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?

[Retropear]

I think a bit of being ignored now and again is good if kids have safe freedom to roam and amuse themselves.

A kitchen cupboard full of saucepans must be one of the most educational experiences a 2 year old can have.

[Goldmandra]

A kitchen cupboard full of saucepans must be one of the most educational experiences a 2 year old can have.

There has to be a wooden spoon too

[Retropear]

And yes

"Sure they do"

10 year olds talk.Mine tell me how TAs at school just stand and chat on playground duty.

[Retropear]

Throw in a bag of pasta and you have peace for an hour minimum.

[georgesdino]

I work there and we do not leave staff looking after others key children whilst nappy changing We pay extra staff

[IceBeing]

gold there are about 20 kids in DD's current room...and on the few times I have dropped in for some reason it has always been 1 person dealing with food (pre or post) 2 people battling nappies in the change area/chasing some kids with his pants down round the room, 1 person watching (but not engaging with) the 8-9 kids running around outside and 1 person doing a bit of painting / drawing with about 3 kids while the other 8 trash the place.

[Goldmandra]

To give constant attention to every child you'd need one to one ratios. That would be a pretty impressive nursery and even then I couldn't agree that it is de facto better than being with a SAHP.

[mrscog]

Interesting thread. I can only give anecdotal evidence but in our case DS is definitely better off in nursery.

I took 12 months ML with him and I loved it. However the 16-22 months stage I have found awful and have teetered on the edge of depression - wanting to hide away from DS at times because he was just so demanding. I initially dropped to 3 days a week, and instead of looking forward to our times together I was terrified of another day of chasing him around the house to get dressed, trying to do wholesome activities like reading together, painting etc but actually just spending an hour asking him not to do dangerous things like climbing and using plug sockets. So much so that I decided to go back to FT work.

We're all so much happier now, I am extremely lucky that DS is in an outstanding setting, I can't believe the things he's learnt, which I would never have thought to encourage him with so early - he was eating with fork and open cup independently at 14 months and I now delight in our time together - which is quite a lot as I pick him up 5ish, and I get 30 days annual leave. I have no reason to think he isn't happy, and we now have lots of really nice times together rather than me half halfheartedly trying to be fun and do housework/ shopping and feeling unfulfilled by it all.

Sometimes I worry that I'll regret missing 40/168 hours a week with him, but at the moment it's necessary for my sanity. Also, I am planning another DC quite soon and I will reduce his hours then, so it's highly likely that around the age of 3 (and I think I'll cope with this age better) he'll have another year of increased parental input from me.

So there's no correct answer - my Mum was a SAHM and I remember the utter grief and shock to the system that starting school was, after 4 years of just me and mum and a few morning playgroup sessions I thought I was being abandoned and I hated school for years - I was homesick constantly. Hopefully DS won't suffer from that as he won't know any different.

[georgesdino]

Today we had 8 staff for 19 children, less than usual as no under 3s

[georgesdino]

*2s

[usuallyright]

where has this idea come from, that kids need to be stimulated,engaged and entertained 24-7 from babyhood onwards? I had a sahm in the 80's.

There were no groups, no tumble tots, rhyme time or monkey music. I went with my mum to the park, the supermarket etc. I played with her on occasion, but also played with myself and siblings because she was busy.

Kids are pretty much never left alone at nursery, to the point of being over stimulated. It is OK to leave children alone! They can entertain themselves! They won't melt and expire if not immersed in a long session of messy play or dressing up or whatever activity.
Learning to be by themselves alone, self sufficient and capable of entertaining themselves is a much overlooked life skill.
Seriously people, you can pop a toddler in front of cbeebies for half an hour whilst you mop the floors and you won't be hampering their longterm life prospects!!

[ThisSummerBetterBeDarnGood]

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

We are turning into china and north korea no one caring about the family unit, people being encouraged to snitch on each other but not in services where they are villified....( care home staff, nhs staff) and trying to get the amercian system where women go back to work at three months old.

[georgesdino]

I know you can usuallyright and will have to when dh is a sahp. I will weep for the loss of childcare :( Hopefully soon I can afford childcare for all my children as we are expecting another

[mrscog]

icebeing I would look for a new nursery - DS' is nothing like that. I've dropped in a few times to find 8 children engaged in various activities of their own choosing with 2 staff supervising with their whole attention.

[ThisSummerBetterBeDarnGood]

where has this idea come from, that kids need to be stimulated,engaged and entertained 24-7 from babyhood onwards?


A baby at home with a responsible caring parent who goes shopping does every day stuff and attends play groups, a local church halls will meet other children out and about and in play parks and so on.

[ThisSummerBetterBeDarnGood]

I've dropped in a few times

anyone with anyone vulnerable anywhere drop in, go in un expected and see whats going on

[fideline]

To answer the original Q , my own feeling is that optimal childcare (and I understand why optimal is often not feasible, so please don't all jump on me) for most (MOST!) children comprises parental care supplemented by parent toddler groups until age 2 or 2.6, then p/t, good quality nursery provision until starting school.

Huge generalisation obs, but if I was in gov't that would be my template when setting policy.

[fideline]

You can't legislate the quality of parent-child interactions. You can fund specific SW intervention for dysfunction on a much wider scale, if the will is there.

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi OP,
Thanks for the question - you're right I didn't get a chance to answer on Today.

As others have said I think it's complicated and it depends. On the age, on the child, on the family, on the finances, on the home situation, on the quality of the childcare.

In the end though, I'd broadly trust parents to make the best decisions for their children and their family given their own, particular circumstances.

The point I was making (or trying to make), is that according to all our many surveys on this issue parents who would rather work more, are put off from working because of difficulty of finding affordable and flexible childcare.

For example in the survey we did with the Resolution Foundation a few months back 37% of SAHM said they'd rather work outside of the home (on average for 23 hours per week). And 15% of Work outside of home mums said they'd rather work more hours than they did (on average 10 more).

I was arguing for better childcare provision for those who want to work outside of the home - by no means all mothers - because I'd trust families to know what's best for them, and for those families there are benefits to working (as there are to the wider economy).

Hope that makes sense.

[UriGeller]

Wish the statistics people (whoever they are) would pay as much attention to emotional quotient as intelligence quotient.

[janey68]

That makes perfect sense Justine. Interesting how the editing/ time constraints of radio don't always allow for the full picture

[Gintonic]

OP asked about studies - there was a high profile one a while ago which found children who had been in nursery settings were more likely to be aggressive and have behavioural problems at school.

I've also seen a study saying that for babies/young toddlers, more than 15 hours a week in childcare of any form risked attachment problems. But after 2 childcare starts to have benefits.

The problem with studies on this is that they are often from the US or other countries where childcare is very different to UK.

I'll look about for links...

[foreverondiet]

My dc went to nursery aged 2, but it was just for 3 hours a day, which I think is good as sociable but not a long day. However wouldn't be much use for working as the duration was short.

[wordfactory]

I think one of the problems with stating what is best for DC, is that you can't look in isolation.

You can't say it is best for a child to be with a SAHP without looking at what that does to the family, the wider community or society in general.

There is little point in saying that DC are better at home with Mum doing messy play, if that means that there are no female doctors, lawyers, MPs etc... that most certaibnly would not be best for any of our DC.

Similarly, there is no point saying what is best for a two year old, if it's going to mean that child as it grows won't have access to certain things due to financial constraints.