Abstract
Background
Five cycles of data from the Canadian National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth (1994/5–2002/3) were used to examine patterns of child care use in Quebec and the rest of Canada to explore the impact of Quebec’s implementation of universal child care.
Methods
Rates of overall use as well as use of regulated (child care centre, family child care) and non-regulated care (sitter, nanny, relative, family child care) were examined for preschoolers aged 0–5 years in Quebec as compared to the other provinces and by family household income. Chi-square tests were used to examine significance of differences.
Results
Since the implementation of Quebec’s child care program, Quebec demonstrated substantial increases in child care use, particularly in the use of regulated care (from 10% prior to program compared to 30% by 2002) whereas the use of unregulated care did not demonstrate a significant increase in Quebec as compared to the other provinces (1994 to 2002). Furthermore, the use of regulated care by low-income families was greater in Quebec than elsewhere in Canada, although the greatest increase in use of regulated care was for children from high-income families.
Conclusion
Findings suggest that since the introduction of Quebec’s universal child care program, there was an increase in the use of regulated child care for families of preschoolaged children in the province, although by 2002 Quebec had not achieved the coverage of universal child care programs attained by many European countries.
Résumé
Contexte
Nous avons examiné les tendances d’utilisation des services de garde au Québec et dans le reste du Canada à partir des cinq cycles de données de l’Enquête longitudinale nationale sur les enfants et les jeunes du Canada (1994–1995 à 2002–2003) afin d’étudier l’impact de la mise en œuvre des garderies universelles au Québec.
Méthode
Nous avons examiné les taux d’utilisation globaux et les taux d’utilisation des services de garde réglementés (centre de la petite enfance, garderie en milieu familial) et non réglementés (gardienne, bonne d’enfants, parenté, garderie en milieu familial) pour les enfants d’âge préscolaire (0 à 5 ans) au Québec, comparativement aux autres provinces et selon le revenu familial du ménage. Des tests du khi-carré ont servi à analyser l’importance des écarts.
Résultats
Depuis la mise en œuvre du programme de garderies québécois, le Québec affiche des augmentations importantes dans l’utilisation des services de garde, particulièrement les services réglementés (qui sont passés de 10 % avant le programme à 30 % en 2002), tandis que l’utilisation des services non réglementés n’a pas augmenté de façon significative au Québec par rapport aux autres provinces entre 1994 et 2002. Par ailleurs, l’utilisation de services réglementés par les familles à faible revenu a été plus importante au Québec qu’ailleurs au Canada, bien que la plus forte augmentation ait concerné les familles à revenu élevé.
Conclusion
Nos résultats donnent à penser que depuis le lancement du programme de garderies universelles au Québec, l’utilisation des services de garde réglementés par les familles ayant des enfants d’âge préscolaire a augmenté dans la province. Signalons cependant qu’en 2002, le programme québécois n’avait pas encore une portée aussi grande que celle de nombreux pays européens.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Schweinhart LJ, Barnes HV, Weikart DP. Significant benefits: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through age 27. Monographs of the High/Scope Educational Research Foundation 1993;10.
Campbell FA, Ramey CT. Effects of early childhood intervention on intellectual and academic achievement: A follow-up study of children from low-income families. Child Dev 1994;65:684–98.
McCarton CM, Brooks-Gunn J, Wallace IF, Bauer CR, Bennett FC, Bernbaum JC, et al. Results at age 8 years of early intervention for low-birth-weight premature infants. JAMA 1997;277(2):126–32.
Heckman JJ. Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science 2006;312(5782):1900–2.
Bushnik T. Child Care in Canada. Ottawa, ON: Minister of Industry, 2006. Report No.: Catalogue no.89-599-XIE.
Kohen D, Hertzman C, Willms JD. The importance of quality child care. In: Willms JD (Ed.), Vulnerable Children: Findings from Canada’s National Survey of Children and Youth. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta Press, 2002.
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. Nonmaternal care and family factors in early development: An overview of the NICHD study of early child care. Appl Develop Psychol 2001;22:457–92.
Pence AR, Goelman H. The Victoria Daycare Research Project. Can J Res Early Childhood Educ 1985;1(1):106–7.
Friendly M, Beach J, Turiano M. Early childhood education and care in Canada 2001. Toronto, ON: Childcare Resource and Research Unit, University of Toronto, 2002.
Field T, Masi W, Goldstein S, Perry S, Parl S. Infant day care facilitates preschool social behavior. Early Child Res Q 1988;3:341–59.
