Sunday

Fell's Point - Baltimore City, Maryland

Received Sunday, June 28, 2009
nanny sighting logo I stopped into The Daily Grind in Fell's Point (on cobblestone street near water) for coffee on Wednesday, June 24th in the morning. Immediately, I noticed the two most gorgeous twins I have ever seen in my life. These babies were beautiful--bright blue eyes, rosey cheeks, chubby little legs and absolutely just positively breathtaking. As I approached and made eye contact with them and smiled, they began to coo and smile and giggle. To say they were adorable is not doing them justice. I'm harping on this because these babies (a boy and a girl) in a black City Mini double-stroller were impossible not to notice, not to engage, not to absolutely love and hug and kiss.

The "caregiver" was African-American and the babies were Caucasion. I'm taking a leap here in assuming the caregiver was not the biological mother. The little baby girl had a helmet on--perhaps from Kennedy Krieger to address the flat head syndrome that sometimes befalls some infants. (Seeing as how I never saw these babies, held or picked up, I now understand why the baby girl's head is in a helmet.) The little boy was not wearing a helmet. The caregiver was reading a textbook and using a highlighter and was facing away from the babies. I'm estimating that the babies were between 6-10 months of age. The caregiver never looked up, never looked at me, never looked at the babies, never moved. She just continued to be engrossed in her text. As I stood in line, I witnessed multiple people coming and going and not one could resist checking out these twins. Grown men in business suits stopped to smile at these babies. Still, the nanny did nothing. She looked at no one. She acknowledged nothing.

This post is not as egregious as others I've read and perhaps does not even necessitate a report, but this scene so completely devastated me. If I were their mother, I would be mortified. As the nanny leaves the home of these babies with the babies in their double stroller, unsuspecting parents would be delighted to know that their babies were going on a walk and getting fresh air. These babies, in fact, aren't getting that. At least not on this particular Wednesday when they were sequestered in a coffee shop when they could have been playing or being engaged in activity. They never cried or whined or grimaced or showed any indication that they were uncomfortable. It just made me sad that the nanny was so checked out. If I were the parents, I would be seeking new help. This woman is just not cut out for working with infants. She was emotionless, flat, completely unaware of her surroundings---or apathetic about those surroundings--and cold. I so wished I had said something to her.

I posted something very generic on my city family yahoo listserv trying to seek out these parents without alluding to what the content of my message was. I got no response which makes me think the parents are not subscribers.

If you live in Canton or Fell's Point and these babies sound familiar to you, please say something to the parents. Their nanny is negligent and needs to be replaced.

71 comments:

ericsmom said...

We don't know what the nanny does in the day with the kids. Just because she stopped by to get a cup of coffee or sit in a shop, doesn't make her a terrible caregiver. The kids were happy and not crying. I don't believe in holding a baby all day. As long as they were happy. And it sounded like they were getting attention from people talking to them and smiling. What's the harm. It was entertainment for them I am sure.

My son at that age loved just going out. Even to the bagel store. He would watch the people going by. Even at the local park he was too young to walk. But I would sit him in the stroller or in my lap and he got a kick out of the big kids playing. I would even ask the older kids to come over. And talk to him. And he would giggle and get so excited. Now don't get me wrong I would put him in the swing as well. Or sit with him in the grass and lay his toys out.

But really a nanny going to a coffee shop, is not a big deal. They are supposed to be doing ordinary things in the day as well.

Think Again said...

I couldn't tell how long the caretaker was absorbed in her textbook from the post (OP, can you clarify?) That said, I think studying while on duty, much less facing AWAY from charges, is not how I would want my kids "watched" (I do not have a nanny, but do employ an occasional babysitter).

I would certainly want to know if I had a caretaker who spent working time doing something non-job related (long calls, studying, etc). Perhaps the employer gave her the OK to study while kids were awake and entertained by watching people, but it never hurts to put it out there, in case he/she did not. Personally, I think these things can be done while babies nap if you are "on the clock".

jacksmom said...

I've almost always felt that all sightings are valid and do belong here, regardless of how slight or heinous they may be. However, this one is completely out of line.

So what? Are you a parent? When your children were babies, did you engage them every minute of every day? These babies were happy and content to do exactly what they were doing. The nanny has ears; she would have known if they needed attention. How do you really know that she was so checked out hat she was oblivious to the attention that others were giving her. How do you know that she wasn't cramming hard for a final or something. It's called multi -tasking and it's really OK.

