Tammi Hill, owner of the Peace of Mind Home Child Care Center in Olathe, has been brought to tears of frustration over a new piece of legislation which is currently in the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee.

Senate Bill 447 would create several new restrictions for day care providers, including regulations on how long children can take using the bathroom, how long a provider can speak with a parent, and how long a provider can spend with any inspector that may drop by the ensure the care center is in compliance with regulations.

Hill, the wife of an Olathe police officer, said she has always worked to ensure the care she provides falls well within the law’s requirements not just because her husband is a member of law enforcement, but because she wants to follow the law and keep her job.

However Hill said she was unsure of how she could possibly follow the stringent regulations being proposed in SB 447. The bill stipulates that children may not use the bathroom for more than five minutes and only if they do so while remaining within earshot of the caregiver. It also states that children may nap only if they are within hearing distance of the caregiver and the caregiver must physically check on each child every 15 minutes.

The bill also requires that a child care provider can only use the bathroom for no longer than five minutes and only if the children are within hearing distance.

Hill said that she has serious concerns with having to limit any potty-training sessions to five minutes, saying she would never force a child to use the restroom in five minutes or less and that she was frustrated that the state would ask her to do so.

Child care providers would also have to limit the amount of time they spend talking with parents or officials to no longer than five minutes and would be permitted to do so only if the children are within hearing distance.

Hill said she routinely calls each parent to discuss how their child’s day is going, and also allows the child to speak with their parent on the phone. Once a month Hill also makes the effort to contact the grandparents of the children and allow the children to speak on the phone with their family. But limiting these conversations to five minutes is not a prospect Hill is pleased with.

“Am I going to have to be setting an egg timer each time we have an interaction,” Hill questioned.

The legislation also requires that a provider can not spend more than five minutes with an inspector, which led Hill to question how an inspector can do a sufficient job of ensuring a provider is in compliance during such a short time period.

“How does that make an inspector a very good inspector,” Hill asked.

Senate Bill 447 would only allow daycare providers to care for six children younger than 16 years old, with no more than two children being younger than 24 months. Current law stipulates that child care providers may work with no more than three children being younger than 18 months.

The statute also says that children younger than 12 who are related to the care provider must be included in the total number.

This alteration would force Hill to change the current status of what children she can provide care for. Hill said that changing requirements for how many children a provider can care for at a certain age creates a level of government intervention that is unacceptable, because it will place restrictions on how parents can time the intervals between children and because it would also create difficult situations for women who have twins or triplets.

“I do have a huge problem with you dictating when my daycare parents can choose to get pregnant and you telling me when I can use the restroom and how long I can toilet train and speak to my daycare parents,” Hill said in a letter to members of the Public Health and Welfare Committee.

Hill said she has spoken with over thirty providers in the state who had similar concerns with the legislation.

Nichole Berry, a Hays-based day-care provider, is also opposed to the proposed additional regulations. Berry said that while she thinks it is important for the government to have strict regulations for daycare providers, that these additional regulations would be too much intervention.

“It is good for the government to have strict rules because some providers may not take their job seriously,” Berry told Kansas Liberty. “So while it is important to have some guidelines, in this particular case I think it is too much.”

Another substantial concern raised by Sen. Ty Masterson, R-Andover, is with how the legislation defines those who fall under the category of “family child care home.” The bill defines a “family child care home” as a place which provides food or lodging for children away from their home, and mandates that children younger than 12 related to the person providing the care would be included in the total 6 child maximum.

Masterson said that due to the large size of his family if his wife wanted to supervise her own children and a few other children related to the family this care would fall into the definition of “family care child home” and would therefore need to follow all of the regulations of the state.

“I have six kids and four of my kids are under 12; so if she wanted to watch three or four of my brothers’ kids she would technically break that barrier and put my family into a situation where they are violating that statute,” Masterson told Kansas Liberty.

Masterson said this statute would place large families in an inconvenient circumstance in which their care was governed by state law, rather than dealt with privately as it has been.

“If you have a fairly large family it would be easy to breach that statute,” Masterson said. “These requirements are overreaching and ridiculous.”

Former Rep. Judy Morrison said she had been hearing negative feedback regarding the legislation from members of the daycare community, even though she no longer serves in the Kansas House.

“I’m not sure that the way this is written will rectify many problems, it seems like it will make more problems,” Morrison told Kansas Liberty. “It just sounds like too much government.”

The legislation was created in response to tragic circumstances of an 18-month old girl dying while at her day care in Olathe. The woman who ran the daycare, Janette L. Lawrence, has been charged with involuntary manslaughter and aggravated endangering of a child. Lawrence was also found guilty of violating day-care regulations due to having 14 children in her day-care when the toddler, Ava Patrick, died.

Ava died of strangulation after getting caught in a fence.

Proponents of the legislation, including Ava's parent argue that stricter requirements are needed to ensure children in Kansas are given the necessary level of attention.

"Children need to be within sight and hearing distance of their childcare provider," the Patricks said in testimony to the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee. "If our daycare provider would have been near Ava, she would be alive today."

Sen. Julia Lynn, R-Olathe, also testified as a proponent while the bill was in committee. Lynn said amendments to current law were necessary to ensure children receive safe care while in a child care home.

"Our constituents assume that because a child care provider has officially registered with the state, that the environment of their child will be in a protected environment and that that the state has taken measures to ensure they will be safe," Lynn testified. "Unfortunately, upon learning more about this through the tragic losses of innocent children, this simply isn't the case."

According to the Kansas Department of Health and Environment there has been 22 incidents of a child dying while in a Kansas daycare since 2007. Out of these incidences 19 were determined to have been sleep-related deaths.

There are currently an estimated 6,710 registered or licensed day care homes in the state. The KDHE does not have information regarding how many children in the state are currently attending a day-care center.

While Hill acknowledged that the legislation appeared to have good intentions, she said the new onslaught of regulations would result in the number of illegal day-care homes skyrocketing.

The bill has been worked in the Senate Public Health and Welfare Committee during three separate sessions, but committee members still have not had enough time to complete their deliberations on the legislation and decide whether or not to pass the bill through committee so it can gain consideration in the Senate.

—Holly Smith

Resources:

Senate Bill 447

The Week in Review