In the US it’s a shame we so under/de value child rearing as somehow “less than”
It is better for the family: - it has more resources - it has more income diversification
It is better for the father: - he doesn't have to carry the weight of income-gathering alone
It is better for the mother: - she doesn't have to carry the weight of child-rearing alone - if things go sour, she can maintain herself and/or the family financially - sha has more choices in life
It is better for the child: - they get a wider variety of experiences - they socialize with other kids earlier, which helps in early school-life - they learn to socialize with more adults too - there are professionals who have seen many children, who will notice problems before the parents will
It is better for the childcare professional: - they have another job choice, helping them pick a job they enjoy
It is good for society: - father, mother and childcare professional can do something that matches their talents, instead of doing something suboptimal for them, thus delivering more value to society
It doesn't devalue child-rearing, it values it more, by having a professional help do it.
I'm always befuddled by that argument. I'm not devaluing plumbing work by hiring a plumber, nor am I devaluing medical work by hiring a doctor. Why would I be devaluing child-rearing by hiring a professional to help?
Who actually cares more about a child's well-being, an employee paid by the hour or their own parents?
As for caring about the child's well-being? The parents, which is why they should hire the best people they can afford to do various parts of taking care off them. Hire the best doctor for their medical care, hire the best dentists for their dental care, hire the best teachers for their education, hire the best child-care professionals for daycare.
If one parent is working, the other home with the kids, chances are that the one working can't take as much time off or has a harder time setting a healthy work-life balance (increasing your pay requires working harder).
Using myself as an example: the only reason I can pick up my kid early from the kindergarten and spend quality time with him is because I can afford to not work 9-5 every day due to my wife also working.
Plus they get the benefit of time with parents, parents can focus on doing things they think is valuable for the kid.
To somehow claim that childcare comes at no cost for kids is naive.
The keyword there is "can". They can, it's just less likely. Especially when a parent takes the "stay at home" part too literal.
> To somehow claim that childcare comes at no cost for kids is naive.
Well, my experience with my kids was that their daycare was beneficial for them. They did not always want to go, but they definitely enjoyed all their days there. And especially for the first one, they had a lot of experiences that my wife and I would never have even considered as an option.
Comparing them to their classmates when school started, they were way ahead in lots of things. Absolutely in language development, socialization and being able to focus. They were also just way less, for lack of a better term, worried about everything. They knew that the world does not revolve around mommy and daddy, and that they'd be fine in new environments.
And you're only counting the benefits of daycare, but ignoring the opportunity cost of less time with parents and the benefits that come from that.
I don't disagree that there are benefits to daycare, but where is the optimum? A few hours a day? Or the kids in daycare from 8am to 6pm, so they see their parents for maybe 2 hours a day before bed time?
Housing costs have risen to match the switch to double income households. Now instead of 1, it takes 2 incomes just to be able to afford housing. This makes the family more brittle since if either parent loses their job both will lose the house.
And with the rise in housing costs people move further afield. Commuting times go way up and people waste more time in the car or on the train. Everybody ends up more stressed than ever before and further behind economically (compared to those whose wealth grows without working).
This not optimal for many reasons:
- once the kids are going to school, regular "office hours" daycare is not needed and it skew the relationship even more by removing one task to one party. If that time is used for personal instead of household chores activities, that person not bringing the income is eventually seen as a partial freeloader by the one bringing the income.
- relationship can go sour quickly and if it doesn't work, the "dependent" one doesn't feel as free to end that relationship
- the person taking care of the kid's social life is usually not as rich
The elephant in the room being that in most case it ends up being the woman staying at home in an heterogender relationship in a society with an historically patriarcal model because of income levels which further increase the inequalities and dependentship.
IMO society is worse now with dual income + strangers raising children.
The only major benefits I've seen are 1) Woman have access to birth control 2) Women have equal rights. Everything else is debatable as "better".
I also felt that putting my daughters to daycare helped them socially.
In post-WWII US, it was generally easy for fathers to find stable, lifelong careers with a low risk of layoffs and a low risk of an untimely death, which allowed families to thrive on single incomes. But that was an outlier, not the norm.
In most places and in most periods of history, mothers have had to work (sewing, gardening, spinning, knitting, brewing, laundering, midwifery, etc., etc.) because fathers have not had widespread access steady, well-paying, low-risk work. Unless she was independently wealthy, a mother who did not bring in income was playing a very risky game with her children's lives.
The biggest difference is that, today, most work must be done outside the home, which is very difficult for mothers. Childcare helps close the gender pay gap and is necessary for a fairer, less sexist society — at least until/unless our economy returns to primarily home-based work.