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?

no kid would rather be at nursery than at home

Am really shocked at that. It's ridiculous, how many homes have tvs blaring day in day out to keep the DCs occupied.

In 'Why French children don't throw food' the author talks of the nurseries in Paris that parents fight to get their DCs chosen for. That top comment suggests the staff are in totally the wrong job.

But most kids wouldn't.

A blaring TV isn't ideal but it's still home and security to a child.

Oh and I wouldn't much stock in the French model of things.The French formal model of nursery is not what I'd want for my child.

Parents fighting to get their dc into a nursery doesn't mean the actual children want to be there or that it is necessarily good for them.

Another thread proves my point www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2016241-to-be-a-bit-surprised-how-many-people-put-buggies-in-front-of-the-tv

Agree maggie. I see so many children with no routine who watch tv all day until they start nursery, and often its because the mums are cut off from normal society and are trying to do the lot themselves. I dont think its a normal situation for people to be in to try and be 100% of everything for a child with limited help from others/community.

My dc has a wonderful childminder, does lots of activities and asks to go to her on my days off! dc is two and pfb.

A blaring tv isn't ideal but it's home and security to a child.

I really don't understand this. Are you saying that no matter how little engagement children have from their parent they are still better off at home.

Children can feel secure away from home. DD knows all her nursery workers. She knows ones from other rooms. She kissed one of the other ones goodbye last week. How is this worse then her sitting in front of a tv all day everyday? which to be fair due to the peppa pig obsession she'd be quite happy to do

I remember studying this during A-level psychology. Lots of studies have been done on childcare (although most are based on testing children at 4 or 5, so long term effects aren't really known). However, the results are inconclusive and contradictory. It also depends on how you measure success, which is very controvesial in itself. Of course, none of these studies are able to control for the hundreds of variables that have an impact on child development. There was one study that said children tended to display better emotional and educational outcomes if the mother self-reported as happy, regardless of childcare setting.

So, basically, much of the research is inconclusive or not very compelling. It's not a simple question to answer. Of course, that doesn't mean it should be ignored, but realistically, no-one is going to get funding to do long term, controlled studies of this type on children (especially as putting strict controls on children would obviously be unethical).

Therefore, it's not as simple as asking the government to create evidence based policy on this subject, because different people, with different agendas will make the evidence say different things.

I suppose it's easier to say "oh children benefit so much from a SAHP" safe in the security that their partner earn well over the national average to support this lifestyle. Easy to hold these opinions when SAH is actually an option.

SlowlorIsIncognito- excellent post which sums it up. There is no conclusive evidence either way... Various pieces of research - of varying quality - have produced different results.

I also think that on MN, it's a case of preaching to the converted. The demographic on here is largely interested, inquisitive parents who think carefully about child rearing decisions. Therefore, if they work and use childcare, they have no doubt carefully researched their options and know what they and their children want. Equally, if they choose not to use childcare, presumably they have thought carefully about that too.

My children actually started off with a childminder as I returned to work when they were 3/4 months and we preferred the cm environment. When they progressed to nursery, there were some younger children in the baby room. I didn't assume that the parents of those babies had made an inferior choice to me: I assumed that for those parents and those children, it was a decision made with as much thought and care as I'd invested in my decisions. It seems to me supremely arrogant to assume that no one else invests the love and care in their decisions that I do

As a bit of an aside, nursery care isn't cheap. It's usually more expensive than a cm, so it's not a decision parents are likely to make on cost.

On a slightly different point: I'm also surprised at people thinking that 5 or even 10 years out of the workplace is nothing. That's a significant amount of time in many careers, particularly where knowledge and skills need to be current. You need only look on the 'Going back to work' section on MN (threads such as 'looking for work after being at home for years and finding it soul destroying...') to see that it really isn't that simple.

If you truly want to stay at home then I expect you weigh these things up and conclude that for your family it's the right thing, and accept the hit your career and long term finances may take... And indeed I know people who are in that situation. They are doing the thing they want to do- being at home- and accept the compromises that means. Interestingly, these people don't tend to tie themselves in knots worrying about other people's childcare choices...

slow

What your saying can be applied to any study, group of stats at any time anywhere. You think one thing is conclusive then another lot come up and all numbers are manipulated to reflect the argument of the moment.

