Childcare : what the science says

[Anonymous]

Within the same family (my husbands) whose socioeconomic status didn’t change significantly over the course of their childhood, the child who spent 1-2.5 in daycare had vastly better outcomes than the subsequent children who were home with a nanny (significant language delays in both girls, attachment issues that endure in adulthood).

What this “study” (actually a blog post, consolidating various sources but ignoring others) doesn’t get at is quality. Quality of the parents and quality of the caregiver. No one should be making their decisions on the basis of this.

[Anonymous]

This study came out as I was deciding on childcare. This was sort of the lynchpin in our decision to hire a nanny, and stagger our work schedules so it maximized our kids’ time with both parents. I was lucky to have a SAHM growing up and I have no desire for that myself but I do want the best for my kids and have made great sacrifices to find the balance that works for every member of our family, not just parental preferences which this board seems to overemphasize in every decision.

[Anonymous]

There is a bit of a selection effect. I work in child care and I have noticed often some of the kids who start as toddlers do so because they were too active/out of bounds for their nanny or parent so their parents thought they needed more stimulation.

I think, because of this, kids who would probably go on to have some behavior issues anyway (even if they had stayed at home) end up in full-day child care.

[Anonymous]

I have a personal theory as a SAHM that if there’s a downside for 2 year olds, it’s mainly that it’s too much stress and they end up tired a lot of the time. For a lot of kids they can handle the load and it’s maybe beneficial but for some it’s too much and it causes behavior problems, so maybe the average is not telling the right story.

For my kiddo at 2 I would be looking for the most chill daycare option. Which is not what people are usually looking for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This blog post is full of editorializing by the author (who is it by the way? I've never been able to find an actual name.) If you look at the actual studies cited, you get a very different picture of "the science" compared with what the author describes. The author also fails to explain that these studies are largely observational, and unobserved variables are likely to influence the results quite a bit. If you look at actual literature reviews of this subject they are much more clear - so many other factors matter so much more than whether you send your child to daycare.

This was a very rigorous study comparing Quebec kids before and after subsidized daycare so all those variables are removed

We evaluate the long-term effects of the Canadian province of Quebec $5 per day universal childcare policy on child and youth well-being (health, behavior, motor and social development). Treated children are followed for more than 19 years. Estimates based on a nonexperimental evaluation framework show that the negative effects on preschoolers documented in previous studies persist over time for most outcomes. Once children enter school, only the impact on emotional disorder and anxiety persists, but the magnitude is smaller than for preschool children. For teens, aged 12 to 19 years old, our estimates do not suggest that the effects persist.

https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/209560/1/WP15-02.pdf

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I sah with my kids back then (woh full time now) and my biggest takeaway knowing all my kids friends, some who were in daycare, some who were home…it doesn’t matter. It really doesn’t. The sah kids are no more creative than daycare kids. The daycare kids don’t have better social skills. If any of them have mental health issues, they would have had them anyway. I hate these studies, they just contribute to the mommy wars. They create guilt where it’s unnecessary.

And they don't propose solutions.

[Anonymous]

To me it seems like you can't just compare kids who go to daycare vs kids who don't and only look at daycare as the determining factor in why they may have different outcomes.

What I mean is, aren't kids who are in daycare more likely to have parents who have stressful jobs/stressful lives than parents who have the privilege of having one parent stay home w/ kids? Doesn't stress factor in as a reason why those kids may be more likely to have behavior challenges? I feel like stress in the home would be more likely to contribute to behavior problems than whether or not the kid went to daycare as a toddler.

And aren't parents who choose to put their kids in daycare when they do have other options (most families don't have any other choice but to put kids in daycare as in most families, both parents have to work) also more likely to make other decisions that affect their kids' development/behavior? So if you're a family who chooses daycare when you could choose to have a SAHP or nanny instead, aren't you likely choosing daycare because your kid already exhibits difficult behavior or learning challenges or seems like they need more socialization or whatever reason and wouldn't that kid then be more likely to still have that behavior issue/learning challenge as they get older? If a kid is especially difficult at age 2, aren't they also more likely to still be a more difficult child once they reach school age?

