HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Gender & Orientation » Feminists (Group) » Relatively free daycare.

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 02:48 PM

Relatively free daycare.

One of the things women have fought for and never got. It would help teens stay in school, it would help mothers when they go to work, it might be a huge change in how women go about their careers.

I don't think many people would disagree with that. So, why not make it an issue?

15 replies, 1605 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Neoma (Original post)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 02:54 PM

1. Hoping to provide this to my daughters,

when they become mothers: ME the relative, the way it was done ine the old, pre-industrial revolution days.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to elleng (Reply #1)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 03:09 PM

4. That is the best way. But here is something you should thing about. What if the woman is

 

married to a man who is in the military and is assigned overseas like many women today are?

I tell you the best option are the grandparents or siblings who are lucky to be home.

Here is an option I like that the Germans do. The government pays a kindergeld (not sure of the spelling) because their is a shortage of German born children. If a woman works full time when it comes times for her to have her baby they give her time out and she stays out at half pay for 9 months. The have excellent daycare where children learn. I wish we could have something like that here. It gives women time to be with their baby. Now I don't know if it still done that way but it really is nice. Their children are a priority. They love children.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Original post)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 03:04 PM

2. There are some reformers around long-term care who would like to see daycare in those

work environments, which are also becoming more home-like, because it makes every kind of sense there is:

- CNA/CMAs need this and would be able to give better care with this worry off of their minds;
- other mothers could benefit from this resource;
- home-like environments are good, more healthy, for elders and part of that could be available to children too;
- some elders enjoy and benefit health-wise from being around children;
- child-care and child-care workers could become more professional.

This is a care model that has been in use for centuries, just got kind of broken by our culture, but has continued amongst folk such as the Mennonites and others.

One reform group is known as The Greenhouse Project http://www.ncbcapitalimpact.org/default.aspx?id=146 - it grew out of the work of Dr. Bill Thomas and there are other reform efforts out there, some incorporating child-care and others not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Original post)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 03:09 PM

3. I will try to remember to look at HR 676 Expanded & Improved Medicare for all in regards to how

there might be at least the possibility of review of how health care providers are financially affected by problems around child care and that this could affect not just the quality of care, but, of course, also it's costs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Original post)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 03:37 PM

5. IMO, it's one of the things government should provide at no cost to all citizens.

> three hots & a cot
> free healthcare
> free education
> free childcare/elderly care

I don't see how we can claim to be civilized when we allow citizens to fend for themselves while spending money on empire.

In our discussions about strippers, I wonder how many women choose that profession because it's one of the few better paying night time jobs? How many would find other employment during the day that would pay the rent, if they had daycare taken care of?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CrispyQ (Reply #5)

Sun Jan 29, 2012, 03:41 PM

6. "Civilized" is a word to differentiate us from...

African and Native American tribes. It's like a simple announcement that we're better than them. So let's enslave and commit genocide!

I hate the word civilized...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Reply #6)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 03:10 PM

7. Perhaps ethical is a better word. -nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Reply #6)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 06:18 PM

15. I love the word "civilized" ;)

 

It is not civilized to leave vulnerable and disadvantaged people to fend for themselves. And a society that doesn't take care of children, the elderly, and people otherwise in need of help and protection just isn't civilized.

By my standard, there were and are African and First Nations societies more civilized than ours.


edit because while I love the word, I don't seem to be able to type it ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Original post)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 03:27 PM

8. I'm sorry to say that I do think many people would disagree with that.

This country seems, to me, to be far too right wing to even consider anything like that.

I'm not sure if even most Democrats would go for it... I would hope so, but... I wouldn't bet on it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 04:58 PM

9. Personally, I see party confusion.

Democrats aren't really democrats.
Republicans are nuts.

So you get people that would usually be Republicans, become libertarians. You get liberals becoming simply progressives, and who the fuck knows what the green party does these days. Then you get conservatives, which falls somewhere between the tea party libertarians and the democrats, which covers a little too much range.

Let's just face it, no one knows what the fuck they're doing anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Reply #9)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 05:01 PM

10. I hope I was supposed to laugh at that.

If not then I'm sorry. Cause I did lol, for real. You're too right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 05:40 PM

11. Pathetic chaos.

That's what I call it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Reply #11)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 05:43 PM

12. I like to think of it as a transition.

To what, I don't know... but, well... you know, that whole crisis = opportunity thing.

