Abstract
Objective
Studies have shown that children growing up in socio-economically disadvantaged families have poorer cognitive scores than children growing up in more advantaged families, and that high-quality childcare services can reduce this gap. This effect may be attenuated, however, if disadvantaged families are less likely than better-off families to use childcare and if they use childcare of lower quality. The aim of this study was to identify factors related to parental decisions to use formal and informal childcare.
Methods
Data were obtained from the Québec Longitudinal Study of Child Development, a birth cohort of children born in 1997/1998 in the Canadian province of Québec (n=1,504). Children receiving formal (e.g., family and centre) and informal (e.g., grandparents, aunt, nanny) childcare from 5 months to 4 years of age were compared to those receiving exclusively parental care on key psycho-socio-economic family factors.
Results
Maternal unemployment during pregnancy, younger maternal age (at initiation of childbearing) and higher number of siblings (e.g., =2) were related to a lower probability of a child receiving either formal or informal childcare (compared to parental care). In addition, low levels of maternal education, higher levels of overprotection, and lower levels of home stimulation were related to a lower probability of a child receiving formal childcare, but not informal childcare. Insufficient income was not associated with childcare use.
Conclusion
Maternal education and maternal employment were the main socio-economic barriers to childcare participation in a province offering low-cost childcare services. Future initiatives may consider prioritizing childcare access to underserved children and other (e.g., literacy-based) interventions to facilitate access.
Keywords: Socio-economic factors, health literacy, child daycare centres
Résumé
Objectif
Des études ont montré que les enfants qui grandissent dans des milieux défavorisés obtiennent des résultats inférieurs aux tests cognitifs comparativement aux enfants provenant de milieux mieux nantis, et que cet écart peut être réduit lorsque les enfants défavorisés fréquentent des services de garde de bonne qualité. Cet effet pourrait toutefois être atténué si les enfants défavorisés sont moins susceptibles que les enfants mieux nantis de fréquenter des services de garde ou s’ils utilisent des services de qualité inférieure. L’objectif de cette étude était de cerner les facteurs associés à la décision des parents d’utiliser les modes de garde formels ou informels pour leurs enfants.
Méthode
Les données proviennent de l’Étude longitudinale du développement des enfants du Québec (ÉLDEQ) et portent sur une cohorte d’enfants nés en 1997–1998 dans la province de Québec, au Canada (n=1 504). Les enfants confiés à une structure d’accueil formelle (en milieu familial ou en établissement) ou informelle (gardienne, grands-parents, tante) entre l’âge de 5 mois et de 4 ans ont été comparés selon des facteurs familiaux psycho-socio-économiques aux enfants gardés exclusivement par leurs parents.
Résultats
Le chômage maternel pendant la grossesse, le jeune âge maternel à la naissance du premier enfant et la présence de plusieurs frères et sœurs (=2) diminuaient la probabilité pour l’enfant d’être confié à une structure d’accueil formelle ou informelle (comparativement à la garde parentale). De plus, le faible niveau d’instruction maternelle, la tendance à la surprotection ou le faible niveau de stimulation cognitive à la maison diminuaient la probabilité que l’enfant soit confié à une structure d’accueil formelle, mais non à une structure informelle. L’insuffisance de revenu n’était pas associée à l’utilisation des services de garde lorsque les autres facteurs psycho-socio-économiques étaient pris en compte.
Conclusion
La faible instruction et le chômage maternels sont les principales barrières socioéconomiques à la participation aux services de garde dans une province qui offre des services de garde à coût modique. Dans les initiatives futures, pour faciliter l’accès aux services de garde, on pourrait envisager d’accorder la priorité aux enfants défavorisés et de mener d’autres interventions (p. ex., selon le niveau de littératie).
Mots clés: statut socioéconomique, garderie, services de garde, enfance, littératie en santé
Footnotes
Funding/Support: This research was supported by the Ministère de la santé et des services sociaux du Québec (Québec Government’s Ministry of Health and Social Services), the Fonds de recherche en santé du Québec (FRSQ) and Canada’s Social Science and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC). Marie-Claude Geoffroy was supported by a fellowship from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and Michel Boivin was supported by the Canada Research Chair Program.
