Diskussionen über Familienpolitik in Österreich und Europa
It is currently 20.06.2019, 11:40

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: 18.08.2007, 09:59 
Site Admin

Joined: 28.08.2006, 08:49
Posts: 1326
Location: Österreich/Austria
Aus dem daily telegraph

Day nursery may harm under-3s, say child experts

By Ben Fenton
Last Updated: 1:45am BST 21/10/2006

Sir Richard's document in full [PDF file]

An eminent group of child-care experts raises serious concerns today about the long-term effects of putting very young children into inadequate day nurseries.

In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, they call for an "urgent national debate" on whether children under three should be cared for by anyone other than trusted and familiar figures in their lives.

There are now more than 500,000 children in group day care

The group, including the psychologist and author Steve Biddulph, Sir Richard Bowlby, the president of the Centre for Child Mental Health in London and Prof Allan Schore, the renowned American child psychologist, demand clearer vision on what babies and very young children need to develop emotionally.

"Consistent, continuous care by a trusted figure is the key to providing a secure and nurturing environment for very young children," the letter says. "Research suggests that its absence can lead to behavioural difficulties."

With the Government's Sure Start scheme encouraging more day-care nurseries, more parents may be placing children "in circumstances that may not be appropriate to their emotional needs".

That risks "storing up behavioural difficulties in a significant proportion of the young children who spend extended periods of time" separated from their mothers and in inappropriate care. The effects would be felt for years.

The other signatories are Sue Gerhardt, a psychologist and author of Why Love Matters, Chris Ponsford, the development director of What About the Children, a campaigning group, Tom Conti, the actor and supporter of the Centre for Attachment-based Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy, London, and Sue Palmer, the author of Toxic Childhood and joint organiser of a letter to The Daily Telegraph signed by 110 experts last month.

That letter drew attention to the sinister cocktail of influences that its signatories said were ruining childhood. The recent rapid growth in the number of children in group day-care, now more than 500,000, was one of the factors identified as of most concern.

This morning's letter was spawned by a 2,600-word paper written by Sir Richard, and circulated to 30 of the world's leading experts and approved by most of them.

Sir Richard laid out all available evidence about the best way to care for children, particularly in the crucial period between birth and the age of 30 months.

He concluded: "In a society which encourages both parents to work outside the home while their children are under three, it is 'attachment-focused' child-care arrangements that have a crucial role to play in facilitating healthy emotional development."

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Sir Richard said: "I am not saying that all group day-care is bad any more than I am saying that all mothers are perfect. But it is far more difficult for a day-care nursery to provide an environment in which a child will develop normal emotions than it is for a mother, or in her absence, a father, grandparent or child-minder.

"Rather than funding day-care nurseries through Sure Start, the Government should make it easier for parents to use their child-care allowances to pay a grandmother or other relative to look after their children, or to use it themselves as 'pay' to look after the child themselves."

Mr Biddulph, an Australian psychologist who has written a series of respected books on parenthood, said: "The psychological neurological evidence is clear that this is not adequate care for proper brain development in the under-two child.

"The proper development of the infant cortex depends on one-to-one loving care, yet we have never had an economy or a government that puts less value on love.

"Supporting young mothers and fathers to have more time is good economics, in preventing socially dysfunctional young people from filling our schools, streets, and work places of the future.

"We need people who are calm, caring, able to bond and be close.

"We are breeding the very opposite."

Sue Palmer said: "This will make uncomfortable reading for many parents because they have chosen to leave their tiny children in day care and they know inside themselves that it is often not the right thing to do."

But other experts demurred from supporting Sir Richard and the other signatories.

Susie Orbach, a psychotherapist and author, who is a fellow trustee of his at the John Bowlby Centre, said: "I am very sympathetic to the point that babies need consistency of care — we don't value child care and we don't pay child-care staff well enough.

"But day care is often very sensitive and we should ask: is a child sitting bored with a nanny at home, or living day to day with a mother who is depressed better off than one in a good, caring, stimulating day-care nursery?"

Michael Lamb, professor of psychology at Cambridge University, said he felt the letter was "alarmist".

"But I strongly endorse the need for careful consideration of policy in this area, and agree that poor quality care can have harmful effects."

Publishers wishing to reproduce photographs on this page should phone 44 (0) 207 538 7505 or e-mail syndication@telegraph.co.uk

PostPosted: 08.05.2012, 22:30 
Site Admin

Joined: 28.08.2006, 08:49
Posts: 1326
Location: Österreich/Austria
Maria Steuer auf Facebook

Das Abendblatt lügt wie gedruckt. Hier die Wahrheit: "Für weiteren Zündstoff in der Kita-Debatte dürfte das Ergebnis einer neuen amerikanischen Langzeitstudie zur Kinderbetreuung sorgen. Die rund zwei Millionen Dollar teure Untersuchung trägt den Titel
"Are There Long-Term Effects of Early Child Care?"
und gilt als die größte, umfassendste und am längsten angelegte Untersuchung zur Kinderbetreuung in den USA. Finanziert hat sie das staatliche National Institute of Child Health and Human Development,
veröffentlicht hat sie das Fachblatt "Child Development" in seiner aktuellen Ausgabe.

Das Pikante an der Sache: An der Studie sind Forscher der sogenannten NICHD-Studie (National Investigation on Child Development) beteiligt, die der Kita-Betreuung bislang weitgehende Unbedenklichkeit bescheinigt hatte. Krippenbefürworter hatten sich in jüngster Vergangenheit immer wieder auf die NICHD-Studie berufen. Ihnen liefert die neue Studie nun kein Futter mehr, Krippengegner dürften dagegen Aufwind verspüren.

Denn der neuen Untersuchung zufolge entwickeln sich Kinder, die schon früh in Kindertagesstätten aufwachsen, später in der Schule eher zu Störenfrieden und Unruhestiftern als Kinder, die daheim von Eltern, Tagesmüttern oder Kinderfrauen betreut werden. Und zwar unabhängig von der Qualität der Kita.

Dieser Artikel erschien in der Zeitung

Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 

All times are UTC + 1 hour [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum. Software © phpBB Group