Exposing the Critical Neglect of Childcare

With the emergence of punitive abortion bans since the overturning of Roe v. Wade (1973), it seems only natural for the U.S. government to also establish more accessible childcare services, as they can help ameliorate the burdens faced by parents who may now be compelled to raise children under inequitable conditions.1 Nevertheless, a stark reality remains: despite being one of the wealthiest nations globally, the U.S. continues to lag significantly in providing adequate childcare support for families, especially in comparison with other countries.2 Instead, the staggering costs and inaccessibility of childcare caused by this discrepancy are left to families to endure in isolation, leading to detrimental repercussions for both individuals and the overall economy.

The Issues with Childcare in the US

The issues surrounding childcare in the US are not just concerning: they are urgent, regardless of the context of abortion. The structures of childcare and labor systemically breed deep and devastating impacts on families and children, generating a web of difficult choices for parents and further exacerbating economic disparities. Thus, prior to identifying how the U.S. can improve its current system, it is necessary to precisely pinpoint the structural issues, grasp the extent of harm to children and families, and highlight the economic reasons we are so urgently inclined to seek an alternative structure. 

The U.S. has two main interconnected challenges within childcare: it faces both the issue of exorbitant costs for these services and lacks the government structures to help individuals with affordability.3 In the U.S., expenses of full-time care for an infant have now actually exceeded that of college tuition for more than half of the states in the country.4 For instance, in New York, parental costs had become $12,844 annually in 2020, measuring about $231,192 over 18 years. This excludes the consideration of inflation costs entirely, which would likely increase this calculation much more.5 These costs consume a substantial portion of parents' incomes annually, accounting for about 41.7% of a single parent's income and 11.2% of a married couple's in New York.6 With these costs, the need for government-led childcare programming becomes a dire necessity. Low-income families, in particular, often struggle to access quality childcare due to these prohibitive costs, perpetuating cycles of poverty and preventing social mobility. By extension, this also disproportionately affects racially marginalized communities, such as Black, Indigenous, and Hispanic families, who are disproportionately represented in low-income classes, worsening other related inequalities in the U.S. as well. The lack of government-led childcare programs creates insurmountable financial barriers for parents that directly dictate a child's access to adequate care and shape their long-term growth and development, indicating how the effects of these financial issues reverberate to other areas. 

Most families in America are expected to raise these childcare funds on their own, but there are some government subsidy programs available to low-income families to help them overcome these economic barriers. Nevertheless, the criteria for eligibility for these programs are incomprehensive in assessing the full scope of financial need for the U.S. population. For instance, the income threshold for a three-person family is 85% of the state median income, which is approximately $59,687 for the U.S. overall.7 However, the way this strict benchmark has been drawn completely excludes families even just slightly above the line, who are still likely struggling to meet the high cost of childcare in the U.S. In addition to these limitations, regional variability in living costs and income continues to exacerbate these issues, as these differences are not adequately considered in the eligibility guidelines. Thus, families living in areas with higher living costs, who are already dealing with expenses such as housing, healthcare, and education, may find it even more challenging to allocate funds towards childcare expenses compared to families in other states with a similar percentile of income. This forces parents, particularly women, to make difficult choices, as it often leaves them in an impossible predicament, torn between sustaining employment to support their families and ensuring their children receive the proper care they need. Finally, even when families do qualify for monthly childcare subsidies, there still lies a fundamental gap between the eligibility and utilization of these services. According to the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, even though approximately 12.5 million children were deemed eligible for these subsidies, only 16% actually received them, underscoring a deeper issue of program accessibility.8 

The issues within childcare extend to workplace barriers that require parents to seek childcare from external sources, inevitably building issues within our larger economic system. The nature of U.S. labor conditions includes limited paid family leave and inflexible work conditions that restrict parents' ability to adequately meet the needs of their children. In many ways, the forms in which labor has been structured in the U.S. have forced parents to rely on alternative and more expensive childcare services, such as daycares, which continue to raise costs for families. Without either affordable external childcare support, comprehensive government subsidy, or accommodating labor structures in place, working parents continue to struggle to balance their professional responsibilities with childcare duties, which ultimately shapes their employment decisions. This fundamental absence of support from companies or governments leads to alienation and resistance within labor for parents, leading to broader economic consequences, such as decreased workforce participation, especially for women. The Center of American Progress (CAP), a public policy research and advocacy organization, stated that mothers who did not find childcare services experienced a drastic decline in employment rates as opposed to mothers who did.9 These impacts in workforce participation inevitably translate to a loss of about $57 billion dollars through earnings, productivity, and revenue nationally due to the childcare challenges.10 

Challenges of childcare also encompass the systemic issue of inadequate compensation for childcare workers, who predominantly consist of women from Black and Latina backgrounds, underscoring the devaluation of this work in the larger society.11 Despite their crucial role in nurturing children's development, many of these caregivers receive disproportionately low wages. The Economic Policy Institute reports that the average hourly wage for childcare workers is $13.51, significantly below the general workforce's average.12 Childcare workers play an essential role in shaping future generations by providing vital care and education. They are the key stakeholders who can uphold the quality of childcare services, meaning it is critical that they receive fair compensation for their invaluable contributions.

