Childcare policy in the UK

Bau Yi Ching, Elena Jacques, Marianne Lampi, Zsuzsa Major (Group1)

YKPA470 Family, care and social policy
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
Jyväskylä University

Y
 1

Table of Contents

1. Introduction............................................................................................................................................2
2. Description of the care policy model.......................................................................................................2
2.1 Regulation of formal and informal care.............................................................................................2
2.2 Funding of formal and informal care.................................................................................................3
2.3 Provision of formal care and support for informal care....................................................................4
2.4 The overall division of responsibilities between the family and the state.........................................4
3. Implications of the care policy model......................................................................................................6
3.1 Implications for wellbeing.................................................................................................................6
3.2 Implications for social inequalities....................................................................................................6
3.3 Implications for gender equality........................................................................................................7
3.4 Implications for intergenerational relations......................................................................................8
3.5 Implications for labor market............................................................................................................9
4. Comparison to the other 5 countries based on the presentations........................................................10
5. Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................11
References.................................................................................................................................................12
 2

1. Introduction

Until the New Labor Government came into power in the UK in 1997, family policy was not
given much attention on the policy schemes. The new government, however, conducted some
major changes and generally devoted more time and money for family policy. The goal of the
government was to increase women’s as well as benefit earners’ participation in paid work
(Daly, 2010).
The UK has a market-oriented family policy, which means that the aim of the childcare policy is
to enhance the labor market. This was also the goal of the New Labor Government (Daly, 2010).
However, in addition to the main aim of the family policy model, the structure and organization
of childcare of a given country has implications on other areas of life as well.
In this essay, we will discuss early years provision of childcare, namely children who are five
years or younger. First, the care policy model and its different aspects are introduced. Then the
essay will move on to explore the implications the care policy model has for wellbeing, social
inequalities, gender equality, intergenerational relations, and the labor market. Finally, there will
be a short comparison between the UK family policy model and the models of France, Italy, the
Netherlands, Germany and Denmark, followed by a short conclusion.

2. Description of the care policy model

2.1 Regulation of formal and informal care

The regulation of formal childcare in the UK is mainly conducted by Ofsted (Office for
Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills), an independent body reporting directly
to the Parliament of Britain. In general, to set up a nursery or to operate as a childminder, one has
to register with Ofsted following a certain procedure that involves a Disclosure and Barring
Service check as well as providing a health declaration booklet identifying the operator’s
possible health problems and medication. In addition the operator should register for the Early
Years Register and pay an annual fee (Ofsted, 2017).
There are a few different types of childcare professionals that the operator can register as
depending on where, how many children, and with how many other adults the operator plans to
care for children. The type of registration also affects the amount of the annual fee. In addition,
Ofsted has a standard criteria about who can and cannot apply for registration as a childcare
provider. For example, those who cannot include individuals of under eighteen years of age,
childminders already registered with an agency, or disqualified individuals, and those who are
barred from working with children or have had their registration cancelled before (Ofsted, 2017).
 3

Regular inspections by Ofsted will be conducted on the overall effectiveness, leadership,

management, teaching, and learning as well as development and behavior of children that the
registered operator is taking care of. Moreover, Ofsted’s registration standards should be met
continuously for the operations to continue. The operator will receive a grade and a possible
notification of needed improvements, and the result will also be published online. If the result of
the inspection is ‘inadequate’, a new inspection will be carried out within six months, and if the
result is ‘inadequate with enforcement’, an inspector will monitor the operations and check the
improvement progress. Two consecutive ‘inadequate’ results can result in Ofsted canceling the
operator’s registration (Ofsted, 2015). Other than Ofsted, some websites such as Childcare.co.uk
and Daynurseries.co.uk provide user reviews of childminders or nurseries respectively.
In relation to the informal care, Ofsted has set up certain criteria when an individual does not
need to register as an official childminder or a nursery. These criteria include for example
childcare in which the child only stays with the care provider for a limited amount of hours, the
children are related to the care provider, the care provider receives no pay or only small amount
of pay, the children are cared for in domestic premises, or other babysitting arrangements
including au pairs. Childcare provided within these limits and without the need of registration
with Ofsted can be categorized as informal care. This type of childcare is not inspected but also
not regulated further than the set limits between formal and informal provision (Ofsted, 2017).

