I was emailed by a friend down in Alabama who told me that early childhood education folks in her state are starting to think pre-birth or pre-natal to five, not just birth to five. This is evidenced in a blueprint they submitted using Recovery Act funds. Pay special attention to page 2 in the document embedded below:
It is bad enough that the state is getting involved early childhood education and taking kids away from their parents at an earlier age. Here is what they wrote:
Our goal is to use one-time funding to put into place important infrastructure components or building blocks for a coordinated and comprehensive system for young children pre-birth to age five. As an economic development initiative to support working families and build for a future of prosperity, there are few investments that will provide such a return. Because of the relatively small investments we currently make in young children and because there is such fertile ground for impact, few opportunities provide such a cost-benefit return. (emphasis mine)
What in the world do they anticipate doing for kids pre-birth? I shudder to think.
It seems to me that the main emphasis of this program is to make sure children are in a day care no matter what the situation of the parents or grandparents. This will have a negative, not positive imact on their development. Young children primarily need to be raised by someone who loves them. Love is of key importance in early development.
The proposal was put together by specialists from Mental Health, Pediatrics, Child Abuse Prevention, Childhood Advocates, Family Advocates and the Department of Education so appears to be quite comprehensive in scope. On page three it says: “Community emphasis should be on empowering families as first teachers and as primary caregivers and supporters of children.”
The only mention of “pre-birth” intervention I find is prenatal care. Considering the increase in teen pregnancy, prenatal care in medical facilities and parenting education in schools or wherever the teen parents can be found should increase the rate of healthy births and reduce child abuse and neglect. These seem to be laudable goals that can be best achieved by “empowering families as first teachers and as primary caregivers and supporters of children.”