OP, I'm a nanny and went through something similar with a 8-month-charge regarding an allergic reaction. We did food testing, the way it was suppose to be done, introduced new foods once a week. We introduced a food that had peppers and the second day DC had a rash around his mouth and stomach, nothing severe. We stopped and it went away, than about a month later MB wanted to try again. I was reluctant but did and DC had a much worse reaction that required a shot of antihistamines. I knew that the reaction was probably from the peppers, I did not feel comfortable testing the peppers again but MB pushed it and ended up with me dealing with a very sick baby. I mean, she can feed him peppers all she wants but I don't want the responsibility of knowing my actions made him sick. PP is right, she had experience, you didn't listen to her, she's screwed either way. Be thankful she had your sons best intentions over her own.

Anonymous wrote:My intent was not to ignore my nannies suggestions, I assure you. My intent was for ME to make these decisions for my son. If I had found out she was disobeying me and my son was not lactose-intolerant I would have already fired her. The fact that she was right puts me in a tough spot because she did do what's best, but at the expense of my trust.

OP, you sound somewhat reasonable so have a reasonable chat with your nanny where you do what I suggested back at the beginning - acknowledge she was right, emphasize your (newfound) trust in her expertise, and say that you will keep the lines of communication open but you absolutely must know if she is making any major changes to his diet/schedule/etc. Then rebuild your mutual trust by respecting each other.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact is, her nanny had a hunch. She's not a doctor and she didn't know 100% that it was in fact milk that was making the child sick. None of what you are saying applies here because she didn't know for a fact that it was a milk allergy.

To do this on a hunch without telling MB was wrong.

If you give your child something, an hour later they're sick, and the next day you don't feed it and they aren't sick... you would continue to experiment, would tentatively conclude that it was an allergy or intolerance, and would make an appointment with your doctor. Nanny did discuss it with them and she said, from that same experience of feeding and not feeding and sick and not sick, "I think this is a milk allergy" and the parents believed it was TEETHING? Teething comes with a cold, sometimes a fever, plenty of drool, more or less sleep, it does NOT come with vomiting and diarrhea. That's lazy parenting and I salute the nanny for making a decision that would prevent the child from suffering needlessly.

OP I've changed my mind. Fire your nanny so she can find a family who listens to her concerns and values her experience and expertise.

Where did this "hour later they're sick" come from? OP did not say "every time I give milk, an hour later he's sick."
If it was this easy to diagnose a milk allergy, who needs doctors, just get the nannies to do the doctor's job. They know best. To question them at all is a sin.

Oh for the love of...

Some of you people here are seriously dumb. It's an example, not a stated fact regarding this specific incident. What it means is that if you are a parent and your child gets sick soon after eating something, you HOPEFULLY can put two and two together and will experiment to see what affects it - presumably the nanny also did this, withholding dairy and seeing if he still got sick, etc. because THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE DO.

If, as OP stated, the nanny raised her concerns numerous times, then I am still on the nanny's side here - she did what was right for the child when the parents couldn't be bothered to explore the issue their EXPERIENCED nanny believed was causing his stomach illness. Her choices were

a) disobey her MB and make a change to his diet
b) follow MB's rules and make the child sick
c) quit

It just doesn't seem fair to the nanny to be stuck in that conundrum, with an MB who ignores multiple conversations about milk being a trigger/cause.

My intent was not to ignore my nannies suggestions, I assure you. My intent was for ME to make these decisions for my son. If I had found out she was disobeying me and my son was not lactose-intolerant I would have already fired her. The fact that she was right puts me in a tough spot because she did do what's best, but at the expense of my trust.

I'm a MB. Why did you not listen to your nanny's advice? Are you that convinced that you know so much better as a first time parent than your experienced nanny?

Seriously. I rely on my nanny to talk to me, and I TRUST HER OPINION enough. She didn't destroy your trust; you just demonstrated your disrespect for her. If I were her, I would be looking for new employment with a family that actually thought my judgment valuable.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact is, her nanny had a hunch. She's not a doctor and she didn't know 100% that it was in fact milk that was making the child sick. None of what you are saying applies here because she didn't know for a fact that it was a milk allergy.

