Received Friday, January 4, 2007
I posted a couple of months ago about a nanny I spotted at World Financial Center. I've seen the usual share of inattentive and great nannies (one today, a slim African American nanny with long braided hair and a creme sweater attending two girls, perhaps 6 and 4, was incredible and is always interacting with the girls when I see them). Today I saw another nanny that made me feel I should post again.
When: around 3pm Friday, January 4
Where: Winter Garden, WFC
Nanny: This nanny was African American, medium build with very close cut hair (you can see her scalp) and dark brown/black frame glasses. She was wearing a black coat and jeans and tan sneakers with orange stripes and dark brown patches on the back heel. She has a dark blue cell phone. Had big gold hoop earrings.
Child: Toddler girl, anywhere from 12 months to 2 years old, light brown hair with bangs. She was wearing a fuzzy creme colored coat with black bow ties for buttons and a brown cable-like sweater. She had on pink Robeez-style shoes with princesses on them and was partly covered with a pink blanket with purple stitching on the edges with a horse and butterfly stitched in one part of the blanket. She was in a red stroller that looked kind of like a Mountain Buggy and said "tike tech" on one of the side handles/bars. She had a Learning Puppy toy in her lap, but was not interested in it.
Situation: I was taking a break and drinking a cup of coffee at a nearby bench. I was there about 15 minutes, maybe longer. The nanny was eating a snack--a bag of smart food popcorn--and the little girl was reaching out to her and trying to get her attention. She seemed to be reaching for some of the snack, because each time the nanny put some in her mouth, the girl reached out as if she was trying to get some. The nanny had the girl in a position where she couldn't fully see the nanny, but could see her head/the snack bag coming toward the nanny's mouth. The nanny completely ignored the girl's attempts to get her attention or get some snack (not saying she should give the child popcorn, but acknowledge her at least). The little girl finally gave up and sat there with tears. A man sitting at the bench by the nanny said something to the nanny about the girl, but I couldn't hear all of what he said (I saw him gesture toward the stroller and say what started with, "she's upset."). The nanny looked over for a second, did nothing and then got on her cell phone. I left the area about three or four minutes after that.
26 comments:
O.k.
What's worse than a nanny ignoring her charge???
YOU sitting there for "15 minutes or more drinking coffee" and not saying or doing anything. Lord knows if that nanny fed the child at all. How sad-that YOU did or said NOTHING!
COME ON PPL, IT'S 2008! TIME FOR ACTION! STAND UP FOR THESE POOR, NEGLECTED CHILDREN.
Poor kid. She was probably hungry for a snack, too. You know you have a bad nanny situation when a complete stranger (the man) said something to the nanny. I hope the parents see this. The child seems to crave affection, which she must not be getting.
I hope you enjoyed your coffee.....
Instead of confronting the nanny, what about going up in a nice way, and ask if theres anything you can do to help. Sometimes, they change faces, and will actually be "nice" to the child then.
Get off OPs back. It's not like the nanny was beating the damn kid. At her age she was probably just fascinated with the nannies hand movement, who knows - YOU weren't there.
Do you want OP to risk her neck over a stupid bag of popcorn, 11:59?
All of you should get a grip and stop being so mean over something as trivial as this.
Pasadena mom, you need a valium!
I agree 12:33 AM, though this is certainly a crappy nanny, this isn't cause for such alarm that we should sound the siren and call the police! The nanny sounds neglectful, however the child wasn't in danger or being abused. I'm not saying OP shouldn't have posted this sighting as I believe most rational parents would at least have "a chat" with said nanny, and many would justly fire her, it's just to say, it's not child abuse to not share your popcorn with a toddler. To be perfectly honest, I don't think I would have walked up and confronted the nanny either, it's a parent or nannies business if they don't want to share popcorn with a child (choking hazard, maybe not in the child's diet etc) the nanny could have of course fed her something else, but who knows, maybe the child just ate? When you starting getting into that "gray area" and have to start speculating too terribly much on a situation, it might be cause to mind your own business a bit. ;) The only thing I would have wanted to approach the nanny about is regarding the cell phone usage, can you imagine what would happen in the work force if ALL employees gabbed on their phone all day rather than working?! BUT again, I'm not her boss, so it's probably not my place to tell her to get off the damn phone, and do her job. LOL
I love the comments "why didn't you do anything?" "This is 2008." Your certainly right, it is 2008. The age of gun toting thugs, and violent agny people. So lets just jump in every time we see someone not giving a child popcorn. There is a line, and the line is pretty obvious. If someone is physically or verbally abusing a child then you step in and confront the person. If a child is in danger, you step in and confront them. You don't step in when someone has their charged strapped in the stroller to long, you don't step in when a nanny isn't giving their charge popcorn, or even because she ignored her charge while in the stroller.
The fact is that in this kind of situation it is the parent's responsibility to make sure their nanny is doing their job and caring for their child properly. It sure is 2008, so get off your ass and check up on your nanny, don't expect a perfect stranger to be your nanny police. This is exacly why I raise my own kids, so I'm not wondering if they are strapped in a stroller all day long.
