Social Problems and Identification of Indicators
Project Research Paper
- Social Problems and Identification of Indicators
Child care is a pivotal social issue that determines the causative effects of how a child grows up. According to the Canadian Social Welfare Policy, three factors are considered regarding the well-being of a society (Chappell, 2013). They include status, life events and critical influences. With respect to child care, there are facets to consider, including learning, financial incentives, environment, health, family life, housing and safety (Chappell, 2013). The factors that affect a child’s development orbit on psychological, social, educational, family and psychosocial.
The individual needs of a child as opposed to an adult are unique and specific. From a private perspective, good quality child care ensures that guardians or parents all the necessary incentives to secure the growth and development of a child in the right manner. It is known that good quality care can have positive, long-lasting effects on child development. In a utopian family setting, parents or guardians would have sufficient income to sustain the factors that a child needs to grow and develop.
To better understand how social, physical, psychological and educational factors contribute to child development, intellectual enlightenment will do so. Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is an elaborative theory that focuses on the psychological needs of humans at different levels. The particular needs that the theory addresses are safety, love and belonging, esteem, self-actualization and physiological needs. From a child care perspective, the theory articulates how the individual needs of children are necessary for proper growth and development.
From the bottom, children need basic human needs. They are shelter, water, housing and clothing. These needs are shared across all levels of needs in humans. The second need is safety and security. For children to thrive, cognitively and psychologically, they need a sense of security not only from their homes but, from their guardians. In other words, children care requires consistency and predictability, where routine thrives within a comfortable environment. Simultaneously, relationships are pivotal to child care and significant growth and development. Healthy relationships help a child grow rapidly with a sense of cohesion on emotional, physical, spiritual and psychological tenets. As a result, the sense of self-actualization through achievement is another crucial need for child care. It allows children to dream, fascinate, act without fear, find purpose and learn from their parents or guardians without resistance.
Family is an essential social aspect in Canada. However, Canada lacks an integrative child care system and policy. The scope of child care is to make it easier for parents to care for their children while juggling busy schedules. It allows children to thrive, and parents have a better work-life balance (“Learn the Issues,” 2013). The lack of proper child care system is proving difficult for mothers in Canada. To be specific, new parents are finding themselves working harder and longer to sustain lifestyles and family security. It is estimated that 70% of mothers with children under five work (“Learn the Issues,” 2013). There are no regulated spaces for infants and toddlers with disabilities, aboriginal and rural children who make up 19% of children under the age of 12 years. Canadian lack of child care system makes it easier for for-profit organizations to profit from parents who are reported to grow rapidly at 28% (“Learn the Issues,” 2013). For families in the low-income bracket, it is difficult to access good child care. As a result, parents are required to seek either relative support. For some, there lacks a proper after school program to care for the children. It is estimated that 46% of high-end and middle-income families seek quality and professional health care compared to 32% in low-income families for those who earn below $ 40 000 (Government of Canada, 2014).
The underlying issue is that Canada’s lack of proper social policy on child care does not safeguard that children are getting the appropriate care. Child arrangements in Canada comprise of nannies, daycare centres, and home care and private arrangements. The ability to access each type is dependent on income status, region, marital status and number of children (Government of Canada, 2014). According to a study on child care in Canada, results indicate that for-profit child care does not necessarily secure quality care for children (“Learn the Issues,” 2013). The lack of proper child care system disregards the need for well-trained, fairly paid staff and educated child guardians. Thus, the effect of child care policy is no longer a private concern but a public one as well. It transcends from economic, financial, social, education, family life and society as well as psychological development of children in the country.
Historical Perspective on Child Care
Before the 20th century, Canada lacked a proper child care system and policy. In an attempt to ensure the safety of children in the country, the first social policy on child care was instituted in 1970 under the Royal Commission on the Status of Women. It was the first attempt in proposing a national care program for children. Since then, there have been at least three to five attempts for the Canadian federal government to develop a national child care strategy (Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 2012). They include the 1986 Task Force on Child Care, 1987 Special Committee on Child Care and the Foundations Programs which was cancelled in 2006.
