Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Milli Hill

GET UPDATES FROM Milli Hill
 

Dear Nick Clegg, Do You Know the Implications of Childcare?

Posted: 26/04/2012 00:00

Dear Nick Clegg,

Like most parents, I'm sure you love your child fervently, and want only the best for them. Like most parents, you like to think that the decisions you make are in your child's best interests, now and in the future. And like most parents who delegate the care of their children to paid strangers, you choose to ignore several decades of psychology and neuroscience, which show quite clearly that the loving and nurturing environment and secure attachment experience provided by a mother cannot be replicated by a childcare worker of any quality.

Of course, like most parents, you're quite sure your choice is the right one, and this wouldn't necessarily matter quite so much, if you were 'like most parents'. But you're not: you're the deputy prime minister.

You recently announced your plans for childcare to be made the coalition government's highest priority social policy, with a massive expansion in nursery places and the recruitment of 65000 new childcare workers. You shared your vision for 'teaching' children as young as two and preparing them for educational success, and, while you were at it, you pledged to take on those with the "sepia-tinted 1950s" view that mothers should not work.

I'm one of those women. I look after my children full time, and don't plan to return to work until the youngest has started school. Far from being a 1950s housewife (to me this implies little skill or ambition beyond bakery), I've studied at post-graduate level, and prior to becoming a mother, I practiced as a therapist, working with both adults and children who had experienced abuse. This gave me a lot of 'hands on' experience of the devastating impact this can have; a lifetime of difficulties such as addiction, self harm, the inability to sustain any meaningful relationships, and unbearable emotional pain.

Of course, this is the extreme end of a very long spectrum. Towards the other end, I met many of those people we might call the 'Walking Wounded', who live their lives fairly successfully, and don't suffer any major mental health problems. But placed in a situation like therapy, in which they are invited to explore their deepest feelings, they will reveal all manner of childhood experiences that they wish had unfolded differently. A Walking Wounded person might cry a river of tears over the fact that their father went away for three days without explanation when they were six, or that their mother's hugs were always slightly brittle and reluctant.

Every choice we make, big and small, accidental or with firm purpose, makes an impact on our children's rapidly developing psychology. We might like to tell ourselves that small children don't remember much, and that therefore what happens to them doesn't really matter, as long as they are fed and warm. This is not the case. Babies are not pot plants, just sitting there growing as long as they get milk and a bit of sunlight. They are subtle and complex human beings, whose brains are developing at an alarming rate. Their experiences are forming the bedrock of their entire future emotional existence. Perhaps most crucially of all, they are learning about the meaning of relationship from the people who care for them; how to love, and be loved.

Mothers today often do not feel valued in their role, and a world which takes your view that they can be easily replaced by relatively low waged nursery workers only serves to reinforce this. Interestingly, I don't feel particularly undervalued, and I put this down to my former job. As a therapist, I spent a lot of time playing, painting, reading stories, or just sitting quietly and attentively watching another person create. Of course it never occurred to me to worry that my work was not of value - I was being paid! As a mother now, my daily activity with my children is not so far removed from my former working life. I play, I witness, I create safe boundaries, I hold the space, and I help other people make sense of difficult emotions. My work as a therapist taught me first hand the enormous value of 'just being there'.

Your policy plans imply that a child will develop in much the same way whether they spend their days with a mother or a paid worker, and that perhaps a child might even be better off in a nursery, where they can be 'educated'. To see child development in this way is utterly ill-informed, and cannot be forgiven in a leading policy maker. Get your team of advisors to put you together a folder Nick. You are powerful. You may not remember the first years of your life, but I can assure you, they shape who you are every second of every day. Please help to create policy that acknowledges the vital importance of this early experience, and that puts love and nurture for small children - not 'education' - at its centre. And that values the work of a mother, not as faded and sepia tinted, but vibrant, sharp and fresh; a modern and newly informed reworking of an old classic.

 

Follow Milli Hill on Twitter: www.twitter.com/themulesmouth

FOLLOW UK LIFESTYLE
Dear Nick Clegg, Like most parents, I'm sure you love your child fervently, and want only the best for them. Like most parents, you like to think that the decisions you make are in your child's best...
Dear Nick Clegg, Like most parents, I'm sure you love your child fervently, and want only the best for them. Like most parents, you like to think that the decisions you make are in your child's best...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 59
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
08:24 AM on 05/03/2012
Reading Milli Hills open letter to Nick Clegg evoked strong emotions within me. Her view that babies learn about the meaning of relationships from those who care for them is correct. However for me she really hit the nail on the head in stating that we might like to tell ourselves that small children don't remember much, and that therefore what happens to them doesn't really matter, as long as they are fed and warm.
In 1957 I was placed in a hospital when I was six weeks old. I had gastroenteritis and spent two months separated from my mother. All my life I have suffered from major insecurity. It has affected every aspect of my life. I know now after years of counselling that I have never really got over this initial separation. In the early 50’s Jimmy Robertson and John Bowlby were responsible for changing the way babies were cared for in English hospitals. Parents were encouraged to stay with their babies while they were in hospital. Sadly the message didn’t get to Ireland till the early 60’s.

