Council Vision and Mission

Keynote Address by the Hon. Margaret Norrie McCain

Honourable Margaret Norrie McCain
Conference: Securing the Future of Our Children
University of Toronto
October 26, 2006

Good afternoon. I want to say first to all of you how grateful I am for the invitation to be your Keynote Speaker at this conference.

Those of us who are deeply committed to early child development call this a “golden opportunity” to get our message out to a group of very influential people; people with the power to use their voices or their status in society to effect real change. I will be presenting a different story than the one you heard from Dr. Baker. Clearly, I have read and studied a different body of research and talked with researchers who present a different picture. So it is up to you to take the information you have heard; perhaps read more about these subjects and form your own opinions.

Let me open with a quote from Dr. James Heckman, Nobel Laureate and Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago. “We cannot afford to postpone investing in children until they become adults; nor can we wait until they reach school age – a time when it may be too late to intervene. Learning is a dynamic process and it is most effective when it begins at a very young age and continues throughout adulthood.”

My topic today is “Society’s Role in the Optimal Development of Children”.

If Canadians were asked the question “What is Society’s role in the optimal development of children”, the majority would reply – good medical care, education from K to 12 (In Ontario) and the reduction of child poverty.

Then, if Canadians were asked “does Society have a role in the development of children from 0 to 6”, the majority would say “beyond good medical care –no – this role is solely for parents and families.”

Before I address the topic of “Society’s Role in the Optimal Development of Children’, I want to address the issue of child poverty and I want to talk about the role and challenges of parenting in the 21st century. These 2 issues are key to determining public policy as it pertains to the optimal development of children.

1. Child poverty is a burning national issue. More than a million children in Canada are growing up in poverty – one in six. Many call that a national shame. The facts are that children who live in poverty are more vulnerable to poor outcomes on health, educational and behavioural measures.

In 1994, Health Canada and Statistics Canada began the National Longitudinal Survey on Children and Youth to measure and analyse a wide range of factors which impact children’s developmental outcomes – including poverty, parenting, family functioning, single parenthood, maternal depression and education as well as the effects of alcohol and tobacco on the fetus in utero and the effects of work/life on family life.

In 2002 they released a book entitled “Vulnerable Children” which is a compilation of the results of the studies carried out on all the risk factors that impact the development of Canadian children which prevent them from reaching their full potential. The researchers chose to refer to children with risk factors as “vulnerable”; children who are likely to go into adulthood experiencing poor mental and physical health and unemployment

The NLSCY created a database on the characteristics and life experiences of Canadian children from infancy to adulthood. It provides sound empirical evidence upon which to plan social policy. The NLSCY analysis tells us that 28.6 percent of Canadian children are classified as vulnerable – that is more than 1 in 4. This is indeed a troubling statistic. In the interests of accuracy, I will quote from their report.

“One of the surprising findings of the study was that the relationship between childhood vulnerability and family income was not as strong as previously believed.” Quoting their statistics “37.1 percent of children in the lowest income quartile are classified as vulnerable. In the highest income quartile (rich kids) 24.2 percent are classified as vulnerable. The majority of Canadian children classified as vulnerable are in the middle class – in families whose incomes are above the poverty threshold.

These results refute the stereotype that the majority of children with developmental problems are from poor families. It is simply not the case. It is true that 37.1 percent of children living in poverty do poorly but look at the other side of the picture – 62.9 percent of children living in poverty Do WELL.

I think all of us can reach into our own life experiences and pull out examples of people who grew up poor and did well. I can. I have friends; I have relatives; I had two parents who grew up poor and did well.

The late Dr. Dan Offord, Founding Director of the Centre for Study of Children at Risk (now the Offord Children’s Centre at McMaster University) carried out extensive research on the effects of poverty on children. His research confirmed the NLSCY’s findings that increasing the family income to above the poverty line would only reduce the prevalence of childhood vulnerability by 10 percent. The same effect can be achieved by ensuring that all mothers have secondary education.

Let me state very clearly – POVERTY MATTERS. And every child needs and deserves to be well nourished and clothed and to live in a safe, protected environment. This is a basic human right. But, if our goal is to improve children’s outcomes so that they reach their full potential and competency and become productive, fulfilled, healthy citizens, we must focus our attention and energy on what evidence tells us will achieve this goal.
Poverty then, of and by itself, is not the high risk factor it is commonly believed to be. But, when it co-exists with one or more other risk factor – i.e. poor parenting, depression, substance abuse, violence – it is extremely damaging.
63 percent of poor children do well - 24 percent of rich children do poorly.

