Impact of nursery on under 3s

[trufflesandolives]

My DS who is nearly 1 is due to start 2 days of nursery a week from next week and I've only just come across Erica Komisar's work claiming that nursery is psychologically damaging for under 3s who should remain with their primary caregiver. Obviously I've been aware of arguments in both camps but hearing it come from a child attachment specialist hit a bit harder than hearing it come from other mums or social media. Since then I've looked into other options (again), considering a nanny (they are significantly more expensive) and looking for coworking spaces with childcare (since I work remotely) but there don't seem to be any in my area. My question is does anyone know of any other significant research around children and nursery in the early years? I'd like to find out if research in both camps is equally extensive and significant or if what Komisar quotes is the scientific consensus. I don't bother talking about it with friends or family because all I hear is unqualified opinions telling me that my DS will benefit from the socialising which isn't, as far as I know, supported by evidence.

This would have been the case had my mum looked after my daughter. She has never had much inclination to properly interact with her or take her out or anything. Much the same as she was as a parent tbh. It wouldn't have been a good choice for us at all if it had even been an option. The nursery my daughter went to was much more in line with our ethos and I loved collecting her from the nursery garden in the summer all dirty and tired and smelling like suncream having had the best day.

We chose a childminder to avoid nursery under 3.

Apologies for coming so late to the posting party on this thread.

The proper research, not that backed by nurseries or mere opinion by so called child experts with no meaningful qualifications, is clear. Avoid childcare under 3...unless the parent(s) cannot provide adequate provision for their children in which case good quality childcare may be better given the alternative.

My partner is a child clinical psychologist and has educated me on this topic. We never used nursery before 3.

I add my own common sense...humans are well undeveloped when born compared to other species...when some mammals are born they walk within minutes, they can move and have some form of autonomy. A human typically takes at least a year to walk and when they do they toddle around it's without awareness of threats. This physical difference is mirrored with the mental development. Human babies are not well developed. They need nurture and protection, to feel safe. To be left to cry or not soothered by a primary care give will stress the hell out of them. People think babies learn from controlled crying...they can't learn at that age ...they give up...damage is caused. Same with the stress caused not being soothered by the primary care giver. This damage will last a life time. Why are we seeing such a rise in anxiety and mental health issues...the way we treat babies is a contributing factor.

You are right about the socialising thing. A load of rubbish. Before the age of three kids don't need to 'socialise' with each other kids. If a child is securely attached from a sound first three years with a primary care giver they will socialise well when they go to nursery or school.

The best primary carer initially for a baby is typically the mother. However I believe parents should work together to raise their children. From one its much easier for the dad to care for the child for longer and parents can mix up work and childcare. (things don't always go to plan but you should look at the optimal and work/adapt from there). Ideally help from family and friend is also good...this could include outsourcing chores to them like house work/cook you a meal etc...if they understand the importance of child attachment they will hopefully want to support you and your child in the best way possible.

The most precious thing in your life should be your child. Why outsource their care? Companies don't outsource the thing they do best. As a parent you are the best carer for your child, don't outsource it.

If any doubts on the research...why risk it?

Life is hard. Raising children, especially in a society promoting childcare and subsidising it is hard. Raising children is seen as a burden and less value than a job. There is nothing more important than a child and parents should be encouraged to raise them. The children will benefit and so will society. Parents should take pride in being a parent. Being there through the first three years is the most important thing a parent can give a child.

I recommend Steve Biddulph books Raising Boys or Raising Girls. I've read Raising boys and is invaluable to understand what boys need through to adulthood from their parents and society. I'm sure Raising girls is equally as good.

If you need to do nursery before 3 don't beat yourself up. Awareness of the issue will help you give them what they need when you are with them.

