<p>Hypothetical: let’s say a sister of a psycho killer was hired by a school. Then a few years later that sister kills a student. Are you saying the parents would not sue the school?</p>
<p>If you knew your sister was hearing voices, would you refer her to a family to care for her small children? Whether to hire the woman is the family’s decision, but they should have been fully informed.</p>
<p>If the sister did something that is truly an action for which the Krims can take action, let them do so. Civil court is there for a reason. Otherwise, the have to let it go. Knowing the NYC nanny scene personally, I don’t know if the info would have made any difference, unless is it was something so drastic, I mean look at the situation as is. Frankly, I’d feel scared to have the sister of a nanny who killed someone’s kids that brutally being so responsible for my kids. Unfair, yes, but gut fellings are important to me when it comes to some things like childcare.</p>
<p>I have neighbor whose parents were Holocaust survivors and they gravely explained to me why they would not get a VW or any other German car or known German items. Which I can understand. Then a year later, they had a German au par, nanny for their kids. Really? I do understand that too, but you can see what I mean. It’s dry here when it come to getting child care especially full time. </p>
<p>I was and am heartsick about the Krim’s tragedy. My SIL’s brother lives in the same area where they have moved, and, she’s tells me it’s such a devastating thing, something that hits right where it strikes the fear in those families that it’s difficult for those who see them to know how to act. And now this situation, which was leaked by someone who knows the krims and are trying to shame the family who have sister of the nanny accused of the murder, into firing her because it’s not just a school thing. The community there of kids in that PS district is not very big and you run into the same people a lot. </p>
<p>Someone needs to embrace the Krims and cry with them, but also explain to them that they should not be penalizing the sister of that nanny, as painful as it is for them, and their daughter, and to truly get some help in both parents and kids in dealing with this It’s going to be an issue as long as they live in that area. When the move there will still be “Ortegas” galore, and women who look like that nanny all over the place. That it’s the sister, makes it creepy, I agree. I am very sorry for the Krims, but I don’t think they should get accommodated for this. Not the sister’s fault,from what I have gleaned, and if it legally is something for which she can be liable,…well, go at it.</p>
<p>(My comment responds to the question in the original post.)</p>
<p>Certainly the Krims have had a terrible tragedy in their family, and all hearts go out to them.</p>
<p>However, I am surprised that the public school got involved in what is really a matter that is not under its control or authority. Perhaps the Krims asked the school administration to get involved, but assuming that is what happened, seems to me the most they could do would be to request of the other family that the sister nanny not come to regular pick-up. If the other family agreed to that, it was considerate of them but not, IMO, something that could be mandated.
And perhaps the occasion cited was an exception because of some other commitment for that afternoon, and in general, the sister nanny will avoid regular pickup.</p>
<p>Seems to me the Krims should focus on addressing this issue via family counseling. It would be nice if the other family would reliably cooperate, even possibly giving notice when their nanny would need, for scheduling reasons, to arrive at regular pickup time. But IMO that can’t be mandated.</p>
<p>EDITED TO ADD:
Also, I wonder about the effects of this situation on the child being cared for by the sister nanny. How does he or she feel about being held back at school for the deferred pickup? How does he or she feel about being part of a story in the news? How does he or she feel about having a nanny whose sister committed such an act?
The stone cast causes many ripples.</p>
<p>
If the basis of their claim was that the teacher’s sister was a killer, their lawsuit would not succeed. Unless there was some evidence that they knew something else about the person they hired, there would be no case. The judge would throw it out.</p>
<p>Psycho killers do have familes. As do most criminals, violent ones, terrible ones. What do you suggest, that all first degree family members have to get mentally assessed and be at risk at their jobs? It’s going to hurt the family members most of the time anyways when word gets out because fair or not, there is a reluctance to hire someone or associate with someone who has family members involved in sordid things Like would you let your kid go to the home of a family who has had a sex offender in it? It happens you know I know such a family One of the older children is a convicted sex offender, the younger kids are great children, family seems fine, but yes, many of us were reluctant to let our minor children go over to that house Fair or not, I just said, no. Too much trouble for me to deal with</p>
<p>There is a case in Virginia now where an orderly at UVMC is suspected (and linked by DNA) to some violent crimes, murder and rape and suspected in the current disappearance of a UVA student. His other is a nurse at the center. His sister is teacher. Should they be suspended from their jobs? They are getting a lot of hate as it is from all of this as they try to deal with this horrible thing What should they do? </p>
<p>Should Yoselyn Ortega’s sister quit working? Move? She’d living hand to mouth as it is, you know. The Krims are relatively well to do. IMO, they should move far away from the NYC nanny scene, but there will still be Dominican Ortegas nannying kids anywhere in the NYC commutable area or in many places.</p>
<p>I think jobs that put you in charge of small children should have strict requirements, yes.