2.2 Funding of formal and informal care

The UK Government offers an array of options to help fund formal childcare. However not all
parents qualify for the funding. One funding option is called Tax-Free Childcare. Tax-free
Childcare is available for parents whose children are between the ages of 0 to 11. Another option
is 15 hours free child care for children aged 2-4 and 30 hours free childcare for children aged 3-
4. To qualify for both of these funding options both parents must be working and each earning at
least £120 a week (on average) and not more than £100,000 each a year. Both Tax-Free
Childcare and hours of free childcare can be used at the same time (The Childcare Service).
Another form of funding for formal care is in the form of Childcare Vouchers. In order to receive
these one’s employer must offer it. Depending on how much one earns, one can take a certain
amount of their wages each week as childcare vouchers and pay for child care with it. These are
beneficial because one does not have to pay tax or insurance on the vouchers. However, parents
cannot receive child care vouchers if they are already receiving tax-free child care. Nevertheless,
Childcare vouchers can be used alongside the 15 and 30 hours of free child care (The Childcare
Service).
There is no government funding for informal childcare as there is for formal childcare. If a
working parent does not qualify for the government assisted programs they will have to pay for
childcare themselves or seek other programs that help with the high costs but however are not
government funded. The average parents will spend £11,300 each year for nurseries. A common
form of informal childcare in the UK is when children are watched over by relatives, in which
 4

case is often unpaid or low paid. With that being said, there is no form of government funding
for informal care.

2.3 Provision of formal care and support for informal care

There are three main kinds of formal care provided by the United Kingdom government. The
first one is 15 hours of free childcare. There are no specific requirements and all children of three
and four years old in England are eligible. 2 years-old children might be eligible under the
circumstance that the parents are getting particular benefits. The United Kingdom provided 570
free hours of childcare per year. In another words, it is 15 hours of free childcare every week
throughout the whole year. There is flexibility of the childcare services. Parents can choose to
equally distributed and utilized the hours of childcare for every week, or utilize all hours of the
childcare in particular weeks when they have hectic schedules. It allows the parent to have better
time management.
Some parents are allowed to take 30 hours of childcare if they are eligible. It applies when either
one of the couples are working (in the stages of parental leave, sick leave or annual leave is
included), and each earn the minimum of national minimum wage of 120 pounds (UK GOV,
2018).
There are limitations on both 15 hours of childcare and 30 hours of childcare when choosing the
childcare service providers. Childcare provider must be registered and approved by the United
Kingdom Government. The approved list of providers have been uploaded to the official
website. Regardless of the 15 hours of childcare or the 30 hours of childcare the services will be
terminated when the child reaches the compulsory school age, which is on the 1st January, April
or September after the child’s 5th birthday. Different regions have the possibility of having
slightly different variations of the provision (UK GOV, 2018).
Free education that targets is also provided in the United Kingdom. The main target is three and
four year old children. In the circumstance that the family is getting either one of the
government’s benefits eg. income support, income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA),
universal credits,the length of education is 570 free hours are also applied to two years old
children. (UK GOV, 2018)
In addition to the formal childcare provided by the United Kingdom Government, there is a
variety of informal childcare provided by non-government organization. For instance, Rainbow
Trust Children’s Charity targets families who have a child under 18 years old with severe illness.
It offers transportation to and from hospitals and the Charity looks after sick children and
organized leisure activities for them such as play groups.