The NLSCY states very strongly that what matters most in how children turn out is PARENTING. The evidence is overwhelming that good parenting skills and the quality of family functioning has the greatest impact on the optimal development of children.

Before I turn to a discussion of the role and challenges of parenting in the 21st century, it is essential that I set it within the context of the neurobiological evidence that was discovered in the early 1990’s. We consider it to be the most important evidence ever to emerge about human development.

This may be familiar to most of you and undoubtedly, it will be mentioned again throughout the day. Suffice it to say that new technologies have allowed neuroscientists to study brain development without invasive interventions. What they discovered was that the brain is not fully developed at birth as was always believed. Rather, over the first 3 – 4 years of life brain development is rapid, extensive and very much influenced by experiences and the quality of the child’s environment.

Positive experiences such as good nutrition, nurturance and stimulation (touching, reading, talking, singing, exploring, appropriate and sensitive emotional interaction) all things that good parents do easily and naturally, will enhance brain development. By contrast, negative experiences such as neglect, abuse, living in an environment characterized by stress, fear and anxiety, can impede optimal brain development.

This neuroscience evidence highlighting the critical importance of the early years is now widely accepted and growing.

Dr. Bruce Perry, Head of the Child Trauma Institute in Houston, Texas and a renowned pediatric neuroscientist, did breakthrough neurobiological research in the early 1990’s. He published this research under the title “Incubated in Terror”. In his presentations, Dr. Perry shows Catscans of the well developed brain of a 3 year old who lives in peace and love, beside the permanently undeveloped brain of a 3 year old raised in an environment of chaos and conflict.

The mounting body of research tells us that experiences in years 0 to 6 set the trajectory for learning, health and behaviour over the life cycle.

And parents play the single most important role in the development of their children

So what are the challenges for modern day parents?

Most parents today are in the workforce. In Canada 70 percent of children have two working parents; another 10 percent a single working parent. This represents a dramatic social change from the time when I raised my children in the 50’s and 60’s.

The OECD’s “Starting Strong Report” states that perhaps the most significant change in modern childhood is that the majority of children no longer spend the first five years at home with their mothers. Armed with the knowledge that parents are the most important factor in their child’s healthy development, they also face the intense demands of the highly competitive 21st century workplace. For the most part, only high income parents can afford to have one parent “at home” caring for the children. Most parents need two incomes to survive and to keep their jobs they must work harder, longer and faster to stay ahead of the competition. This competition may come from a new piece of software or from a worker in a Third World country.

It was predicted that new technologies would provide more leisure time but, in fact, the opposite has happened. With the arrival of computers, Blackberries, email, voice mail and cellphones, the lines between workplace and home have been blurred. The 9 to 5 work day has disappeared and work has invaded the sanctity of family life. Never before in history have parents been so stressed and stretched.

The Vanier Institute for The Family recently reported that workers today have to work 60 hours a week in order to maintain the same standard of living enjoyed by people in the 1950’s working 40 hours a week. Most people have to take their work home . Striving to be the best at work and the best at home places enormous burdens and stress on today’s parents.

Dr. Robert Reich, Professor of Socio Economic Policy at Brandeis University, who wrote the book “Future Stress”, likens this situation to a runaway train barreling down the track. The question is -do you try to stop the train or do you run with it? His answer is –neither. All social revolutions throughout history –agricultural, industrial and, now, technological, - have disrupted social structures and family life. Society must find ways to adapt.

Dr. James Heckman, who I quoted at the beginning of this speech, spoke in Toronto recently at an OECD ministerial summit on jobs and growth. He stated “education is a major development of long-run employment and unemployment” He stressed that investments in early child development have profound effects on skills and abilities through the life cycle. After pointing out that “Awareness and knowledge of brain and human development have found critical and sensitive periods in the lives of children and ECD interventions stimulate the cognitive and socioemotional skills of individuals (such as motivation, perseverance, tenacity) putting them on better trajectories for life-long learning and skills development”, Prof. Heckman went on to say “but once a child falls behind, he or she is likely to remain behind” So the point of Early Child Development is to enhance the readiness to learn of children entering the school system. Prof. Heckman then added “early child development simultaneously promotes economic opportunity and social equity, while also promoting economic productivity – a rare case where there is no trade-off between sound social equity and economic efficiency”

No better case for early child development could be made.

