Hacker News Reader

Comment by thu2111 | Hacker News Reader

I wonder how the ratios are decided. 4:1 sounds pretty generous. There are families out there with stay at home mums that have 5 kids, and the mothers there have to do housework too. So the government is mandating here the child:carer hour ratio is better than some actual families.

Do infants actually need the kind of attention these ratios imply? What happened to the era when families with lots of kids would just let them play outside all day?

View on HN

Infant != kids.

Twins are quite stressful for mothers, and 4 infants would be like having quadruplets. Usually the ratios continue to rise as the children get older. Here's California's rules, for example. From kindergarten (66 months age on average) and up it's 14:1

- Infants (birth to 18 months old) -1:3

- Toddlers (18 months to 36 months old) -1:4

- Preschool (36 months to enrollment in kindergarten) - 1:8

- Children enrolled in kindergarten through 14 years old - 1:14

Are these numbers based on anything concrete or are they just judgment calls? Whatever one thinks about class sizes, 14:1 seems absurd as a legal limit for everyone. There's no clear and present danger with having an adult watch 30 4th graders. (My guess is the preschool and toddler cutoffs are also too strict, although I feel less confident.)

Most of those families with multiple kids don't have 5 infants, but rather ages of the children are spread out. The ratio GP is talking about is, I believe, a limit so that infants are not neglected due to lack of time on the caretakers part. Infants do need lots of care and attention specifically during early development.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com