~Lindsey, SAHM~ Sacramento, CA
Lindsey ~
You conveyed my thoughts perfectly! Great post!
I would be hesitant to confront a nanny head on, especially in Brooklyn. I read a survey that said 9 percent of those nannies are armed.
armed nannies? Concealed weapons or what? What survey was this, may I ask?
What does that mean, especially in Brooklyn? Are you kidding me? What survey says 9% of nannies carry a weapon? What sort of weapon?
my bad. i guess i just assumed that the survey was talking about weapons since so many brooklyn nannies i met seemed to be dating gang bangers. you know it was a gang that was abducting all those strollers in park slope, yeah?
Hey, I take offense by that. Im a Brooklyn nanny and my husband worked for NYPD.
Hey, here's a thought...perhaps the baby had already eaten her snack or simply wasn't due for a snack...and in any case a child under the age of two should NOT be eating popcorn. Perhaps the nanny needed a snack and the baby did not. Perhaps the baby doesn't need to have a snack every time she sees someone else eating something. Maybe the nanny isn't so horrible afterall. Maybe she just needs to eat now and then.
It amazes me the stupid things people come on here posting about. The nanny ate a snack and didn't give any to the baby. Oh no.
Oh, Brooklyn nanny with the cop husband... being married to a cop doesn't guarantee a thing about your character or that of any police officer's spouse, for that matter. My cousin's sister, who is married to a policeman, recently spent a year in a Federal Prison for embezzling money from her employer. To be sure, there are also many crooked cops out there.
Pasadena mom, you are the one who was completely unconcerned about your toddler playing 100 yards away from you while you chatted with other moms, and thought other parents were being uptight when they expressed concern about how far away from you he was.
SO maybe this nanny could have acknowledged the little girl's desire for the popcorn, BUT I think most likely as people have said, probably the little girl had just eaten, was not allowed to have popcorn, was maybe needing to learn that just because someone else has something doesn't mean she can have it too...This is like the Hoho eating nanny. If she had shared it with the little girl surely someone would have been screaming that she was trying to kill the child by making her choke on popcorn. I don't see this as a real problem just from what is written here.
fg, your cousin's sister would be your cousin.
AND maybe the nanny was calling the girl's parents? We just don't know and it seems silly to pick on that if OP didn't hear any of the ensuing call. If she was obviously calling some low-life gangbanger boyfriend and using innapropriate language or something, that's cause for concern but who's to say that's what it was??
I'm not trying to downplay this post, but who's to say this was a neglectful nanny?
There are so many "what ifs" going on with this scenerio, that it is actually kind of silly because no one knows for sure and it is purely speculative.
Cali Mom,
My comment was with regard to a nanny being offended due to her husband being with the NYPD. Also, my cousin's sister is not my cousin. Think outside the box once in awhile.
So your cousin's sister is not your cousin, just like your mother's daughter is not your sister? OK.
Here is another thought. The nanny should not be eating popcorn in front of the child, who is to young to share it. I agree children have to learn they can't have everything they want, but they should also learn that it is rude to eat in front of others and not offer to share. The nanny is modeling poor manners. I don't eat things in front of my charges that they can't have, unless it is something they don't like.
I am the OP. My concern was about the nanny's complete lack of care about the child. It wasn't about the popcorn, but rather about how she ignored the girl, without a care. It was 3pm and other kids were there with nannies (when it's cold there are a lot of nannies who bring the kids in there to play) and were running around, playing games, etc. My concern was that if this nanny ignores the child so easily in public, what about outside of the public eye? She literally did not SPEAK to or LOOK at the child the entire time, until the passing glance after the man spoke to her. The man was there longer than I was and probably saw more than I did. If he hadn't, I might have told the nanny about the girl's tears... eg, "she seems to be upset, maybe her toy isn't working?" to get her attention. But this was a nanny like a number I have seen at WFC... she was concerned about anything but the child. That's what bothered me. If I sat here and ignored the people who worked under me (who I am in charge of and am responsible for) or my boss and chatted on my phone, I'd be a short-timer. I just think our kids deserve more than being ignored.
YES, exactly OP, I got that when I first read your post. The nanny appeared to me, from reading what you wrote, very COLD and uncaring. How can you not react to a crying child? Even the concerned citizen sitting next to her made a comment to her directly. I can't imagine what else goes on behind closed doors.
11:55, You got it right.
We have to assume the worse, given the nanny's lack of conern for the crying child. This is just so sad.
Personally, I know everyone parents differently, but little guy eats every 1 1/2 to 2 hours, meaning he has two tiny snacks in between meals, ie., raisins then fruit or yogurt etc. Whenever I would have a snack or something to drink, he would want some, too. So I always made sure I have tons of stuff on hand for him, and extra to share.
*.....my little guy.....
OP needs to get a new hobby! That story almost put me to sleep.
I used to work with little girl,
and she wanted to eat every time. And if somebody was eating- she would cry. Doctor put her on a diet.
This nanny was turning away from child,right? May be this was a reason?
"AND maybe the nanny was calling the girl's parents?"
100%.
I always call parents.
And always pick up the phone.
And I'm a good nanny.
Post a Comment