MAH RESPONDS TO MEDIA: Child Care on Parade

Parade magazine, the national magazine supplement for hundreds of weekend edition newspaper (circulation 37 million) chose to highlight the issue of child care in its January 24, 1999 cover story entitled "Every Child Deserves the Best."  Unfortunately, this article completely ignored the option of parental care, using distorted, misleading statistics to create an image of a national emergency.  While posing as a practical article to help dual-income parents select good child care, the text throughout suggested that business and government have a primary responsibility for providing quality care.  Particularly disturbing were broad comments noting the use of relatives to care for children and criticisms of the quality of this care.

The information provided in this article appears to be drawn from the promotional materials of the Child Care Action Campaign, an advocacy group Mothers At Home has tracked for nearly ten years.  The CCAC misuses statistics--for example, stating that the majority of preschoolers are cared for by someone other than their parents.  Data from the Census Bureau report, "Who's Minding Our Preschoolers?" (March 1996) reveals that 63.7% of preschoolers are cared for by their own parents. Parade quoted Richard D. Stolley, a senior editorial adviser at Time Inc., and chairman of CCAC, "Child care is a bottom-line issue for this nation.  If you're an American, you don't want a generation of dumb, psychologically deprived children.  Good child care is essential for a functioning, humane society."

--by Heidi L. Brennan, MAH Public Policy  Director
from the March 1999 issue of Welcome Home
 

Highlights of the January 24, 1999 Parade Magazine Cover Story

"When a Mommy or a Daddy Can't be There . . . A Report by Lyric Wallwork Winik"

Article Title:  "Every Child Deserves the Best"

Making the Case that Day Care Needs Improving

The Parade article opens by stating that 25 million Americans with children below age six leave their kids in some form of non-parental care, noting "...  most preschoolers are now cared for by someone other than their parents."  The article presents data on the opinion of parents, noting "Between 50% and 75% of parents say they have no choices in child care."  The article states that most day care centers are rated as poor to mediocre in the quality of care provided, and questions the quality of care that relatives provide, noting "Even more troubling, 60% of relatives who care for children said they were only doing so 'to help out the mothers' and not because they wanted to be caregivers."

The article mentions child care research which shows that good quality care for young children is critical to a child's brain development, and therefore, critical to us all.  The article then quotes Richard D. Stolley of the Child Care Action Campaign (see Heidi Brennan's article above for the actual quote), and then makes the case that good alternate child care is possible.
 

Types of Child Care

This section describes how in-home day care and care by relatives are the preferred choice of most "working" parents, with 30% choosing day care centers, and 5% choosing the care of a non-relative in the child's home (often referred to as "nanny care").  The article provides a brief description of the care provided by day care centers, in-home day care, and nanny care and the price range of each.
 

How to Find Good Day Care

This section provides pragmatic suggestions for finding good child care, noting "If you were buying a car, you probably wouldn't settle on the first model you saw."  Recommendations include asking friends, religious organizations and area schools for suggestions, checking with community referral services, and "trust your instincts about a person because you will be forming a partnership with her to care for your child."  The article notes several recommendations of Nancy Close of the Early Childhood Education Program at Yale Child Study Center and Ellen Galinsky of the Families and Work Institute, including:  visit several homes or centers; look for a home or center that is clean, attractive, safety-conscious and licensed; when you visit, don't be afraid to ask questions; and ask yourself if the caregiver is warm, caring and seems to know your child.
 

How to Improve the Care You Have

This section offers tips for establishing a better relationship with an alternative caregiver, including:  keeping lines of communication open; having a written agreement covering responsibilities and expectations even if the caregiver is a relative; sharing child development resources with the caregivers; and recognizing that providers can change.

The article then makes the case that alternate child care providers are more than baby-sitters and are not well paid, noting "The average child-care worker earns $9,000 to $12,000 a year, barely enough to support a single adult, let alone a family."  (Note:  The article did not distinguish between the average salary of a full-time day care worker and the average salary of an in-home provider who may be caring for children for a limited number of hours per week.)  The article then mentions that there is high turnover in alternate care providers with a third leaving the field each year, and that parents are spending up to a third of their monthly income on child care.  The article again quotes Mr. Stolley who pitches that businesses should be doing more, "Businesses only contribute 1% of all money spent on child care but it is in their own best interest to take this crisis seriously . . ."

The closing paragraph reiterates the theme that good child care is possible.
 

What You Can Do

Mothers At Home encourages you to write to Parade.  These are the types of comments that you could make:

1. An article entitled, "Every Child Deserves the Best," should have acknowledged the other forms of care that parents are using to give their child "the best."  The largest form of care for young children is parental care which was barely mentioned in the article.
2. The article focused heavily on improving negative situations with alternate child care providers--clearly one course of action.  It did not, however, describe the creative ways in which parents are caring for their children while still earning income and avoiding alternate child care altogether.  For example, some of the options that parents are using include:  caring for children via tag team care arrangements with both spouses working cooperatively to ensure parental care of the child; working at home via telecommuting or home-based businesses; and bringing the child (or children) to work while the parents themselves care for the child.
3. It's incredible that the limited space of Parade magazine is reserved for this issue that is well-covered in most parenting books, including a brochure issued by the American Academy of Pediatrics. Parade could have covered a myriad of other issues that are important to families, including:  profiling businesses that are redefining the phrase "family friendly" to mean something beyond on-site day care; providing information on how families can make the choice to have a parent at home possible through financial planning and adjusting their spending habits; and describing how some parents are finding time to spend with their children in this harried world in which we live.
4. Parents provide something unique to their child.  In most cases, even the best alternate child care provider cannot offer the same love, care and attention as a child's parent.  The article fails to acknowledge this unique relationship between the parent and child and implies that alternate child care providers can--if only their pay were higher, if only businesses were more financially supportive, if only parents would establish a written contract with a provider, etc.--be just as good as parent care.

