Addressing Misconceptions about Early Childhood Educators

In Dr. Jane Healy’s book, Different Learners, she clearly states, “…today’s lifestyles are a big part of the problems we see affecting young children. Even in affluent communities, the most basic needs of a youngster’s developing brain are violated on a daily basis. How are parents, teachers, caregivers or children to succeed in a culture that does not respect its most important asset-the developing mind?”

Maybe the answer lies in the fact there seems to be different attitudes about who should be shaping the minds of children during the critical first three years. Unfortunately, the most popular style of care, for an infant when parents are unavailable, is inherited by a housekeeper/maid, usually grossly underpaid and patronizingly referred to as part of the family. This person who, often speaks a different language than the parents and almost certainly does not share the same cultural values, is unexpectedly given the monumental task of shaping the mind of the child. They are simply allowed to influence the development of the child’s mind because they have worked with the family before and said, “I like children.”

In the best of circumstances, the maid/housekeeper is asked to take courses on childcare methods of the parents choosing. This is a leap of faith at best. The employer/parent’s are assuming that this level of professional childcare is equal to a skilled labor that can be taught over a series of two-hour courses to anyone regardless of their educational background. In addition, parents have no idea if these methods will be put into practice when the parents are not present.

People from a different cultural backgrounds often have very ingrained in them a right and wrong way to treat an infant and may choose to ignore what they learned in the course, not out of malice, but out of their genuine concern for the child. The responsibility for any negative results this may bring lies squarely on the parents and not the worker, who must reluctantly accept a caregiver role in order to maintain their livelihood.

On the other-hand we have the case of when parents seek out professional caregivers. Many parents take it upon themselves to find the most qualified, most trained, most experienced and professional caregiver they can find who fits their parenting approach best and… is willing to do windows, cook and clean while the child is sleeping (for a fraction of the hourly rate of a professional dog-walker). This level of condescension, blatant disrespect for a professional and most importantly the child, is reflected at the moment of payment. If we hire a plumber or a handyman, when they complete their job they hand us the bill. Often, they will not leave without collecting payments. When it comes to a person hired to care for children it is not uncommon to hear, “this is how much I will ‘give’ you.” In this case, a child is not allowed enough consideration to be taught by a professional who is treated like a professional. “Giving” carries with it the subtle implication that the professional (teacher/caregiver etc.) is fortunate to be “given” a certain amount of money. As if they are competing for the same position with the housekeeper. Either way, the conclusion seems to be the same, a child is not entitled to more care an expertise than a housekeeper can provide, anything beyond that is a luxury.

Here the solution, or conclusion is a simple one, if you can afford to educate yourself and stay with your child for that crucial period of time, do it. It is a short period of time that is as beautiful and unforgettable as it is fleeting. If this is not possible and you need the help of another person to be there when you are not, make sure that you consider first and foremost the value of your child and find for them an educated professional whom you respect and admire enough to share time with your child.

Post by: Magdalena S. Palencia and Roseann Murphy