Joiner Flourishing Pathway Blog Four - Childcare

In this blog we explore JFP Principle 4 – Childcare is not the panacea we thought it was for infants. While childcare has become an accepted part of modern life, research suggests it may have long-term negative effects that deserve closer attention.

This is a condensed version of a longer discussion in my book The Foundations of Flourishing and Our Responsibility to Infants https://ethicspress.com/products/the-foundations-of-flourishing . Here, I'll summarise the key findings and reflect on what they mean for parents, infants, and society.

When Separation Causes Stress

The biggest challenge for infants in childcare is separation from their primary attachment figure—usually the mother. Young infants have no sense of time, so even short absences can feel endless. Without the ability to self-sooth, their distress can quickly escalate.

Prolonged stress in infancy is not harmless. While adults can recover from stress, an infant’s developing brain is far more vulnerable. Neuroscientist Bruce McEwen (2022) reminds us that chronic, unresolved stress can become toxic to brain development.

While conducting a review and meta-analysis of cortisol (stress) levels in infants in childcare centres, researchers Vermeer and van IJzendoorn (2006) found ‘that at daycare children display higher cortisol levels compared to the home setting’, and this steadily increased from morning into the afternoon (p. 390) rising to ‘75-100% higher than when at home' (p. 394). These findings were consistent for children in childcare up to the age of 3 years when it is believed children are better able to self-sooth.

Neuroscientist Darcia Narvaez (2014) also found that repeated early stress can cause damage to brain cells in areas that control memory and emotional balance, potentially leading to anxiety, depression, and relational difficulties later in life. Considering that an infant’s brain doubles in size during the first year, such stress-related effects can be profound.

The Language and Connection Gap

Language development depends on close, responsive interaction. It’s not just about hearing words—it’s how they’re spoken. Parents instinctively use “parentese,” the slow, melodic speech that captures a baby’s attention and helps them feel connected and link sounds to meaning.

Research by Ramirez-Esparza, Garcia-Sierra, and Kuhl (2014) found that one-on-one parentese strongly predicts both early speech and later vocabulary. These exchanges happen face-to-face, filled with warmth, expression, and eye contact.

In childcare, where one carer may attend to several infants at once, opportunities for this type of intimate communication are limited. Even the most caring staff cannot replicate the constant, individualised attention that infants receive from a dedicated caregiver.

Hart and Risley’s (1995) study showed that by age three, children exposed to fewer verbal interactions had smaller vocabularies—and that even intensive intervention could not fully close this gap. These findings show how deeply early communication helps shape cognitive development.

The Attachment Question

Secure attachment forms when infants experience consistent, loving care from a primary caregiver over the first years of life. For babies placed in childcare very early, this process may be disrupted before it develops, or can interrupt its full development once an attachment schema has begun.

While child carers often reassure parents when infants protest at being left that babies “get used to it”; its true they do, but we have to ask at what cost? Babies are not born able to regulate their emotions; they learn it through thousands of to and fro turn taking loving interactions with an enduring attachment figure who helps them feel safe and connected. While a baby may stop protesting this does not mean they are content

When that consistent connection is missing, or feels unpredictable, a baby may start to emotionally shut down as a way to cope. With limited one-on-one attention and changing carers, childcare settings cannot easily replicate the deep emotional learning that is necessary. Over time, the emotionally withdrawn baby may think, “When I reach out, no one comes—so I’ll stop reaching out.”  This early withdrawal can elevate cortisol and shape the brain for survival rather than connection.

Parents sometimes assume babies in childcare are “learning to socialise,” but infants don’t learn social skills from other babies—they learn them through secure, responsive relationships with enduring others.

What Emotional Withdrawal Does to a Child

• Short-term protection, long-term cost: Withdrawing helps an infant avoid emotional overload but can lead to loneliness and disconnection.

• Blocks emotional growth: When emotions are suppressed, children lose vital feedback that helps them understand themselves and others.

• Strains relationships: The pattern of withdrawal can confuse loved ones and make closeness feel unsafe.

• Affects body and mind: Emotional numbing raises stress hormones and has been linked to anxiety and depression.

• Reduces resilience: Avoiding emotion makes it harder to recover from challenges because feelings remain unprocessed.

  
  

A Positive for Some

There is an exception. For infants from severely neglectful or unsafe homes, high-quality childcare can provide a level of stability and emotional respite (Berry et al., 2014). So, while early childcare may be stressful for most infants, it can be protective for a small number from high-risk environments.

Rethinking the Narrative

All this evidence suggests that while childcare helps parents balance work and family, it is not an ideal environment for very young infants. Early stress, reduced one-on-one connection, and disrupted attachment all raise questions about its suitability during the most crucial years of brain development.

Our growing reliance on childcare reflects social and economic pressures, not biological needs. For decades, parents—especially mothers—have been encouraged by society to return to work quickly after birth, to help keep the economy strong. Women are often also pressured by employers to return to work or risk losing career advancement. But if we truly value infant and future societal wellbeing, we must reconsider whether this system serves us, or if it compromises what babies need most: safety, closeness, and love.

In the next blog, we turn to JFP Principle 5 – What Are Our Obligations to Infants? Here we’ll look at the ethical implications of what we now know, and how we might begin to rebuild a society that better supports both parents and children in the earliest years of life.

Bibliography

Berry, D, Blair, C, Ursache, A, Willoughby, M, Garrett-Peters, P, Vernon-Feagans, L, Bratsch-Hines, M, Mills-Koonce, WR & Granger, DA 2014, 'Child care and cortisol across early childhood: Context matters', Developmental Psychology, vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 514-525.

Hart, B & Risley, TR 1995, Meaningful differences in the everyday experience of young American children, Paul H. Brookes, Baltimore.

Knickmeyer, RC, Gilmore, JH, Gouttard, S, Kang, C, Evans, D, Wilber, K, Smith, JK, Hamer, RM, Lin, W & Gerig, G 2008, 'A Structural MRI Study of Human Brain Development from Birth to 2 Years', Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 28, no. 47, pp. 12176-12182.

McEwen, BS 2022, 'Protective and damaging effects of stress mediators: central role of the brain', Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 367-381.

Narvaez, D 2014, Neurobiology and the Development of Human Morality: Evolution, Culture, and Wisdom, W W Norton & Company, New York.

Narvaez, D, Panksepp, J, Schore, AN & Gleason, TR 2013, 'The Future of Human Nature: Implications for Research, Policy, and Ethics', in D Narvaez, J Panksepp, AN Schore & TR Gleason (eds), Evolution, Early Experience and Human Development: From research to practice and policy, Cambridge University Press, New York, pp. 455-468.

Ramirez-Esparza, N, Garcia-Sierra, A & Kuhl, PK 2014, 'Look who's talking: speech style and social context in language input to infants are linked to concurrent and future speech development', Developmental Science, no. 6, p. 880.

Vermeer, HJ & van IJzendoorn, MH 2006, 'Children's elevated cortisol levels at daycare: A review and meta-analysis', Early Childhood Research Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 390-401.