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
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
RSS