2.4 The overall division of responsibilities between the family and the state
In spite of the emphasis and great amount of evidence on developmental and educational benefits
of early years education, as well as the efforts of the government to make formal childcare
available to all families (see sub-chapter above), according to Daly (2010), out-of-home (formal)
 5

care provided by the government is still complementary to informal care rather than a substitute
for it. Therefore the family can be considered the main care giver of the child. Furthermore, by
closely examining the childcare system crafted by the New Labour, it can be seen that the
continuous and gradually fortified market-oriented family policy model of the UK positions
parents as consumers in the context of a childcare market. Consequently, preschool childcare is
still the private responsibility of the parent-consumer (Simon, Owen, Hollingworth, 2015). Paull
(2014) also confirms this statement by affirming that childcare in the UK is delivered through a
centrally regulated market, using a mixed economy of providers, from which 65 per cent (more
than half of the care providers) were private owned in 2011.
From the consumption of social and economical driven services, perspectives on the overall
division of childcare responsibilities between the family and the state draw the question: What
are the needs of parents and how is the state trying to cover/address these needs? In order to
answer this question one has to analyze and contrast the formal childcare provision of the state,
the alternative informal childcare possibilities of families and the comprehensive picture on the
overall usage of childcare (formal and informal) in the UK. One must look into the tendencies of
this usage as well in order to understand the logic behind (what are the childcare strategies and
what are effecting the childcare choices of families’?).
By looking at the childcare usage and its subtle rationale, based on the study conducted by the
TCRU, UCL Institute of Education in 2015 and other yearly (most recent) surveys available on
the gov.uk website (National Statistics), it can be concluded that there is a great need for formal
childcare provision regardless of family structures and the families’ socio-economic
backgrounds, since the use of formal childcare is very high. Additionally it is visible that
families tend to use more than one type of formal childcare, which raises questions regarding
quality, availability, and affordability. These have potential implications on mothers’ work
(labour market) and the welfare of the child. But the usage of informal care is also very high and
the single largest category of this usage is care by grandparents. The third and most significant
key finding is that the usage is not evenly distributed, but it is closely related to family
circumstances (Simon et al., 2015). It was found that “formal childcare is used more by
employed, higher income families whereas informal care is used more by mothers who are not
employed and by younger mothers. Couples where both partners were in employment were most
likely to use childcare.” (Simon et al., 2015, p.4) Ironically, this seems to contradict the
aspirations of the government in encouraging mothers to go to work and strengthen the labour
market, but underlining the expected, it is also reflecting the importance of childcare in
facilitating maternal employment. “As the proportions indicate, many children receive a
combination of formal and informal types of care. Working parents are more likely than non-
working parents to use childcare… yet substantial proportions of non-working parents use
childcare, showing that child-related reasons are the driving factor for using childcare in many
families.” (Paull, 2014, p.)
After attempting to draw the outlines of the childcare-responsibility-division between the family
and the state, and having a glimpse into the tendencies of formal and informal childcare usage in
the UK (considering that these tendencies reflect some of the needs of parents who are in the end
responsible for their children’s care), also by inevitably touching upon some of the
 6

explanations/consequences of these tendencies, we will move on to our next chapter. We will

elaborate separately on the interconnected implications of the British childcare policy model.

3. Implications of the care policy model

3.1 Implications for wellbeing

According to Paull (2014) childcare policy documents are emphasizing three objectives: to raise
the quality of care, to make childcare more affordable and to make childcare more accessible.
These objectives are apparently focusing on both the welfare of the child (by increased quality
offering a “better start” and by increased accessibility promoting social equality) and the welfare
of the family as a social institution (by increased affordability, again, promoting social equality).
Therefore the underlined dual purpose of formal childcare by the above mentioned objectives
are: first facilitating and encouraging employment (by highlighting the welfare-to-work agenda,
targeting especially mothers) and then enhancing the wellbeing of the child by providing
educational and developmental benefits through quality childcare. Growing evidence of “the
importance of early education in helping address social inequities in child development provided
support for child development to be mentioned first in the rationale for policy“(Paull, 2014,
p.18). In other words, but again, the vision of childcare policies seem to be ensuring that every
child gets the best start in life and also giving parents more choice about how to balance work
and family life. (Paull, 2014)
However the divided childcare strategy into increasing quality and making it possible for parents
to find affordable and suitable childcare to enable them to work, in the long run states only one
thing: that formal childcare’s social importance is based on the ultimate goal, which is
enhancement of economic productivity. For supporting this statement refer to Paull (2014) again:
“the former is focusing on improving child development to enhance workforce skills and the
latter is emphasizing the need to use the full potential of the parental workforce.” (p.18) This
conclusion characterizes again the labour market centered childcare policy model of the UK.
At this point it is important to talk about the wellbeing of the people present in the childcare
workforce, which is very much gendered and young. This workforce is overwhelmingly female,
with little change in gender profile over the past years and the childcare workers are young
compared to the general workforce, with the average age of 36 years. The ideological aspiration
(the principles) embedded in the childcare policies of increasing quality, the childcare workforce
demanded raised qualifications from its workers. But in spite of the rising qualifications low pay
remained persistent in childcare in contrast with other occupations. (Simon et al., 2015)
When it comes to wellbeing, especially in the context of the childcare system in the UK, we have
to look more into the persistent interrelated (societal) inequalities between families, if we want to
cover the whole British population (in the same way the childcare system does). Therefore in the
next section we will reflect on the implications of the policy model in relation to social
inequalities.
 7

