"I think it is shocking that we don't have a much higher proportion of our children . . . in excellent, quality child care," said Sharon Landesman Ramey, director of the Georgetown University Center on Health and Education.

I think it is shocking that we don't have a much higher proportion of our children . . . in excellent, quality PARENTAL care.

Montessori = not that expensive, with lifelong benefits that begin in basic toddler/preschool academic areas (beads and blocks), play, and age appropriate life-confidence skills, with logic-critical thinking thrown in as icing on the cake. All day care & preschool operations (and parents) would do children a service in the U.S. by at least implementing some of these heavily-researched and proven early child care and education methods. Plus, kids universally love it, gain a respect for school and others at an early age, gain self-respect that comes from safe, nurtured independent play and curiosity, AND behave better at home as well as in public.

Poor day care, lets face it, means poor parenting. My son didn't go to pre-school until he was two and a half and only three days a week for half days. He stayed with my father, for the most part (who only has a GED and is not the 'smartest' man I know, but he's very dedicated to my son, for which I'm very grateful and appreciative). I invested in a ton of learning games, books and spent time 'teaching' in fun ways for him and he learned a LOT before he went to kindergarten. Parents today want children, but they don't really want to 'raise' them. I feel sorry for today's children.

It's not the 'other' people who 'take care' of your child, it's YOU...

That's ridiculous, and small-minded Angelo. Why can't we assume the vast majority of parents want to do what's right by their own children...and not finger wag them to death because they are fewer options than you do. How would you react if someone said you were a poor parent for abdicating your own responsibility to your child because YOU are not the one with him during that time--YOUR parent is. Have some respect for others and get off the high horse.

What about the effects of low (or no) quality care from children remaining at home with low quality parents or grandparents ?

Even the authors of this study said it would not be politically correct. I didnt bother reading this one as read a much longer version of this article on another site. It points out that there are cons to daycare...plain and simple. Some of the kids used as not going to daycare didnthave great home lives as the poster who pointed out above me stated. But the evidence remains a child is better off with their parents. How can anyone even argue this? Its an idiots argument.

Angela - that's a very ignorant comparision. My son was at a daycare for over a year and was allowed to watch the movie "Cars" as often as he liked. I told his provider repeatedly that it was unacceptable to watch tv all day. I put him on several waiting lists for better facilities in our community. Finally after 10 months....nearly 1 year....we were able to put him in a facility that did not allow television. I'm a working parent. For over a year, I was a single parent. Sometimes parents have to deal with these crappy daycares just to get by financially. Additionally, some of the better daycares are more expensive. I don't know about you, but I don't make a whole lot of money. Anyhow, when my son was at home we played, colored, read books, went on walks, sidewalk chalk, etc. BUT to your standards, I'm still a crappy parent just because I had no other options than a crappy childcare provider.

Not every family has the advantage of their children staying with gramps for the first 3 years of their life. Get your head out of the clouds.

sugartree

sorry about your situation...but in all reality you situation is not the norm. If most people were to try they would be able to find an alternative situation. Myself and my situation...i have cut my hours down to 30 a week...my wife about the same...we work different days all so one of us can be home. Would of loved to have gotten a newer car a while back...sacrifice.....goodwill and I are on first name basis. but hey she and I are sacrificing for our children. A career? lol means nothing in the big picture.....now are children? thats big...and it will be carried on down through the generations long after we are gone. What I do as far as work? unless I am the president or some uber rich person will all but be forgotten.....oops forgot serial killers. so really it comes down to the majority of people on how selfish they are.

Thank you, James. :)

Sadly, you are right. There are too many kids that are being raised in this way. I also cut my hours to 30 a week and obviously my son does not attend daycare when his stepdad is not working (he's military & has strange hours sometimes). So we've been able to cutback on the number of hours my son is in daycare (a good one or crappy one) each week. I also plan to quit my primary job when our next one is due. Hopefully by then we'll be better off financially and 2 kids in daycare could cost nearly $1000/month. Not exactly feasible for us. We too would love to have a bigger car (not newer) but that's obviously on the back burner.

We know that we are great parents regardless of the daycare situation. We have a very smart, healthy & active toddler. Life is too short to put kids on hold. We are doing our best to provide for him in every possible way we can.

Another good article that should also examine the social costs. America has to become a proavtive society, and stop with all the reactive policies due to poor planning or irresponsibilty.

If we put communities first, many of our "problems" would be solved. It's that simple.

I feel the frustration of all the "Sugartrees" and people like her in the same boat.

despise it all you want, but America has to put progressivism to the forefront at the expense of the wealthy. Otherwise, we will continue this downward spiral until we devolve as a society, and we'll take the rich with us..