The 1986 Task Force on Child Care was proposed shortly after the 1984 federal elections where the Liberal government announced that a Task Force on Child Care would be implemented (Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 2012). The objective was to cater to the need for child care services and paid parental leave. Additionally, it was proposed that the federal government’s role was to safeguard child care through the development of an effective system. However, as soon as the Task Force was able to complete its mandate, the Liberal government lost the elections and was replaced by the Mulroney Progressive Conservatives (Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 2012). Thus, the report by the Task Force was shelved and forgotten.
In 1987 the Special Committee on Child Care was presented under the Mulroney government. The objective was to issue tax reliefs for parents, grants to for-profit organizations and businesses to create workplace child care (Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 2012). The proposal was widely criticised on the premise that parents were not to be given a tax-break and that the Federal government was losing sight of its original principles and standards. As a result, the Child Care Act was abolished.
The trend has been consistent with several nullifications of programs for child care. An example is the 2005 Foundations Program which was Liberal government’s agenda in promoting child care from the instituted Child Care and Canadian Federalism of the 1990s on coal mines (Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 2012). Others are the National Daycare Plan, Child Care’s Time and Child Care Program; the Manitoba Child Care Act and the Dryden 10 Child Care agreements were disbanded in 2005. In general, there lacks a federal premise on child care policy or regulation. However, this is different from the ground-level up.
On the bright side, it was in 2015 when a new regulation was amended on Child Care. It is known as the Child Care and Early Years Act of 2014 that replaced the Day Nurseries Act in Ontario. The Act focuses on unlicensed care, home care, licenced child care centres and licenced caregivers (Ontario, 2015). There is an Act that supports families through financial aid on child care choices under S.C. 2006 c. 4, s. 168 (Branch, 2016). It only safeguards child care from a financial perspective and not on the hierarchy of needs as described under Maslow’s theory.
Service Delivery Model
Canada’s 14 jurisdictions, three territories and the federal government, has individualised ideologies and participatory roles on child care. In general, the programs on child care involve education, objectives in mitigating poverty and supporting parents and care (Richardson and Langford, 2018). The structure of child care is organic meaning each jurisdiction, territory and the Canadian federal government has individualised conception, social policy and law regarding child care. Primarily, it revolves around nursery, pre-school, centre-based full daycare and regulated family child care services (Richardson and Langford, 2018). From a provincial perspective, child care programs are legislations that require the operation of services, including financial support from the governments either through social or community-based services (Richardson and Langford, 2018). Territorial and provincial governments also have responsibilities for public school programs for five years old under the education ministries. In other words, the child care system or policy revolves around caring and provision of child education at an early age, such as the Aboriginal Head Start and the First Nations/Inuit Child Care Initiative.
Another service model delivery by the provinces is through the provision of social services for child care. Initially, this was not a service provided in Canada up until the 1970s. The mandatory funding by provinces ensures that social service program is efficient in managing the enforcement of policies on child care in the regions (Richardson and Langford, 2018). However, there is still a high incidence of out-of-pocket support for child care from parents, especially from the middle-class economic rank. The reason is due to the rejection of the tax exemption for parents in the 1970s under the federal government.
For the Federal Government, there is little intervention when it comes to child care from a national level. It was not until 1942 that the Federal Government of Canada instituted an intervention for standardised and organised child care. The role has been indirect and limited with emphasis on financial assistance to parents (Richardson and Langford, 2018). Under the Canada Assistance Plan of 1966, the federal government provided an initiative to eliminate poverty levels in the country. Since then, the government has supported a cost-sharing program with the territories, jurisdictions and provinces in the provision of welfare services for parents (Richardson and Langford, 2018). The conditions, nevertheless, only permit financial aid for parents who are needy, are in potential need for assistance and are eligible for financial welfare assistance. The regulation only encompasses both public and private assistance. The service delivery model is exclusive for families of low-income as well as middle-income.
The role of participatory democracy is the assurance that citizens participate in the expression of their rights and views. It encompasses aspects of social, economic, socio-economic and political avenues. However, the concept of participatory democracy is disenfranchised in the region (Richardson and Langford, 2018). According to Chappell (2013), the ideology of the federal government and the subsequent governments has been limited. Roles on social welfare policies among government policymakers only focus on each level and not on a vertical perspective. The only achievement that the social policy on child care has achieved is the introduction of the cost-sharing arrangements and nothing more (Chappell, 2013). Nevertheless, accountability has been achieved with each government playing its due role in ensuring the policy on child care is effective in each province, territory, jurisdictions and from a national level.
