Et tu, Slate?
A new study on the long-term effects of child care was released this week and, of course, the media was all over it. Apparently, kids who attend daycare tend to be more disruptive in the fifth and sixth grades. Finally, the Today Show has some proof that daycare is damaging to kids. Lauer could barely hide his glee beneath the solemnity of his "But what about single and lower-income parents who hear this news but may not have an option?" question to the idiot child psychologist next to him who stressed the importance of finding a quality daycare center. I’m sure the Today Show producers were high-fiving each other for this nugget of advice. "Find quality daycare. Who would have thought? It’s so brilliant it just might work." Never mind that most single and lower-income parents are lucky if they can find affordable daycare, regardless of quality.
When I first heard about this study, I laughed it off. First, the study didn't just look at daycare centers, but all types of "early childcare" - including nannies and relatives. Second, I can think of plenty of parents (including one of my own) whose daily presence would do a lot more to damage a child than being in daycare. Sure, there may be some crazies in the daycare system, but kids there have the benefit of spreading out their risk, as opposed to having to sit home with one wacko you can't get away from. I know, I know, you’re going to remind me that all stay-at-home mommies are saints. They are also brilliant and ethereally beautiful and clever enough to manage to make due with one income or, at the very least, to earn an excellent living from their blog (but their main income is not dollars and cents, but their babies’ hugs and kisses). That's a given. But I'm willing to bet there are a few you wouldn't want to hang out with all day, even if you did get to watch endless loops of Judging Amy... I mean, Blue's Clues. Surely there are one or two SAHMs who should not be. There must be at least a handful to be avoided, regardless of their child's potentially bad attitude in sixth grade.
That was my attitude yesterday. Today, I read this Slate article on the subject. It was meant to clear up the confusion, show how the media overreacted in its reporting, help working mommies breathe a sigh of relief.
It made me cry.
Then I took a walk downstairs, and saw a cracked bird's egg with bits of goo and feather sticking out. Thanks, life, for offering such a poetic image to illustrate my failure as a mommy. I half expected to turn around and see the stroller-on-the-stairs scene from Battleship Potemkin. But I only saw a well-dressed woman in her late 30s happily pushing a Bugaboo, at 11:30 on a Friday morning.
Then I cried some more.
By digging deeper into the study the writer, Emily Bazelon, made it more specific to my situation. The effect was more pronounced in kids who had spent more than two years in daycare. Those who had spent less time there did not demonstrate the same bad behavior (great, I’m not planning to make changes anytime soon, so my kid will be one of the unlucky ones). The upside is that these same kids often had better vocabulary skills (unlikely in my situation – I can barely understand what the women who care for my son are saying). Quality is a big factor, so if you have quality daycare, your odds for a normal sixth-grader improve dramatically (not sure what this means to me, as quality is subjective. Put it this way: I don’t send my son to the posh River School downtown, where tuition is double what I currently pay and the wait list is two years long). Lucky Emily, whose kids attended schools with a two-to-one kid/teacher ratio for less than two years, ends the article by describing the withering look a stranger in the supermarket gave her upon hearing that her son attends daycare. I hear you Emily – people are disapproving and cruel to working mothers. Even those who know enough to choose quality daycare.
When I first heard about this study, I laughed it off. First, the study didn't just look at daycare centers, but all types of "early childcare" - including nannies and relatives. Second, I can think of plenty of parents (including one of my own) whose daily presence would do a lot more to damage a child than being in daycare. Sure, there may be some crazies in the daycare system, but kids there have the benefit of spreading out their risk, as opposed to having to sit home with one wacko you can't get away from. I know, I know, you’re going to remind me that all stay-at-home mommies are saints. They are also brilliant and ethereally beautiful and clever enough to manage to make due with one income or, at the very least, to earn an excellent living from their blog (but their main income is not dollars and cents, but their babies’ hugs and kisses). That's a given. But I'm willing to bet there are a few you wouldn't want to hang out with all day, even if you did get to watch endless loops of Judging Amy... I mean, Blue's Clues. Surely there are one or two SAHMs who should not be. There must be at least a handful to be avoided, regardless of their child's potentially bad attitude in sixth grade.
That was my attitude yesterday. Today, I read this Slate article on the subject. It was meant to clear up the confusion, show how the media overreacted in its reporting, help working mommies breathe a sigh of relief.
It made me cry.
Then I took a walk downstairs, and saw a cracked bird's egg with bits of goo and feather sticking out. Thanks, life, for offering such a poetic image to illustrate my failure as a mommy. I half expected to turn around and see the stroller-on-the-stairs scene from Battleship Potemkin. But I only saw a well-dressed woman in her late 30s happily pushing a Bugaboo, at 11:30 on a Friday morning.
Then I cried some more.
By digging deeper into the study the writer, Emily Bazelon, made it more specific to my situation. The effect was more pronounced in kids who had spent more than two years in daycare. Those who had spent less time there did not demonstrate the same bad behavior (great, I’m not planning to make changes anytime soon, so my kid will be one of the unlucky ones). The upside is that these same kids often had better vocabulary skills (unlikely in my situation – I can barely understand what the women who care for my son are saying). Quality is a big factor, so if you have quality daycare, your odds for a normal sixth-grader improve dramatically (not sure what this means to me, as quality is subjective. Put it this way: I don’t send my son to the posh River School downtown, where tuition is double what I currently pay and the wait list is two years long). Lucky Emily, whose kids attended schools with a two-to-one kid/teacher ratio for less than two years, ends the article by describing the withering look a stranger in the supermarket gave her upon hearing that her son attends daycare. I hear you Emily – people are disapproving and cruel to working mothers. Even those who know enough to choose quality daycare.
posted by j.m. at 3:25 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home