To do this on a hunch without telling MB was wrong.

If you give your child something, an hour later they're sick, and the next day you don't feed it and they aren't sick... you would continue to experiment, would tentatively conclude that it was an allergy or intolerance, and would make an appointment with your doctor. Nanny did discuss it with them and she said, from that same experience of feeding and not feeding and sick and not sick, "I think this is a milk allergy" and the parents believed it was TEETHING? Teething comes with a cold, sometimes a fever, plenty of drool, more or less sleep, it does NOT come with vomiting and diarrhea. That's lazy parenting and I salute the nanny for making a decision that would prevent the child from suffering needlessly.

OP I've changed my mind. Fire your nanny so she can find a family who listens to her concerns and values her experience and expertise.

Where did this "hour later they're sick" come from? OP did not say "every time I give milk, an hour later he's sick."
If it was this easy to diagnose a milk allergy, who needs doctors, just get the nannies to do the doctor's job. They know best. To question them at all is a sin.

Oh for the love of...

Some of you people here are seriously dumb. It's an example, not a stated fact regarding this specific incident. What it means is that if you are a parent and your child gets sick soon after eating something, you HOPEFULLY can put two and two together and will experiment to see what affects it - presumably the nanny also did this, withholding dairy and seeing if he still got sick, etc. because THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE DO.

If, as OP stated, the nanny raised her concerns numerous times, then I am still on the nanny's side here - she did what was right for the child when the parents couldn't be bothered to explore the issue their EXPERIENCED nanny believed was causing his stomach illness. Her choices were

a) disobey her MB and make a change to his diet
b) follow MB's rules and make the child sick
c) quit

It just doesn't seem fair to the nanny to be stuck in that conundrum, with an MB who ignores multiple conversations about milk being a trigger/cause.

My intent was not to ignore my nannies suggestions, I assure you. My intent was for ME to make these decisions for my son. If I had found out she was disobeying me and my son was not lactose-intolerant I would have already fired her. The fact that she was right puts me in a tough spot because she did do what's best, but at the expense of my trust.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact is, her nanny had a hunch. She's not a doctor and she didn't know 100% that it was in fact milk that was making the child sick. None of what you are saying applies here because she didn't know for a fact that it was a milk allergy.

To do this on a hunch without telling MB was wrong.

If you give your child something, an hour later they're sick, and the next day you don't feed it and they aren't sick... you would continue to experiment, would tentatively conclude that it was an allergy or intolerance, and would make an appointment with your doctor. Nanny did discuss it with them and she said, from that same experience of feeding and not feeding and sick and not sick, "I think this is a milk allergy" and the parents believed it was TEETHING? Teething comes with a cold, sometimes a fever, plenty of drool, more or less sleep, it does NOT come with vomiting and diarrhea. That's lazy parenting and I salute the nanny for making a decision that would prevent the child from suffering needlessly.

OP I've changed my mind. Fire your nanny so she can find a family who listens to her concerns and values her experience and expertise.

Where did this "hour later they're sick" come from? OP did not say "every time I give milk, an hour later he's sick."
If it was this easy to diagnose a milk allergy, who needs doctors, just get the nannies to do the doctor's job. They know best. To question them at all is a sin.

Oh for the love of...

Some of you people here are seriously dumb. It's an example, not a stated fact regarding this specific incident. What it means is that if you are a parent and your child gets sick soon after eating something, you HOPEFULLY can put two and two together and will experiment to see what affects it - presumably the nanny also did this, withholding dairy and seeing if he still got sick, etc. because THAT IS WHAT PEOPLE DO.

If, as OP stated, the nanny raised her concerns numerous times, then I am still on the nanny's side here - she did what was right for the child when the parents couldn't be bothered to explore the issue their EXPERIENCED nanny believed was causing his stomach illness. Her choices were

a) disobey her MB and make a change to his diet
b) follow MB's rules and make the child sick
c) quit

It just doesn't seem fair to the nanny to be stuck in that conundrum, with an MB who ignores multiple conversations about milk being a trigger/cause.

