to re-pose the radio 4 question - Is childcare good for CHILDREN?

[IceBeing]

Our dearest Justine and some bloke from the family childcare trust were on radio 4 this morning talking about childcare costs.

They focussed on Mums who would like to work more but cannot afford to due to childcare costs, and a proposal to make more free time available for 2-3 yos.

They both made a compelling case that this situation was bad for the Mums (because they want to work and can't).

They made a reasonable (but by no means obviously correct) argument that it was better for the economy for these Mums to work.

But they were then asked something along the lines of:

" Is increased access to childcare good for children? I mean if it isn't there isn't really any point? "

And they didn't answer AT ALL. They went back to the previous economic answer. Well actually Justine didn't get a chance to respond - so no accusation in her specific direction!

But what is the answer?

Is taking a child out of the home and putting them in nursery for an additional period between 2 and 3 yo (which was the proposal being discussed) actually good for the child?

Do kids in nursery earlier do better/worse at school? Are they happier/less happy? Is this a simple case of happier mummy, happier toddler?

Yeah, she's chronically shy though, even at 6. It holds her back. I wonder if I hadn't sent her to nursery so young whether things may have been different. All kids cope differently though. I know that too.

I don't think childcare is at all bad for kids after a certain age. It doesn't matter quite so much whether their carer engages with them after the age of 3 or so. They're independent enough to ask for help etc. I did used to feel bad for the babies though when I used to have to walk through the room to get DS though. They were always sitting in high chairs and looked sick.

But would be medic that's completely anecdotal. Fwiw, my experience of nurseries is completely different. Lots of mature staff who have been there for a long time. Their own children went there (always in different rooms and didn't care for their own child). I deal with the nursery my son goes to in a professional capacity that means some surprise visits. He is often being cuddled if he needs to be. I've never seen them looking sick and sitting in high chairs! If they're in high chairs they're eating. He is 13 months now, has been going since he was 7 months and he loves it. They are great at always doing different stimulating things. Maybe I'm a crap mum but I often run out of ideas of what to play with ds. The nursery nurses would never dream of making comments that kids wouldn't choose to go there. I know a lot of local kids go back and see their key workers in the few years after they leave.

Anecdotes are just that, anecdotes.

You don't know what gentle remarks the NNs might make anonymously in an internet discussion lily

Quantative analysis of hard outcomes is not the only way to evaluate the desirability of putting young babies in commercial daycare settings. Qualitative (anecdotal) evidence is also valid and highlight/evaluates factors that statistical studies can't

wouldbemedicmade some perfectly valid calm observations from her own professional experience, rather rude to dismiss them just because they don't chime with what you would like to believe (btw she didn't mention children looking sick in highchairs so i'm not sure why you've included that rather random remark.)

I never get why some nns such as wouldbemedic would work in such awful settings. I gave very high standards so always work in high quality ones if I saw something I didnt like I would report to ofsted. My children have been brought up like in a tribe with all their close friends and the same loving carers.

First dd has been in childcare since 4 months with me and is still there at 6, dc2 started at 7 months, I also attended as a little one.

And our nursery every mum and dad thats ever worked there has had all their child attend, and in the same room as them from birth. Very rare to meet a nursery nurse who doesnt work with their child. All of my degree course did at various settings, and the nvq at various nurseries.

yy to woolybobs. My manager always says you can tell they have been to nursery before even after an hour after meeting a child. Its always obvious who has gone and who hasnt at age 3/4

My children both went to nursery from 2 1/2 and gave every appearance of being happy there. I'm sure that there were times when they were bored or cross or sad, but that's normal life and possibly quite important to experience. Several of the nursery nurses had children there, and there was a strong family atmostphere. We quite often went to birthday parties etc with staff and there was obvious affection between the children and adults. The rooms were small, usually with one adult to a small group of children. The only thing we noticed is that the atmosphere changed quite a bit when they decided to take on babies too. Mainly it got a lot noisier!

Before that we had a nanny, which was fantastically low stress and worked out very well for us. Then we had all sorts of different arrangements including dh staying at home.

I've not looked at the area for a while (my children are teens now), but my understanding is that there has been quite a bit of research and that the results are a bit all over the place depending on where the research was conducted and how good the studies were.

One thing I can say is that looking at my childrens friends I have no idea what childcare arrangements they had as babies. That's not to say that early childhood experiences don't matter, dds friend whose mum was a drug addict has certainly suffered as a result of early neglect.

