Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 91, Issue 6, pp 418–422 | Cite as

Child Care Arrangement and Preschool Development

  • Teresa To
  • Suzanne M. Cadarette
  • Ying Liu
Article

Abstract

Baseline data from the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth were used to evaluate the associations between child care arrangement and poor developmental attainment (PDA). A weighted total of 521,800 children aged 2 to 3 years were studied (N=2,709). PDA was assessed by agestandardized motor and social development score. Children were grouped by the predominant type of arrangement: care by someone in the child’s own home, in another home (family child care), at a child care centre, or none (child care exclusive to parents).

Controlling for socioeconomic status, biological factors and maternal immigration, family dysfunction, hostile parenting and low neighbourhood safety were correlated with PDA and positive parent-child interaction decreased the odds of PDA. Whereas centre child care arrangements were beneficial to development overall (OR=0.41, 99% CI=0.18, 0.93), an interaction existed between type of child care and maternal depression; among children with depressed mothers, centre child care was associated with increased odds of PDA. Findings suggest that the associations between child care arrangement and child development involve interactions of factors that influence a child’s home environment. Future child development studies exploring these interactions are warranted.

Résumé

Les données de base recueillies par l’Enquête Longitudinale Nationale sur les Enfants et les Jeunes ont servi à évaluer les liens entre les dispositions pour la garde d’un enfant et son niveau de développement (ND). On a étudié un total de 521 800 enfants âgés de 2 à 3 ans (N=2 709). Le ND a été déterminé selon les résultats obtenus après des tests de développement moteur et social par catégorie d’âge. On a groupé les enfants selon le genre d’arrangement de garde prédominant: par une personne au foyer de l’enfant, dans un autre foyer (garde familiale), dans une garderie, ou aucun (garde exclusive par les parents).