Just one more example of how chasing the dollar at the expense of all else, has failed us time and time again. To the victor go the spoils. And if those victors don't care for the populous, then they or their children also live in uncertainty, just like the desperate. And just like here in the war-torn Middle east

Stop with the rat race & put families first. It will only help society in the long run.

warprofiteer

i couldnt disagree with you more. All of the problems over the last 40 years has been due to progressives......ugghhhhh.....what has happened in the last 40 years as people become more and more dependent upon the government? Families and communities are broken down. Exactly the opposite of what you think needs to happen. We need to get the government out of our lives and start relying on ourselves, family and community...but see we dont have to do that when the government is there....ugghhh

That's a good question that I wondered myself after reading the article.

To the responders: Of course, parental care is preferable, but not all parents can afford to stay home in the modern world. In some areas two incomes are required just to get by. Also, many would agree that raising a child takes precendent over a career, but returning to said career can be almost impossible in many cases after several years out. This is especially true for women. It's a sad truth but many employers look at women who have had children or are of child-bearing age and think "how long before they leave for several months or quit alltogether?"

Mikky -

many employers look at women who have had children or are of child-bearing age and think "how long before they leave for several months or quit alltogether?"

My boss has actually asked me this.

I just tell him I have no idea what the future holds. If he wants to get rid of me for not having psychic abilities, let it be.

Boldfresh?

Yes it is sad that we have such a poor quality of child care, at home.

Used to be we were poor but didn't know it. The govt did not tell us.

No health insurance, beans on the table, wood stove in the house and out house (outside) but we were rich in child care and family. People forget that many of us in our late 60's & 70's lived this way.

In defense of women in careers, men are probably more likely to leave when poached by another company dangling a bonus.

I heard somebody moaning about what it takes to raise a family. We did not have two cars. We lived where you need a car. In big cities they have public transportation. No carpeting, no central air, no steaks and many others things. No drugs in the family, food stamps, subsidized housing, welfare. Of course my parents respected and stayed together. Just like today if you stay together as a family you will raise smart children. Though you can not keep up with two parents working and having what you want.

It's interesting to me how "child care" rather than "parenting" seems to have become the dominant force shaping the upbringing of children.

I agree. What are they saying is 'high quality' care? They talk about the need for funding of high-quality care but then say day-care links to behavioral problems.

Yeah, cut back at work...heck quit a job. Tell me, in THIS economy just exactly how is that an option for most people. It's nice to prattle on about 'family', I don't know about you, however MY son likes to eat, have clothing to wear that fit him and are clean. Actually, HE likes to be clean as well. He also likes to have a house in a nice neighborhood to live in and everything else that goes along with living in this life. I'm a single parent, who's never received one penny in child support (and that's NOT unusual). I HAVE TO WORK... Explain to me please, How would I manage to live in YOUR dream world?

This is one of those "DUH" studies to me. I can point out those kids who attended poor quality daycare in my son's 2nd grade class. I could point them our in preschool, kindergarten, and 1st grade as well.

I am a stay-at-home dad with a Master's degree in education. My wife and I decided if we were not willing to put in the time and effort to raise our kids ourselves, there was no point in having them. I am not going to pay someone else to raise my kids. I help in kids classrooms and spend my summers with them.

Are your kids important enough to you to do the job yourself, or are you going to outsource?

We live within our means and spend our time and money building memories with our kids, not collections of consumer goods.

disgusted

but what has got us to this point where both parents need towork? what has changed in the last 40 years to make things different? I can be very specific as to the cause and what has changed since the 60's and how much our country has changed.....both parents working, more single parent househoulds, increased crime, increased teen pregnancies, increased STD's, increased drug use, increased suicide rate, should I go on? Why are things so much worse since the 60's? and why were they not this bad for the hundreds of years before that?

hmmmmmmmmmmmm

The average U.S. house averaged 850 square feet in 1950. It now averages over 2000 square feet. Some have master suites larger than the average house in 1950. How many TVs, DVD players and computers were in the average 1950 home? Does anybody really think before signing up for a $75 cell phone plan? The more things we own, the more our things own us.

Just a thought.

All day care is low quality, compared to the care of a loving mother.

If you're going to have a baby, plan for it. Stay home and care for it until it is in school. Otherwise you are a neglectful parent. Period.

If you can't do that, and can't think of a way to do it, you have no business getting pregnant. People used to wait to have children until they could afford a child. Stop being so selfish, self-centered, and irresponsible.

Right Diane, because we all know this is the 1950's and women have to be told they can't work AND be mothers. Oh please, get over yourself and you're moral high horse. Talk about irresponsible and self-centered!