I tend to agree Georgesdino

These threads always attract a few people eager to tell us about the dreadful childcare settings where they were employed... They don't seem to realise that it reflects more on them than anything else. It's usually followed up with some dark hints that of course the parents have the wool pulled over their eyes completely because they don't know their children well enough to acually judge whether their child is contented, stimulated etc Andcdotes don't prove anything, either way. My children went to a fabulous nursery staffed by nn who were precessional and dedicated... Does this mean I think childcare is 'right' for everyone? No! Some children may not do well in childcare; some children might do but their parents can't afford it or don't want it, and some childcare settings like the ones a few people here worked in are crap

Just an observation... But it does seem to be the case that those of us who have used childcare happily don't bang the drum that everyone should do it. Whereas there does seem to be a tendency for some mums who don't use it, to decry it. I don't really understand why. The only reason that would make sense is if you are a SAHM precisely because you tried childcare and your child was unhappy, or you've never tried it because you disagree with it fundamentally. And yet there are many other reasons why women might be a SAHM... Some simply want to be a SAHM regardless of whether their child would be happy in childcare or not. Its a choice made for their family because it suits them. Some mums don't have a career to return to, or don't enjoy it enough to want to return... There are myriad reasons for being a SAHM so it does seem odd that some people who've chosen it are so eager to criticise childcare.

At the end of the day, my teenagers, who went to childcare from a young age, are happy , resilient and do well at school. Do I think thiis is because they went to nursery? No! I think they would be the same if I'd been a SAHM. It seems odd to think that if things had been the other way round, I'd be contributing their happiness to having been at home.

It comes back to the same thing... Sometimes people struggle to accept that there can be more than one way of doing things, and the outcomes can be very similar. There can be a tendency to believe that if we do something a certain way, and have a good outcome, if we'd done something different, we'd have had a bad outcome. Not so.
I don't think my children would be lacking in confidence, struggling academically or whatever if they hadnt gone to nursery. Nursery complemented the experiences they had at home, but parents and home are by far the major influences in shaping a child and I'm sure my children would be fine if they'd been home full time with me or DH.

Perhaps we should get away from this whole concept of 'is nursery better?' I wasn't looking for something 'better'... I wanted an environment where my children could thrive and be happy.

FFS! Precessional = professional

Chiming in because I'd like to put a slightly different perspective. I was a home-educating (HE) mum - DD went to primary for one term in Y5, DS not at all. I worked from home as the sole earner throughout (as a PT childminder when DS was under 5 and in a professional computer-based job the rest of the time). I had no family nearby (so no free GP care).

I think there are great benefits to raising children in a family (or I wouldn't have done it) but I know that not everyone is in a position to make the same choices I did. I do not think that everyone should make those choices.

My experience of HE is that children are not "babied" - when you are with your children 24/7 and do not delegate their education, you know that you want them to become independent adults and so you make sure they learn to do stuff. That does not mean 100% attention (certainly not 1:1 - mine had to share me with each other and minded children). Also, I am not suggesting that HE parents never baby their children - just that it is not a necessary outcome of a child not being in a daycare setting. So you can't "tell the difference" (it is likely that if you met an older child you wouldn't know and wouldn't be able to tell what setting they had been in as a young child - or that confirmation bias would set in if you asked).

I recommend Young Children Learning by Tizard and Hughes - the original data is now quite old (and the study was small), but it has been confirmed by other researchers, that the quality of conversational interaction is better for 3-4yo children at home than in daycare. That is saying nothing about babies in nursery or FT daycare but people who would like a child at home with a parent might like to read it to allay concerns that they are damaging their children by not sending them into daycare.

But it does seem to be the case that those of us who have used childcare happily don't bang the drum that everyone should do it.

There are plenty of people on this thread saying exactly that.

Perhaps we should get away from this whole concept of 'is nursery better?'

But that is the whole point of the thread, not whether children can thrive or be OK in nurseries. Some children absolutely can.

The question is whether it is better for children to be in childcare. I've not seen one post which would begin to persuade me that children in general are better off in childcare than with a SAHP.

There are some for whom home is awful and high quality childcare has been shown to be beneficial but that does not include children whose parents feel that they can't think of enough games to play. Child development is about a lot more than playing games.

We seem to be moving towards a culture that sees group childcare as beneficial to the child and that parents should be going to work in order to enable them to access it. I don't feel comfortable with the idea that professionals are better. Lots are good, some are excellent but there is no evidence to suggest that any child from a stable home with healthy relationships is better off in with them than with their own parent.

If the government cannot show that childcare would be better for the majority of children they should not be exerting any pressure on parents to put their child into it. It's a sector which is under a great deal of pressure already and all the proposed measures to make it more affordable (and get more parents into work) are also inevitably going to drive down standards which means that more children will be in settings where the care isn't adequate.

This is a choice that parents should be making freely without being made to feel that they are letting their child down by not sending them off to be looked after by others.

Haven't read the whole thread but I think you raise a good point OP. It surprises me that what's best for CHILDREN isn't talked about more when discussing childcare. Just because something is necessary/convenient for working parents doesn't automatically mean it's the best thing for the children involved.