Anonymous wrote:OP again.

My nanny did voice her concern with me numerous times, but I honestly thought it was teething, a virus ect..,because nothing was adding up. I asked her to make no changes to his diet and she disobeyed me. She said her daughter is lactose interact and so she recognizes the symptoms but my son is MY child and therefor my husband and I make the decisions. I know she had good intentions, and I'm thankful she was right (this time) but she did disobey me. I just can't trust her anymore.

*intolerant

Also she supplemented milk with his formula.

OP again.

My nanny did voice her concern with me numerous times, but I honestly thought it was teething, a virus ect..,because nothing was adding up. I asked her to make no changes to his diet and she disobeyed me. She said her daughter is lactose interact and so she recognizes the symptoms but my son is MY child and therefor my husband and I make the decisions. I know she had good intentions, and I'm thankful she was right (this time) but she did disobey me. I just can't trust her anymore.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The fact is, her nanny had a hunch. She's not a doctor and she didn't know 100% that it was in fact milk that was making the child sick. None of what you are saying applies here because she didn't know for a fact that it was a milk allergy.

To do this on a hunch without telling MB was wrong.

If you give your child something, an hour later they're sick, and the next day you don't feed it and they aren't sick... you would continue to experiment, would tentatively conclude that it was an allergy or intolerance, and would make an appointment with your doctor. Nanny did discuss it with them and she said, from that same experience of feeding and not feeding and sick and not sick, "I think this is a milk allergy" and the parents believed it was TEETHING? Teething comes with a cold, sometimes a fever, plenty of drool, more or less sleep, it does NOT come with vomiting and diarrhea. That's lazy parenting and I salute the nanny for making a decision that would prevent the child from suffering needlessly.

OP I've changed my mind. Fire your nanny so she can find a family who listens to her concerns and values her experience and expertise.

Where did this "hour later they're sick" come from? OP did not say "every time I give milk, an hour later he's sick."
If it was this easy to diagnose a milk allergy, who needs doctors, just get the nannies to do the doctor's job. They know best. To question them at all is a sin.

Anonymous wrote:The fact is, her nanny had a hunch. She's not a doctor and she didn't know 100% that it was in fact milk that was making the child sick. None of what you are saying applies here because she didn't know for a fact that it was a milk allergy.

To do this on a hunch without telling MB was wrong.

If you give your child something, an hour later they're sick, and the next day you don't feed it and they aren't sick... you would continue to experiment, would tentatively conclude that it was an allergy or intolerance, and would make an appointment with your doctor. Nanny did discuss it with them and she said, from that same experience of feeding and not feeding and sick and not sick, "I think this is a milk allergy" and the parents believed it was TEETHING? Teething comes with a cold, sometimes a fever, plenty of drool, more or less sleep, it does NOT come with vomiting and diarrhea. That's lazy parenting and I salute the nanny for making a decision that would prevent the child from suffering needlessly.

OP I've changed my mind. Fire your nanny so she can find a family who listens to her concerns and values her experience and expertise.

Anonymous wrote:Clearly your DC was still getting dairy as he continued to be sick, so I doubt his physical health was severely compromised.

No, a nanny shouldn't eliminate a food group from a child's diet without informing the parents, etc. etc. etc. but let me pose another question:

Question: What should a nanny do when the parent is asking them to feed their child something that makes them ill?

Answer: Talk to the parents.

Question: If the parents are too self-important, ignorant, lazy, whatever to understand that a food is making their child sick - vomiting and diarrhea people! - what should the nanny do then?

If she knowingly feeds the child something that makes them vomit, imo she should be fired anyway because that is the OPPOSITE of providing healthy and safe care for the child. If she stops feeding it to them, what, she should be fired also, because she "disobeyed"? What if she made sure DC got all the essential nutrients by serving alternative sources of calcium, iron, vitamin D, whatever?

Talk to your nannies. Listen to your nannies. Understand that putting them in a position where they are mandated to make your child VOMIT is wrong and immoral and you frankly don't deserve to have a nanny anymore.