Milli is spot on in stating that babies are subtle and complex human beings, whose brains are developing at an alarming rate. Their experiences are forming the bedrock of their entire future emotional existence. Society needs to wake up to that fact. The psychological facts have been around for a long time and they are now well backed up by hard scientific data.

JimJackman
Dublin
Former President, NationalParentsCouncil (Repof Ireland)
02:24 PM on 05/02/2012
You say that you're planning to stay at home until your kids are at school, so I assume that you don't think that sending children to school 5 days a week is a problem? Does something magical happen between 4 and 5 that means children go from suffering without their parents to thriving without them? Of course not. In other words: what about part time care for older toddlers and pre-schoolers? (Which is exactly what these new childcare proposals will focus on.)
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Milli Hill
08:19 PM on 05/02/2012
Well, actually, something magical DOES happen, certainly between 0 and 4 or 5, there is a huge amount of brain growth and development - around 85% of core structure of the brain is developed in those first four years. By the time they start school, many of the neurological foundations will already have been laid down that will affect their future mental health, learning ability, sense of identity, relationship patterns, and more. Pretty magical I think, and certainly too important a task to delegate in my view.
04:12 PM on 05/07/2012
I didn't ask about 0-4, I asked about 4-5. Surely if full time childcare is fine for 5 year olds but bad for 0 year olds, there must be a sliding scale in between. If 5 days a week of school is a good idea for 5 year olds, 1 day a week could be a good idea for 3 year olds, for example.

