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?

Morethanpotatoprints - I don't think it's just about can't cope. There are many parents who would be good SAHPs and would find enjoyment in it but who choose to go back to work part time and use some childcare because they believe in it for a multitude of reasons - many of which people have explained above.

And I don't seem the point in arguing that for all children childcare isn't damaging.

We are entering new territory.Questions need to be asked and acted on if needs be.At the very least if needs be looking at ways to reduce the use of it,different types etc.

Not getting the argument for not asking the op's question.Smacks of sticking one's fingers in one' ears and going la la la.

Sorry I haven't been back for a while.

to everyone for suggestions on my specific situation. I think we may well either up the hours at the nursery or look into a childminder. I think maybe DD just isn't a thrive-at-nursery type.

also for broadly keeping this non-emotive and non-judgemental.

I would like to emphasise that this was not about the financial decisions people have to make or about one size fits all....

the real question is should the government act in a way which will increase the use of nursery for 2-3 yo children on the basis of it being better for parents that wish to work and arguably for the economy...when there seems (as yet) no clear picture emerging on whether or not it is good for the children themselves.

I've just heard a man on Call You and Yours saying that his children are in childcare for 55 hours a week which means that the increase in household income due to his wife working is virtually nil but they keep at it because the childcare is so beneficial to the children.

I was left wondering whether their parenting skills are really so poor that their really children are better off with professional childcarers or if they have been sold an idea of childcare which is so far removed from reality that they really believe that it is better than they could provide as loving and responsive parents.

I have worked in childcare, both as an childminder and in some excellent group settings and I can honestly say that I can not think of one child under four in any of those settings who has been better off for being in my care or that of any other practitioner than they would have been had they been with their parents. I've also worked in an 'Outstanding' group setting where the children would definitely far worse off than being at home.

I can see that the child may benefit in the long term from better financial security from having working parents and that there is some benefit from having parents who feel happier and more fulfilled. I know that it is helpful for children to experience a few months of group childcare as a gentle preparation for school. I also know that there are children for whom childcare is the only appropriate adult interaction they experience and there is good evidence to demonstrate how much they benefit from it but they are very much in the minority.

So no, I don't think it is usually better for a child to be in childcare rather than being with your average loving and responsive parent but I have a feeling that the idea that they are is being sold to parents in order to encourage them back into work.

Gold thank you so much for that contribution. That really reflects what I heard from DD's NNs.

It is not a judgement on anyone that they are financially constrained to make one choice or the other.

But the government should certainly consider whether childcare is really beneficial to children before pouring money into it surely?

Both my children have been through the childminder and nursery settings, I found our childminder great until they were about 18 months then the nursery setting seemed more stimulating. I am pretty sure we arent raising depressed, unattached children!

Financial stability is very important to me, not just the I want a nice home, car, holidays, sky etc (although an added bonus) like already stated by Hopalong my DH has had a turbulent time during the last 3 years with work, but we did not need to hit panic stations has we had my earnings to fall back on. I personally would never be financially dependant on anyone even though DH is a great husband and father.

What works for some does not work for others, both my children are thriving, happy, well adjusted, inquisitive, polite children who know they are dearly loved, I dont need a study or the government to tell me this, I know they are because Im their mum! I work very hard at home with my children with homework and projects I find it really annoying that working mothers have to justify their 'mummyness'

slightly off topic but why are people so desperate to get parents back to work when we have high unemployment?

Won't the net result of this be parents taking jobs off young people?

I don't this as for many jobs they will be contributing very little in tax but costing in gov help with childcare.A young childless person doing the same job would cost less.

No not off topic. Supply and demand, I'd say. If you have a larger pool of labour than you have jobs to go round, you can keep wages depressed.

Funnily enough they're full time jobs - no one in politics suggests decent rates of pay and the possibility of flexible working, the chance of both parents going part time etc., which one might naively think would be of benefit both to working parents and in times of high unemployment - because this would, if not exactly inconvenience employers, at least cause them to re-think what they do at the moment, and god forbid we should have to re-think any part of the economy, thus shaving a few fractions of a percent off shareholder dividends...

I think Lurcio has got it in one

My sister and her dh both went part time and it was fab.They had a nanny share for two days.

Lucrio Both parents part time would be bloody brilliant wouldn't it?

I mean the main reason we put DD in nursery at all is because the SAHP (in fact my DH as it happens) is doing their nut by midweek...but if we were alternating she would be getting the best of both of us.

the SAHP (in fact my DH as it happens) is doing their nut by midweek

What do you mean by 'doing their nut'?

it is helpful for children to experience a few months of group childcare as a gentle preparation for school

This is important.

What frightens me is that, despite the rhetoric, no political party genuinely puts what is best for families at the heart of their policies in this area. What they actually promote is what is best for commerce, all predicated on the idea (it seems) that a person's worth is dependent upon them being in paid work, and nothing else.

Yes and let's not forget the nice little earner the nursery chains will have, like the catering companies will have with school meals.

the problem is that it is a decision that has to be made when they are so sweet and tiny. They are naturally shy and clingy and so much guilt is associated with asking someone else to care for your children that for many mums its too much. I work FT so didnt have a choice and my DS got on fine. I know kids who never went to nursery and were so shy and scared in there first few weeks of school but within a few months were active and social members of the class. Is there any long term damage from either decision? Who knows.

I'm lucky enough to work for an employer which is v. good about part time working and job shares (I even know one married couple who actually job share and hot-desk - oh dear, something about that sentence makes it sound like chucking car keys in the punchbowl at a 70s party ) - and guess what - they're probably top 3 in their field worldwide. It doesn't have any detrimental effect on performance at all!

womble I mean he is not able to give her the devoted 1:1 time and loving learning environment that he would like to because he has been asked to 'be the fat controller' at least 100 times already and has lost his mind.

I have certainly found that I have a more rewarding (for both of us) experience with DD when I am fresh from work than DH is capable of after 8 hours solid of repetitive role play...

The argument is that there are not a finite number of jobs however this seems a bit counter-intuitive to me also.

lucrio you have really made me wonder if I could job share with my DH....it is a really interesting thought...

What works for some does not work for others, both my children are thriving, happy, well adjusted, inquisitive, polite children who know they are dearly loved, I dont need a study or the government to tell me this, I know they are because Im their mum! I work very hard at home with my children with homework and projects I find it really annoying that working mothers have to justify their 'mummyness'

This isn't about whether children can thrive in childcare. Of course lots can and do. It's about whether they are better off in childcare which is a very different question.

I thought the 3-4 yo free nursery days were there to help children adjust to the artificially authoritarian experience that is school? you don't need to start at 2 for that....

I doubt good childcare has any detrimental effect on young children. The dc's nursery was outstanding, long term staff, ex-staff sent their dc's there, more of an extended family than a childcare setting.

In comparison I saw a pre-school where frankly I wouldn't have put a house plant (obviously we never used it), that was 4yrs ago and it only recently received a dreadful ofsted.

artificially authoritarian experience It's infant school, not North Korea you know .

I reckon I could job-shard dh's job. With a bit of training. Also it's computer-based and could easily be done from home.

Masses of desk-based jobs could be shared between partners this way, I think. Only it's too radical