Call to Action - Daycare Troubles Ahead for Ontario Parents

Bill 143 Child Care Modernization has passed its First Reading. The Bill seems to stem from well-meaning roots, but some of the proposed changes will wreak havoc on the current daycare situation and cause much difficulty for parents of young children. Ultimately, a number of fantastic, well-run home daycares will have to close and not only will we lose those providers but we will also flood an already-strained system with more children in need of care.

A detailed, concise article explaining the issue can be found here, so I'll not repeat what has already been said. To sum up, the main changes focus on the unlicensed home daycares on which working families depend and the major issues are as follows:

• Providers are limited to 5 charges, including their own children under the age of 6. Previously, a provider could have 5 children in addition to his/her own 
• Providers are only permitted two charges under the age of two. This particular rule would apply to licensed and unlicensed daycares alike

To illustrate what these changes would look like, I present you with the actual situation of someone I know. EJ has two children ages 1 and 3. As both parents work full-time, the children attend an unlicensed daycare in their neighbourhood. The provider, CS, has a large area of the home dedicated to her daycare. The children complete a variety of art projects and other creative activities daily. CS supports Eco-friendly initiatives and uses both cloth diapers and cloth wipes which she provides for her charges. The children all enjoy a variety of nutritious meals and snacks. EJ is extremely happy with the current setup and counts herself lucky that her children have access to such a place.

CS herself has three children and is planning on a fourth. If the proposed changes go through, she would only be permitted one child for whom to provide care. That would not be financially feasible and she would thus need to close her daycare and seek employment out of the home if she wished to make a similar income. In the end, one fantastic daycare would close and six children would be pushed into the system. Now imagine that scenario multiplied ten, twenty, a hundredfold.

As I stated earlier, the changes come from noble enough reasons. Tragedies in overcrowded home daycares have recently been in the media, and the Bill hopes to reign in these home centres and perhaps encourage providers to become licensed. But will squeezing the numbers really make the positive changes they hope for? The age limits seem illogical when children are most in need of daycare when they are not yet school-age. Only allowing two children under the age of two will add more toddlers to wait lists while leaving empty spots in quality home daycares. Many licensed centres do not take infants under the age of 18 months, so where are all these toddlers to go?

In addition, the government ought to look into the licensing process itself. Survey the providers and find out why qualified, well-educated and compassionate daycare providers are not becoming licensed. Perhaps they are tripping on the hoops they must jump through or are finding the timelines too constraining. Maybe they do not wish to be associated with a for-profit licensed centre. Regardless, it is worth discovering so that sensible and appropriate changes can be made to the process, and the desired outcome of more licensed centres can still be met.

Also, and perhaps most importantly, if safety is a priority, why not make annual police screens and CPR certification mandatory? These are often requirements for working or volunteering with vulnerable populations, and do not our children count as such? Similarly, perhaps they should educate the public about what qualities parents ought to look for when selecting a daycare. The information could be disseminated in a variety of ways: info nights at libraries or schools, discussions during well-baby appointments at the doctor, or simple handouts given upon discharge from the hospital.

Bill 143 is well-meaning but flawed. Amendments ought to be made, particularly to the number restrictions currently being proposed. Should the changes go through as they are, many families will be scrambling and competing to find daycare spots. And for those who are unsuccessful, one parent may be forced to stay home until their children are old enough to qualify for daycare (that may be the most ridiculous sentence I have ever written). More people at home, more people needing social assistance...the potential snowball effect is frightening. Maybe the solution is to allow this Bill to pass with the addition of two-year parental leave! That should make everyone happy!

If you are also opposed to Bill 143, please make your voice heard. Write to your MPP or to your local newspaper editor. Spread the word so the message can be amplified: Bill 143 cannot pass as is or young families, and young children, will suffer.