In other words, I will dismiss any argument which seems to assume that there is a magic line where full time childcare goes from being a bad idea to a great one overnight.
07:43 PM on 05/08/2012
Pre-school toddlers already get 5 sessions of nursery paid for by the government every week - this enables them to adapt to a school routine gradually - and helps their parent get used to them being away from them more gently too.
11:56 AM on 04/29/2012
Uplifting article – thank you. Sadly, politicians seem to have a very narrow vision of what a large number of mothers and fathers hope for when they embark on family life. From my own experience as a research interviewer, what parents often want is for family life to be manageable once again on one (or one and a half) incomes, lower house prices, decently paid jobs and more time with the kids. Incidentally, constantly blaming the 'high' cost of childcare/nurseries is a red herring since quality care can never come cheap and in reality do we really want the people (women) who care for our children to be on the minimum wage or less? Is that what feminism fought for? We should value care work and it should be well paid and therefore 'more expensive'!
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Milli Hill
08:29 PM on 05/02/2012
Thanks for your comment Mari.
Feminism and it's implications for motherhood are a real hotbed of discussion right now. I have been in a bit of hot water with a few feminists over this post! Today, one of them commented to me, that at nursery, her children get better food than she can make, better facilities, better entertainment, better education, better stimulation, and that she is a better mother for not having to spend all her time with them! I feel sad that we have somehow arrived at a place where a mother feels that someone else can look after and nurture her children better than she can! I don't feel this way of thinking is woman centred, or child centred for that matter!
11:38 AM on 04/29/2012
d
10:41 PM on 04/27/2012
I think the main premise that came across from the article is that we should be ALLOWED to have the choice to stay at home with our children and not made to feel bad about it. As soon as I read the article I could practically predict the comments that would follow. I wasn't far wrong, working mum's getting defensive and stay at home mum's thanking someone for finally saying they have some worth (which they do.) I don't think the article attacked the decision to work, it was merely defending the decision to be a stay at home mum. I work part time and my husband works full time. My children are still both very young but I decided in the long term we couldn't afford for me to be stay at home. My children love nursery, though it's hell when they're ill but then I've never had a boss who is a mother herself. I think I have the balance right for us, but I couldn't imagine being home or in work 'full time'. But that just suits me and mine. I do feel that the government is missing an important point. Our care system is being strangled because quite often people cannot afford to stay at home and care for the vunerable. We need to give more acknowledgement and respect to parents. We also need to stop tearing apart other people's parenting decisions. I did not feel this article attacked working parents or their ch
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Milli Hill
08:44 PM on 05/02/2012
Thanks for your balanced view Kathlyn.
Your last sentence was cut off, but I'm glad you did not feel attacked. If anyone was meant to be attacked by the article, it was Nick Clegg and other leading policy makers who refuse to acknowledge the importance of the early years of life and who undermine the work of mothers (and other carers, as you point out) when they imply that they are so easily and cheaply replaceable.
06:22 PM on 04/27/2012
I agree with a lot of the conclusions in this article, which strongly underscore our decision to have one parent at home to raise our child adn future children; however I disagree with the conclusion that it is only the prescence of the mother that matters. My husband has been at home with our daughter from 13th months on after my maternity leave. We'llll swap with a next maternity leave -I I'll stay home for a year ( crucial to infant development, babies need their mother almost exclusively the first year) then trade off again. We've never used a babysitter or paid stranger, only my mum occasionally. I am the higher wage earner ( we'd love me to be the full time stay home parent but we couldn't afford it). The research also supports the validity of the father staying home as the full time parenting providing the secure attachment, and prime development environemnt. Is the reference to mother deliberate, or an oversight based on her lack of exposure to the stay-at-home attachment parenting model. Otherwise an interesting article - most of my professional colleagues could afford to have a parent stay home choose not to in pursuit of material things ( bigger house fancy vacations, cars, career accolades) which is to the detriment of their child's developent. We've invested in our children rather than material things ( I am asked " when is my husband going back to work". he's raising our family!)
09:10 PM on 04/27/2012
Hi Jennybugg...yes, on reflection, I should have made it clear that by mother I meant 'primary care giver', and that this could be mother / father / grandparent / adoptive parent ... anyone who loves the child and is in it for love and the long haul... I guess I used the word mother as this is often, but of course not always, who this person tends to be. Also, I do think there IS something special about a 'mother' ... in our politically correct world we always seem to have to include everybody, nobody is allowed to be more special than the next person! But actually, as you say, a mother IS crucial in those first days, months, and I would argue that she offers something special throughout childhood, and life! But as I said, not very PC to say that sort of thing these days!
02:33 AM on 04/28/2012
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I do believe a mother is special, and that research has supported this conclusion. I've had 'heated" discussions about this when colleagues have taken a two month mat leave and left the baby at home with dad and pumped breastmilk. While a valiant effort the reality ( while not PC as you state) a bottle of pumped milk adn dad ( no matter how amazing he is) is not the same to an infant genetically primed to expect and thrive with a mother. Which is why i will always take a year mat leave regardless of the hit to my career and finances. beyond a a year, I agree that mother will be ideal. but I think dad/ grandparent gets really close to ideal in many circumstances, and shouldn't be lumped in the same category as 'paid caregiver". I can attest that my daughter still prefers me, especially when hurt or scared, even though dad is home full time.
12:36 PM on 04/27/2012
Do this, Do that culture, maybe we should stop worrying about the Subtle nuances of how we live our lives and get on with common sense
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Milli Hill
08:41 PM on 05/02/2012
Some of us think it is common sense to explore the subtle nuances John!
11:13 AM on 04/27/2012
From the legal point of view, there is a big issue with divorce for mothers like me who have given up work to follow husbands abroad and raise children. Best is to let you read my developments on my blog on the issue of forum shopping and Eurostar divorce becoming very popular with the current economic climate of executives loosing jobs and moving out. Yes, part of the new deal is to get rid of the old family to start a new life to live a mid life crisis.
In resume, I do agree with you that nothing replace the love and care of a mother. However, she needs to be able to keep active and not bored and most of all, they should be a recognition and support for these mothers. The benefit of the children should not mean a life sacrifice of mothers. http://clarinettesblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/30/abusive-institutions-or-abuse-of-institutions/
04:14 PM on 04/28/2012
That reads like the paparazzi who only care about a good gossip and not the truth. I presume none of them are actually Nick Clegg?
04:19 PM on 04/28/2012
Sounds like the paparazzi. I assume that none of them are Nick Clegg?
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Milli Hill
08:48 PM on 05/02/2012
I did actually try to comment on the thread above but the group of people there were very attacking and even rather personal, so I decided it was best to stay out of it. I don't think this issue is about 'mummy wars' - my letter was to Nick Clegg, not to a working mother. As women we need to try and get to the bottom of these issues together, that is my hope anyway.
10:18 PM on 04/26/2012
Infants should be provided with play-centres where socialization may take place and where communication and social skills may be developed. Children need to sing and dance nad listen to stories and play games. There is no need to consider formal education until the age of five. Age six would be even better.

