Putting a Price on Our Children

(4 of 5)
N

ever far away, however, is the hotly argued question: should young children be in child care at all? Reviving it in her new book, Motherhood: How Should We Care for Our Children? (Allen & Unwin), Anne Manne presents a body of international research suggesting that too much time in child care, or poor-quality care, can impede kids' social and emotional development, particularly if they attend child care before the age of two. Manne argues that the value of full-time motherhood needs to be reasserted (see box, next page) - and that children's interests are best served when mothers are well supported, whether they stay at home or juggle work and family. Many countries tackle the dilemma of infant child care by providing paid parental leave - in Canada, women who work 600 hours the year before their child is born qualify for a year's paid leave, which they can share with their partner. "It helps with family bonding," says Toronto economist Cleveland, "and gets rid of the problems with infant care levels." But despite a long campaign for a national paid parental leave scheme, Australia remains one of the few developed nations without one.

Unfortunately, children often can't tell their parents what their day's been like, but researcher Sims believes there is a simple way to find out - and to bring some scientific clarity to a debate often ruled by emotional battles about what a "good" mother should do. By measuring children's levels of the stress hormone cortisol, Sims says it's possible to gauge how they're reacting to their surroundings. Her initial research showed that the better the care - "where children felt loved and safe and secure, and where care-givers knew them as individuals" - the lower their cortisol levels. Because chronically high cortisol levels can impair memory and the immune system, Sims argues that children receiving consistently poor care are at risk of learning and social problems later in life. Early findings from research on babies and toddlers suggests they are the most vulnerable: "A kindergarten-age child can probably supplement a good relationship with a carer with their best friend," Sims says. "But younger children really need a superb relationship with their carer."

Which means, at the very least, getting enough attention. Across Australia, a mish-mash of standards means staff-to-child ratios vary widely from state to state. In New South Wales, for example, there must be one carer for every five children under the age of three; in Queensland the maximum ratio is 1 to 4. Another essential is qualified staff. More child-care centers mean more jobs, but the industry struggles to keep workers from deserting the profession because of burnout and low wages - a qualified child-care worker might get $A35,000 a year. At Whittlesea Child Care Centre, in Melbourne, coordinator Margaret Hayes recently had a carer quit because she could earn more working in a supermarket. At the East Melbourne Child Care Co-operative, manager Petra Hilsen is happy if just a handful of people apply for a position. Ten years ago, "you got so many you didn't have time to look at them all." Wages in several states are rising thanks to successful union claims - and bigger paychecks mean more than money, says Perth child-care worker Shannon Burns: "It shows the community we are professionals." Only a handful of 50 diploma students Burns graduated with six years ago are still in the industry. The low pay has made her consider leaving several times; she's stayed, she says, only because she loves what she does. In the Department of Child Studies at Canberra's Institute of Technology, head Leslie Ralph says enrolments are healthy, but students are often disheartened by stories of wages and conditions. Ralph hopes they'll benefit from a growing recognition of their job's importance: "Parents are more aware that it's not baby-sitting."