Could we please have a link to this “proper research” please so we can analyse the data ourselves. I dont mean that in a facetious way I am genuinely intrigued

@trufflesandolives sending your child to nursery is hard. Mine is 1 but started a month ago and I was surprised by how hard I found it emotionally - it’s a whole new routine, she is tired because she’s literally playing all day and switched on a lot more than she would be at home with me. As another pp has said I don’t know how you can have any “hard evidence” as there are so many confounding factors. There are some things that are black and white like does drug A treat cancer, I don’t think if your child goes to nursery or not is that simple. I think part of it is trust your gut and hope for the best.

I haven't research to hand but will post when I get a moment.

There is a reason you found it hard emotionally. You should do because you've passed your most precious item (containing half your genes that you are design to protect and keep alive) to essentially a stranger and you have no idea how your child is in that environment. It's not natural, that's why it's hard.

How do you know your daughter is tired through play all day? Without meaning to cause distress to you. Could it be your daughter is tired from the stress of being away from you. She probably is switched on all day wondering where you are, are you coming back, will a predator get her? Humans are incredibly complex, our brains built through evolution and our society has developed in recent (100s/1000s) years way quicker than evolution can cater for. We are not designed to be away from the person who shares our genes and desire for our survival. A baby is not aware of the risk assessment at a nursery.

Cancer drugs are not black and white... different people react differently....many factors involved...they won't treat everyone the same but there will be results hopefully that are consistent for the majority of patients or affect on a scale.

There is no really good research in this area. It's impossible to do properly, because you cannot randomise children to childcare.

At childcare, you do not hand your child to a stranger. You hand them to a trusted adult with whom they have an ongoing relationship / attachment.

The nuclear family model, especially with kids at home with mum, is no more "natural" than childcare. It's an invention of post war America.

Steve Biddulph's work is very questionable, and poorly supported by evidence.

@Theboymolefoxandhorse Re the research, my children are 9 & 11 so it was some time ago I did the reading around this and to be honest I can't find the books/texts I read then. But here is a typical link on the subject:
https://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/content/opinion/the-big-debate-is-the-expanded-entitlement-negatively-impacting-children-who-spend-longer-in-nursery/

Note the first commentator, who I would say comes across as balanced, has references to research. The second 'expert' works in a nursery, has no qualification listed, will not be following up on the children after the leave nursery, quotes no reseach and has nothing to back up her statements. Her comments hold no validity. (I have to be open and say I have no knowldege of nurseryworld.co.uk and can only make assumptions about their stance on things).

This article is old, but I think it is helpful in this debate, it references research:
www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2010/oct/02/nurseries-childcare-pre-school-cortisol#comments

@LameBorzoi There is good research around this area. However, you are right, it is impossibleto do the direct study putting children in nursery and seeing how it works out. Not because you cannot randomise it, but because you would never get ethics approval for the research. No one today would sign off on the ethics where your hypothesis and prior research indicate children may be harmed by the experiment. Similarly, with controlled crying, you can't do a study leaving children to cry when prior evidence and hypothesis would be that the child is harmed.

What has been well researched by professionals is attachment theory, the effects of being away from parents, looking at the outcomes of children who have been securely attached and those who have not, and cortisol levels in children in nursery, amongst many other things. Many things are on a scale. I saw images of the undeveloped brains of children in an orphanage. They are left all day in beds alone with no human contact. The scans show the significant damage caused. At the other end, you have images of securely attached children with no damage. I am not suggesting nursery is any way like an orphanage, but if you look at the scale, you know which end is optimal. Babies and toddlers need to be soothed quickly when they cry and not left. How can you guarantee this in a nursery when the carer is doing it for a job?

I trust the experts who are trained in this field, studying 6+ years at uni and lots of learning between stints at uni and subsequent research and continued CPD. Some write books and make money, so I see a potential motive to say what they do, but others do not and use this knowledge in their therapy of their clients. I can't see the motive to make this stuff up, unlike a nursery that spouts rubbish about socialising a 'baby'. Professionals who study this inside and out, who know how to interpret research and apply it, are the ones I trust and read from. Many 'professionals' have a basic degree or course, but this does not make them experts in early childhood development. Take teachers for example...made out to be experts about children...the thing that sets them apart from anyone else with a degree is typically that they have done a 1 year PCGE ...how much of that is dedicated to early childhood development? That is not to say teachers are not knowledgeable, but we have to be careful about how we understand something so complex and hard to understand, and study alongside people's opinions and not wanting to undermine their own life choices. I can't read all the research and understand it, but I know which professionals I trust to have a better understanding.