It just seems like a study that doesn't take other factors into account.

[Anonymous]

Did you really post a Medium article from an anonymous source?

[Anonymous]

Interesting how OP didn't quote this from the EXACT same article:

"High quality daycare reduces all the negative effects I’ve discussed above, although it doesn’t eliminate them. It also has long-lasting positive effects on educational outcomes. That’s the good news. The bad news is that it’s hard to find; only 10–15% of daycare in the US is high quality, and many child care centers offer “disturbingly low quality programs”."

[Anonymous]

Rather than shaming moms who work, how about we figure out how to improve access to high quality childcare? And improve the outcomes for children who are in daycare.

Stop shaming moms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This blog post is full of editorializing by the author (who is it by the way? I've never been able to find an actual name.) If you look at the actual studies cited, you get a very different picture of "the science" compared with what the author describes. The author also fails to explain that these studies are largely observational, and unobserved variables are likely to influence the results quite a bit. If you look at actual literature reviews of this subject they are much more clear - so many other factors matter so much more than whether you send your child to daycare.

This was a very rigorous study comparing Quebec kids before and after subsidized daycare so all those variables are removed

We evaluate the long-term effects of the Canadian province of Quebec $5 per day universal childcare policy on child and youth well-being (health, behavior, motor and social development). Treated children are followed for more than 19 years. Estimates based on a nonexperimental evaluation framework show that the negative effects on preschoolers documented in previous studies persist over time for most outcomes. Once children enter school, only the impact on emotional disorder and anxiety persists, but the magnitude is smaller than for preschool children. For teens, aged 12 to 19 years old, our estimates do not suggest that the effects persist.

https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/209560/1/WP15-02.pdf

I am going to guess that Quebecois government funded daycare was not particularly high quality, and as the blog post OP linked to says, high quality daycare does not have such outcomes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rather than shaming moms who work, how about we figure out how to improve access to high quality childcare? And improve the outcomes for children who are in daycare.

Stop shaming moms.

SAHMs who lack confidence in their decision are always going to try to shame working mothers in order to make themselves feel better. ALWAYS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is a bit of a selection effect. I work in child care and I have noticed often some of the kids who start as toddlers do so because they were too active/out of bounds for their nanny or parent so their parents thought they needed more stimulation.

I think, because of this, kids who would probably go on to have some behavior issues anyway (even if they had stayed at home) end up in full-day child care.

I am keeping my son out of public school because he seems to have mild inattentive ADHD and I don't want him to get yelled at constantly and made to feel like he is a bad kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Within the same family (my husbands) whose socioeconomic status didn’t change significantly over the course of their childhood, the child who spent 1-2.5 in daycare had vastly better outcomes than the subsequent children who were home with a nanny (significant language delays in both girls, attachment issues that endure in adulthood).

What this “study” (actually a blog post, consolidating various sources but ignoring others) doesn’t get at is quality. Quality of the parents and quality of the caregiver. No one should be making their decisions on the basis of this.

That anecdote wouldn’t lead me to conclude anything about the early childhood setting. The significant language delays suggest something much more consequential than daycare vs nanny. Even high quality daycare vs poor nanny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Rather than shaming moms who work, how about we figure out how to improve access to high quality childcare? And improve the outcomes for children who are in daycare.

Stop shaming moms.

SAHMs who lack confidence in their decision are always going to try to shame working mothers in order to make themselves feel better. ALWAYS.

You guys shame us for being lazy and bad feminists. I was horribly abused by working mothers (midwives) my last pregnancy to the point I have PTSD and medical anxiety, I think because they thought I am stupid and wouldn't realize what they were doing. I floored that B when I interpreted ultrasound information from the images. And I am going to sue. So yeah, I don't have a high opinion of working moms. Sorry not sorry. I didn't start the war, but I will fight it.