Service Providers
The policy on child care in Canada focuses on three dimensions: professional, non-professional and intermediate. The type of care is dependent on the territory, province, and jurisdictions. The federal cost-sharing policy framework requires the parties to provide a long-term solution that allows the government officials to work closely with service providers, early childhood educators and school authorities on child care policies. With respect to education, the role is played by paid professionals that range from teachers, educators and authorities. The regulations stipulate that with education for infants and toddlers, there is a widespread regulation on learning. It includes full-day (mixed), part-day preschools, home and family care, school-age and family resource programs.
The aspect of child care from a non-financial perspective does not include government subsidies. As a result, there is little regulation on the professionalism that child care requires. In this case, parents are allowed to seek two options: the high quality or unregulated child care. For both, paid professionals, intermediate professionals and unpaid non-professionals are included. The child care professional is dependent on the type of child care sought out by the parents. They include home daycares, private arrangements such as grandparents or relatives, nannies and daycare centres. In most cases, parents within the low-income bracket prefer using non-paid unprofessional individuals, including relatives or nannies.
Daycare centres offer professional services which can range from as low $ 150 to as high as $ 1 500 (Government of Canada, 2014). Daycare centres are different for the territories, jurisdictions and provinces. For instance, Atlantic Provinces prefer private care compared to a home daycare, whereas, Ontario and Prairie Provinces prefer daycare centres to home care centres. The preference for private care for children below the age of four is highest in the eastern and western region (“Learn the Issues,” 2013). Most parents prefer turning to private care for children of very young age. It is characterised by low professionalism and unpaid non-professionals. They are nannies, grandparents or other relatives or other means of private arrangement such as neighbours. The private arrangement is preferred given that parents do not have to incur any expenses when it comes to caring for their children (Branch, 2016). Therefore, the use of home daycare is a preferable take for low-income parents which is characterised with low-quality care due to lack of professional standards.
Local governments identify community-based and parent-based child care as an important factor in early child care. The delivery of the service, however, is not regulated, which means voluntary care for children is allowed (Government of Canada, 2014). Voluntary based services are provided by non-professionals who are either paid or not paid and are in the for-profit sector. In this case, the parents have limited control over the care of their children with the bulk of the services falling on the service provider (Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 2012). The only burden the parent experiences are the need to pay for service fee to the volunteers. In general, child care service providers are divided into professional, intermediate and non-professional (Childcare Resource and Research Unit, 2012). Depending on the type of quality care sort by the parents, the child is subjected to either relative care, professional care or volunteer care. Hence, the quality of care in Canada is low, given that the country has not centralised regulation on child care welfare from a social policy perspective, and the only regard is on educational and cost-sharing programs.
Critical Analysis
Canada is experiencing an increase in disparities regarding children on health and social constructs. Most children in Canada experience an influential life that ranges from poverty, violence, social dislocation and infant mortality in the region (Denburg, 2016). Compared to other countries, Canada’s perception of social welfare for children is ranked lower than the Netherlands and Scandinavia. It is necessary to understand the impact that social policy on child care has on safeguarding the interests and rights of children in Canada for a better future.
From a social policy point of view, the fundamental values presented on child care include the elimination of poverty or its amelioration, the value on increased economic equality and improve child health and educational care (Pasolli, 2015). Currently, the social welfare policy on child care is inept. From medical care to technological and educational premises, there are perceivable problems regarding Canadian Children (Denburg, 2016). There is little pre-emption solution discourse on these issues. There lacks a proper all-round well-resourced child care system that encompasses health care, education, economic status and welfare of Canadian children. It is important to have such as refined system since it promotes dignity and opportunity.
A deeper analysis of the social policy uncovers political influences in safeguarding the rights of Canadian children. Legislation and policies promote the values that guide the decisions that can give a big difference to the health and well-being of the children in society (Pasolli, 2015). Based on the historical and current legislative participation, I have given enough thought on the political influence on the social policy and the conclusion is that evolutionary political cultures and institutions around the country have provided little address to the social problem (Denburg, 2016). The political culture of the region uncovers the ideology that the discourse on the promotion of child welfare is never on the values of liberty and equality or solidarity; it is always in favour of political ideologies.