@LameBorzoi I agree that the nuclear family is not natural, and I have not suggested it is. As per my previous post, it would be a significant help for extended family members and friends to assist parents with raising their children, including taking on some chores to make it easier on parents, mimicking a bit more, where possible, to a more group-assisted approach that would be more natural.

None of this is easy and I am not saying it is possible for most people. Nursary is a neccesity for many. But that does not mean we should not speak with truth and try to change things to move forward. If people bury their heads it will cause harm. If people are aware of issue they can mitigate it where they can and work around it in a positive way.

It is a natural desire to want to look after a child, but society is telling parents that parenting is not important and to outsource it.

If you had all the money in the world, what model what you put around your child? Would you use a nursery?
Think of the best case scenario for you with no constraints and work back from there, putting in the constraints and mitigation where you can to come up with the best solution for you.

@LGAT
I work in a parallel field, and it's not as clear as you make out. There is NO professional consensus on childcare.

The Romanian orphans brains is always trotted out, and it is irrelevant to this conversation. Occasional daycare with trusted adults and going home to a parent with whom they have a secure attachment has no parallels to Romanian orphans.

I spent hours sitting in the nursery before I left my kids there- a pretty common practice. Honestly, they were faster to get to a crying baby than I was when I was at home with an older child to look after.

The cortisol studies, if they are the ones I think they are, are misleading. We spike cortisol whenever we do things that activate us - this includes fun things. Constant over stimulation is bad, but that's not what it showed.

I am well past using nursery now, but if I had all the money / choice in the world, I'd probably do the same again. A small well run nursery with excellent staff retention.

What is the parallel field?

You were sat there and they were faster to get to a crying baby then you would be at home....I'd be shocked if they weren't on it in the presence of a parent! Take the parents away and you never know how long it takes them.

Your first post talked about undermining grandparent care often not being better because in your friends case the grandparent let them watch TV all day...the issue here is not the theory or fact a good grandparent is better but that particular grandparent wasn't looking after the child properly. The concept is not necessarily wrong but the application is wrong. The concept of nursery for <3 is wrong (except in some situations for some parents with difficulties).

You've also slipped in the word 'occasional'...'occasional childcare with trusted adults'...this thread is not about occasional childcare...it's about regular childcare...I would suggest more people think of this type of childcare we are talking being at least 6 hours a day. The original post quotes 2 days.

The secure attachment you speak of is developing particularly to the age 3. Nursery will damage it.

Bizarre if all the money/choice you would still send you kids to nursery regardless of it's size and staff retention. I would outsource all the other chores in life and be present for my child before 3. We are talking about beings with no understanding of the world...their bubble is the parent.

The research is nowhere near as clear cut as you make out, I wouldn’t have bothered reading links shared by a nursery chain because I’d have assumed bias, for a start. And Steve Biddulph isn’t exactly a great source either! People pick the research that supports their own view, but the Romanian orphanage research just shows (surprise!) that abuse and neglect is horrifically bad for children. It bares very little resemblance to the childhood of almost all kids in the U.K.

Couldn’t help wondering if your clinical psychologist partner is male or female and whether they shared the care of your children before age 3, or whether you stayed off work for that period?!

Let’s not romanticise the past. The idea of a nuclear family with a mum at home all the time is relatively recent, and a lot of those mums ended up on anti-depressants or tranquillisers because of their miserable lives. And the children outside unsupervised for the majority of the day. Yes, before that people tended to live with or near extended family, but that means everyone was pulling their weight finding and preparing food, caring for those who couldn’t care for themselves and doing hard physical work. It was tough, children wouldn’t have had loads of individual attention, sorting out food would have taken large amounts of time every day, children had lots of siblings. Care would have been farmed out to other women, sisters, cousins, grandmothers. You do realise women tied babies on their backs or to a board hung on a peg so they could get on with their other work?! And toddlers were left on the care of older children and other women.

I always saw nursery as the extended family we didn’t have. Except the nursery workers were people
who liked children, had qualifications in their development and care, DBS checks and safeguarding. A good nursery follows attachment theory and assigns a keyworker to each child - mine formed a great bond with hers and it was wonderful to see her developing strong relationships with other adults. Local nursery so these were people we’d bump into in the street or could pay to babysit.

The key is finding a high quality nursery who invest in their staff and have low turnover. It isn’t in forcing women to stay at home until their child is at least three. Fine if someone wants to do that, but they shouldn’t feel they have to because otherwise they’re somehow going to damage their child.

My 18 month loves nursery. Has been going full time since 9 months. They are lovely with him. But that's just his nature. Rarely cries and he's playful. Your millage may very

DT’s started full time nursery at six months (Normal maternity leave then). They are now in their mid 20’s. They were not anxious or sensitive but happy, healthy and confident babies and children. No issues in forming strong attachments. Same as all their friends.

I go with.emily oster.
However we put our kids in with a solo childminder and I (personally) strongly prefer this over nursery settings for non verbal children

Why? How is it safer?

DT’s nursery had a ratio of 1:2 for babies so DT’s got the same level of attention they would have got at home with me. Nursery was well run, low turnover and highly educated and well trained staff. I didn’t financially need to work but chose to.

Attachments theory has its origins on rather cruel experiments on primates. I wouldn't discard it because it came about in the 60-es. Evolutionary, we still have a need to a strong bond with another being from a young age in order to thrive later on.
Going to OP question...
Last time I looked into research many years ago nursery was beneficial to the children from a lower-economic background only.
If you really must work can you consider spreading the job over 5 days and using a childminder? Nurseries often have a high turnover of staff which isn't obvious

Did you pay £9+ an hour for them to afford 2:1?

It’s 20 odd years ago but one of the reasons for choosing the nursery was the ratio for babies. No idea of what we paid although we had them on the waiting list whilst I was still pregnant.

Not all nurseries have a high turnover but imo are more reliable than childminders as they are usually open 50 weeks a year and don’t take their holidays when it’s inconvenient to the parents.

Childminders aren't automatically better than nurseries. It really varies.

I'm glad I use a nursery.

I think it depends a great deal on the child too. My DS wasn't able to tell me what was going on in his "setting" until his middle teens, and undoing the damage is taking a long time. Kids who are independent and verbal earlier are probably able to cope a lot better.

I'm not sure that there is one correct answer to this question that is true for all children and all settings.

I'm sorry to hear that

@ThatTipsyOpalBiscuit Thanks, that is really kind and helps actually. It's been a bit rough here.

You have 1 person fully accountable for your child.
They are in a home environment and as they are only catering to 2-3 children, they can be flexible with day plans in a way nurseries cant.
My CM did a whole ornithological themed month because my DD loves birds. They went to bird sanctuaries, made feeders, made binoculars from loo rolls and bird watched in the garden.
She also did a dinosaur one (all the kids) and a transport one (one of the other little boys but all kids like trains i guess)
This is over and above thr big standard seasons EYFS stuff

A crap CM is no doubt worse than a decent nursery - we saw very variable standards of CMs but the ones we have been fortune enough to use we were better the (very good) nursery options we had locally.

That's my own personal opinion / experience...

You've got one person and when she goes for a poo no one is watching the children.

Also do you think they have the temperament of a saint and not going to get over stimulated, not have a good night's sleep etc or had an argument with hubby. Spending all day with children and rarely with another adult. Also no breaks.

Doesn't sound good imo