Having said that, I don't think there's an easy answer as obviously children are different and lots of families need/want two incomes regardless. My two DC hated large group settings until they were 3, so we had a child minder and grandparents (part-time) looking after them before that. Even with that, their preference until 3 was always home with a parent. But I know other more extroverted/confident children love nursery at a young age.

And lots of single parent families obviously need one income.

Childcare has been good for my DD. She had a CM for two days a week from 4 months and her Auntie for two days a week. I worked full-time over 4 days so had 3 days a week with her.

At 2 years she briefly was with the CM for 4 days a week and then from 2.5 she went to private preschool for 2 days, CM for 2 days and then at 3, the school for 4 days.

She is still with the same CM during the holidays when we can't cover the dates and she has a fab time. Actually prefers to be with her!!

But who's to say if it's good for them. Because she hasn't known any different, we don't know if it would have been better or worse if she HADN'T been in childcare!

georges I have been pondering this since I first saw your comments but how expensive is the nursery you refer to? The talk of extra people doing menial tasks seems massively out of kilter with how nurseries around here function and I am starting to wonder if this is reflected in a price differential?

katnis you are correct that it is impossible to know for an individual child which setting would be best. That doesn't mean you can't know which setting is best on average....the government should know the answer for children on average before pushing either SAHP or Childcare. preferably they should know by age range as that is clearly important.

If the government cannot show that childcare would be better for the majority of children they should not be exerting any pressure on parents to put their child into it.

Or should it be that since the government wants the majority of both family working because they feel it is better economically (I'm fence sitting on what I think about that) they have a duty to look at whether or not it is worse for children. I don't know if they have to prove that it is better for children, rather that it is not worse (in terms of outcomes for children ) than staying at home with a parent?

YY to London and Gold's posts.

Also getting back to the op and Justine's comments.Parents(and it's not just mothers)need more info in order to make informed choices re what is best for their family.

It is very hard to make informed choices when there is buggar all info and nobody is interested in providing it or asking questions.

We are bombarded with info for all sorts of parenting choices but not so much re childcare.We seem to be becoming railroaded down one route without the question in the op ever being asked in any discussion.Just maybe many would act differently if we knew more.Maybe the gov would be held more accountable to what was actually best for families instead of what they as a gov want.

I would also like to point out that MN doesn't speak for all parents.MN also has a particular demographic.We don't all live in London with amazing careers and job opportunities.We don't all want or need big mortgages,holidays etc.Many of us would actually far rather be with our children more for what is such a short fleeting time.

It's interesting as the last time the gov ran a survey a huge percentage of mothers wanted to work less.I live in quite a mixed area 4 hours from London with a broad section of friends ranging from mums working in Tescos to lawyers,teachers etc.All without exception are part time and none want more hours but less.

And re the mothers who want to work more but can't well sorry it is temporary,they'll be 13 in the blink of an eye and you can work all the hours you choose.Yo could also plan ahead and except that you are responsible for your child's childcare?We all are. Sahp take a far bigger hit but at the end of the day we all knew what we were getting into.

hop sure - I would accept neutral assuming there are gains elsewhere!

I think it also depends on what we're using to measure the notions of 'best' or 'better' or 'worse'.

There is currently research underway into which young adults have fared 'best' at 18. It is looking at a number of things including whether they had working mothers etc.

I think it will be very interesting to see the results.

IceBeing to give the government a break I think that once you get beyond looking at deprived children who do better in a childcare setting it is difficult to measure a difference.

The anecdotes here about teachers seeing the difference in children who have been to nursery are ime dubious and go against my own experiences. Plus where I live SAHP usually send the children to school nursery for half-days in the pre-school year, the number of children with no experience of a group setting before school is miniscule!

retro I sort of agree...but I think it is a shame if anyone is not working the pattern and number of hours they would like.

Also people don't necessarily know what they are signing up for. You don't know what sort of personality your child will have...you don't know what their specific needs will be.

You also don't know what the employment landscape will look like (people are rather more clingy about jobs right now than you would be on average due to temporary (I hope) high unemployment).

You also don't know at all how you will feel. I am completely astonished on the whole about how much time I would like to spend with DD. It has been a rapidly evolving number and nothing in my experience before giving birth lead me to believe either that I would hate having a baby so much or that I would love being around a toddler so much.

Argh! I just wish all policy was evidence based....'SHOW ME THE FECKING SCIENCE' then I might actually vote for you.

Thing is though ice even evidence based results will still not counter your personal feelings or your circumstances.

Let's say the new research shows the DC of working mothers fare 'best'. I bet my bottom dollar that the die hards will dispute the definition of 'best'.

Let's say the reseach shows that the DC of SAHMs fare 'best' and I bet huge numbers of women will still either have to work despite the evidence or will choose to be pragmatic.

Let's say the evidence shows there aint much difference, then we'll all have to just do what we we think is right in our circumstances.