Director's Newsletter
Director's Newsletter
4 March, 2026
The Problem with Institutional Childcare
Last week I attended the Aspire Conference held in Sydney, organised by the former deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson and broadly part of the Association for Responsible Government (ARC) movement internationally. There were many very interesting presentations highlighting the very significant challenges Australia is facing (along with the rest of the West) which threaten societal collapse if not addressed.
One of the most important presentations was made by Erica Komisar a social worker and psychoanalyst, specialising in childhood development, who has written a number of books and more recently appeared on a number of very popular podcasts.
Around thirty years ago when Erica started her practice she began to see a significant increase in mental illness among very young children, with regard to suicidal ideation, anxiety and ADHD, and noticed that a common feature in these cases was the absence of the mother in very early childhood.
Looking for a scientific basis for what she was seeing in her practice she turned to the published neuroscience and epigenetics research and started speaking to the key researchers in these fields. What the research clearly showed was not just that mothers were emotionally necessary for the child's development but also biologically necessary, particularly in the first three years, and the lack of the mother at this crucial stage was ultimately behind the significant increase in mental illness.
The research showed that children are born ‘neurologically fragile’ not resilient and that it is the sensitive empathic nurturing presence of the mother at this early stage of development that works to wire the brain to enable the child to become an independent and resilient person, able to properly deal with stress and anxiety.
The problem is that if children do not receive this sensitive empathic nurturing presence of the mother, in terms of her being biologically present to the child during these first three years of development, the child will develop pathological defences to cope with the loss of this presence. And the development of these defences makes these children psychologically weaker leading them to breakdown as they move through childhood. The problem is that, without the presence of the mother, the foundation of their personality is not built organically on something secure, but instead the absence of this. Their personality is based on ‘insecurity’.
And, of course, this is not just a problem for the individual child but has also become a significant social and financial problem for the society which then has to deal with the rise in mental illness and its social impact both throughout childhood and when these children reach adulthood.
Given the scientific evidence Komisar recommends that ‘daycare’ (what she refers to as ‘institutional childcare’), should be avoided where this is at all possible. According to her it is the worst option for parents where both parents are required to work for reasons of financial necessity.
In fact, in her opinion ‘daycare’ is so damaging to early childhood development that she recommends that parents look to make financial sacrifices to allow for the mother to stay at home with the baby until they reach three years old. This might involve giving up things like annual holiday trips and other forms of unnecessary spending or even going as far as moving to a different part of the city where housing is cheaper.
In Australia the problem from a public policy perspective, of course, is that successive Commonwealth governments, both Labor and Coalition, have not recognised the scientific evidence and continue to look to increase funding for ‘institutional childcare’ as the first and only option, rather than prioritise financial support that would allow mothers to actually care for their own children at home until they are ready for school.
This clearly needs to change. The Commonwealth's government’s ‘childcare’ policy needs to be based on what is scientifically proven to be best for children, and this is ‘home’ care provided by the mother, not care within institutional facilities. Even in the most extreme cases of economic deprivation where the mother needs to work, Komisar argues that the better option is for care to be provided by a trusted relative who has a natural relationship to the child and where the child can be cared for in a domestic setting.
Komisar’s work and the scientific studies on which it is based of course aligns with Christian anthropology and the Christian understanding of the family and parenthood. God fundamentally created human beings as male and female so that they might be ‘fruitful and multiply’. After the love and worship of God, the most important work of the human person is marriage, the family and the generation of children. In order for children to flourish they require the full love, attention and support of both their mother and father, but within this, mothers play a particularly crucial biological role. Komisar summarises this understanding in a quote attributed to CS Lewis that: ‘Children are not a distraction from more important work. They are the most important work.’
If we are to save western civilisation it is clear that we must again recognise this timeless truth, which modern science has confirmed. That the biological presence of parents is crucial to the flourishing of children, and therefore to the very flourishing of society. The job of raising children must not be handed over the state or other commercial entities. Rather parents must be recognised and supported as the first and best educators of their children.
The Dawson Centre to will work with other groups in society for a fundamental change in both the Albanese government's and Coalition's approach to childcare from one of only supporting institutional childcare to one that prioritises homecare provided by the mother for at least the first three years of the child’s life.
Best regards,
Alexander Sidhu
Director of the Christopher Dawson Centre