En tenant compte de la situation socioéconomique, des facteurs biologiques et de l’immigration de la mère, on constate que le dysfonctionnement familial, l’hostilité des parents et un voisinage à bas niveau de sécurité sont en corrélation avec un faible ND. Par contre, les interactions positives parent-enfant diminuent les chances de faible ND. Bien que la présence en garderie ait des effets bénéfiques sur le développement de l’enfant en général (RC=0,41, 99 % IC=0,18, 0,93), une interaction existe entre le genre d’arrangement de garde et la dépression chez la mère; pour les enfants ayant une mère dépressive, la présence en garderie augmente les chances de faible ND. Les résultats de l’enquête suggèrent que les liens entre les dispositions de garde et le ND sont aussi déterminés par l’environnement familial. De plus amples études sur le développement de l’enfant sont nécessaires pour explorer ces interactions.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Ramey CT, Ramey, SL. Prevention of intellectual disabilities: Early interventions to improve cognitive development. Prev Med 1998;27:224–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berlin LJ, Brooks-Gunn J, McCarton C, McCormick, MC. The effectiveness of early intervention: Examining risk factors and pathways to enhanced development. Prev Med 1998;27:238–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Doherty G. The Great Child Care Debate: The Long-term Effects of Non-parental Child Care. Toronto: Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bertrand JØ. Enriching the preschool experiences of children. In: Canada Health Action: Building on the Legacy. Volume 1. Determinants of Health: Children and Youth. Quebec: Éditions MultiMondes, 1998;3–46.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Caughy MO, DiPietro JA, Strobino, DM. Daycare participation as a protective factor in the cognitive development of low-income children. Child Development 1994;65:457–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Steinhauer, PD. Developing resiliency in children from disadvantaged populations. In: Canada Health Action: Building on the Legacy. Volume 1. Determinants of Health: Children and Youth. Quebec: Éditions MultiMondes, 1998;47–102.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dilks, SA. Developmental aspects of child care. Pediatric Clinics of North America 1991;38:1529–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Doherty G, Stuart B. The association between child care quality, ratio and staff training: A Canada-wide study. Can J Research in Early Childhood Education 1997;6:127–38.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Desai S, Chase-Lansdale PL, Michael, RT. Mother or market? Effects of maternal employment on the intellectual ability of 4-year-old children. Demography 1989;26:545–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Caldwell, BM. Impact of day care on the child. Pediatrics 1993;91:225–28.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lamb, ME. Effects of nonparental child care on child development: An update. Can J Psychiatry 1996;41:330–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Human Resources Development Canada and Statistics Canada. National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. User’s Handbook and Microdata Guide. Ottawa: Minister of Industry, 1997.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Poe, GS. Design and Procedures for the 1981 Child Health Supplement to the National Health Interview Survey. Working paper series. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics, 1986.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Baker PC, Kech CK, Mott FL, Quinlan, SV. NLSY Child Handbook - Revised Edition. A Guide to the 1986–1990 National Longitudinal Survey of Youth - Child Data. Columbus, Ohio: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1993.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mott FL, Baker PC, Ball DE, et al. The NLSY Children 1992: Description and Evaluation - Revised. Columbus, Ohio: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1998.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Center for Human Resource Research. NLSY79 1996, Child and Young Adult Data Users Guide. Columbus, Ohio: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1998.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Peterson JL, Moore, KA. Motor and Social Development in Infancy: Some Results from a National Survey. Washington: Child Trends, 1987.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bates JE, Freeland CAB, Lounsbury, ML. Measurement of infant difficultness. Child Development 1984;50:794–803.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kohen DE, Hertzman C, Wiens M. Environmental Changes and Children’s Competencies. Hull, Quebec: Applied Research Branch, Strategic Policy, Human Resources Development Canada, 1998;54.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Statistics Canada. Low Income Cut-Offs. Ottawa, 1996.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Epstein NB, Bishop DS, Levin S. The McMaster Family Assessment Device. J Marital and Family Therapy 1978;9:19–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Epstein NB, Baldwin LM, Bishop, DS. The McMaster Family Assessment Device. J Marital and Family Therapy 1983;9:171–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Byles J, Byrne C, Boyle MH, Offord, DR. Ontario Child Health Study: Reliability and Validity of the General Functioning Subscale of the McMaster Family Assessment Device. Family Process 1988;27:97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cutrona CE, Russell, DW. The provision of social relationships and adaptation to stress. Advances in Personal Relationships 1989;1:37–67.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Radloff, LS. The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement 1977;1:385–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ross DP, Scott K, Kelly, MA. Overview: Children in Canada in the 1990s. Growing up in Canada: National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth. Ottawa: Statistics Canada and Human Resources Development Canada, 1996;15–45.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Landy S, Tam, KK. Understanding the Contribution of Multiple Risk Factors on Child Development at Various Ages. Hull, Quebec: Applied Research Branch, Strategic Policy, Human Resources Development Canada, 1998;30.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Strayhorn JM, Weidman, CS. A parent practices scale and its relation to parent and child mental health. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1988;27:613–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Schlesselman JJ, Stolley, PD. Multivariate analysis. In: Case-control Studies: Design, Conduct, Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 1982;227–90.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Millar WJ, Hill, GB. Childhood asthma. Health Reports 1998;10:9–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    American Psychiatric Association task force on day care for pre-school children. Day care for early preschool children: Implications for the child and family. Am J Psychiatry 1993;150:1281–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Majnemer A. Benefits of early intervention for children with developmental disabilities. Seminars in Pediatric Neurology 1998;5:62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Iannantuono A, Eyles J. Meanings in policy: A textual analysis of Canada’s “Achieving Health for All” document. Soc Sci Med 1997;44:1611–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. Child Outcomes When Child Care Center Classes Meet Recommended Standards for Quality. Am J Public Health 1999;89:1072–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    National Council of Welfare. Preschool Children: Promises to Keep. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada, 1999.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Childcare Resource and Research Unit. Child Care in Canada: Provinces and Territories 1995. Toronto: Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 1997.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Burchinal MR, Roberts JE, Nabors LA, Bryant DM. Quality of center child care and infant cognitive and language development. Child Development 1996;67:606–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teresa To
    • 1
    • 2
  • Suzanne M. Cadarette
    • 1
    • 3
  • Ying Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Population Health Sciences, Research InstituteThe Hospital for Sick ChildrenTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Department of Public Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  3. 3.The Canadian Multicentre Osteoporosis Study Toronto SiteTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations