stranger into their home and leaves her alone to care for their precious children??! My God...What in the world were they even thinking?? Guess they weren't. Their SECOND mistake was that they didn't pay this lady a dime for her services rendered. In other words, they got what they "paid" for which was nothing. Yes, you heard me right. Nothing. Nada.

This lady watched their children, yet she never was paid any salary for her work. They just let her stay in the house and eat their food. That is equivalent to slavery. And slavery is ILLEGAL since it was outlawed more than a century ago.

So this family gets zero sympathy from me.

Zero.

[Anonymous]

+1,000,000