The bottom line, in human nature is, no one else cares more about you than you.

Not one nursery worker or even child minder, will ever ever care more about your child, than you.

You can find caring people, wonderful people and the child will grow attached to them and really flourish they do exist! But the bottom line is, you will still find no paid care who will love that child as you do.

That is the fundamental difference in keeping your child with you when they are little and putting them in someone else's hands.

I just pray that women don't go back to work as the norm in future like America and continue to weigh up the options. Keep the choice, for those who have it there. Then the women who want to go back to work can, and those that don't, wont.

I just don't want women who choose to stay at home feel ashamed for it.

I would also like much more rigorous checks on nurseries and more transparency.

Therefore, if they work and use childcare, they have no doubt carefully researched their options and know what they and their children want

This is what worries me.

I have heard many rumours of an awful nursery near me, from a large group of women, nothing major to report but just little things. I was at a baby group and nurseries were mentioned and this one cropped up and everyone piled in with personal and second hand stories from it.

My new neighbour has cheerily announced her child goes there 5 days a week early till late. she is 14 months.

Isratherplayhere- you're missing a fundamental point : parents don't use childcare for their children to be loved as much as the parents love them. I didn't use it as a 'replacement' for parenting, or wanting anyone else to care about them in the way DH and I do. We used childcare to provide feeding, caring, playing with, nappy changing, appropriate stimulation etc etc. This enabled us to continue with our careers alongside the stupendously important role of being mum and dad.

To my mind, what the vast majority of parents are invested in is raising healthy, well adjusted young people. There are many ways to do that, not one 'right' way

Idrather do you think the norm is that women don't go back to work? That's interesting. My experience is that most women do go back to work, often part time but they go back. In fact it's often the second baby that means they take time out because the childcare costs are so high, rather than a fundamental wish to stay home.

Alittle I really resent the implication that any child not in a nursery is strapped in a buggy in front of the TV all day.

I know nobody that does that.The vast majority of people don't do that.

Yes the maj may watch the odd bit of CBeebies(which can actually be beneficial) but sat there all day doing little else other than watch TV they don't.

Slow a lot of mothers are very unhappy being away from their children instead of having more time at home.

I don't think that is good for them or their children.

I didn't say any child not in a nursery was strapped in buggy in front of the tv.

You said "A blaring TV isn't ideal but it's still home and security to a child" in response to Maggie commenting that many homes have tvs blaring day in day out to keep the children occupied. You admit some homes will do this.

What about that minority. Is being at home in those circumstances still better in your view?

Of course the vast majority of children at home aren't Parked in front of the telly.

The vast majority of children are brought up by caring and responsible parents- who may , or may not, work.

I just wish basic respect could be afforded to each side. I don't think childcare was 'better' for my children. I believe it gave them an exeperience different, but equal to, the experience they'd have had at home full time. The only claim id make is that it enabled DH as I to both continue in our careers - which has definitely been better for us as a whole family overall. But that's our family; others of course are different. Not better, just different

And Janey a lot of women don't have careers,never have done and never will.They have jobs.Not every woman lives the MN dream life of a fulfilling enjoyable career they can't wait to get out of bed for every day.

For same lucky enough to get it part time work is a good compromise and enough.

Slow a lot of mothers are very unhappy being away from their children instead of having more time at home.

But this doesn't mean they don't want to work or know that if they leave their jobs now they will never get an equivalent one 5, 10 or 13 years down thr line.

And what percentage of women are you talking about?

If the blaring TV was on only for the odd hour yes.They may in between go to the park,read loads of books and do a shed load of painting.

Isratherplayhere- you're missing a fundamental point : parents don't use childcare for their children to be loved as much as the parents love them

No your missing my point.

So if you have a fulfilling enjoyable career it's ok to use childcare?

But if you have a job it's not and you should stay home?

The gov survey was quite a reasonable percentage.I can't rem exact figures.

For many women an equivalent job isn't the priority,for some any job further down the line will do.That is ok.

Perhaps more should be done to enable breaks and part time work.Many families want a better work/ life balance.Denmark has two years leave I think- 1 for each parent.Some companies are better than others re flexi hours,dropping days.

No I didn't say that.

But getting any job down the line is difficult if you've a long break in your cv. You're not living in the real world.