Women can work and be mothers. They just can't work and nurture an infant. Not in the 50's, not today, and not 100 years from today. Babies separated from their mothers do not thrive. If someone has a zillion IQ after being separated from their mother, it is only the exception that proves the rule. Baby animals separated from mother do not thrive and baby humans separated from mother do not thrive.

You are a) not a woman, or b) not a mother, or c) lying to yourself, or d) one of those pseudo-women who had a baby to gain attention. There is no real mother in this world who doesn't know deep in her heart that it is WRONG when she hands her 6 week old baby over to strangers to raise.

Selfish people want to deny this fact. So go buy some more big screen TV's and one day, when you are old, and your children don't care what happens to you because they never actually bonded with you, remember it was your choice. Maybe they'll send some nice electronics to you at the nursing home.

If they don't shoot you first because you annoyed them and they are borderline autistic.

And BTW -- being on a "moral high horse" beats not having any morals. People who won't even raise their own children are hardly in a position to preach about morals and responsibility.

What a joke.

Diane - I agree with you on ALL COUNTS! Having seen the results of both ends of the spectrum in a medical context AND a personal one - you have succinctly hit upon the key when you allude to psychic 'failure to thrive'. Physical growth may be on target but by age four - the current wisdom indicates that the die is cast and there IS NO substitute for a loving mother. We have tried but we cannot synthesize THAT!

I could not agree with you more. This story is ridiculous and, so was the study. There are over 100 million children in America. The 1,300 sample size ( TOO SMALL) is like, a drop of water in a 10 gallon bucket.

What about the children born with silver spoons in their mouths and still group up with issues, by the age of 15. "FEDERAL FUNDED STUDY" is the key here. Some one came up with this study to have access to "FREE" money and give the public BS information.

Plus, what constitutes a "high quality" child care. A pretty building, "smart" care givers, 5 star lunches, expensive play things?

This story is a non issue and funny. However someone is all the richer for it.

It has nothing to do with organic, or baby einstein, it has to do with effort, time, love, energy, and concern. If you have to use day-care find someone who gives the same things that you would to your child; talks to your child, sings to your child, plays with your child, then do those things when you get home from work yourself.

It doesn't take learning the alphabet when you're two, or all your shapes by the time you're three, it just takes teaching your child what you know when they're ready and most important, that they are loved, protected, and important.

If you can't give that, don't have children.

I know a lot of kids in day care so Mom can work so they can afford food in the fridge, car insurance, and have a little bit in savings in case emergencies come up. I know, because I'm one of them.

There are definitely bad day care centers out there, and the results are obvious. But, there are great daycare centers out there as well, and the results are also evident. At home parental daycare is probably the best, but there are problems there as well. Outside day care might be a godsend for some kids in dysfunctional families. There are a lot a variables to consider, but my opinion is that having the Mom stay home until the kid is in kindergarten is the best possible path to take. It is just more natural than throwing a kid into a mass care facility and miss out on mom/kid bonding. Although it is true that in some societies (mostly in the past) communities did share child rearing and care in the group format, and the kids generally turned out ok, but I suspect that in those situations, there was more personalized caring and interaction than your typical modern day care center. One of the problems is that the day care providers, although dedicated and decent for the most part, don't get payed much, so there is a lot of turn over, thus potentially a less stable environment for the kids. I believe that the church based day care centers are a bit better because they are not so profit oriented. Ideally, Mom's or if not possible, Dad's should be home 24/7 for the first four years, or almost as good are grandparents and to a lesser extent aunts or uncles. Sibling care is not wise in my opinion.

Oh please, Mack...It's not the 1950's--get over it...not the ol "it's all working mom's fault" nonsense again (right--kids in YOUR generation were absolutely PERFECT in the Donna Reed days of your imagination.)

This isn't about mommy wars--It's about getting high quality care for kids.

K von-as I wrote, I know sometimes moms have to work to put food in the fridge etc..., I was just referring to some people who do not really need to work. They could make it on one salary, if they are willing to keep the old BMW a couple of extra years and only spend 1 week in Florida a year instead of 2. I am not referring to need. That is a fact of life and we do what we have to do. We are just so willing to jump all over daycare for not providing the things that we whould/could provide ourselves.

My family struggles so that I can stay home with my kids. It would in many ways be easier for us if I just put my kids in daycare and went back to work FT, but it's more important to us to be there for the kids.

My SIL is a single mom who works her butt off to take care of her son on her own and we are all so proud of her, but I know if she had her way, she would be home, putting 50x more effort into her son than a daycare worker-no matter how good-is capable of giving.

I just don't like the way everyone assumes it's perfectly ok to herd all kids into goverment-sponsored schools by the age of 3. It is NOT ideal for kids. Ideal is home with a loving parent.

