The role of nuance in child care costs

One of your readers (Your Views — “Cautionary tale” — Jan. 22) finds it useful to remind us that years ago he and his wife successfully arranged for child care for their two children “without seeking help from the government.” Yes, nostalgia: such a warm and fuzzy thing. Attending college was cheaper back then, too, as were so many other services.

The reader then gratuitously mentions that fraud is being investigated in a child care program funded within the state of Minnesota. Just how does inclusion of this incident now help us to recognize and resolve what is essentially an affordability issue?

Immediately above your reader's testament is juxtaposed an article indicating that “There are 14 million children in this country who do not have enough to eat.” What are we to make of these disparities? Some had once been able to afford the cost of child care, but now others may need some assistance to provide similar care — and even to feed their kids. At least part of the answer, I believe, relates to 40 years of stagnant wages (and check out the federal minimum wage rate) as well as the professionalization of the provision of child care service itself.

Yes, nuance: such a harsh and insightful thing.

Jim Kinney

Vernon Hills