In the current landscape, child care is increasingly being seen as a place for early education, and systems are largely bundling child care in the Early Care and Education sphere through funding and quality measures. As states define school readiness and quality, they often miss critical elements, such as equitable access to quality and cultural traditions. This article provides a summary of the various definitions and structures of child care. It also discusses how the current child care policy conversation can and ought to be infused with a framework grounded in the context of institutional racism and trauma. Models and examples will explore the differences between state government regulations, and how those differ than the regulation and structure of child care in Indian Country.
The age range may differ depending on state regulation and ability.
3.
P.Braveman, “What Are Health Disparities and Health Equity? We Need to Be Clear,”Public Health Reports129, Supp. 1 (2014): 5-8, available at <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3863701/> (last visited January 24, 2017).
4.
22 Virginia Annotated Code 40-111-130.4 (July 17, 2013).
5.
California Manual of Policy and Procedures, Title 22, Division 12, Chapter 3, Section 102417(p).
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and US Department of Education, High-Quality Early Learning Settings Depend on a High-Quality Workforce: Low Compensation Undermines Quality (June2016).
11.
National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development, Committee on Integrating the Science of Early Childhood Development, Jack P.Shonkoff and Deborah A.Phillips, eds., Board on Children, Youth, and Families, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2000): 5.
12.
Number and Characteristics of Early Care and Education (ECE) Teachers and Caregivers: Initial Findings from the National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE), at Tables 12 and 13.
13.
M.Whitebook, C.McLean, and L. J. E.Austin, Early Childhood Workforce Index – 2016 (Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, University of California, Berkeley, 2016).
14.
See supra note 10.
15.
M. Y. H. BraveHeart, “Gender Differences in the Historical Trauma Response among the Lakota,”Journal of Health & Social Policy10, no. 4 (1999): 1-21. See also T. Evans-Campbell, “Historical Trauma in American Indian/Native Alaska Communities,” Journal of Interpersonal Violence 23, no. 3 (2008): 316–338; C. Michaels, R. Rousseau, and Y. Yang, “Historical Trauma and Microaggressions: A Framework for Culturally-Based Practice,” Children's Mental Health eReview (2010): 1-9.
16.
Several lawsuits challenging ICWA's legal presumption that Native children belong in their own homes or with other family or tribal members are making their way through the court system throughout the country, and may ultimately be heard by the Supreme Court. L.Laird, “Children of the Tribe Lawsuits Claim the Indian Child Welfare Act Is Not Always in the Best Interests of Those It's Meant to Protect,”ABA Journal, October2016, available at < http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/indian_child_welfare_tribal_lawsuits/> (last visited January 24, 2017); C. M. Turner, “Implementing and Defending the Indian Child Welfare Act Through Revised State Requirements,” Columbia Journal of Law & Social Problems 49, no. 4 (2016): 501-549; M. L. M. Fletcher W. T. and Singel, “Indian Children and the Federal-Tribal Trust Relationship,” April 28, 2016, available at <https://ssrn.com/abstract=2772139> (last visited January 24, 2017); C. Hodge, “Is the Indian Child Welfare Act Losing Steam?: Narrowing Non-custodial Parental Rights after Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl,” Columbia Journal of Race & Law 7 (2016): 191.
