Choosing for children.

Sometimes, it is worthwhile to learn from the affluent because they are in the best position to make choices. They have the financial means, are usually better educated and have access to information that can help them make informed choices. So we would do well to heed their child care decisions as we head into a national child care system.

Some affluent parents choose to remain at home to look after their own children and some recruit nannies and other domestic aides to free them to pursue other interests. Regardless whether they have help at home or not, most such mothers choose to enrol their pre-schoolers in some type of regulated, early child care institution. The care they choose may range from a full-day, full-week program to a few hours a week. Most choose such an option in the conviction that a well designed group experience is good for the social, psychological and intellectual development of their children.

What do affluent parents do with their free time when their children are so occupied? They exercise the choices open to them. They engage in full or part-time work for which they are paid; they further their education; or they choose to volunteer in community service. They choose one or another of these courses of action in the conviction that this is good for their own personal growth and development, and that it does no harm to their role as parents.

Choices become steadily more limited as we go down the socio-economic ladder. Most mothers of young children choose to work. They do this out of a mix of motives that include: augmenting the family finances, child development, and pursuing the personal interests of parents for wider experience. Indications are that where resources are available and affordable, most of the less affluent parents will, like the rich, choose a regulated child care centre.

Single parents on social assistance are a special case. These parents are encouraged (sometimes pressured) to choose some form of licensed child care that is subsidized with public funds. Policy makers and welfare administrators view child care services as useful tools in ending welfare dependency. In such cases, many parents and welfare administrators agree that it is good for all concerned. Governments are convinced that it is a good way to reduce the welfare rolls.

With every one seeing so much good in a regulated child care system, we wonder what is holding up the development of a national program or provincial programs? So far, only Quebec has acted positively. That province has North America's only universal child care system that costs parents $7.00 per day. More than 160,000 children, 0-4 years of age are enrolled in it, with more on the waiting list as the provincial government delivers on its promise to provide more that 200,000 spaces.

Is there an economic problem? Economists Gordon Cleveland and Michael Krashinsky have argued extensively that a well regulated child care program is good for the economy. Each dollar spent brings an eight dollar return because of its positive impact on children, families, education systems, health and social services and plays a role in raising the economic status of women and entire communities.

The federal government has indicated that it is willing to give $5 billion over a five year period to the provinces, a modest amount for a start. However, both levels of government are doing a wary dance to limit their commitments. Most provinces are resisting the advocates of a Quebec style approach and would prefer a nastier, means-tested or welfare oriented system.

Many are wary of a universal child care system; some because they dislike public program spending and want to see lower taxes. Others would like to see mothers remain at home with their children and believe that public funds should not be spent to encourage otherwise.

The state of our economy depends upon large numbers of parents in the labour force and a large number of women want to be there. There is no going back. We owe women, children and ourselves the assurance that safe and satisfying early child care and education facilities are readily available.