It is evident that there are many underlying obstacles to affording quality childcare in the U.S. As working parents are forced to navigate this system of barriers, it is deeply necessary for some type of reform or structural change. Therefore, it is important we strive for solutions in these specific subcategories: affordability, accessibility, workforce support, and parental leave. Norway serves as a compelling role model for addressing this. 

A Path Towards Comprehensive Childcare

The most apparent solution to the childcare crisis would be to implement a universal childcare system in which high-quality care is available and affordable to all families. However, the expectation that the U.S. will transform its system from a completely privatized model to a public one is unrealistic. Nevertheless, we can still use Norway's social model to understand the features that help make childcare so successful there and build a more tangible strategy for the U.S. that incorporates those aspects, even within a private system. 

Norway's childcare system implements specific policies that increase accessibility to childcare for the population. Primarily, they gauge financial need based on different measurements and also hold a much lower income threshold to spread access to more robust subsidies. No family pays more than 6% of their total income for childcare, as opposed to 31% in the U.S.13 Similar to Norway, the U.S. could adopt a standardized percentage of childcare costs in an individual's income as a measure for the amount of subsidies the government should provide them instead of a fixed income threshold. This could help us better gauge the need for financial assistance and, subsequently, expand accessibility in a similar way. By doing this, we additionally help absolve the issue of regional differences in living costs. Using the local costs for childcare in this measurement would additionally allow the U.S. to tailor subsidy amounts to relative economic conditions and living costs, permitting families across different states to receive adequate support to afford childcare services. Although it may not be successful for the U.S. percentage requirements to be as low as 6% like in Norway, these reforms could help decrease the exclusiveness of eligibility qualifications and, subsequently, lessen the number parents spend on childcare from the current-one-third. The model of Norway does not need to seem so far-fetched: Canada, a neighboring country with a comparable economic system to the U.S., has implemented a similar reform with positive benefits. In the program, they pledged $24 billion over five years to establish a more federally funded childcare system, significantly reducing the financial burden on families.14 More autonomy was given to provinces over implementation details to tailor programs to local needs in a similar way to this U.S.-adapted proposal.

In addition to Norway's subsidy programs, their emphasis on fair parental leave continues to ameliorate childcare burdens. The paternal and maternal leave given to Norwegian workers consists of either 49 weeks total for both parents with full paid leave or 59 weeks with 80% paid leave. However, in the U.S. system, leave is significantly less, almost nonexistent, with companies typically providing an average of 4 weeks for paid maternity leave and an average of 2.5 weeks for paid paternity leave.15 Increased access and duration to paid parental leave can alleviate financial strain on families, allowing parents to take necessary time off to bond with their newborns without sacrificing or worrying about economic security and also increasing workplace productivity and employee satisfaction.

Clearly, Norway's approach to childcare is uniquely characterized by its strong emphasis on universal access, government funding, high-quality standards, work-life balance, and gender equality. In contrast to both of those systems, the U.S. system is more fragmented, holds a greater reliance on private providers, lacks consistent levels of government support, and faces challenges related to affordability, accessibility, and quality. While these issues in the U.S. can be improved by the possible reforms outlined above, such as accounting for regional differences in living costs, none of these policies can even be implemented without instigating a cultural shift within the public. Resistance to government involvement in childcare, concerns about individual freedom and parental choice, and debates over the role of government in family life present impending obstacles to implementing a more robust childcare system. Therefore, any sort of program aiming to implement childcare reforms must start with addressing these aversions, particularly through building awareness around the reasons the industry of childcare, in particular, needs to be decommodified to some degree. As current narratives often focus on the direct costs we lose through government assistance programs within childcare, it is essential to communicate how this initial government investment yields greater benefits than burdens in the long term, making it a worthwhile endeavor. In fact, a 2023 study asserted that approximately $122 billion could be saved annually through effective investment in quality childcare services for infants and toddlers, as these more preventative solutions bring benefits to working parents that reverberate in many aspects of their lives.16 Engaging the public through awareness campaigns can highlight the economic and moral benefits of extensive childcare for families and society, helping shift cultural perceptions and build support for policy change. Additionally, as Norway has a higher GDP per capita—about $108,729 in 2022—compared to the US, concerns about GDP consequences from social programs hold less salience.17 Federal government spending ensures both equitable access to quality childcare and economic growth. 

The issue of childcare demands urgent attention and action, as it implicates central parts of people's lives. Ensuring access to quality childcare services not only supports the healthy development of children but also promotes gender equality, enhances workforce productivity, and strengthens societal well-being. By addressing the childcare crisis and prioritizing the needs of children and families, we can truly uphold the value of life and create a more just and compassionate society for all.