I think ericsmom said this much better than I did; but I did want you to know that I'm actually rather appalled at your shock - you'd FIRE this nanny? That's just wrong and you need to get over your self-righteousness.

sh said...

I think it's rather presumptuous for you to decide that because the little girl had a helmet she was never held. I am a nanny for twins, and the little boy has a helmet. It has nothing to do with him not being held enough, he was born this way because of his position in the womb. I suggest you stop your incorrect assumptions.

rolling eyes said...

I think the OP, doesn't have children. And doesn't know how long a day can be just "playing". Or holding their kids 24/7. I don't see anything wrong with what the nanny did. Or at least what was stated by the OP. If this was a mother I am sure she would not have a problem seeing two happy babies in the stroller.

It would be terrible for a good nanny to lose her job. Because a stranger only observed her for 10-15 minutes.

If the OP stated the kids were screaming and crying. Or were trying to tug on the nanny to get attention okay. Or if they were older lets say 15 months are were running around the store unsupervised okay. Thats a problem. But this is nothing

world's best nanny said...

Ack! What kind of post is this? If I kept all the babies I watch engaged for a solid 10 hours I'd be babbling incoherently! There is no harm in letting infants absorb the world around them by just sitting quietly and observing.

Argh....... said...

I am sorry, 6 month old babies should be playing?
What do you suggest they play? Monopoly? hop scotch? Tic Tac toe?

Nannies are only human said...

Ok, Ok enough already. The babies were in no harm- yes the nanny should at least look up- do the text book thing during their nap- singing songs, talking with them or pointing colors, shapes, numbers and letters out- engaging with them- but there is not foul about the nanny grabbing a coffee and sitting down for just a few. But no more than 5-10 minutes.

I work as a nanny for a 13 month old little boy and if I am grabbing his meal or changing laundry- I let him play alone for a couple minutes- with me sharply watching and listening for him.

fox in socks said...

I disagree. This sounds to me like another neglectful "nanny" ignoring her charges. I doubt anyone would intentionally pay another person good money to sit in a coffee shop ignoring the charges while studying her textbook highlighting the relevant portions. If mom wanted this level of care she can ignore her babies on her own time while she studies her own textbooks. Why pay another person to do this.

I'm sick of people jumping all over the OPs. Just trust that the OP witnessed it for a sickening amount of time, an amount of time that was too long. Just trust the OP that it wasn't right.

I wish people would wake up and realize that so many of our supposed "caregivers" are not providing good care.

Lindsey said...

Jackmom, it's been stated before a nanny is not a parent and therefore the standards are not the same. She is not being paid to study, she is infact being paid to engage and play with/care for a child. Making calls, studying, parking the kids in front of the tv, or leaving them strapped in the stroller at the park while reading a magazine is not exceptable for someone being paid for a particular service.

And btw, I would not tolerate a perfect stranger touching my child, and I would expect my nanny not to let every Tom, Dick, and Jane touch them either.

virginia nanny said...

The thing about infants is...they don't talk. So, yes, some amount of running commentary is appropriate, but realistically you cannot do that 10 hours per day. Taking infants to a public place and allowing them to people watch (especially if other people are interacting with them) is a good activity.
However, I'm giving the OP the benefit of the doubt. The nanny should have been facing the children and keeping an eye on all the people who were coming over to interact with the babies because they are, after all, strangers. As the nanny, you may not have to talk to them all day, but you should always be aware of what they're doing.

ericsmom said...

Where does it say strangers are touching the kids??

cali mom said...

Skipping ahead, but...OP I don't get from your post what was so awful. Unless you sat with *your* coffee for hours, you are absolutely horrified that the nanny was not actively engaging and playing with her charges for the time that it took you to get your coffee?? Especially horrified because the babies were super duper cute? Jujst because she did not make eye contact with each and every person who interacted with them does not convey that the parents should be alarmed. Sorry.

Jacksmom said...

Lindsay,

Yes, Nannnies aren't mothers. But, they ARE human. And "as it's been stated," actively engaging six month old babies 100% of the time is a ridiculous expectation to have of anyone. I cringe as hard as anyone when I hear about nannies who take their charges to the park, only to leave them restrained in the stroller while the nanny chats it up with her friends. This was different. First, these children were only SIX MONTHS OLD... what would you suggest they do? They can barely sit up on their own, much less get out an play on the playground. Second, they were perfectly content - no struggling against their seat belts. It was the OP who had a problem.