What Mothers At Home Has Done

Mothers At Home sent the following letter to Parade magazine to voice its concerns about the article.  You are welcome to also draw from the ideas presented in this letter when you correspond with Parade.  (See the letter for the appropriate names and address.  You can also email to www.parade.com.)

February 1, 1999

Mr. Walter Anderson, Editor
Mr. Larry Smith, Managing Editor
Parade Publications
711 Third Avenue
New York, NY  10017

Dear Mr. Anderson and Mr. Smith:

Who can argue that all children cared for in day care centers or by home care providers should not receive the very best of care?  (See "When a Mommy or a Daddy Can't Be There . . ." from the 1/24/99 issue of Parade.)  The tips presented in the article for securing or improving alternate child care are standard, boiler plate ideas that parents can use when entrusting their children of any age to someone other than themselves.  Unfortunately, however, this sound message was presented against a backdrop of misleading data.  Ms. Lyric Wallwork Winik's article, and Parade's inadequate editorial review, have served to assist the Child Care Action Campaign's (CCAC's) political agenda rather than the desire of most parents in this country to have more -- not less -- family time.

The article begins by stating that "most preschoolers are now cared for by someone other than their parents."  This fact is not supported by Census Bureau data which shows that 63.7% of preschoolers are cared for by a non-employed mother (49.9%), a mother who cared for her child while on the job (3.0%), by the father while the mother is on the job (9.3%) or by the father (1.5%).  That is 63.7% -- THE MAJORITY!  I would be most interested in seeing the data that Ms. Winik used to derive her conclusions.  (Source:  Data presented here is drawn from Census Bureau staff and the report, "Who's Minding Our Preschoolers?"  March 1996, U.S. Census Bureau Current Population Report, P70-36.)

The article states that day care centers are the arrangement for 30% of young children.  But, this figure most likely relates to the percent of young children whose parents are employed and use some non-parental childcare, rather than all children.  The more accurate Census Bureau figure for the number of children in day care centers is
15.1%.  In "Who's Minding Our Preschoolers?", the Census Bureau uses "day care centers" as a generic term which also includes nursery schools, preschools, school-based activities, kindergarten and even grade school.  Home-based care givers take care of another 8.0%.  And, care by a non-relative in the child's home, commonly referred to as "nanny care," comprises just 2.4% of the care arrangements of ALL children.  That's just 25.5% of all children -- with the remaining 74.5% in the care of mothers, fathers or other relatives.  The 30% figure is a classic example of how day care advocates use whatever tools they can to lead people to believe that day care centers are the preferred option.  Ms. Winik fell prey to this gross misconception.

To lump care by relatives into the same pool of care as day care centers, home-care providers, and "au pairs" is a great way to boost up the numbers of children in non-parental care and mislead readers.  Yet, I would like to see the evidence that this type of care is equivalent to care by a non-relative or that it is substandard -- meaning that children are suffering.  This is implied in the second full paragraph of the article, "Even more troubling, 60% of relatives who care for children said they were only doing so 'to help out the mothers' and not because they wanted to be care-givers."  I wonder if the survey also asked these same people if they would prefer these children to be cared for in a day care center, by a nanny, or a home-based day care provider.  Surely few would argue that -- in most cases -- relatives have more passion and a vested interest in caring for a child than would a stranger being paid to care for the child.

Ultimately, there is little acknowledgement in this article that parents provide something unique to their children -- and that even the best alternate child care provider cannot duplicate a parent's love and care.  I call your attention to the enclosed article by Dr. Stanley Greenspan, a recognized expert on what alternate child care can and cannot provide to our Nation's children.  (Article:  "The Reasons Why We Need to Rely Less on Day Care," in the Outlook Section of the Washington Post, 10/19/97 issue.)  I think you'll discover a perspective that was sorely missing from the Parade article.

President Clinton's day care initiative failed because the people who most likely were to benefit from the tax credits were couples whose incomes were well above the median and the day care center industry for which CCAC advocates.  The day care initiative also failed because it did not respond to the desire of most parents -- to spend more time with their children.  Surveys and opinion polls consistently indicate that this is a widespread concern.  This ultimately is the issue needing attention -- how we as a Nation can provide economic relief to allow ALL parents and children to spend more time with each other without worrying so much about finances.

Almost seven million families in the United Sates have an at-home parent.  The economic sacrifices are great, but the outcome cannot be legislated.  Parents DO provide something unique to children.  How about a Parade article on the critical role that parents can play in the physical and emotional well-being of our Nation's children?  Mothers At Home stands ready to serve as a resource.

                                Warm regards,
                                Betty Walter, Executive Director

cc: Mr. David Currier, Executive Editor
     Mr. Carlo Vittorini, Publisher
     Mr. Jack Anderson, Washington Bureau Chief
     Dr. Stanley Greenspan
     Ms. Marian Gormley, MAH Public Relations Director