In the dim evening light of my bedroom, I could barely make out the surprise that lay on my pillow. A tiny note with delicate handwriting was awaiting me. I strained my eyes to read the words:
"Mommy you're so nice and funny. I love you. You are the best!!!"
TRENDING: Greatest Show on Earth: The Hur report hearing
Adorning the note were hearts, a smiley face and the "x"s and "o"s that symbolize a little girl's kisses and hugs. The treasure was from my 9-year-old daughter Kristin.
I reflected on the routine events of the day: I had worked in my home office, assisted the children in their home schooling, driven them to various group lessons, etc. For some unexplained reason, my daughter had penned a simple expression of her affection and thoughtfully placed it so it would be among the last words I "heard" before drifting off to sleep.
My husband and I seek to raise children that are intelligent and loving. We've passed-up opportunities to earn more money and much else to be home with them during their early years. As the children grow, we've remained committed to making our home my "place" of business. The time we pour into our children is paying off: it's evident each day that they are thriving from the nurture that only family can provide. And I wouldn't miss it for the world. As the commercial says, "this is the good stuff."
Yet, according to "child care experts" my children are likely to suffer because I'm not a licensed child-care professional with formal training in child rearing.
I kid you not.
A recent University of Washington "study" of children in the care of family members and friends reveals that this unregulated care causes children to be less educated and affluent than the general population. Richard Brandon, the study's co-author said, "About 30 percent of these children are in care enough hours a week for its quality to affect their development."
The answer to this dreadful family care situation? Why government-sponsored, taxpayer-funded training, of course!
Incidentally, the co-author of the study is also the co-director of a policy center that advocates increased government spending and government intrusion into our lives and families. Surprised?
The "study" is particularly hard on grandmothers. Seems it would be better to send a precious grandchild off with the herd to an impersonal day-care center filled with slobber-laden "learning toys" and government-licensed professionals than to be in the love and care of grandma.
I have always found it heart-breaking to see young children strapped into car seats at 6:30 a.m. on their way to jam-packed day-care centers where many of them will remain for 10 hours or more. I think we all know where the child would rather be. But the advocates of socialized day care are bolstered by the "study" in their quest for control. Nina Auerbach, chief executive officer of Child Care Resources in Washington says of children who are cared for by family members, "There's this whole group of people out there caring for kids, and nobody is watching them, and nobody is helping them. We just can't ignore this whole segment of care anymore."
Although the criticism in the "study" is on grandmothers, extended family and friends – rather than moms – mothering is cleverly and indirectly called into question: Moms are not licensed and don't routinely receive government training – therefore, children raised by moms are at risk too. The shrewd "researchers" know that to question the value of mom, baseball or apple-pie would cause their study to be chucked by the bulk of thinking Americans. So, they went after grandma in hopes it would be easy to convince us of the lie that the elder mother becomes inept somewhere along the way.
Several years ago, I made a presentation about the value of mother and family care. A "day-care advocate" presented the "virtues" of socialized, cookie-cutter day-care services. She enthusiastically pointed to the benefits of day-care over home care with only one example, "Our children obtain skills earlier, like learning to tie their shoes at a younger age."
While extolling the early development of the incredibly important life-skill of shoe tying, she conveniently forgot to mention the many ills of socialized care. As Janice Crouse of the Beverly LaHaye Institute points out, these include, "higher risk for serious respiratory-tract infections, chronic ear infections, and infectious diarrhea." And that's just for starters. (Learn more at the Beverly LaHaye Institute and Mothers At Home.
Like millions of unlicensed, unchecked, unsupervised and untrained moms and grandmas, I don't just think family care is better, I know it is. And in her heart, America knows it too.
Related offer:
Are dads better than moms? "Father and Child Reunion" is creating equal opportunity for men. Available now through WorldNetDaily's online store!