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
References
- 1.Muennig P, Schweinhart L, Montie J, Neidell M. Effects of a prekindergarten educational intervention on adult health: 37-year follow-up results of a randomized controlled trial. Am J Public Health. 2009;99(8):1431–37. doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2008.148353. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Pungello EP, Kainz K, Burchinal M, Wasik BH, Sparling JJ, Ramey CT, et al. Early educational intervention, early cumulative risk, and the early home environment as predictors of young adult outcomes within a high-risk sample. Child Dev. 2010;81(1):410–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01403.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Melhuish E, Belsky J, Leyland AH, Barnes J. Effects of fully-established Sure Start Local Programmes on 3-year-old children and their families living in England: A quasi-experimental observational study. Lancet. 2008;372(9650):1641–47. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)61687-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Geoffroy MC, Côté SM, Borge AI, Larouche F, Séguin JR, Rutter M. Association between nonmaternal care in the first year of life and children’s receptive language skills prior to school entry: The moderating role of socioeconomic status. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2007;48(5):490–97. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2006.01704.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Geoffroy MC, Côté SM, Giguère C, Dionne G, Zelazo PD, Tremblay RE, et al. Closing the gap in academic readiness and achievement: The role of early childcare. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2010;51(12):1359–67. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02316.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Caughy MOB, DiPietro JA, Strobino DM. Day-care participation as a protective factor in the cognitive development of low-income children. Child Dev. 1994;65(2):457–71. doi: 10.2307/1131396. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.McCartney K, Dearing E, Taylor BA, Bub KL. Quality child care supports the achievement of low-income children: Direct and indirect pathways through caregiving and the home environment. J Appl Develop Psychol. 2007;28(5–6):411–26. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2007.06.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Dearing E, McCartney K, Taylor BA. Does higher quality early child care pro-mote low-income children’s math and reading achievement in middle childhood? Child Dev. 2009;80(5):1329–49. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01336.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Ceci SJ, Papierno PB. The rhetoric and reality of gap closing: When the “have-nots” gain but the “haves” gain even more. Am Psychol. 2005;60(2):149–60. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.2.149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Booth CL, Clarke-Stewart KA, Vandell DL, McCartney K, Owen MT. Child-care usage and mother-infant “quality time”. J Marriage Fam. 2002;64(1):16–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00016.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 11.NICHD ECCRN. Child-care effect sizes for the NICHD study of early child care and youth development. Am Psychol. 2006;61(2):99–116. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.2.99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Singer JD, Fuller B, Keiley MK, Wolf A. Early child-care selection: Variation by geographic location, maternal characteristics, and family structure. Dev Psychol. 1998;34(5):1129–44. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.34.5.1129. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Morrissey TW. Familial factors associated with the use of multiple child-care arrangements. J Marriage Family. 2008;70(2):549–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00500.x. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Fuller B, Holloway SD, Liang X. Family selection of child-care centers: The influence of household support, ethnicity, and parental practices. Child Dev. 1996;67(6):3320–37. doi: 10.2307/1131781. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Dowsett CJ, Huston AC, Imes AE, Gennetian L. Structural and process features in three types of child care for children from high and low income families. Early Childhood Res Q. 2008;23(1):69–93. doi: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2007.06.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Anderson LM, Shinn C, Fullilove MT, Scrimshaw SC, Fielding JE, Normand J, et al. The effectiveness of early childhood development programs: A systematic review. Am J Prev Med. 2003;24(3Supplement1):32–46. doi: 10.1016/S0749-3797(02)00655-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Statistics Canada. Income Trends in Canada: 1976–2006. Ottawa, ON: Minister of Industry; 2008. [Google Scholar]
- 18.Radloff LS. The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Appl Psychol Measure. 1977;1(3):385–401. doi: 10.1177/014662167700100306. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Bradley RH, Caldwell BM. The HOME Inventory and family demographics. Dev Psychol. 1984;20(2):315–20. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.20.2.315. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Boivin M, Perusse D, Dionne G, Saysset V, Zoccolillo M, Tarabulsy GM, et al. The genetic-environmental etiology of parents’ perceptions and self-assessed behaviours toward their 5-month-old infants in a large twin and singleton sample. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2005;46(6):612–30. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2004.00375.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Choices Institute for Research on Public Policy. 2005.
- 22.Rootman I, Ronson B. Literacy and health research in Canada: Where have we been and where should we go? Can J Public Health. 2005;96:S62–S77. doi: 10.1007/BF03403703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Sanders LM, Thompson VT, Wilkinson JD. Caregiver health literacy and the use of child health services. Pediatrics. 2007;119(1):e86–e92. doi: 10.1542/peds.2005-1738. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Luman ET, McCauley MM, Shefer A, Chu SY. Maternal characteristics associated with vaccination of young children. Pediatrics. 2003;111(5):1215–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Lowe ED, Weisner TS. ‘You have to push it-who’s gonna raise your kids?’: Situating child care and child care subsidy use in the daily routines of lower income families. Children and Youth Services Rev. 2004;26(2):143–71. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2004.01.011. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Lieb R, Wittchen H-U, Hofler M, Fuetsch M, Stein MB, Merikangas KR. Parental psychopathology, parenting styles, and the risk of social phobia in offspring: A prospective-longitudinal community study. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2000;57(9):859–66. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.57.9.859. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.NICHD ECCRN. Familial factors associated with the characteristics of non-maternal care for infants. J Marriage Fam. 1997;59(2):389–408. doi: 10.2307/353478. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Kohen D, Dahinten VS, Khan S, Hertzman C. Child care in Québec access to a universal program. Can J Public Health. 2008;99(6):451–55. doi: 10.1007/BF03403774. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Côté SM, Boivin M, Nagin DS, Japel C, Xu Q, Zoccolillo M, et al. The role of maternal education and nonmaternal care services in the prevention of children’s physical aggression problems. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(11):1305–12. doi: 10.1001/archpsyc.64.11.1305. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Melhuish EC, Sylva K, Sammons P, Siraj-Blatchford I, Taggart B, Phan MB, et al. The early years: Preschool influences on mathematics achievement. Science. 2008;321(5893):1161–62. doi: 10.1126/science.1158808. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]