The fact is, her nanny had a hunch. She's not a doctor and she didn't know 100% that it was in fact milk that was making the child sick. None of what you are saying applies here because she didn't know for a fact that it was a milk allergy.

To do this on a hunch without telling MB was wrong.

Clearly your DC was still getting dairy as he continued to be sick, so I doubt his physical health was severely compromised.

No, a nanny shouldn't eliminate a food group from a child's diet without informing the parents, etc. etc. etc. but let me pose another question:

Question: What should a nanny do when the parent is asking them to feed their child something that makes them ill?

Answer: Talk to the parents.

Question: If the parents are too self-important, ignorant, lazy, whatever to understand that a food is making their child sick - vomiting and diarrhea people! - what should the nanny do then?

If she knowingly feeds the child something that makes them vomit, imo she should be fired anyway because that is the OPPOSITE of providing healthy and safe care for the child. If she stops feeding it to them, what, she should be fired also, because she "disobeyed"? What if she made sure DC got all the essential nutrients by serving alternative sources of calcium, iron, vitamin D, whatever?

Talk to your nannies. Listen to your nannies. Understand that putting them in a position where they are mandated to make your child VOMIT is wrong and immoral and you frankly don't deserve to have a nanny anymore.

Nanny here.

OP, you are right to be upset. Your nanny changed your child's diet without your knowledge or consent. Yes, she did this in what she felt was the child's best interest and lucky for her she was correct. Unfortunately for her nannies don't get to make major changes like that without their employer's consent.

This whole issue could have been avoided if your nanny had communicated her continuing concerns with you and asked how you felt about doing a trial-run with eliminating dairy. I'm not sure what orders she disobeyed b/c you didn't say that you told her to continue giving dairy (although you may have for all we know).

It definitely needs to be addressed with her. You need to let her know that her lack of communication with you about a major aspect of your child's life (his diet) has led to a loss of trust within the relationship. If you do appreciate her concern you could let her know that, but tell her that in order to remain employed by you (if you decide to keep her) she will need to defer to you for major decisions. As your son's mother you are the decision maker and it is her job to support those decisions.

Major decisions are the parents' to make. Period. A nanny can respectfully express her thoughts, but ultimately she is not part of the final say. I make minor decisions all the time at work, and my employer's trust me to do so. I tell them when I make minor changes/decisions and all is well. All major concerns/decisions are discussed with MB and left to her to decide what is best.

We're you the one changing the exploding diarrheal diapers during the day after the kid had dairy? No. I would have eliminated dairy as well. You should be grateful the nanny knew what she was doing because you obviously didn't have a clue!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No to the nanny chorus. The OP instructed her nanny to not stop giving the baby dairy. The nanny did it anyway. This is a big problem and its not a nanny that would I trust.

What if the baby had died because of OPs stupidity? Fire her, OP, you need a "yes maam" nanny. The line is already forming with parents who want to hire your nanny and these parents will listen to her because she is experienced. You are not worthy of yohr nannyand I am not a nanny.

Food elimination to test for intolerance is not done willy nilly by the nanny.
If you suspect that your child is allergic to dairy, then you eliminate that, just that, while giving everything else the child usually has, and not introducing new foods. Then after the test period, if the child has not shown symptoms, you can conclude that it is an allergy to dairy.

If your nanny eliminates dairy and MB thinks fruit juice is the culprit and cuts that back too, you don't know what was causing what.
If your nanny eliminates dairy and MB gave a dinner with pine nuts, something baby's never had, it could be the pine nuts or the milk. You just don't know.

While you eliminate dairy, you need to substitute other sources of same nutrition, perhaps soymilk or cheese, etc. You don't just take away milk from a 16 month old for who knows how long of a period the nanny did this.

All those nannies saying your nanny knew better and you should feel lucky are just plain wrong. These are big decisions and she should've told you what she was doing. She clearly doesn't know her boundaries and thinks of herself as a co-parent than a nanny.

A co-parent would share this kind of information with the other parent.

you are an idiot.