3.2 Implications for social inequalities

Social inequalities are always a core issue when it comes to childcare. According to statistics
from Department for Work and Pensions, there are four million children living in poverty in the
United Kingdom in the year of 2015-2016. This accounts for the thirty percent of children. It is a
very astonishing statistic. The United Kingdom government also introduced specific childcare
policy to tackle this extreme social inequality. For instance, as mentioned in the upper part of
childcare provision, the government has offered 30 hours of childcare for family that need
financial help. It aims to make childcare more affordable for low income working parents.
However, the outcome is not efficient and it does not help a lot.
The first reason is low paid work. According to the Government’s Social Mobility Commission
report of United Kingdom, the richest fifth of households earned an average of 88 per cent more
than those from the poorest families in 2012. The income difference between rich and poor is
extremely large. Low class earns a meagre salary. They cannot get off the hook from poverty
through enjoying the free childcare to lengthen the working hours. (CPAG, 2018)
The second reason is the rising cost of living. According to the report conducted by the
independent, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, people in the poorest fifth of the population undergo
a higher rate of inflation than the rest of the country every year after 2003. It is hard enough for
low income adults to undergo inflation but when these adults have children, inflation is an even
heavier financial burden when trying to care for their children. It is one of the leading causes of
social inequality and why child poverty is so severe when it comes to childcare. The measures
that United Kingdom government introduced are not comprehensive enough to deal with the
situation (Chu, 2017).
The third reason is that the quality of free education and childcare is not guaranteed to be good.
According to the Good Care Guide report, reviews rating nurseries as ‘poor’ or ‘bad for value of
money’ dramatically rose from 9.3% in 2012 to 12.8% in 2016. Children who come from low
class families can only afford the free public childcare. It is acknowledged that quality comes
with price. When children receive cheaper child care, the quality of education will be poor. This
forms a barrier for the children trying to escape poverty. The low quality of child care amongst
the poor is a main cause of social inequality and child poverty in United Kingdom. (Otte,2017)

3.3 Implications for gender equality

Information on how the British state is supporting families when they are having babies can be
found on the government’s official website (gov.uk). There are maternity and paternity parental
leave types and their pays imply that the state is enforcing the historically engraved cultural
belief of women being the primary carers of the family/household rather than gender-neutralizing
it. The affiliation of the national child care policies on the division of the informal child care
labour is still gender-based.
 8

