Return of the Nanny: Public Policy towards In‐home Childcare in the UK, Canada and Australia

Abstract

Research on early childhood education and care (ECEC) policy focuses overwhelmingly on formal, centre‐based provision and, to a lesser extent, on family day care (or childminding) provided in the homes of registered carers. Comparatively little research addresses the policy treatment of care provided in the child's home by nannies and au pairs. This article examines the position of in‐home childcare in Australia, the UK and Canada, and the varied nature and extent of public funding and regulation. Introducing a new dimension into comparative studies of ECEC, it also explores how shifts in migration policy in each country have intersected with ECEC funding and regulation to reshape the recruitment and employment of in‐home child carers. Australia, the UK and Canada are all liberal, market‐oriented countries, but there is considerable diversity in the way governments support and regulate in‐home childcare, their rationales for so doing, and in the connections between childcare and migration. We argue that connecting the analysis of in‐home childcare to migration policies raises new questions about the classification and comparison of ECEC policies.

Parenting Stress and the Use of Formal and Informal Child Care: Associations for Fathers and Mothers

“…A place in formal day care is not always available, especially in a convenient location (Adamson & Brennan, 2014). The need to transport children at set times, especially infants below a year old, can be taxing; and parents may prefer they are cared for in their own home (Adamson & Brennan, 2017). Some parents worry that care centers do not cater for the particular needs of their children (Gray, Baxter, & Alexander, 2008).…”

“…However, it is very expensive—fees for a child in day care fulltime can be $30,000 a year (NATSEM, 2013)—and with national average full time earnings at $79,000 a year (ABS, 2017), many families struggle to find affordable, accessible services. Changing work conditions, including more casual jobs and nonstandard working hours, mean many parents also seek more flexibility than is available through the formal childcare market (Adamson & Brennan, 2017), so many families rely on informal carers, either solely or to plug service gaps (Craig & Jenkins, 2015).…”

“…Thus, the use of both informal and formal care has increased in Australia over time (Adamson & Brennan, 2017). By 2014, around 30% of single and partnered mothers used day care centers and a further 20% used family day care (Brady & Perales, 2016).…”

Working and Caring at Home: Gender Differences in the Effects of Covid-19 on Paid and Unpaid Labor in Australia

“…The federal government adjusted the childcare subsidy system, ensuring that services received a weekly "business continuity payment" (Department of Education, Skills and Employment [DESE] 2020). The intervention was both unexpected and welcome because Australian childcare is among the most expensive in the world, nearly five times the European average (Adamson and Brennan 2017).…”

Coronavirus, domestic labour and care: Gendered roles locked down

“…Also, along with income maintenance measures, the government ensured formal childcare was made temporarily free to parents. This was a remarkable intervention, because Australian childcare is usually among the most expensive in the world, nearly five time the European average (Adamson and Brennan, 2017). Through the clarifying lens of the imminent lockdowns, the government could see that if mothers didn't have someone to look after their children, they would have to do it themselves.…”