Do you ever think to yourself that it isn't about the BMW or trips to Florida (which, btw, family vacations are extremely important to many people and make lifetime memories). My wife doesn't need to work based on the math of our mortgage, car, and utility payments. We'd be fine financially if she were to be at home but things would obviously be tighter. She works because it is fulfilling to her and she has a wonderful career. She works so we can provide some things to our children that she didn't have growing up (traveling and paying for their schooling being the major ones). She works because we want to travel the world when we retire. A benefit to her career is her organization provides cadillac health coverage as well. The BMW and Florida vacations are not an either/or to Mom staying at home for everyone. If Mom's income is such that once saving for retirement/rainy-day/college/childcare are factored in and there is a $1,000 left over each month to help pay for the BMW over the Honda - that isn't your right to judge how others spend their money. Now if they were opting for the BMW and not justifying Mom working by spending everything and not saving for a brighter future, by all means judge away. BTW, we love our child care center and have the luxury of working very close and being able to stop in when ever we want. Don't cast a wide net and act all holy because you decided to sacrifice to stay home.

And the govt. will not be providing high quality day care facilities for the general public at any time in the near (or far distant) future. Even though a greater percentage of the working population is women, no one cares who raises their children. And that's a fact.

Of course, dads bear no responsibility for this....it's all about how much more we can $hit on moms for not being the superheroes they're expected to be. How many dads are made to feel guilty for having to work??

I would also add that past the age of about 18 months, keeping them at home 24/7 is not doing them any favors either....they need more of a set curriculum, developmental tools, and socialization by then than one parent can teach at home.

hound

so what you are saying is that children are better off in daycare? ok I think this has been proven to be false. How can anyone say a child is better off without their parents? amazing.

Morndew, has it occurred to you that those who are working to be able to provide those extra things are probably also the same children who are receiving high quality care in a daycare setting. Also, it is great if you can get by on one income, but what happens if that one income is suddenly gone? Are you completely unaware of the number of people who were laid off over the past couple of years? My husband and I have both always worked, our two boys were in daycare their entire lives, until they started kindergarten, but we sent our children to a daycare center that is a nationally accredited pre-school, that is right, they were in pre-school from before they could walk, and guess what, we have been told by all of their teachers they are the best behaved children in the classroom and are consistenly in the top 10 percent of their class. Yes, we drive a new car, yes, we talk family vacations, but when my husband lost his job when the housing market crashed, we didn't lose our house because I was also working, neither of us had to scramble to get a job.

On the flip side, my neighbors didn't put their son into daycare until he was 4 and he was almost kicked out of kindergarten because he didn't know how to behave in a classroom setting and didn't have the appropriate social skills for a child of his age. It is horribly presumptuous to assume that any child who is placed in a daycare setting will turn out to be an unruly child or that child would have been better off if one parent had been at home with them. If children are put into a high quality daycare center they learn important skills well before entering into school that parents cannot teach their children. Such as how to interact with other children and how to respond to a structured setting, such as a classroom.

natedom

in regards to a child being kicked out of kindergarten....well this study showed children into their teen years. Does daycare help with socialization....sure. that is one of its pros. but the cons outweigh it. I am sure your neighbors child will adapt. who knows they could be crappy parents or maybe this kid has psych issues. dont know. all I know is that a child is better off with their parents the majority of cases. I really dont know how anyone can argue this.

You don't think the social skills a child can learn prior to school can follow them through life? There are many cases where great, loving parents choose to put their children into a daycare in order to gain these social skills and these children turn out to be some of the better children in class, through high school. There are many cases where children who stay home with a parent end up behaving badly all the way through high school, including becoming bullies. You cannot throw a net over every situation and say all parents who want to be good parents need to have one stay home with their children. Placing a child in daycare in their formative years can have very positive ramifications. Yes, there are scenarios where these children turn out poorly, but chances are, those children would have turned out poorly regardless because those parents don't make the time they do have with their children quality time. My children both started daycare at a very young age, I spend time individual time with both of them every night, reading books, doing homework or just talking about their day.So does my husband. I am on the PTO board at their school, we attend every school event, my husband and I both volunteer in their classrooms whenever we can, both my children are at the top of their classes and perform above grade level, and I have always been congratulated, by teachers, daycare providers and other parents on how well behaved and polite my children are.We take at least two family vacations every year, we take our children to the zoo or a museum almost every weekend. How many of those parents who choose to stay home can say the same thing? We are able to do this because we both work. If being able to offer these things to our children makes us bad parents, please, explain to me how we could have done better.