Clegg has been misled by that crazy Gove and his rightist Christian colleagues that if they can get infants at two sitting in rows and complying then they can overcome the problems of mass non-compliance in the school system.

In your dreams Gove. If you deliver this idiocy, things will get worse and worse. You will create little monsters who hate teachers. You do not have a clue, do you? It is ideology all the way Gove, isn't it?

Your visions of premodern subordination of working-class children is going to end in your tears and your utter failure.
10:11 PM on 04/26/2012
And like most parents who delegate the care of their children to paid strangers, you choose to ignore several decades of psychology and neuroscience, which show quite clearly that the loving and nurturing environment and secure attachment experience provided by a mother cannot be replicated by a childcare worker of any quality.
--------------------------------------------------
You are assuming rather a lot here. Average mothers with childcare do not read findings of neuroscientists. And psychology is not held in high esteem because of the preponderance of reports of trivial research.
09:13 PM on 04/27/2012
I'm not writing to 'average mothers', I'm writing to Nick Clegg! Anyone who has the power to make policy that influences the lives of children should be reading some neuroscience and psychology (- or at least getting a minion to read it for them!)
09:17 PM on 04/27/2012
'Average mothers' might not read findings of neuroscientists, but Nick Clegg, or anyone who has the power to make policy which shapes lives, should.
08:19 PM on 05/08/2012
You're right on that count. Their expert advisers are more interested in focus groups reactions to ideological policy than science.
08:56 PM on 04/26/2012
From what I can see of this article it seems that Mrs Hill is as deluded as Nick Clegg, just from a different direction. Does she consider the financial need that parents have to work? The strain on a marraige that comes from financial stress? I am a working mother and my daughter is a happy bright child who has the opportunity to learn social and practical skills in a safe place while I work and learns how to form meaningful relationships with her family at home! I believe in Nick Cleggs 'attempts' to reform the current policy on childcare and think that mothers should be supoorted in their choices and not pressured one way or the other. Let parents be partents and deduce what is best for theor children and their families without being made to feel guilty for needs outwith their control.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Ruth Whippman
05:29 PM on 04/26/2012
"you choose to ignore several decades of psychology and neuroscience, which show quite clearly that the loving and nurturing environment and secure attachment experience provided by a mother cannot be replicated by a childcare worker of any quality."

This really is not the case, several studies, including one of the most recent, largest scale and long term studies, carried out by University College London on over 19,000 children, that shows that the ideal scenario for children is to have both parents working. Girls in particular fare better with working mothers than stay at home ones. (summarised in link below)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/jul/22/working-mothers-no-harm-children

However, the whole debate is somewhat ridiculous. People make their childrearing choices based on their own preferences, economic and social circumstances and what they feel is right for their family, and not on the basis of studies. People's choices should be valued.

It is also a shame that this debate always comes down to 'mothers' and the choices they make too, whereas fathers' choices are usually guilt free.
09:25 PM on 04/27/2012
Thanks for your comment Ruth.
I'd like to find out more about that study. Ideal to have both parents working....from what age?
I totally agree that people's choices should be valued, but I do think it is worth looking always at the cultural backdrop that infoms our choices - sometimes we think we are free when in fact we are restricted by all kinds of - social, familial, cultural, political - baggage and expectations.
05:26 PM on 04/26/2012
I too am a stay at home mum. I agree with everything this article said about the several decades of psychology and neuroscience, which show quite clearly that the loving and nurturing environment and secure attachment experience provided by a mother cannot be replicated by a childcare worker of any quality. I am also working class which meant that to stay at homewith my own children, I had to find a job that allowed me to work from home so I became a childminder. In that time I have met parents who desperatly wanted to be with their kids but had to put bread on the table at the end of the day, I have met parents who couldn't care less where their kids were and who looked after them and I have met parents whose children have for one reason or another been failed either by the nhs, the education system or both and I have been there for all those parents and their children.
No, I will never be as good as their own mum's, but I am there. We don't all have the privalige of being able to afford to stop at home to be with our children, just count your self fortunate that you can.
02:51 PM on 04/26/2012
Amazing piece of writing. I wonder how many people will actually read her points and how many people will just attack the premise of motherhood being valuable. And I wonder how many people will immediately be on the defensive because they are working mothers....
09:16 PM on 04/27/2012
Thank you Alex. I have read a few people who could be described as being 'on the defensive' over on mumsnet today!