Steve Biddulph discusses the results of a childcare "experiment" from Canada.

[Astrophe]

here, in the Sydney Morning Herald

any idea where to find the original study?
he is pretty inaccurate about the situation in th e UK

No idea sorry - maybe you could email the SMH?

I believe in Australia though he is trying to address the situation whereby there is virtually no paid parental leave...is that right astrophe
Agree with harpsi that he has grotesquely misrepresented the revised "paid parental leave" situation in the UK for his own purposes in that news story though
We are hardly a beacon of excellence
I have issues with SB anyway tbh. It's very easy for a writer to only work from home and tell everyone that they should do likewise for the sake of their child's wellbeing
His view of paid-for daycare, a necessity for a lot of families, is simplistically hostile

agree with Marina

His book "raising boys" is totally negative about childcare for the under 3's

i don't rate him, i don't like his philosophy and he is totally unrealistic about the NEED that many parents have for childcare

agree with Marina, he's just damming of daycare without proposing any practical solution. And Harpsi's 'pretty inaccurate' is mild, frankly!

I hear you - I agree his approach in Raising Babies is unhelpful. But what if this study is right? (also agree that his info about the situation in the UK is inaccurate. A friend from Aus emailed me saying 'wow, you're so lucky, you will be able to get paid parental leave now!' and I went huh?)

Seems to me that here he does recognise the financial need for child care, which is why he is advocating paid parental leave as an alternative to child care outside the home (as opposed to "one parent must just stay home, end of story").

I'm not a slavish follower of his, honestly, but I don't think we can discount studies just because we don't like that they have shown.

It would be much more helpful to see the study itself - maybe I will email the SMH myself.

is it inaccurate about the uk? the childrens centres have had zero effect on outcomes and last i read there were probs with too many spare nursery places, has that changed?

edam,why isn't the paid parental leave a la Sweden a practical solution?

if you google the guys names plus quebec the study shows up, one handed typing so cant link, sorry

tbh I have a lot of time for him, and I think he has a lot of sensible things to say (and his reporting about the Quebec study looks fairly accurate when compared to the other reporting I have ben able to access online). He is hostile to the idea of paid for daycare for young children, but I think he is addressing it at the policy level and I think it is valid for him to challenge the accepted norms notwithstanding that it might be painful and difficult for people to accept.

but the stuff about the UK is just bolleaux.
"In Britain, the policy of the former prime minister, Tony Blair, of building vast numbers of centres has proved an expensive mistake (actually, the policy of surestart was a greater deal wider than day care): a younger generation of parents is choosing to stay home (haha I don't think so) and one-fifth of British nursery places stand empty (this is a nonsequitur, falling nursery rolls are due to falling birth rates, first and foremost). Under pressure from parents and child development experts, Britain has now introduced paid parental leave (the UK has had paid maternity leave for a long time, it has been extended but not really for the reasons set out - it is at least partly and probably subsantially for ecomonic reasons, to encourage women and men back to work with the same employer and to avoid the drain of skilled workers).

here is the study

oh that is very interesting.
thanks for posting astrophe

Welcome.I think it will take some considered reading by me when I am not so tired.

Off to bed for me now

I always found it strange that these "experts" never talk about the situation in Scandinavia. Tha majority of children in scandinavia go to nursery and has done for many decades from around 12-18 months normally. I would say practically all mothers work more. Yet Scandinavia are not known as having a lot of children with social problems, are they? There is of course a big difference because UK/US and scandinavia (don't know anything about canada), but certainly does not seem that children under 3 in daycare is the main issue. I am Swedish by the way. Attended fulltime nursery from I was a baby as have my children and I don't rate SB at all. I think he is completely wrong and should come up with constructive solutions like improving daycare in the UK, make the cost less, reduce working hours for both parents etc

A google on "baker gruber milligan quebec" turns up lots of good stuff. Here's a summary.

Also a New York Times article on the same study. Seems like it's from 18 months ago though, how come we didn't hear about it at the time?

I like him

The nursery situation in Canada is bizarre. The ratios are 1/5 for all kids, even when out and about. In the parks, you're forever seeing troops of under-supervised kids being ignored by the childcare workers.

I don't think anyone is a fan of crappy nurseries, to be fair, and I suspect many of the $5 ones are crappy. (None of my Quebec friends use them, let's put it that way - they fight to pay more.)

(NB: the ratio for under-2s is 1/3 in the UK. 1/4 for 2-3, 3-8 it's 1/8.)

He has experience and knowledge of many studies and has an opinion on childcare. I don't think that is a reason to discredit him, even if you disagree

ooh i do think this man is a twit.
in his own book he is forced to say (because EVERY SINGLE STUDY SAYS IT!) that the most important thing in child happiness/development/welfare is the quality of the parent-child relationship, NOT how many hours the child spends in childcare.
there is a valid argument that if the child is being cared for 12 hours a day by someone else, the quality of that relationship may suffer, but to demonize all women who go out to work and have to use childcare is irresponsible and just flippin useless.
i really think he's just a big bully whose found a topic that people feel insecure enough about to be bullied on. AND that he can get paid to bully about AND feel self righteous about it.

rant over. i'll slink off now.

Do you really think he demonizes working women?
I don't know, when I read his book he stated his opinion and admitted that people may not agree.He also acknowleged it was not possibe for all under threes to be cared for at home due to modern financial pressures.
I think his books are sensitive and funny. He does have a right to an opinion and to quote sources that back it up

I like him, too.

Who looked after his children while he wrote all these books and articles?

I'm going to start a campaign for the government to pay for everyone to have a WIFE (men and women).

Ratios in Canada are 1/5 for all kids, including newborns?! That is horrific!

That is like comparing a family of 2 parents and 2 kids with a single-parent family with 4 kids and deciding that single parents are Bad For Children.