Oh you people need to take a train back to the 1950's..this is ridiculous. Women work for heaven's sake. Get over it. This is an issue about good DAY CARE, jeez...

sGbAeBaLb You are so right. My husband and I both work. We could easily afford for me to quit and live comfortably. However, I work to save for my children's future. I have no plans on relying on the govt to provide my child a college education and thus am working to contribute to their college funds (ie Pell Grants and govt subsidized college loans). You won't hear my family complaining about health insurance costs---both my husbands and my companies provide insurance so my children have primary and supplementary coverage and my job allows me to have a nice savings account to cover any expenses or deductibles. My income provides my children with learning experiences that would not otherwise be possible. They have travelled overseas and visited museums and monuments (There is something about actually seeing Notre Dame cathedral versus seeing a picture). None of these would be possible if I quit working. So, please don't give me the "holier than thou" attitude of being a stay at home mom (many of whom collect their welfare checks--through the form of an EIC).

I'm with you, Karen and sGbAeBaLb. My kids would be pretty upset if I were to take away all the things having 2 incomes provides - vacations, dance lessons, nice clothes, etc. Although they are bigger now, if I hadn't worked while they were small, I would have said bye-bye to my fairly decent paying career and they would not even had said hello to the high caliber public school they go to because we were able to afford to move here.

I'm not acting holy, and-for the 3rd time @@-I am not talking about need. Many many people need to work (some for the money, some for the sanity lol) but I don't believe kids are better off shoved into daycare centers. I don't believe possesions are more important than spending time with my kids. That's just me. I'm not judging, just giving my opinion. Everyone is different, that's all.

The bottom line is that each parent teaches his/her child how to treat other people, including themselves. So if they feel like their parent cares more about his/her career than he/she does about them, the child will probably care more about his/her career than his/her parents 20 years from now. Treat your kid like he/she's less important than your career, and sure enough he/she will do the same to you some day. Whether you work all day or stay home with them, they will know how much you care about them versus your own selfish desires.

Morndew - it isn't POSSESSIONS > KIDS for many people. My wife and I want to provide a college education to our kids. My wife and I aren't relying on the Gov't to provide for us in our golden years. Our family is young and these are prime earning years to fund retirement and education to capture the benefit of time-value of money. My wife and I want to show our children this great country of ours and hopefully other parts of the world. I have great memories traveling with my family when I grew up and I was better off and more well-rounded for having those experiences. What is fact is a child who touches the Vietnam Memorial in Washington DC is going to have a better perspective of what it means than a child who sees a photo in a text book. A child that walks across the golden gate bridge has a better perspective than one who looks at a post card. What isn't fact is that your kids will turn out better than mine because you sacrifice some things to stay home with them. My parents had me bouncing around to various neighbors in an effort to patch together CHEAP child care while they worked their butts off to provide said experiences to their kids. Well, all my siblings are well adjusted adults and now great parents, all have a bachelors degrees and all but one have graduate level education. This article is about poor vs. good quality child care - it is unfortunate that many don't have the resources for good quality care and that is fact. My wife and I are grateful we can provide what we can to our kids, now and in the future. What is annoying is you acting like you know what is best for others because you have a preference of what works for YOUR family.

Many folks buy a higher cost house in order to get into a good school - if we lived on just one income, we would have to buy a home in a poorer area of town, and would have to send our children to a school where our kids would be the 3% minority, in schools rife with gangs, teen pregnancy (when a school has a daycare center, there's a tip off), and high % of kids who don't speak English (we're in TX) -- meaning the English speaking kids are held back in their learning as everything is geared to getting the English deficient kids up to speed -- I'd rather work and get my kids into a good school, than stay home in my low income house and send my kids into that school environment.

Susan, that is a valid point :)

Precisely.

My thoughts exactly!

So true.

I've often wondered this myself. I mean, if you aren't raising them then what's the point? All the money in the world isn't going to substitute for the memories you have forgone in order to afford the child you don't know.

Ok let's stop the mommy wars here --speaking of ridiculous--Women aren't going back--The vast majority with young children work outside the home and wagging fingers aren't going to change that. High quality day care will. (and for the record--being at home doesn't necessarily equal "high quality" care.)

AP,

What world do you live in? It OFTEN takes two incomes just to scrape by. Most women HAVE to work. Fact of life...

I did, but guess what, I managed to produce a child who has straight B's in school and is dyslexic. It's a LOT of work, but well worth it to me. You can never take those achievements away from my child. I'm setting him up for success in his adult life. As a single parent, I couldn't be prouder of my son, and I tell him that often.

Angela--I don't know what you're disagreeing with--I said it's the parent's choice--whether you work, don't work, have to work or choose to work, I assume the vast majority of parents want to do right by their children. To say every parent who works is "abdicating" their responsbility is absolutely ridiculous. And I happen to have a dyslexic child myself who is doing just great AND her mother works AND she had day care. I couldn't be prouder of her.

