View Item 

Show simple item record

Recent U.S. Child Care and Family Legislation in Comparative Perspective

dc.contributor.authorHofferth, Sandra L.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDeich, Sharonen_US
dc.date.accessioned2010-04-13T19:52:51Z
dc.date.available2010-04-13T19:52:51Z
dc.date.issued1994en_US
dc.identifier.citationHOFFERTH, SANDRA; DEICH, SHARON (1994). "Recent U.S. Child Care and Family Legislation in Comparative Perspective." Journal of Family Issues 3(15): 424-448. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67859>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0192-513Xen_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67859
dc.description.abstractThis article reviews the history and content of recently passed U.S. child care and family legislation. This legislation is compared to the child care and family policies of four European nations in terms of five major policy objectives: (a) increasing supply, (b) supporting maternal employment, (c) easing the burdens of child rearing, (d) permitting parental choice, and (e) raising the quality of programs. All four European nations have been concerned with promoting childbearing and assisting parents to balance work and family responsibilities. They have also increased national responsibility for the care and education of children ages 3-5 and employer responsibility for parental leave. In contrast to the state-run systems in France, the United States has a market-based system with middle- and upper-income parents making the choices and being reimbursed by the state for part of those expenses. Low-income parents receive targeted subsidies. Recent parental leave legislation brings the United States only slightly closer to Europe because the leave is unpaid.en_US
dc.format.extent3108 bytes
dc.format.extent2192695 bytes
dc.format.mimetypetext/plain
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.publisherSAGE Periodicals Pressen_US
dc.titleRecent U.S. Child Care and Family Legislation in Comparative Perspectiveen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelSocial Worken_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelSociologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumUniversity of Michiganen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherPelavin Associatesen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/67859/2/10.1177_019251394015003005.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/019251394015003005en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdamik, M. (1991). Hungary—Supporting parenting and child rearing: Policy innovation in Eastern Europe. In S. B. Kamerman & A. J. Kahn (Eds.), Child care, parental leave and the under 3s: Policy innovation in Europe (pp. 115-144). Westport, CT: Auburn House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAdvisory Committee on Head Start Quality and Expansion. (1993). Creating a 21st century Head Start. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBarnes, R. (1988, October). The distributional effects of alternative child care proposals. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management, Seattle, WA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClarke-Stewart, A. (1989). Infant day care: Maligned or malignant?American Psychologist, 44, 266-273.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCombes, J. (1993). France. In M. Cochran (Ed.), International handbook of child care policies and programs (pp. 187-209). Westport, CT: Greenwood.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCrenshaw, A. (1991, February 14). An IRS chiller: Case of the disappearing dependents, or where did millions of children go?Washington Post, p. 21.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavid, H. (1982). Eastern Europe: Pronatalist policies and private behavior. Population Bulletin, 36, 1-48.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavid, M. G., & Starzec, C. (1991). France: A diversity of family options. In S. B. Kamerman & A. J. Kahn (Eds.), Child care, parental leave and the under 3s: Policy innovation in Europe (pp. 81-113). Westport, CT: Auburn House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFinn-Stevenson, M., & Trzcinski, E. (1990). Public policy issues surrounding parental leave: A state-by-state analysis of parental leave legislation. Unpublished manuscript.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGolonka, S., & Ooms, T. (1991). Child care in the 101st Congress: What was achieved and how will it work?Washington, DC: The Family Impact Seminar.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGunnarsson, L. (1993). Sweden. In M. Cochran (Ed.), International handbook of child care policies and programs (pp. 491-514). Westport, CT: Greenwood.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHofferth, S. (1993). Child care in the 101st Congress: Emerging agenda for children in poverty. In J. Chafel (Ed.), Childhood poverty and public policy (pp. 203-243). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHofferth, S., Brayfield, A., Deich, S., & Holcomb, P. (1991). The national child care survey 1990. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKamerman, S. (1991). Child care policies and programs: An international overview. Journal of Social Issues, 47(2), 179-196.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKamerman, S. B., & Kahn, A. J. (1981). Child care, family benefits, and working parents. New York: Columbia University Press.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKamerman, S. B., & Kahn, A. J. (Eds.). (1991). Child care, parental leave and the under 3s: Policy innovation in Europe. Westport, CT: Auburn House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMc Intosh, C. A. (1987). Recent pronatalist policies in Western Europe. In K. Davis, M. Bernstam, & R. Ricardo-Campbell (Eds.), Below-replacement fertility in industrial societies: Causes, consequences, policies(Supplement to Population and Development Review) (Vol. 12, pp. 318-334). New York: Population Council.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNational Commission on Children. (1991). Beyond rhetoric: A new American agenda for children and families. Washington, DC: Author.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceNemenyi, Maria. (1993). Hungary. In M. Cochran (Ed.), International handbook of child care policies and programs (pp. 231-245). Westport, CT: Greenwood.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO'Connell, M. (1990). Maternity leave arrangements: 1961-85. Work and family patterns of American women. In Current Population Reports (pp. 11-27), Special Studies Series P-23, No. 165. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOlmsted, P. (1988). Child care in 17 countries: The many worlds of today's preschoolers. High/Scope Resource, Spring/Summer, 1-3.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePettinger, R. (1993). Germany. In M. Cochran (Ed.), International handbook of child care policies and programs (pp. 211-230). Westport, CT: Greenwood.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePhillips, D. (Ed.). (1987). Quality in child care: What does research tell us?Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRichardson, G., & Marx, E. (1989). A welcome for every child: How France achieves quality in child care. Washington, DC: French-American Foundation.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRobins, P. (1988). Federal support for child care: Current policies and a proposed new system. Focus, 11(2), 1-9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSchiersmann, C. (1991). Germany: Recognizing the value of childrearing. In S. B. Kamerman & A. J. Kahn (Eds.), Child care, parental leave and the under 3s: Policy innovation in Europe (pp. 51-79). Westport, CT: Auburn House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSorrentino, C. (1990). The changing family in international perspective. Monthly Labor Review, 113(3), 41-58.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpencer, G. (1989). Projections of the population of the United States by age, sex, and race: 1988 to 2080. Current Population Reports, Series P-25, No. 1018.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSundstrom, M. (1991). Parenting policies for young families in Sweden. In S. B. Kamerman & A. J. Kahn (Eds.), Child care, parental leave and the under 3s: Policy innovation in Europe (pp. 171-199). Westport, CT: Auburn House.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceU.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (1989). Employee benefits in medium and large firms, 1988 (Bulletin 2336). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceU.S. Congress. (1990). Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, section 5082, P.L.101-508. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceU.S. Congress. (1993). Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993 (Conference Report). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWhitebook, M., Howes, C., & Phillips, D. (1989). Who cares? Child care teachers and the quality of care in America. Oakland, CA: Child Care Employee Project.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWiller, B. (Ed.). (1990). Reaching the full cost of quality. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWiller, B., Hofferth, S., Kisker, E., Divine-Hawkins, P., Farquhar, E., & Glantz, F. (1991). The demand and supply of child care in 1990: Joint findings from the National Child Care Survey 1990 and a Profile of Child Care Settings. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
10.1177_019251394015003005.pdf
Size:
2.091MB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.