When examining the changes in childcare policies (in terms of supporting families when having
babies) and also the subtle principles in their background during the governance of New Labour,
Daly (2010) talks about the ‘modernization’ of the old family/maternal care model instead of
creating a new one in line with European, especially northern tendencies (which are advocating
for parental leaves). Therefore the women’s function around care was slightly altered by added
‘additional’ care support (placing other care providers alongside women), including fathers to
some extent and by the increased financial compensation of giving birth. Daly’s example (2010)
of policy attention turned on fathers, which is granting men two weeks of paternity paid leave
and further points at policy interest (also historically explained) in getting men to financially
support their children and families in general. These paternal leaves could explain the desire of
enabling “men to bond with their young children rather than change the gendered division of
labour and responsibility around parenting” (p.440).
Conversely, Schober & Scott (2012) talk about a slow and barely visible cultural shift in the
division of gender roles within the context of childcare. They say that the market oriented care
policies are influencing mothers when combining work (half norm) and organizing care
(combining formal and informal care). They say that the traditional and less traditional attitudes,
the old and new cultural norms towards motherhood, and maternal employment towards
children’s wellbeing (the positive effects of early years education) are affecting men’s perception
about fatherhood as well.
An important thread in the discourse of childcare policy implications on gender equality is the
perspective of men which is well transmitted through the study of Baker, Miller, Bosoni and
Rossi (2010), since their research focused on the position of men in work and in family life
within the framework of policies and of practices. These authors pinpoint cultural stereotypes
and describe how the construction of fatherhood (as a concept) was formed in parallel, in
contrast, and in relation with motherhood. They also highlighted how this idea of fatherhood is
reflected in the childcare policies of the above mentioned countries. The opportunities to care for
children are not equal, since fathers are regarded as only the secondary carers of their children
implicitly in the policies and explicitly in the cultural norms/stereotypes. Nevertheless an
important change occurred in the self-image of men in form of the “main breadwinner” male
identity being out shadowed by the “involved father” image (Baker et al.,2011).

3.4 Implications for intergenerational relations

A common form of informal child care is when relatives care for the children while the parents
of the children are at work. Even children who reside in formal childcare sometimes need to be
watched by relatives during holiday breaks and weekends or they may only reside in formal care
part time and need relatives to watch them as well. Regardless, being cared for by relatives is
common amongst all children. Nonetheless, the most common relative that cares for children
while parents are working are grandparents. Specifically, the grandmother of the children on the
mother’s side of the family is most likely to care for the children (Gray, 2005).
 9

The most common reasons that parents use grandparents for informal childcare is because formal
childcare is too expensive and because some mothers works evenings and weekends when
formal childcare is not available (Gray,2005). The Time Use Survey also known as TUS
conducted a study in the year 2000 in the UK about child care arrangements. The TUS results
confirmed that grandparents provided childcare for their grandchildren under the age of 12 for
about 25% of the parents in the survey. Parents with children aged 5 or below were more likely
to use grandparents as carers as 30% of the parents surveyed responded. However the care
provided by grandparents in this survey was not specific to an amount of time that the
grandparent spent caring for the children. The grandparent could have been caring for the child
for as little as a few hours a week to full time care(Gray,2005).
Grandparents are more likely to spend time caring for their younger grandchildren under 5 rather
than their older grandchildren. The reason for this is that older grandchildren have entered school
systems while the younger grandchildren have not yet. Rather, the younger grandchildren are
attending nurseries, child minders, and other forms of formal childcare. However, because
formal childcare of children under age 5 is commonly unaffordable in the UK, grandparents take
on the responsibilities of caring for the grandchildren under 5 either part or full time each week.
When grandparents are actively providing informal care of their grandchildren the mothers of the
children are given the opportunity to enter employment positions with longer and more
demanding hours than that of previous cohorts. This results in the mothers earning higher
incomes (Gray, 20015).
To sum up, many families use relatives, specifically grandmothers as a form of informal
childcare. Sometimes grandparents are the sole caretaker and sometimes grandparents’ care is
mixed with formal care that the child is also receiving. Nonetheless, grandparents are vital to
informal care in the UK.
3.5 Implications for labor market
The New Labor government’s family policy had some quite important implications on the labor
market. The main aim of the family policy was to increase the work life participation of women
as well as benefit earners or low-income parents. (Daly, 2010) Therefore, work was at the core of
the formulation of the family policy in the UK (Fleckenstein et al, 2011).
The New Labor government extended the childcare voucher scheme of subsidized childcare and
introduced the Childcare Tax Credit, which can provide support for the childcare of the family.
(Daly, 2010) The government also provided free childcare for limited amount of hours per day.
Basically, the free childcare as well as the Childcare Tax Credit benefited low-income families
more, while the childcare vouchers were more useful for working parents (Fleckenstein et al,
2011).
In general, the government’s support for childcare became more generous than before. These
measures ensured that the parents have an incentive to join the working life rather than stay
home caring for the children to avoid the high childcare costs. They also encouraged single
parents to join the working life. Other than encouraging, however, some compulsory elements
 10