Tell that to the rich, royal, and famous.

Kmar - how does working and putting your child in daycare equate to someone else raising them? Yes, they are with someone else while you are at work, but who is with them the rest of the time? Who gets up with them in the middle of the night when they have a bad dream or a horrible bout of croup? Certainly not the daycare provider, that is the parent. As a parent of two children who both spent their infant and toddler years in daycare/preschool, I resent the fact that you assume I gave up my responsibility as a parent. I am the one who was home with them every evening reading books with them before bed. I am the one who was there for the middle of the night feedings, and when my youngest son was up all night fighting to breath because of his croup and asthma, not his daycare providers. At the same time, their daycare providers were able to give them a structured setting where they sat down for lunch with other children, where they had set times for "art" and "reading." Through daycare they were able to learn how to interact with other children and how to deal with children who were bullies. This is not something they could have received at home. A lot of time, the children who were kept at home are the very same children who act out in classrooms and who do not know how to share or interact properly with other children.

I'm a mother of two who works at a group daycare in order to help make ends meet at home. I'm thankful for my job because I know my boys get more chances to learn and better "quality" care when they were at daycare than when they were home with me. At home there is always something else that is "more important" than sitting down and playing cars, coloring, or reading with my kids. It was fun when I had my sons in my daycare room because I could just play and interact with them while I was at work. For me it also helps to know I work at a "high quality" center and I know the boys' daycare teachers very well.

As a parent who had her chidren in a high quality center, I want to thank you for all you do for children. You are absolutely correct that the parents who are at home probably take for granted the time those of us who work spend with our children. Another bonus to having my children in daycare, when we had our oldest son screened for kindergarten, the evaluator said he had abandonment issues because he wasn't willing to walk away from us with a complete stranger, our daycare provider reassured us that there was no problem, that we weren't overreacting in wanting a second evaluation. When our second son had speech difficulties, they made us aware that he was behind for his age and suggested getting him screened early to get him into pre-k speech classes so he would be ready for kindergarten. If not for them, I wouldn't have realized how bad his speech was and would have waited until the normal time to screen him, simply because I could understand him and knew what he wanted. There are definitely benefits to having children in good, high-quality daycare centers.

Natedom you are so right on the early screenings! We knew dd tended to get stuffy sometimes, and that her speech wasn't the best, but kids are variable on that so we really weren't worried. Until the preschool did a hearing test and she flatlined it because her ears were so filled with fluid from a milk allergy! Absolutely no one - not us, not her pediatrician, not the grandparents or people who were around her regularly had any idea. She's a smart one and would hear part of something and put it together, kind of like when you see a billboard and can make out just enough of the lettering to know what it says. Honestly I don't know if we'd have ever really figured it out, and I'm very thankful she was in a preschool that tested such things!

Thank you MonkeyMo, I could go on and on about different things my daycare helped us with in finding a problem or reassuring us there was no problem. When my oldest son was three we had his hearing tested because his speech was a little behind, have you ever seen how they test young children's hearing? They put them in a sound room and have them look at a poster full of animals to catch their attention, they then pipe in sounds from one side of the room or the other, if the child looks in the correct direction of the sound, a little toy pops up, spins around and has a light that flashes, to get them to look back forward, they have another toy that pops up in the center and spins and flashes. Well, because my son reacted to these toys by saying their names "mickey mouse" or whatever, then continued to point at the poster full of animals and name the animals and imitate their sounds, the test took a little longer than usual. Apparently my three year olds short attention span led the person giving the test to the belief that he was very hyper and needed to be tested and should be put on ritalin. Because my son was in daycare, I asked his teacher about this and she was dumbfounded, she said he was the most mellow child in her class and was better at paying attention and following along to rules and instructions than the other kids. If I had been a stay at home mom, I for one probably wouldn't have had his hearing tested to begin with because his speech wasn't that far behind, but if I had I may have tried to have him tested for ADHD because I would have had no other opinion but the technician.

ooops sorry, I misread your post. Apologies...

My thoughts exactly. Parents who can afford high quality care(whatever that means) obviously have more resources. They may be more successful, more mature, above average intelligence, and be placing their child in a high quality daycare to provide socialization and additional exposure to new things, while spending a great deal of time quality time with them around daycare.

There is a tremendous amount of pressure to put children into "pre-preschool" programs (which would likely be classed high quality. Sometimes it is the only way to get them into top nursery schools (if they require the children attend their preparation grades) so it's not about whether you want to raise them yourself, in fact, I suspect for parents who put their kids into high quality care, it's just the opposite. They want to give them the best care in the home and out of the home, so they are well prepared for school, and can get into top programs.

in the article I read it stated it didnt matter which daycare you went to....worse off than at home.

as far as having money to afford higher quality daycare....hmmmmm that should mean you could afford to work less to be home with your children? hmmmmmmm so how is a child overrall better off without their parents? sure there are some pros but as the extended version of this article states there are more cons. Children should be with their parents how is this even a question?