The best single investment Canada can make for social justice and the optimal development of our children is to get them off to a good early start by building a High Quality, Evidence Based, Early Child Development System.

The pay off comes in later life for adults who are healthier, have better life skills and life-long learning capacities and lead a better quality life over-all

James Heckman says “learning begets learning and the earlier children are stimulated and engaged, the more successful the adult.”

In Canada (in North America) the prevailing belief system around child care is that it is about maternal employment – in other words – a baby sitting service for working mothers.

However, we see it as a much broader issue. We see it as Tier One in Human Development – the foundation years of o to 6; the critical years that set the life trajectory for learning, for behaviour and for health. We see an integrated ECD system that would include child care and education and much, much more. We see it as a developmental necessity.

In the Early Years Report, we proposed a plan to build an Early Child Development System modeled on best practice, evidence based systems in Western Europe and the Scandinavian countries as well as our own province of Quebec. We were also influenced by successful research projects such as the Carolina Abecedarian Project.

Based on many studies, the Early Years Report recommended that the ECD system be universal. By that we do not mean universal public funding. We mean, universal in the sense that it is available, accessible, affordable and optional for everyone.

It must be universal as opposed to targeted toward those we determine are “at risk”. – for example, low income; single parents; immigrant families. To do that would be to miss the largest number of Canadian children who are vulnerable – such as those in the middle class.

We believe all children do well in a high quality ECD system especially those with high risk factors. And studies show that low-income and vulnerable children benefit greatly by being with children who have no vulnerabilities,

The plan we propose would have as its centerpiece Early Child Development and Parenting Centres (many attached to schools) which are child focused and parent focused. Programmes at these Centres would include child care as a basic need plus experience based learning. They would also include parent education and support. The Centres must be culturally sensitive and community driven. They must be linked to community resources such as schools, libraries and recreational activities and it is essential that they be staffed by caring, well educated and well-paid ECD professionals who are trained to identify children with special needs and able to refer them to appropriate interventions before biological embedding occurs.

Ideally, the system needs to be supported by a wide range of interventions for children with special needs. This universal system would create a cachement mechanism where all children participate and special needs are identified before there is biological embedding. I want to stress once again that it is vital to provide early intervention for children who live with abuse – because Family Violence is the Single Biggest Impediment to the healty development of children.

The Early Years Report has traveled around the world and is being used as the seminal document for the development in ECD systems in countless countries –including many developing countries. It is the plan we propose for Canada in order to achieve our goal of building a healthy, productive, competent, literate population and work force.

Let me digress a moment to briefly talk about the Cuban story. Not many of us would want to move to Cuba, given the repression of civil liberties and basic freedoms we take for granted. Plus, it is one of the poorest countries in the world. Having said that, I have to point out that in all human development indices, Cuba is leading the world. They have the highest rates of literacy. Compare this to Canada. The OECD states that about 50 percent of Canadians are functionally illiterate – they can read and understand only simple material. Cuba spends a lot of time, energy and resources on education – but so does Canada. The difference is that Cuba also spends a lot on early child development. Canada, on the other hand , ranks at the bottom of the chart in terms of investment in ECD. I think this is worthy of note. Cuba also has one of the highest rates of life expectancy, one of the lowest rates of violence and almost no problems with Autism or ADHD. Why? Research points to their heavy investment in ECD –where it really count.s

Two years ago Dr. Daniel Trefler, Professor of Economics at U of T and occupant of the J. Douglas and Ruth Grant Chair in Competitiveness and Prosperity at the Rotman School of Management, delivered a lecture entitled “Looking Backward: How Childhood Experiences Impact a Nation’s Wealth”. I highly recommend that you read the whole paper but let me conclude with just one quote.

After confessing to years of skepticism and questioning the value of public investments in the early years, Dr. Trefler said “over the last decade, science has filled in many of the gaps. So now the picture is more complete. We can clearly see the links between childhood interventions and a host of productivity enhancing policies. Policies that Canada must consider if it is to become the richest and most livable jurisdiction in the world.”

It is my hope that by the end of this day, you too will be convinced that promoting society’s role in the early development of children achieves the goal of optimal prosperity for our country.

Thank you/.