A new National Affairs essay highlighting some of the overlooked deficiencies of universal daycare (now a mainstay of the Democratic policy agenda), raises an interesting question: Why is there so little reliable public information on the costs and benefits of such programs?
There is more research than anyone needs on the dangers of certain fabrics used in car seats and backpacks or the risks of drinking from a garden hose or eating conventionally grown fruit. […]
When it comes to daycare — something that instinctively worries many parents — few are willing to take a hard look. The media, which seemingly report constantly on alarming new risks to children, rarely present the public with information from studies on the impact of daycare, especially when the findings suggest that daycare is associated with significant negative outcomes. […]
A deeper reason may be that the psychologists who study daycare have attempted to downplay or put a comforting spin on troubling findings. Just last year, an important study found that the culturally liberal outlook of almost all social psychologists had biased the studies and conclusions they reached. It is likely that a similar outlook, and in particular an unwillingness to present findings that may interfere with women’s progress in the workplace, has similarly harmed the work of developmental psychologists regarding daycare.
Everybody knows that children do better (development, happiness, lack of fear of the world, etc.) when attended to by their parents (exceptions of course for crackhead parents, etc.). There really just is not any doubt. Nobody cares for their children as much as their parents. Is there anybody out there who wants to challenge the contents of this paragraph?
This does not necessarily apply to pre-school, as they are about educating and socializing older children for typically limited amounts of the day. It is really sad to think of very young children being warehoused. So very sad.
Probably everybody knows why there are a dearth of studies related to daycare, and why the few that exist show what they show. It makes a mockery of the often used phrase “it’s for the children“. It should be an embarrassment to Universities that do the research; it should be an embarrassment to Hillary, who advocates more of it. Slightly more than half of the children are girls; why does Hillary care for them little?
Now back to our regularly scheduled trainwreck.