were added as well; as of 2010, lone parents on benefits were required to seek work once their
children were seven years old (Daly, 2010). Fleckenstein et al (2011) also mention that those
parents who wish to care for their children at home should also be supported rather than only
encouraged to participate in paid labor. After all, the organization of formal care creates jobs as
well.
The New Labor’s extension of maternity leave and increase in its pay, as well as introduction of
paternity leave and the possibility for mothers to transfer part of their maternity leave pay to the
fathers in case they returned to working life before their entitlement to the leave expires, also
have their impacts on the labor market (Daly, 2010). These changes might mean that one or both
parents stay at home and thus outside of working life for a longer period of time after childbirth.
The introduction of paternity leave could mean higher absence of fathers from the working life in
comparison to previous family policy schemes.
Moreover, as of 2003, the parents of children of under sixteen years of age have a right to request
flexible working hours (Fleckenstein et al, 2011). This inevitably affects the organization of
working times at the workplace, and Fleckenstein et al (2011) point out that this possibility as
well as the abovementioned changes to the family policy might have negative consequences
especially on small and medium-sized enterprises.
According to Fleckenstein et al (2011), the business community in the UK was rather reluctant to
consent to the family policy changes. The minimum requirements of law were met, but the
leading employers’ association called the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) strongly
opposed the extension of the parental leaves as well as the possibility for flexible working hours.
Rather, they would have favored voluntary arrangements at workplaces as well as an increase in
affordable childcare (Fleckenstein et al, 2011).
To sum up, the New Labor government’s family policy was centered on increased employment
rates rather than the children as individuals or the idea of providing universal childcare.

4. Comparison to the other 5 countries based on the presentations

In comparison to UK, France’s family policy is generally more extensive and the mindset is that
the state should take care of its citizens. France offers more formal care and support for informal
care, and the state generally pays a larger part of the care. However, several factors are similar
between the two countries. Both countries pay the childcare benefits to the mother, who is then
regarded as the main care provider, and both countries have fewer formal childcare places than
meets the need. However, in the UK the responsibility to pay for the childcare is more on the
parents than in France. Both countries also provide some free childcare and are rather selective in
the provision of care, although this trait is more evident in the UK system. Whereas the UK has
aimed to promote the employment of single parents and especially low-income women, France
has introduced both paid home-based childcare and household services to encourage women to
 11

work as well as a “cash for childcare” model that encourages mothers to stay home. In other
words, France offers slightly more choices for the mothers.
In Italy, similar to in the United Kingdom, there are similar childcare policy targeting to help the
poor. Families need to pay fees for childcare services and its price varies according to household
income and the timetable selected. Some child-care centers provide child care services with a
affordably low price to the family with income below a certain salary point. Gender Inequality
concerning childcare is a core issue both in the United Kingdom and Italy. In the case of the
United Kingdom, early years and maternity services are very mum-centric and the fathers are
breadwinners. In the case of Italy, the employment rate of mothers is 14 points lower than the
employment rate of women with no kids (Matt, 2017). This implies that both mothers in Italy
and the United Kingdom bear more responsibility on childcare compared to fathers.
Just like in the UK, the childcare policy in the Netherlands also aims at the increased paid work
participation of women. In comparison to UK, however, the childcare in the Netherlands is
mainly organized and funded privately, especially by employers. The role of employers is also
evident in the parental leaves, which are not paid for by the state but organized with the
employers, who are not required to pay for it. The policies in the Netherlands also target families
with two working parents, as opposed to the more traditional male breadwinner and female carer
model of UK.
In Germany, the parental leave system and the state support of it are quite extensive and formal
childcare provision is also universal. Thus, the state takes care of the childcare provision more
than in the UK. The family policy model of Germany promotes a dual earner/carer model in
contrast to the UK’s female carer model. The German model seems to be rather efficient in
promoting gender equality and women’s work, although like in the UK, women’s work is
typically lower paid or only part-time.
The childcare system of Denmark is also universal and largely organized, supported, and
supervised by the state. One interesting issue is that even au pairs have to register and meet
certain conditions to be able to care for a child. Denmark also has extensive and rather gender-
equal parental leave systems and supports the possibility for parents to care for their child at
home, which is something the UK does not offer. In general, Denmark has more varied childcare
system than the UK and also spends substantially more money on it.
To sum up, it would seem that increasing the amount of working women is the aim of all the
different countries discussed here. Although, the actions taken to achieve this and their
implications are more varied. The countries also differ in the family policy’s emphasis between
labor market and social issues.

