On Friday, April 20, 2001, an article appeared on the front page of the National Post under the title, “Study paints daycare as hothouse for aggression.” The main substance of the article is the result of a 10-year study by psychological experts on the effects of daycare on young children. The principal researcher is a Dr. Belsky, a developmental psychologist at the University of London. The results of the research are summed up in these words: “The longer young children spend in daycare, away from their mothers, the more likely they are to be overly aggressive by the time they reach kindergarten, according to the largest study of child care development ever conducted” Dr. Belsky added that daycare children are more prone to get into fights, cruelty, bullying, meanness and insisting that their demands be met immediately. The study began in 1990. If defines daycare as supervision by anyone other than the mother. According to records, 13 million preschoolers, including six million infants and toddlers, are in daycare in the United States. That is roughly 75 per cent of all children of that age, according to the Children’s Defence Fund in Washington. In Canada, close to 1.4 million children are in paid daycare services. Having read this article, I remembered that some 10 years ago I wrote an article for The Interim on the importance of the family. I unearthed it and I think it might be pertinent to quote some statements from it, particularly from some of the experts whom I had consulted.
Recently I saw a TV program on the subject of the increase of violence among young people. A few days later I came across an article in a secular paper on the same subject. Both the TV program and the article suggested reasons for this sad phenomenon, and the common denominator seemed to be the breakdown of the family. This gave me the idea of writing about the importance of the family for the good and even for the survival of society. There are innumerable statements in Church documents on the family and its importance, but I think it is perhaps more effective to confine myself to the expressed opinions of what I might term non-religious experts, such as social scientists and university professors, who write or speak from the “practical” point of view.
Dr. Wilder Penfield, former president of the Vanier Institute of the Family, asked the question, “Is the family important for society?” He answers his question in these words: “There never has been and there never will be a durable society based on any other system than the union of man, woman, and child and on fidelity to that union. Should the family fail, society and civilization are doomed.”
An expert on family life in the United States, Dr. Ross Campbell, has written a book entitled, How to Really Love Your Child. In it he says that parents are very discouraged today because they feel that no matter how hard they try to raise their children well, the influence of others seems to override their efforts. Dr. Campbell says that every study he has read indicates that the opposite is true. Despite all the distractions, he is convinced that the family has the greatest overall influence. The home, he says, has the upper hand in determining how stable and secure the child will be, and how affectionate or aloof he or she will be.
Every study I have made on the family as the foundation of society stresses the paramount influence of the mother. Some readers will be familiar with The Feminist Takeover, by Betty Steele. Dr. Charles Fell, former chancellor of McMaster University, wrote the foreword, in which he says, “If I were to sum up the book in a few words, I would say, ‘The mother is the heart of the family and consequently the heart of society.'” That is a powerful statement but by no means new. We have all heard the old adage, “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.” In the past, the hand that rocked the cradle was invariably the mother. It was not necessary to mention her as it was taken for granted; but is that true today, with the introduction of babysitting as almost a profession? Sadly, in modern times, the hand that rocks the cradle is more often a teenage babysitter – or, what is even more serious, a daycare worker – rather than the mother. It is really impossible to find words to express the deleterious effect of daycare on the family and consequently on society.
Again I must defer to the social experts, even though my own convictions on the subject are very strong. Dr. Donald Rinsley is clinical professor of psychiatry at the Kansas School of Medicine. He has written a book entitled, A Child Psychiatrist Looks at Daycare. Here are some relevant quotes: “During the first three or four years of life, the child undergoes an enormous expansion of intellectual, emotional and neuromuscular development. From the very beginning of life outside the mother’s body, the infant seeks to relate to and bond with the mother by means of reflex actions of contact. The bonding relationship is essential for the later development of the child’s capacity to form human relationships, thereby becoming a social human being.” Dr. Rinsley then speaks of the importance of the father’s relationship with the child. But, he says, “While others may at times replace the mother, there is evidence that the mother-infant bond, which actually begins to form during pregnancy, is unique and cannot be fully substituted for even by the most sensitive and caring surrogate mother figures. Men can carry out maternal functions, but their effect on the child is by no means comparable to that of the mother. It is, then, the solid, healthy, intact family which will ensure the future of mankind.”
Brenda Hunter is the author of a book entitled, Where Have all the Mothers Gone? Here are some significant quotes: “The attachment relationship that a young child forges with his or her mother forms the foundation stone of personality. The young child’s hunger for his mother’s presence is as great as his hunger for food.”
“Even though society has tried to draft babysitters, nannies, fathers, and corporations to serve as ‘mothers,’ in recent years, mother, it seems, is not off the hook. She is still the central figure in her child’s emotional development.”
“When a mother goes back to work during the baby’s first year of life, the baby comes to view the daily separations as rejection. While the mother herself may not be rejecting the baby, the baby interprets her absence as rejection.” Is there anything more devastating than rejection, even in later years?
Brenda Hunter then takes up the question of the effect on mothers of being separated from their babies. “Have we created a cultural climate in America that wars against Mother Love? Is this partly responsible for the fact that infant daycare is the fastest growing segment of the daycare population? I believe we have created a cultural climate that makes it hard for women to elect to rear their children themselves. Just the other day I received a letter from a mother who stays at home with her children. She said that she is often asked, “But what do you do?” This mother says, “The mother at home is continually intimidated and devalued by others. I find myself vacillating and wondering about my worth, due to the pressures placed on me by the world’s system of values.”‘