In the course of raising my own two children, I've had several nannies and I didn't expect any of them to do anything I wouldn't do - including keeping them actively entertained every minute of the day. Periods of the day that are spent quietly observing their surroundings is a wonderful thing, particularly for young babies.

By the way, Lindsay, the word is "acceptable."

cali mom said...

Caught up. Fox in Socks, exactly why *should* we give every OP "the benefit of the doubt"? This may be a very good nanny with a complete raving ass of a boss (one who requires her LI to keep her window treatments closed and pay for her own food on weekends, perhaps), who would fire her nanny over a report that she sat next to the happy babies in their stroller for 5 minutes with a cup of coffee. So, why SHOULD every OP be given the benefit of the oubt in every situation? Have you seriously never realized that there are some really unreasonable, dare I say, clueless people in this world?

Lindsey said...

..."were impossible not to notice, not to engage, not to absolutely love and hug and kiss."

Lindsey said...

Don't correct my spelling if you can't even spell my name right, when it is right in front of you!

NannyJ said...

I agree with the OP,Fox in Socks and Lindsey.

I nanny a 6 mo old, and I just could never imagine doing this! Just how it is! That is not acceptable nanny behavior, under most circumstances! Maybe the parents ok-ed this, who knows. But the purpose of this site is to alert parents to what they may not know their nannies are doing, and they very well may not know that this is their child's activity.
No, no harm done, however... what are they paying her for? I'm sure she didn't just look at her textbook for 5 minutes, actively high lighting. I am also a college student, and really 5 minutes with a textbook isn't going to get you very far, she was probably fairly invested (in the book that is, not the child).

It's not that hard to be ATTENTIVE to babies for a full work day. (and though this is neither here nor there... the nanny probably isn't working 10hr days if she is a student...)

citysitter said...

When i read this post, the biggest issue i could see is that the nanny was not physically watching the children.

I agree with nannyj, if she was highlighting and reading from a textbook, it is fair to say that she was engrossed in her work for at least half an hour or longer. Five minutes with a textbook is not going to be enough for anyone, no matter what class the book is for.

On that note, if the nanny were sipping her coffee, studying and had the babies close by and in her line of vision, this would not be a problem. As many of you said, a 6 month old child does not need constant amusement, and would probably be very happy to sit and observe their surroundings. However, a six month old child should not be left completely unsupervised by their caregiver in public, as described in this post. Yes the nanny was there, but her back was to the children in a loud, public place, and she was absorbed in her work. It would be all too easy for some creep to walk off with the stroller, or for one of the babies to stick something small in their mouths or any number of horrible things to occur, and since the nanny was not looking and she was preoccupied with her work, she would not have noticed these things until it was far too late.

Parents, would you want your children to be left unsupervised in public for 20-30 minutes or more? Would you want to be paying someone to NOT supervise your children? i think this is a good sighting.

Nanny Taxi said...

Nannies are human. Childcare is a job. We cannot punch out for 15 minutes to take a break so why not grab a cup of coffee when you can?

When my boy was a baby there was nothing he loved more than lying on a blanket in the shade at the park and looking up at the trees.

These babies were not harmed, they were being stimulated by the goings on. Please!!

MinuteMuggle said...

I think the helmet comment was ignorant. I have taken care of children with helmets and it has absolutely nothing to do with how much they are held/put down on their backs.

Jacksmom said...

Good point, Lindsey, and I apologize. The rest stands though.

feeling plucky... said...

would it be different if the babies were ugly lol...

va nanny said...

here we go with the "but they could be abducted!!!" thing again. I believe the nanny should have been facing the babies and keeping an eye on the people who were talking to them, but I do not believe she would have been oblivious to someone walking off with the double stroller (which would undoubtedly take some maneuvering to get out of the shop).
I think people can disagree on whether or not this was appropriate for the nanny to do, but I hardly think it is atrocious on any level, and it doesn't merit terminating employment unless the employer has already told the nanny it's not okay.

Elizabeth said...

Twins receive an OVERWHELMING amount of attention. Should the nanny stop and acknowledge each admirer? Is this what you want in a nanny? I think not. In fact, I think the nanny was doing the right thing in minimizing/ignoring some of the attention the children were getting. Their lives should not be a circus. OP needs to get a life.