However, there are important strides that have been made in the country regarding the social problem. The financial incentives the federal government provides to the state and local governments in carrying out the policies on behalf of parents (Denburg, 2016). The incentives concentrate on the educational aspects of children above the age of five. The downside to this political ideology is the myopic observation that education is the only facet need under Maslow’s hierarchy of needs theory that can be supported by the governments. There are other needs including social, psychological and health needs. There is little address on this within the child care policy (Pasolli, 2015). Further, the political influence on the social issue from a historical point of view showcases a controversial case. Differential opinions about taxation of parents, to the countrywide provision of child care services and address of poverty amelioration for low-income families, are among the factors argued upon the different representatives (Denburg, 2016). There is a need for cooperation among all government representatives either vertically and horizontally. The essence of child care is not a private endeavour for parents, but a concerted public need that requires immediate evaluation and address from all levels of government in Canada. There needs a widespread analysis of how the federal, state and local governments can help achieve a unified child care system that protects the rights and needs of Canadian children and protection of parents from exploitation from the for-profit organizations in child care.
Conclusion: Recommendations
If I were the Minister within the Canadian federal government, with regard to the social problem on lack of a proper child care system, I would use three key principles to ensure the safe delivery of social policy on this matter. The principles I would use are equal rights and social justice, equity and choice and social needs and social problems. The reason I choose these principles is the state of welfare for children in the country. The report above has shown the loopholes within the social welfare policy that do not give holistic regard for the rights and safety of Canadian children. To properly enact a social policy, I would recommend the use of the social problems facing children including poverty, lack of access to high-quality education, altruistic view of access to proper child care and reduced burden to parents on fees paid for child care.
The principles suggested emphasize the institutional approach to social welfare. The model proposes the amplification of values and beliefs of how people’s welfare can be promoted. It is a fundamental basis for child care in Canada. The model ensures that children’s rights are protected through the provision of essential services, the values and beliefs that the community are catered for including health, social and health. Concurrently, the approach will focus on the pooling of resources from the federal, state and local governments. Institutionalisation, on the other hand, will promote community-based, local-based and family-based cohesion in promotion of the child care welfare in different regions. The idea is to ensure that children are given the best care from a standardised perspective which also safeguards parents from excessive exploitation from for-profit organisations.
To ensure inclusivity, the social policy will promote local, community, government and family platform for increased expression. Currently, there lacks a proper participatory democracy that ensures even the citizen’s perspective is heard. Through the institutional approach, communities will be provided with enhanced contributory roles compared to the past. The implication to the service providers and organizations is the need to conform to the legal provisions that the governments will cater for from federal, local and state. It will also ensure that service providers are licensed and have the proper educational tools required in providing all-inclusive child care for all levels of age groups.
References
Branch, L. S. (2016, July 1). Consolidated federal laws of Canada, An Act to assist families by supporting their child care choices through direct financial support and to make consequential and related amendments to certain Acts. https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/u-3.2/page-1.html#h-462246
Chappell, R. (2013). Social welfare in Canadian society. ITP Nelson.
Childcare Resource and Research Unit. (2012). Canada’s history of the never-was national child care program | Child care Canada. https://www.childcarecanada.org/documents/research-policy-practice/12/02/canada%E2%80%99s-history-never-was-national-child-care-program
Denburg, A. (2016). Canadian values, social policy and the health of our kids. Paediatrics & child health, 21(5), 242-244.
Government of Canada, S. C. (2014, October 30). Child care in Canada. https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/89-652-x/89-652-x2014005-eng.htm
Learn the Issues. (2013, February 25). Rethink Child Care. https://rethinkchildcare.ca/learn/
Ontario. (2015). Child care rules under the Child Care and Early Years Act, 2014 (CCEYA) | Ontario.ca. https://www.ontario.ca/page/child-care-rules-child-care-and-early-years-act
Pasolli, K. E. (2015). Comparing child care policy in the Canadian provinces. Canadian Political Science Review, 9(2), 63-78.
Richardson, B., & Langford, R. (2018). Early childhood education and care in Canada: Consistently inconsistent childcare policy. International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Care (pp. 20-33). Routledge.