5. Conclusion
 12

In general, the family policy in the UK seems to focus more around the labor market, which is
already evident from the goals set by the New Labor Government. The policies also target the
family as a social institution and not the child as an individual, thus the family remains the main
care provider in the UK. Between the parents, the mother is still regarded as the main care
provider, although there has been a rising trend towards men as “involved fathers” (Baker et
al.,2011).
As an ending we quote Daly (2010): “For one needs to be clear: what does not exist in the UK is
a universal, publicly funded, integrated and equitable childcare system uncoupled from parental
status, family income level and family investment in care (Lloyd, 2008: 483). Now this, if it were
effected, would constitute a paradigm change.”

References

Baker, S., Miller, T., Rossi, G., & Bosoni, M. L. (2011). Men, work and family life: A study of
policy and practice in the UK and Italy, research project report funded by the British Academy.
Child care and parenting: Financial help if you have children: Financial help when having a
baby, (2018). Gov.uk., retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/browse/childcare-parenting/financial-
help-children
Child Poverty Action Group, 2017. Child Poverty Facts and Figures. Retrieved 30.1.2018 from
http://www.cpag.org.uk/child-poverty-facts-and-figures
Daly, M. (2010). Shifts in family policy in the UK under New Labour. Journal of European
Social Policy, 20, 433.
Department for Education. (2017). National Statistics: childcare and early years. Childcare
arrangements for all ages and early years provision for children who are 5 years of age or
younger. UK Government website. Retrieved from
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/statistics-childcare-and-early-years
Fleckenstein, T. & Seeleib-Kaiser, M. (2011). Business, skills and the welfare state: the political
economy of employment-oriented family policy in Britain and Germany.  Journal of European
Social Policy, Vol. 19(5): 136–14.

Gray, A. (2005). The changing availability of grandparents as carers and its implications for
childcare policy in the UK. Journal of Social Policy, 34, 557-577.

Matt Turner, 2017. Here's how much paid leave new mothers and fathers get in 11 different
countries. Retrieved 30.1.2018 from http://nordic.businessinsider.com/maternity-leave-
worldwide-2017-8?r=US&IR=T
Ofsted, 2015. Early years inspection handbook. Retrieved 30.1.2018 from
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/596329/Early_yea
rs_inspection_handbook.pdf
 13

Ofsted, 2017. Early years and childcare registration handbook. Retrieved 30.1.2018 from
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/650103/EY_and_
childcare_reg_handbook.pdf
Otte, J, 2017. Parents say childcare quality is falling. Retrieved 30.1.2018 from
https://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/
Paull, G. (2014). Can government intervention in childcare be justified?. economic affairs, 34(1),
14-34.
Schober, P., & Scott, J. (2012). Maternal employment and gender role attitudes: dissonance
among British men and women in the transition to parenthood. Work, employment and society,
26(3), 514-530.
Simon, A., Owen, C., & Hollingworth, K. (2015). Provision and use of preschool childcare in
Britain. London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, UCL.

The Childcare Service. (n.d.). Retrieved January 29, 2018, from https://www.gov.uk/