To T, Cadarette SM, Liu Y. Child care arrangement and preschool development. Can J Public Health 2000;91(6):418–22.
Cleveland G, Gunderson M, Hyatt D. Child care costs and the employment decision of women: Canadian evidence. Can J Economics 1996;96:132–51.
Singer JD, Fuller B, Keiley MK, Wolf A. Early child-care selection: Variation by geographic location, maternal characteristics, and family structure. Develop Psychol 1998;34(5):1129–44.
Liang X, Fuller B, Singer JD. Ethnic differences in child care selection: The influence of family structure, parental practices, and home language. Early Child Res Q 2000;15(3):357–84.
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. Familial factors associated with the characteristics of nonmaternal care for infants. J Marriage Fam 1997;59:389–408.
Friendly M, Beach J. Trends and analysis: Early childhood education and care in Canada 2004. Toronto, ON: Childcare Research and Resource Unit, Centre for Urban and Community Studies, 2005.
Japel C, Tremblay RE, Côté S. La qualité, ça compte! Choix, IRPP 2005;11(4):9.
Lowe Vandell D, Ramanan J. Effects of early and recent maternal employment of children from low-income families. Child Dev 1992;63(938):949.
Peisner-Feinberg ES, Burchinal MR, Clifford RM, Culkin ML, Howes C, Kagan SL, et al. The relation of preschool child-care quality to children’s cognitive and social developmental trajectories through second grade. Child Dev 2001;72(5):1534–53.
NICHD Early Child Care Research Network. The interaction of child care and family risk in relation to child development at 24 and 36 months. Appl Develop Sci 2002;6:144–56.
Tougas J. Child care in Quebec: Where there’s a will, there’s a way. Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada, 2002.
Statistics Canada/Human Resources Development Canada. National Longitudinal Survey of Children and Youth Users Handbook and Microdata Guide (Cycle 1, Release 2, Microdata document 89M0015 GPE). Ottawa: Special Surveys, Statistics Canada, 1996.
Rust KF, Rao JN. Variance estimation for complex surveys using replication techniques. Stat Methods Med Res 1996;5(3):283–310.
Rao JN, Wu C-FJ, Yue K. Some recent work on resampling methods for complex surveys. Survey Methodology 1992;18(209):217.
Statistics Canada. Low income cutoffs from 1994–2003 and low income measures from 1992–2001. Ottawa: Income Statistics Division, 2004.
Ministère de l’Emploi, de la Solidarité sociale et de la Famille. Portraits de Politiques Familiales: situation dans onze pays développés. Gouvernement du Québec, 2004.
Institut de la Statistique du Québec. Longitudinal study of child development in Quebec: Family, child care and neighbourhood characteristics. Government of Quebec, 2000;1(2).
Jette M, Desrosiers H, Tremblay RE, Thibault J. Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development. Quebec, Institut de la statistique du Québec, 2000.
Offord DR, Kraemer HC, Kazdin AE, Jensen PS, Harrington R. Lowering the burden of suffering from child psychiatric disorder: Trade-offs among clinical, targeted and universal interventions. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 1998;37(7):686–94.
Zigler E. School should begin at age 3 years for American children. J Dev Behav Pediatr 1998;19(1):38–40.
Kwong JC, Sambell C, Johansen H, Stukel TA, Manuel DG. The effect of universal influenza immunization on vaccination rates in Ontario. Health Reports 2006;17(2):31–40.
Ministère de l’éducation de Québec. Les États Généraux sur l’Éducation. Gouvernement du Québec, 1996.
Kershaw P, Forer B, Goelman H. Hidden fragility: Closure among licensed child-care services in British Columbia. Early Childhood Res Q 2005;20(4):417–32.
Bradshaw J, Finch N. A comparison of child benefit packages in 22 countries — A summary of the child benefit package of each country. London: Department for Work and Pensions, 2002. Report No. 174.
Doherty G, Lero DS, Goelman H, Tougas J. Caring and Learning Environments: Quality in Family Child Care Across Canada. Report 3, You Bet I Care. Guelph, ON: Centre for Families, Work, and Well-Being, University of Guelph, 2000.
Beaujot R. Parental preferences for work and childcare. Can Public Policy 1997;23(3):275–88.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kohen, D., Dahinten, V.S., Khan, S. et al. Child Care in Quebec. Can J Public Health 99, 451–455 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03403774
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03403774