Anonymous said...

This person is just ridiculous and racist. Hello!!! White babies and black nanny. Talk about pointing it out! I have twins and even I couldn't give both children constant attention and could barely take them out for a stroll on my own when they were infants. I would have to say that at least the girl was studying and not smoking or drink. Now that would be something to point out. Your post is just ridiculous and racist. Go find a hobby.

Della said...

Wow! I can't believe some of the commenters think this is not a big deal...that the nanny is at a coffee shop of all places and neglectfully with the twin infants. A coffee shop is a place where people are tired and are getting their caffeine so they could easily spil HOT coffee and I don't want to think of that! People also smoke with their coffee drinks so all of that secondhand smoke makes coffee shops a not so great place to take the babies. AND did you read this is from BALTIMORE CITY? Hello??!! Baltimore City is one of the most violent cities in our nation! This woman should not have been reading/studying and ignoring the children she is being paid to watch! THAT IS EXACTLY what the post says!
Sure, she can read while they sleep at home or somewhere safer (maybe outdoors away from strangers). I am a nanny and WOULD NEVER take young babies to a coffee shop so I could read and study. It is SO important to have full attention to the babies. It sounds like she wasn't even acknowledging that the babies were in her care. This woman should be fired. Obviously the original poster was SO upset that she deemed it appropriate to post this on a public webpage in HOPE to have it read by the parents. I would do the same thing.

Bottom line: When children are under one year of age, take them places that are kid friendly! Don't take them to coffee shops where someone could possibly spill a hot beverage near these precious ones or the babies could be submitted to second hand cigarette smoke. BAD NANNY! To the parents: What were you thinking when you hired a black nanny college student? Of course she is going to be studying and NOT working with your babies 100% of the time. Did the parents know she took them here?

So sad and the nanny won't take her job seriously-she's just trying to earn some money while in college probably. HIRE a professional. These are YOUR babies!

Lola said...

"What were you thinking when you hired a black nanny college student?"


Wow, that is extremely racist! okay why did they hire a college student, maybe that's what you meant? What does the color of her skin have to do with it?


And where in the civilized world do they still allow smoking inside public places, especially restaurants?!?

freshmeat said...

. . . What Lola said.

I'm afraid I'm more concerned by "Della's" post, than Op's . . .

ericsmom said...

Where do you live? Della. Most cities don't allow smoking inside their restaurants or coffee houses.

Dellathemoron said...

I think Della needs to go back to college.................

New Jersey mom said...

Wow, I am really offended by Della's reasoning. What a racist thing to say!!!

Are you teaching your charges to have the same view??? I am a mom and would not hire you in a million years!

It sounds like your very paranoid of the world. And very childish.

Kristen said...

OP - I really don't think you can make assumptions on the quality of care of this nanny because of the girl's helmet. In twins, there is a higher chance that one of the babies will have this condition because of decreased room in the womb. Also, I had mild flat head syndrome (thankfully no helmet was needed) as an infant because of severe torticollis in my neck that I developed from a reflux problems that required me to sleep in a sitting position for the first year of my life. My mom was always tentative to pick me up in public because the movement often caused me to have projectile spit up. I can't imagine anyone ever calling my mother neglectful because she wanted to save herself and others from a gross and embarrassing situation. Don't be so quick to judge without knowing any details. I'm sure if you confronted the nanny or the babies parents about your assumptions, it would make for a slightly awkward situation. Don't forget, when you assume you make and ass out of you and me (in this case the OP and the nanny/nanny's employer)

sd said...

Maybe the nanny was following the orders of the parents. I worked for a family for 3 years while taking care of their son who was an infant when I started. I was under strict rules not to over engage him. It didn't mean that was what I preferred, it's just what the parents wanted. Whether we were at home, or in public, they didn't want me playing with him 24/7. They wanted him to learn to be happy on his own, and learn that he could be okay even if he wasn't constantly stimulated.

So we would play together for 15 minutes, then I would let him play on his own for 30 minutes. One time the Mom was home getting caught up on her computer and said that I played with him too much!

Again, not saying that his how I raise my child, but when you are getting paid to raise the child of another person, you can't always do things how you would.

So before we make all these assumptions, let's think that the nanny might have been just doing her job. Plus, maybe she works a 12 hour day? Was it really so bad for her to take a little break and do school work while the babies were in a good mood?

just another mommy said...

Ok everyone, this is what I'm thinking. This lady hired on from one of those CL ads that said "Twins, easy to care for, almost independent 6 months olds, ideal for a college student who could do her studying while the babies just watch the world go by. Pay $20 daily."

And if this were the case (and you have to admit, we've all seen the ads!) then it would be perfectly acceptable and actually expected that this nanny would be doing her schoolwork. She is just following the ad.

floralshell said...

I really dont understand why all of you are not getting the real problem here. It isnt that a nanny was studying while watching her young charges in a coffee shop, or not engaging them during every waking moment. I don't think anyone would ever say that a nanny is responsible for providing a stream of chatter and activity that fills every second of her time with the kids she is watching. The issue here is that the nanny had her back to two BABIES. in public. For obviously a decent length of time. If she wants to park the kids in front of her and let them people watch quietly, in such a way that she can see both of them clearly while she studies, i see no problem with that. They are babies, if they are happy and peaceful for the time being, let them remain so. But when a parent or nanny literally can not see a child while they are in public for more than a few minutes, i think it is a problem.

personally, i know if the parent of the 8 month old that i sit for walked into a coffee shop to find her child's stroller parked behind me, with her kid strapped in and completely out of my sight, as i fervently highlighted passages in a textbook, while a stranger cooed over her baby, i would probably be given a pretty stern lecture and a warning about keeping my job. Also della, what does the nanny's race have to do with anything?

MinuteMuggle said...

della,

racist much? geez.

Psyber Chica said...

Della,

Your post must be completely sarcastic to prove the point that the OP's post was ridiculous, right?

If not, please go away until you have gained some life experience.

lovesthegirls said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
lovesthegirls said...

Just another mommy--

are you a lawyer? GREAT point :P. I love it!

On other notes: Children should not be constantly stimulated directly... it makes for VERY codependant people. I have sen the fallout. Perhaps, OP didn't watch long enough..? r maybe she did... who knows. The bottom line is: the children were safe, happy, sheltered, and clean. All the basics of life. If the nnny was ripping one up by their arms-- problem here. But, she was not. And to the poster re second hand smoke... so... do your kids/ charges/neices/nephews whatever... not get to go into coffee shoips or restaurants ever??? Even if you still live in an area that allows indoor smoking? Seriously. I agree second hand smoke sucks... but so does living your life ala Boo Radley...

Kristen said...

I think some of the comments are harsh to the op, she felt it was worth posting and I think if someone felt it was worth posting I would rather see it and decide it wasn't than not.

Also, I do not feel that the babies need to be engaged all the time but I would take issue with the fact random strangers were coming up to them over and over and she was not looking at them. It is perfectly possible to study but still be facing the stroller.

concerned said...

This may be a little dramatic and over-the-top, but it has happened, multiple times - and been in the News. The fact that this Nanny did not have the babies facing her and seemed to be "disconnected", at best, was truly detrimental. We had one woman going around with a dirty needle and just poking it into very small children - she was finally caught, but not for a long while and several young children were injured. This is just one example of many of sick people walking around out there... you MUST keep your eyes on young children AT ALL TIMES!

bosh said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Carrie said...

i think the lady meant that secondhand smoke could come in from outdoors or be inhaled if sitting outside. i don't see a problem with calling the nanny, a black college nanny. what else are we supposed to call her? an african american nanny who studies?


jeez people. fact is the colored nanny or whatever you want to call her was not watching the babies! that's wrong.

nataliekorsch said...

I have seen this nanny before at the same coffee shop. She is older and it's not study work she is focusing on. It's music she is writing. She is an earth woman type who's not all there.

I just happened to stumble upon this site to see something noted in my city. I'm happy that someone else typed up a post about her, she isn't a good nanny. She always ignores those twins and if I knew the parents, I would tell em myself!

This particular coffee shop is not a great pick either because about 3 months ago, someone was robbed and beaten right outside at 11am! I feel scared still coming here! Eventually, the nanny will get caught or seen by someone who knows the parents and she will be let go. THEN she can go write her music any day of the week and the babies will be okay.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
MinuteMuggle said...

natalie,

yes, how horrible that this nanny is creative and writes music and is "earthy." A grave offense in any nanny.

You yourself sound not all there.