Some days I think all is vanity, other times I'm more cheerful and hopeful. I hope I didn't offend you, I didn't mean to be flippant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to redqueen (Reply #12)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 06:09 PM

13. No offense taken.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Neoma (Original post)

Mon Jan 30, 2012, 06:15 PM

14. up here in the land of milk and honey ...

 

http://www.servicecanada.gc.ca/eng/sc/ei/benefits/maternityparental.shtml

Employment Insurance Maternity and Parental Benefits

Employment Insurance (EI) provides Maternity and Parental Benefits to individuals who are pregnant, have recently given birth, are adopting a child, or are caring for a newborn.

Current application processing time: 28 days

How long will I receive EI maternity or parental benefits?

EI maternity benefits can be paid for a maximum period of 15 weeks. You cannot receive EI maternity benefits beyond 17 weeks after the expected or actual week of childbirth, whichever of the two is later.

EI parental benefits can be paid for a maximum period of 35 weeks. The payments must be made within 52 weeks of the week your child was born or the week your child was placed with you for adoption.

For most people, the basic rate for calculating EI benefits is 55% of your average insurable weekly earnings, up to a maximum amount. As of January 1, 2012, the maximum yearly insurable earnings amount is $45,900. This means that you can receive a maximum amount of $485 per week.


Maternity benefits (totalling 4 months) are exclusively for the late-pregnancy, delivery, post partum period of special needs.

Parental benefits (totalling 8 months) can be taken by either parent or divided between the parents however they like, and either simultaneously or sequentially.

So a woman could take one month before delivery and three months after, with the father taking the same three months after, each of them taking another month, and the mother taking the last three months, bringing them to seven months after the birth, just for example. This gives both parents time to spend with the child right after birth. Or the mother could take two months' maternity leave after the birth, then return to work while the father stayed home for the full eight months' parental leave. If the woman was not working and thus not eligible for either kind of EI, the father would be eligible for the full eight months. Or vice versa.

When I posted about this a couple of years ago, there were DU feminists who opposed it strenuously. I never really understood their problem. I'm not in a position to take advantage of the EI provisions (even if I paid into EI, which I don't, being self-employed -- but recently the self-employed became eligible to opt in, which is a reasonable thing in the new economy where jobs are now businesses). But if I were paying in and not ever going to be eligible to draw maternity/parental benefits, I just don't think I'd be in a huge flap about it. I pay school taxes for schools I don't use, and taxes for all kinds of other things I don't use, and protecting the ability of women in particular, given that most families are still patriarichal in that way, to re-enter the labour force after having a child, and providing working families with that little bit of security, strikes me as very good social policy.

Now, child care here, not so great. For decades, the Liberal Party promised universal childcare every election, and did nothing. It promised to end child poverty by 2002 or something, too. The Conservatives' take is different. Give parents $100 a month or something and they can use it however is best for their kids. Stay at home parents who don't even have childcare expenses can send them to soccer camp! Of course this does absolutely nothing to generate the actual childcare infrastructure that is needed, and leaves parents scrambling for scarce places. We do have a fair bit of parent co-op childcare and other non-profit arrangements.

For anyone interested:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2009/02/06/f-daycare.html

In the lead-up to the 2004 election, the Liberals promised $5 billion to create 250,000 child care spaces by 2009. The plan pointed to Quebec's now $7-a-day daycare plan as a model.

The government signed deals with each province before the government fell in the fall of 2005. In the election that ensued, the Conservatives unveiled their child care plan. Dubbed the "Choice in Child Care Plan," it provided cheques of $100 a month to parents for each child under six. Parents could spend the money as they saw fit. It would also be treated as income (attributed to the parent with the lower income) and taxed as such.

When the Conservatives won the election, they announced the child care benefit would go into effect July 1, 2006, and quickly moved to cancel the Liberal plan.

... In October 2004, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development released a report that described Canada's child care system as a chronically underfunded patchwork of programs with no overarching goals. It found that many centres were shabby and many workers were poorly trained. As well, staff turnover at many centres was very high.


Europe beats us all hands down at this game. And it's another situation where Canadians are too often too complacent: we do things so much better than south of the border, and we don't bother looking at who is doing it so much better than us.

Quebec embarked on the great social project some years ago of offering childcare to everyone who wanted it, even on a drop-in basis, for $5 a day. I'm not sure how that's working out these days.

Early childhood education is the single best investment a society can make to level the playing field for kids at a disadvantage, and at risk, i.e. to cut crime rates, just for starters. Don't build prisons, build preschools. Way better than the older extended family members or the neighbour. Childcare that offers socialization and stimulation is what succeeds and helps kids succeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread