The "After-school Child Care Initiative" passed by the Ministry of Education a few days ago, allows elementary schools to provide after-school programs for their students. It attempts to take care of the needs of both parents and children by utilizing the resources available from schools, parents, communities and private groups. Such a well-intended policy, however, is encountering criticism from supplementary-education operators, who suspect that the government is trying to steal business from them. Their claims are beyond comprehension.
We support the popularization of after-school day care for the following reasons:
First, with economic development and rising living standards, Taiwan has seen an increasing number of families in which both parents have to work to make ends meet. Occupied with work, they find it difficult to spend time with their children. Therefore, many women either exhaust themselves by handling their careers and kids at the same time, or simply stay away from work to take care of their family. The latter choice explains why women's employment rate has not risen for a long time.
Child-care businesses charge around NT$4,000 to NT$16,000 per month. Those unable to afford such service cannot but leave their children at home alone when they are at work. The ministry's initiative takes advantage of the safe and spacious environment of schools, with which children are already familiar. Children can stay there until their parents finish work. Each school may engage parents, private groups and local communities in the child-care responsibilities.
It is truly a benign policy that helps parents, especially women, to work without having to worry about their children.
Second, the ministry's statistics shows there were1,918,034 students enrolled in elementary schools last year. There are only 922 registered child-care centers, accommodating only 38,000 pupils after school. The current provision of after-school child care is insufficient.
It is risky to turn children between the ages of seven and 12 into latch-key kids. As they are not taken good care of, they may wander the streets, causing other social problems. The ministry's initiative, utilizing resources currently available, places kids in the safe environment of schools, provides good care and solves the problem of insufficient child care.
Third, the after-school programs outlined in the initiative cannot go beyond tutoring, activities and child care. No talent classes or teaching ahead of the school schedule are allowed. There is a clear distinction between such programs and those offered by supplementary-education businesses, so the ministry is not trying to steal business from private companies.
Besides, the initiative does not exclude supplementary-education businesses. They are welcome to participate in the child-care work. Therefore, contrary to their claims, the initiative is not unfair rivalry against after-school child care businesses, talent classes, or the whole industry of supplementary education.
Fourth, the recent move to raise university tuition fees stirred up sweeping criticism. Students protested on the streets and political figures scrambled to make promises. As we eagerly examine the reasonability of university tuition, we should pay more attention to the availability and affordability of child care.
Compared to university tui-tion, the fees charged by private child-care businesses place an even heavier burden on ordinary families. University students have various means to finance their study, such as loans, part-time jobs and so on. They can even consider working first and going back to school later in life. Yet basic education that does not include child care will have a tremendous impact on children's growth as well as women's development and parents' careers. Therefore, this issue demands more attention from society.
Fifth, supplementary education and child-care businesses maintain that after-school programs should be provided by professionals. It is not true since the programs outlined in the initiative aim to provide care, rather than enhancement courses or talent lessons. Therefore parents, private groups and anyone who cares about the community can participate. Mothers who stay at home will be excellent candidates after some training as they are already experienced in child care. At the same time this policy solves their problems in re-entering the workforce.
Based on the reasons outlined above, we support the initiative proposed by the ministry to make child care service more readily available.
Huang Sue-ying is chairperson of Taiwan Women's Link and Liu Yi-chieh is a secretary.
TRANSLATED BY JENNIE SHIH
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
Behind the gloating, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) must be letting out a big sigh of relief. Its powerful party machine saved the day, but it took that much effort just to survive a challenge mounted by a humble group of active citizens, and in areas where the KMT is historically strong. On the other hand, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) must now realize how toxic a brand it has become to many voters. The campaigners’ amateurism is what made them feel valid and authentic, but when the DPP belatedly inserted itself into the campaign, it did more harm than good. The
RSS