“…29 The identification of these problems has led to first order change in the form of investment in collective crèche facilities, particularly in more deprived areas. Indeed, investment in collective facilities, after having been reduced in favour of subsidising individual care arrangements in the 1990s underwent a resurgence in the new millenium (Fagnani, 2012) and from 2009 onwards, the reform of parental leave has been dependent on the expansion of formal childcare. Both the Sarkozy and Hollande administrations have had ambitious objectives for increasing the overall supply of childcare places, both collective and individual, despite the economic crisis.…”
This article compares work-family reconciliation policy since 2008 in two contrasting case-study countries, namely France and the UK, and investigates how post-2008 economic circumstances and austerity measures have interacted with other policy drivers to influence the extent and shape of change in this policy area in these countries. The article demonstrates that work-family reconciliation policy in both countries has been resilient in the face of economic and budgetary problems and progress has been made albeit from different starting points and in path-dependent ways to “degender” parental leave and to improve the affordability of and access to childcare particularly for those on lower incomes. However, it also reveals that in both countries, despite partisan consensus on the need to further develop policy, a combination of economic constraints and the opposition to reform of key social and political actors has put a brake on change.
“…29 The identification of these problems has led to first order change in the form of investment in collective crèche facilities, particularly in more deprived areas. Indeed, investment in collective facilities, after having been reduced in favour of subsidising individual care arrangements in the 1990s underwent a resurgence in the new millenium (Fagnani, 2012) and from 2009 onwards, the reform of parental leave has been dependent on the expansion of formal childcare. Both the Sarkozy and Hollande administrations have had ambitious objectives for increasing the overall supply of childcare places, both collective and individual, despite the economic crisis.…”
This article compares work-family reconciliation policy since 2008 in two contrasting case-study countries, namely France and the UK, and investigates how post-2008 economic circumstances and austerity measures have interacted with other policy drivers to influence the extent and shape of change in this policy area in these countries. The article demonstrates that work-family reconciliation policy in both countries has been resilient in the face of economic and budgetary problems and progress has been made albeit from different starting points and in path-dependent ways to “degender” parental leave and to improve the affordability of and access to childcare particularly for those on lower incomes. However, it also reveals that in both countries, despite partisan consensus on the need to further develop policy, a combination of economic constraints and the opposition to reform of key social and political actors has put a brake on change.
“…These programmes and services are often represented as designed to address gaps in the 'social ecology' of disadvantaged and vulnerable families, when communities and wider family networks are viewed as unable to provide sufficient or appropriate support (Dolan et al, 2006). Several recent policies have substantially developed targeted measures and services (Fagnani, 2012). There has been much emphasis on support targeted at specific categories of families and children.…”
Section: The Policy and Service Context In Francementioning
This article examines developments in parenting and family support services in France. Drawing on qualitative empirical studies, the article considers two types of initiatives ‒ the Programmes for Educational Success (PRE) and parenting interventions delivered alongside child protection services. Both of these services are examples of new types of parenting and family support interventions in the French context targeted at ‘children at risk’, seeking to address and prevent problems of educational underachievement, youth offending, poor health in children and young people and child neglect and maltreatment. The article critically reviews tensions between principles of more responsive, partnership-based family support and more prescriptive parenting education and family interventions. Drawing on empirical findings, the article examines frontline practice and professional‒family relationships, highlighting the significance of ‘parental involvement’ practice and conflicting professional and parental perspectives about children's needs, family support and professional–client relationships
“…Moreover, while path dependency is very apparent, change can and does happen. For example, since the beginning of the present century ‘Germany has been undertaking a significant turnabout in its family policy paradigm with the introduction of new laws in the domain of parental leave and child care provision’ (Fagnani, ). Decades of maternalism and male breadwinning in former West Germany are giving way to the adoption of a dual earner / dual carer model and measures to retain women in the labour market after they have children.…”
Section: The Challenge For Working Parents — Mind the Gapmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These measures include a major reform of leave policies, intended to encourage women's early return to employment after childbirth and greater participation by fathers in their children's care and upbringing (see Erler, for a full account of the politics leading to this reform); and an expansion of ECEC services for children under 3 years in the former West German Länder to match those that have been long available in the East of the country.Drafted into law and effective from January 2005 local authorities are now responsible for providing childcare facilities to all children under three whose parents are working, undergoing professional training, or as the need arose, by the year 2013. Roughly a third of this care will be provided by registered child minders as they represent a less expensive option for local authorities than the construction of more childcare facilities (Fagnani, ).A substantive, though less marked and paradigmatic, change of policy direction can be seen in the UK, where, since 1997, leave provision has been substantially extended and the provision of ECEC services has become a priority of public policy. This follows belated recognition that the relationship between work and family life can no longer be left entirely to the private sphere.…”
Section: The Challenge For Working Parents — Mind the Gapmentioning
Parental leave and early childhood education and care (ECEC) are two policies widely proposed and implemented to support working parents with young children. This article examines entitlement to leave and ECEC in 25 European countries, including 22 EU Member and Accession States, and the relationship between them, in particular to what degree entitlements are aligned to provide parents with integrated support. In most countries, there is a substantial gap between the end of well‐paid leave and the start of an entitlement to ECEC. Only five countries, four Nordic States plus Slovenia, are aligned and the article considers some of the reasons for this. It highlights the common approach to ECEC adopted by all five countries, resulting in a fully integrated system, rather than the much more common split system that divides responsibility for children under and over 3 years between welfare and education. The article ends with some speculations about future developments.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