Honestly it's been my experience that higher quality daycare really isn't always the more expensive option. The real trick is finding the better care and getting your child into it. We tried one daycare a couple days a week for my son when our daughter was first born. It was far from cheap, but since it was only a couple of mornings we could swing it. Turned out to be the worst facility I've ever seen and we ran as fast as we could. When I had to go back to work, my son was 4 and daughter was 2 and we simply lucked into finding a place that was pretty awesome and very reasonable. It's more about the people who are there than the amount they charge. Generally though I have to agree that most places that charge less tend to have the higher turnovers and lessor quality care.

Kind of hard to say when they don't define anything in the article. In my neighborhood, pre-preschool starts at 20K per year and is only for 2 hours per day, M-F. That's not exactly depriving a child from its parent. But is required if you want your child to get into their top primary school program starting at 6 years old.

Hey I know! How about providing a minimum length of maternity leave so a parent can actually stay home for a bit? At present there's no provisions for that and I know people who were back at work in 2 weeks because they HAD to. If you look at other countries, some places provide up to a year off for one parent with 60% pay for that year. If this were really, truely and honestly a serious concern of our nation, the money wouldn't be the issue.

You'll discover that 1-3 year olds don't form social groups that readily with other non-sibling kids like teenagers do. Interaction with other kids at that age is not a priority from a child development standpoint. Interaction with a caring parent is more valuable.

They don't need to "form social groups" with non-siblings to develop the basics like listening skills, sharing, etc.

Not everyone has two parents at play which is why some children have to be placed in daycare. I was a single parent and there were sacrifices that I made but it was worth it. Mine was an only child and therefore the inter acting with children her own age was important. Having said that she also was never afraid of her own company and was always able to find things to do either with me or on her own. I will add there was limited TV time in our house for many years and even to this day we are both great readers.

The listening skills, sharing, manners, respect for herself and others came from home. It was helped by the school choices I made but in the end the buck stopped with me.

You'll discover that 1-3 year olds don't form social groups that readily

Mack, I didn't say social groups, I said social skills. Simple things like understanding that toys need to be shared, that hitting or biting isn't appropriate, and that just because Mommy and Daddy can give you lots of 1:1 time that doesn't mean you get to monopolize every adult's attention. Our son won't have any siblings so the best place for him to learn these things in a real-world situation will be day care.

I would love to stay home and take care of him all the time. But I know that in some situations, bad experience is better than no experience.

Right Krazy--There's got to be a government conspiracy here somewhere if we look hard enough!

I was thinking the same thing. Here comes more federal government guidelines and intrusion, which will drive the costs up further. Then the lower income subsidies for some, paid for by the upper middle class will come into play. This will be to socio-economically 'integrate' the daycare facilities, in the name of 'fairness'. But as we see in the social justice schools, kids who bring behavioral problems into school because of poor parenting at home, will drive the kids of more stable and affluent homes to send their children elsewhere. The schools will become worse off and less integrated for it, leaving behind ony those who cannot afford to move or put their kids into private schools.

I can only imagine the impending mandates on private schools coming down the pipeline. Then affluent people will simply pool their resources and set up their own education system in their homes, with privately hired teachers. I suppose the government can try to outlaw all of that, and my well give it a go. You cannot mandate fairness, life is not fair. The choices people make in life matter, as does plain old fashioned luck.

But if the government further intevenes dirving it's 'spread the wealth' programs into daycare, you will simply see the affluent kids pulled out and private high-end nannies, or governesses will become the norm. The more the government interfere's with its social justice schemes, the worse the results will become. And the more the government taxes some to 'help' others, the more charitable organizations that really do help people, will suffer.

Winterpark, exactly what I am thinking.

AP, not conspiracy. We need to think for ourselves or our government will think for us!

Krazy, krazy...go back to 8th grade government class. WE is them. This is a democracy. You don't like it...work to change it.

Don't worry, both sides (Republican and Democrat's) are working on it...

AP, we are a republic! If you learned we are a democracy in 8th grade, you should ask for a refund!