Erika said...

this is crazy and you really need to get a life. no one plays with their children all day long! and there really was no need to point out she was black because being a bad nanny has nothing to do with color.

Natalie said...

i was trying to explain that this nanny is a hippie- she isn't all there. it's not my problem if she chooses to be a nanny and write rap music. i was just stating the facts. her name is taneeka i think. the nanny's name that is. i am all here by the way thank you very much.

nigger hater said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
mary said...

MPP and Jane:
please delete this above hateful post with the offensive words! :(

Portlander said...

Why are these racist posts not being deleted? Carrie's post and the last post, especially.

i strike again said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
gabriela said...

wow. unexpected commentary.

um..~ pls don't feed the trolls? yeesh, i'm at a loss for words.

WTF? said...

And we've officially hit a new low for caliber of trolls. @@.

I didn't think much of this sighting which is why I didn't comment earlier. Just a couple of things:

1. The level of paranoia never ceases to amaze me. Not only will the twins be snatched, but they are guaranteed to inhale smoke of have hot coffee poured on them. How do some of you ever leave the house?

2. While I am not bothered by this sighting, because of it's very brief duration, I really dislike this ides that you can give an infant too much attention. I think it's hogwash. You cannot spoil infants by being attentive to their social, physical, and emotional needs. Having those needs met in infancy is what makes children grow up to be confident and independent. It's the children who are often ignored who grow up clingy and insecure. At any rate, it's certainly not necessary to avoid giving infants attention just to make a point. In fact, I can't imagine anything dumber. They are only babies for a short time.

Okay, I'm done. :)

cali mom said...

Well, ignorant people come in all colors. (Thanks for illustrating Carrie/Della/Anon racist).

It is quite unusual though, in my experience, for hippies to be heavily into rap music. Are you a musician also, Natalie, that you are able to tell it is rap music she is writing from simply watching her hand move from across a coffee shop? Or, do you hear the voices rapping in your head?

mom said...

WTF Said:

"2. While I am not bothered by this sighting, because of it's very brief duration, I really dislike this ides that you can give an infant too much attention. I think it's hogwash. You cannot spoil infants by being attentive to their social, physical, and emotional needs. Having those needs met in infancy is what makes children grow up to be confident and independent. It's the children who are often ignored who grow up clingy and insecure. At any rate, it's certainly not necessary to avoid giving infants attention just to make a point. In fact, I can't imagine anything dumber. They are only babies for a short time."

I couldn't agree more!!!! (Same for leaving them to cry so they can be "taught who is boss." Ugh!) Pick up your babies and lavish them with as much attention as you can. It is so true that it is the kids to get too little attention are the clingy ones, while the ones who have been given plenty of attention tend to be more secure.

Somebody once advised me to send my three year old son to preschool so that he would be used to being away form me and therefore not cry when I sent him to kindergarten. it was the going thing in the area when we moved here to push them right out of the nest, tears and all, as toddlers, to "train" them to build independence. I watched their kids cry and cling upon being left for years...and wondered when those mothers would ever become "trained" enough to realize that their brilliant methods seemed to be backfiring.

JacksMom said...

I don't think anybody was advocating ignoring their babies; we were pointing out that they do not need to be actively engaged every waking moment. Both of my babies very much enjoyed just quietly taking in their environment, as it sounds like these twins were doing. Visual stimulation is every bit as important as physical and mental stimulation.

I agree with you, Mom, on the horrible practice of just letting babies cry. To do so is cruel and ignorant.

Natalie said...

I agree completely that babies need to be in different environments to be stimulated! A plus side to a nanny job with babies is stimulating them. Sure perhaps a coffee shop may be a great place for the nanny to get a nice drink to re-fuel her difficult job as a nanny for TWIN INFANTS! However, this was not the case. The reason this was even posted was because the nanny was ignoring the twin babies. This is where it is so wrong.

Not it's not being too paranoid. If a woman was in line (the original poster in this case) and she noticed that the nanny was completely unattentive-what if a con artist or someone targeting the 'busy type' or distracted type of individual had come into that shop on that morning?
Maybe now some readers can see my point. I just find it very unethical to any norm especially in today's society, yet alone the city of Baltimore.

As far as the nanny who writes music and is earthy- I was trying to hint that she appears to be quite the party type. She wears the hemp necklaces and has tatoos all over here. She also hands out cards with her myspace information which is the sole reason I know she composes rap lyrics.