Landscaping - meh, I don’t really care if Timothy McVeigh’s brother does my landscaping.</p>
<p>If someone tried to fire me because of my brother’s behaviors, I’d be talking to a lawyer. He’s mentally ill and has a criminal record. Just because we have the same parents doesn’t mean we are remotely the same.</p>
<p>But would you be part of a protected class? </p>
<p>^^^^My place of employment has policies in their employee handbook which outlines their process for hiring and firing. They have to follow their own plan as stated, and there is nothing in there which states that finding out that an employees sibling is mentally ill or has a criminal record is cause for termination. So yeah, I’d be protected.</p>
<p>“What do you suggest, that all first degree family members have to get mentally assessed and be at risk at their jobs?”</p>
<p>It’s kind of amusing to me that the same people who tend to be small-g government types are now proposing that first-degree family members of “bad people” should be mentally assessed before being allowed to work or continue at a job. This is really one of the oddest threads. </p>
<p>I’m very sorry for the Krim family’s horrendous loss, but the sister has not done anything illegal and they have no right to penalize her or make her accommodate their wishes in the course of her doing her job. There’s nothing to suggest that she’s harassing them in any way, such as coming up to them and bothering them. As to the wisdom of the other family keeping the sister as a nanny-- that’s their business and prerogative, and it’s simply not the concern of the Krim family. </p>
<p>“Hypothetical: let’s say a sister of a psycho killer was hired by a school. Then a few years later that sister kills a student. Are you saying the parents would not sue the school?”</p>
<p>They might have a case if the PERSON THEY HIRED had an unstable background. Having a relative with an unstable background isn’t grounds for a lawsuit. </p>
<p>Who here has absolutely no history of depression, anxiety, any kind of mental illness in their extended family or in your spouse’s extended family? Raise your hand. I’m betting absolutely none of you can. EVERYONE has something in their family somewhere, be it depression, anxiety, schizophrenia, alcoholism, drug abuse, gambling addiction, etc. </p>
<p>Nrdsb4, yes, I guess you’d be protected from firing because you were already hired. But if you weren’t hired because of a crime your brother committed, then you wouldn’t be part of a protected class. </p>
<p>Now I’m wondering if all of these Dominican nannies are legally in the US and having the proper taxes withheld. Or are they overstaying visas and being paid under the table? </p>
<p>I wonder if it would even be legal to ask a prospective employee about family history of mental illness or critical behavior. We need our CC expert on employment law to chime in. Where is @MomofWildChild?</p>
<p>But if no one asked would it be illegal? Say, if the applicant was known to be the relative of a notorious criminal and so wasn’t hired? </p>
<p>There is this article that popped up in Yahoo yesterday. A young man who cannot get employed. What is his crime? He cannot HONESTLY answer the personality profile test questions given on pre-employment HR tests asked without being red flagged. </p>
<p>Does this make him a potentially bad employee, or just unfailingly honest? An honest employee is a good thing, right?</p>
<p>I bet most folks fudge those answers a bit. It is hard not to. I used to administer these tests with students. Only they would see their answers. Not everyone feels happy and up beat all the time. That doesn’t mean they would be horrible or even dangerous employees. </p>
<p><a href=“http://finance.yahoo.com/news/are-workplace-personality-tests-fair-164715348.html”>http://finance.yahoo.com/news/are-workplace-personality-tests-fair-164715348.html</a></p>
<p>As I said before, slippery slope. </p>
<p>It would probably not be illegal to decline to hire somebody because they were related to a criminal. It would just be unfair.</p>
<p>Related to a different thread - how about hiring the sibling of a violent criminal to guard POTUS?</p>
<p>They are probably allowed to discriminate pretty much anyone or anything. A top secret clearance is hard to obtain. If you have never seen the questions they ask, or how many people they ask about the person getting the check, it would stun and amaze you. </p>
<p>The Secret Service has actually relaxed their hiring practices in last few years to develop a more diverse group of employees. After allegedly 1000 plus breaches and now public attention to the matter, this will tighten up. </p>
<p>But no, it is not necessarily fair to penalize the family of a violent criminal for one family member’s acts. Or thoughts. </p>
<p>And they probably wouldn’t tell you WHY you were not selected. Just that you were not selected for job. </p>