What if a set of parents had "large house, 5 bedrooms, home office, granite countertops, hardwood floors, huge HD TV's, cell phones, huge SUVs, pool, stainless steel appliances, etc etc" but were also saving 20-25% of their income for retirement, a few hundred a month for each kid's college fun, had an existing and healthy emergency fund, etc? Ever think that Mommy/Daddy both work because they want a much brighter future for their kids than they might have had? They want to travel and show them the world and make it pre-determined that they WILL go to college because it will be paid for? My wife is a GREAT Mom and also has a very rewarding career. I'll now bow down to you oh holy parental expert.

uh Bartman--these aren't the families that put their kids in 'low quality' day care because that's all they can afford--

if that is the case with you, sGbAeBaLb, congratulations! you are truly living the American Dream. You should go into every classroom in your high school and college nearby and teach your way to success.

But it is not the way our society has been progressing in the last 30 years or so. Witness the declining savings rate of your fellow citizens, the declining graduation rates, the overall declining inclination to succeed on one's own merit as opposed to taking the easy way out.

It all starts with parents...daycare or no daycare.

Try Mommy can't survive without a job. I'm a single mother. If my kid is going to eat, have a roof over her head and clothes, I have to work. And I know plenty of 2-income families who are not living the high life. We're not all making 6 figures. I drive a 10-year-old car and live in a small home. When my daughter was in 'quality' daycare, it was almost as much as my mortgage. Now she's at a sitter and, although its less than daycare its still a good chunk of my check.

It blows my mind that so many idiots think that people with 2 incomes are rolling in money or living extravagently. Kids eat a lot, grow out of their clothes every few months and cost a fortune to raise. I'm paying for childcare now and I'll be paying for private school until college (thank you crappy public schools). I knew this getting into parenthood. I'm not complaining, just explaining.

Oh for cripes' sake. We have been on this 'learning disability' bandwagon for so long now, no one knows where the friggin' brakes are anymore. Maybe there aren't as many disabilities as you like to tout, maybe it's just poor early parenting, maybe it's maternal drug use, maybe it's lack of early bonding, maybe it's poor kindergarten teachers, maybe it's just poor early language skills because of lack of good English in the home.

Everbody wants to add more money to the problem because then they are asssured of keeping their jobs for a few more years, but nobody really wants to figure out what the real problem is.

Happy--There is no one-size fits all. If you quit to stay at home, good for you. Some of us women work (shockingly you 1950's folks here), not because we have to, but because we want to--AND we love our children. We're the ones who can afford high quality care. Low quality care wouldn't be any parents willing choice--and thats what the article speaks to. One would assume that any parent stuck with low quality care (whether it be poor staff/child ratios, a lack of advanced degrees in the staff, etc.) doesn't have other options such as a relative to fill in. That would argue for some subsidies--but then you'd get the right wing crowd arguing that it's only American if its everyone for himself consequences be damned--and that's why we've got this ridiculous situation.

What about when Mommy makes significantly more money than Daddy, but Daddy won't stay home and be the homemaker? I know there are a lot of Men who do stay home with the kids (good for you!!), but many men don't want to do it - they feel maybe it takes away their masculinity, or they are afraid of being responsible for a young child, or they don't want to do the housework, meal planning, grocery shopping, and all the other things Women tradionally are responsible for (whether working outside the home or stay-at-home). You can debate this 'stay home' or 'work/daycare' situation many ways, because we're all in different circumstances - some have no choice, they need 2 incomes - others are more interested in the 5,000 square foot house and the 2 Lexuses. (fools) It's usually an easy decision if Mom is making low wages, because daycare eats up your earnings. It's harder if you're making good money. we have paid down our house, saved for retirement and college funds, paid cash for everything instead of using credit cards, been able to get the kids involved in Band (a sax is $1,200), girl scout trips (cost money), trips to the Zoo (cost money), buying books and educational toys (costs money), piano lessons (costs money), dance (money). my point is - on one income, it's tough to afford a lot of the things than enrich your kids life.

No Hoosier--we'll do what we've been doing---abandon them to their fates.

poor baby, another whiner about taxes.

And then there was the idiot at breakfast this am whining about taxes; I went outside and saw his Corvette.

Another baby.

Do you work and pay taxes?

Unless you get divorced and have to re-enter the work place with no skills and no chance of caring for that precious one. Do the math is right. Do we have to re-learn that lesson EVERY generation?? Stay home if you want to--work f you want to. Do what you can. Love your kids (and quit blaming women.)

oh really Caroline. Women are choosing their coach purses over their children?? You're a woman AND a mysogenist???

Sometimes one gets that impression. But it's not a valid impression to stamp onto all women. Probably more a West Hollywood thing.

Wow, AP. You got a bark!

That's all fine and good Caroline but birth control isn't 100% (I have an 8 yr old to prove it!). I've working in the corporate world for the better part of 15 years and in that time I can honestly only think of one woman who cared more about her "stuff" than her kids. Most of the mom's I worked with couldn't wait until they could get to spend time with their children and missed them terribly.