I did not mean to attack this individual by referring to her as black, colored or african. It really seems that whatever I were to call her, SOMEONE would be offended?!

So at this point we will refer to her as the woman with dark skin such as someone from Africa or another country where people of color originate from. I would never use fowl language to describe anyone.

I just thought I'd check back to see what all had written and was quite surprised that so many of you were referring to my prior comment as notorious.

Best of luck to those of you who don't realize that this nanny sighting is gladly submitted and we can all learn from one another not to hire this type of individual in our homes.

These people (nanny) are those who we should steer clear of in our lives. I can only pray that the parents find out and do what is deemed appropriate.

Just Sayin' said...

If you can infer this much about her just from observing her at a coffee shop, don't you think the parents have at least a tiny clue as to who she is? I think you're biassed.

offended by the ignorance. said...

I don't think hemp necklaces or tattoos make her a party girl.
Who cares if she writes rap lyrics? Who cares if she has tattoos?
I am a nanny and I also hang out with a very large group of nannies and about 90% of us have tattoos. They aren't offensive, they don't interfere with our job, and they certainly don't make us bad nannies.
I completely and utterly agree that she should not have had her back to the babies, I wouldn't ever have my back to my charges because they are my priority while I'm working but I think her color and personal life have been discussed enough. Obviously the parents hired her so she must be doing something right especially if she still has her job.
Stay on track with the comments please. Degrading a person because of color, likes, dislikes, hobbies, interests (or whatever else you can think of to pick on someone about) truly leads away from the original post and gets everyone off track of the issues.
She should have been facing the babies but one sighting and the hear say of another commenter doesn't mean this nanny is a bad nanny. She made a mistake and I'm sure if it keeps happening the parents will hear it from someone and she will be dealt with. Lay off the ladies appearance. geez.

MinuteMuggle said...

natalie,
the more you talk the more ignorant you sound. you should quit.

Natalie said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jacksmom said...

***rolls eyes***

MinuteMuggle said...

natalie,

lol whaaat?

"colored?" Nobody says that anymore. And I'm white by the way and you should really watch what you say. Why would you assume that I was black, just because I am not racist like you? As I said, the more you talk, the more ignorant you sound.

regular poster said...

Stop picking on Natalie. Did it ever occur to you that maybe she is not from the US and that explain certain terms being used. She does not seem to be racist. She is in fact trying to be sensitive. Enough already.

Katie Klenn said...

Look Minute Moogle or whatever you call your odd self... I am tired of you insisting that people are racist. I am not. Let's focus on the posting not little things you are pulling apart. Perhaps you could read a book about How Not to read into things so much!

Jeez. You are THE weirdo on here.

Now back to the posting, I like all the comments on here and some point out really good points. However, I find that the nanny ignoring children is NOT okay.

Needs to be fired, now!

MinuteMuggle said...

katie,

I did not call you a racist, unless you are posting under multiple monikers which would not surprise me. Why don't you eat my shorts?

I have just as much a right to post my opinion as anyone else. Maybe you need to learn how to read. period. If you could, you would see that I am not the only one on here offended by "natalie's" comments.

If the size 9 fits, wear it, I always say.
Word.

chrissyma said...

I'm from the area too, but I don't know the parents off the top of my head. If I think of someone, I'll definitely inform them.

That being said, I disagree ericsmom. I don't think babies should be held all the time either but in a public place like that, the nanny needs to keep an eye on them and at least make some sort of acknowledgment to complete strangers coming up to them.

And I've been in the coffee shop that OP spoke of and there's one not so sane fellow who occasionally stops by. So there's making sure skeevy people stay away from infants too.

(he's the guy who yells at the ground, curses at everyone and throws stuff :()

chrissyma said...

I also meant to add that I don't think she is a bad nanny, but probably preoccupied by school (I'm willing to bet Nursing, considering the area!) and I certainly don't know that this is a good reason to fire her but maybe the family should make it known that Nanny time = work time.

But for all we know, she could be the mom, or a friend keeping an eye on them for someone.

Jane Fomda said...

did any of you think of the naacp? It stands for National Accredited Associated for COLORED people. There is nothing wrong with calling blacks/ dark skinned brown/black COLORED! Jee whiz. They prefer it. That is, according to this association that has been around for quite sometime now.