Teh Real Child Care Crisis; J. B. Phillips

Of course, not every parent can afford such services. But the private sector has generated a number of options. For example, many employ ers, becoming increasingly aware of the problems their employees face in finding child care, are of fering a variety of programs. Some companies, such as Merck, Campbell Soup, and Apple Computer, operate on-site child care facilities for employees' children. Others, like IBM and BankAmerica, subsidize communi ty centers. In all, the Conference Board estimates that 150 businesses and 600 hospitals have estab lished on-site or near-site child care operations. A growing number of firms such as IBM, Merck, Hewlett-Packard, SmithKline Beckman, and Transamerica offer alternative work schedMr. Phillips is a freelance writer based in Houston, Texas. ules to give parents more time to care for their children. Control Data, Pacific Bell, The Travel ers Companies, Ie. Penney, New York Life, and many smaller companies allow some employees to work at home via computer terminals.

Rolscreen, an Iowa manufacturer, has used job sharing to overcome a labor shortage caused by a lack of child care options. Real estate developers also recognize the growing importance of child care. "Developers are using day care as an amenity the way they used to use shrubbery and health clubs," real es tate magnate Leonard N. Stern told Fortune magazine (November 21,1988). Office buildings, apartment complexes, residential subdivisions, and business parks increasingly are offering on site child care for tenants. Perhaps the most ignored child care option is the most widely used: home-based care by a rela tive or hired sitter. Nearly 70 percent of all child care is provided in this manner. Similarly, some parents form co-ops-resources are pooled and parents watch their children on alternate days. ParentalResponsibility Without a doubt, there is a tremendous need for child care services. Most of this need, how ever, is being met by the private sector-en trepreneurs, employers, developers, relatives, friends, neighbors, and church groups. But for a small, vocal minority, these alternatives are insuf ficient. They believe that child care, like educa tion, is a right. And, like education, they believe others should pay for it.

The public school system, few would argue, is 393 in terrible shape-violence, drugs, crumbling buildings, falling test scores, uninterested teach ers, and rebellious students. Increased govern ment controls haven't improved the educational system; in fact, the opposite is true. Yet, in the name of improved quality and affordability,many people want to subject the child care industry to similar controls. This brings us to the real essence of the child care debate. Contrary to popular belief, parent hood is not a right, but a responsibility.And, with few exceptions, parenthood is avoidable. What child care advocates seek to !avoidis not parenthood, but the responsibilities that follow. Many people give more thought to the financial ramifications of a home or car purchase than to those involved in raising a child. Yet, the lifetime costs of raising a child can easily approach those of buying a house.

Some argue that children are innocent victims of their parents' irresponsibility or misfortune. While this may be true, the childless neig\1bor, whose tax dollars would pay for government child care programs, is no less innocent. Subsi dized child care, in fact, is an undeserved reward. Like all undeserved rewards, it provides an in centive for irresponsible people to continue their irresponsible ways. Of course, unforeseen events sometimes change an individual's or a family's financial situ ation. But bad luck is no justification for a coer cive redistribution of wealth. Such people must rely on the voluntary charity of others. One per son's need is not a claim on the property of oth ers. Conclusion The free market can operate effectively only when people are responsible for their actions. When the market provides consumers with a choice of goods and services, the consumer must decide which suits his wants, desires, and values.

The market provides many child care options. Cost and quality vary widely,and parents are free to choose which best suits their budget and re quirements. When consumers refuse to accept a substandard product, the market responds ac cordingly.This is as true of child care as any other product or service. But a growing number of parents refuse to ac cept the responsibility of choosing. They want the government to mandate standards, to provide li censing, and to pay for child care. They want the government to assume their responsibilities as parents. Sadly,this is the real crisisin childcare. D 394 Specialization and Exchange by Gene Smiley I have spent the last 17 years teaching eco nomics to college students. During this time my wife and I have owned two homes, nei ther of which we built ourselves. To furnish our homes we have purchased chairs, tables, sofas, coffee makers, stoves, refrigerators, television sets, stereo systems, lamps, computers, and an in describable mosaic of other home furnishings.