Conceptualising the Making of Young Children’s Routine Care Arrangements

  • Borbála Kovács


The focus of this chapter is the articulation of a theory of process underpinning embodied families’ childcare decisions and their children’s routine care arrangements during the early years. The chapter commences with a discussion of the nature of childcare decisions in light of parental narratives, highlighting the central importance of carers and parental ideas about carers’ care ethos when considering childcare alternatives. The following section outlines the conceptual building blocks of the theoretical formulation of the making of childcare decisions, namely care ideals and the hierarchies they form. Following the description of seven care ideals revealed by parental narratives, the chapter expands on the analytical centrality of these in individual couples’ childcare decisions. The chapter then provides a theoretical formulation of the process whereby individual parents and couples arrive at specific care arrangements, with hierarchies of care ideals at the heart of this process. The discussion about the origins and reproduction of hierarchies of care ideals concludes the chapter.


  1. Braun, A., Vincent, C., & Ball, S. (2008). ‘I’m so much more myself now, coming back to work’—Working class mothers, paid work and childcare. Journal of Education Policy, 23, 533–548. Scholar
  2. Crompton, R., & Harris, F. (1998). Explaining women’s employment patterns: “Orientations to work” revisited. The British Journal of Sociology, 49, 118–136. Scholar
  3. Dodson, L. (2007). Wage-poor mothers and moral economy. Social Politics, 14, 258–280. Scholar
  4. Drobnič, S., & Guillén, A. M. (2011). Work-life balance in Europe : The role of job quality. Work and welfare in Europe. Y. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Duncan, S., & Edwards, R. (1999). Lone mothers, paid work, and gendered moral rationalities. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Duncan, S., Edwards, R., Reynolds, T., & Alldred, P. (2004). Mothers and child care: Policies, values and theories. Children and Society, 18, 254–265. Scholar
  7. European Commission. (2016). Assessing the implementation of the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies and the Council Recommendation on Effective Roma integration measures in the Member States—2016 (Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions). European Commission.Google Scholar
  8. Finch, J., & Mason, J. (1993). Negotiating family responsibilities. London and New York: Tavistock/Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fischer, P., Jonas, E., Frey, D., & Kastenmüller, A. (2008). Selective exposure and decision framing: The impact of gain and loss framing on confirmatory information search after decisions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 312–320. Scholar
  10. Hakim, C. (2000). Work-lifestyle choices in the 21st century: Preference theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Himmelweit, S., & Sigala, M. (2004). Choice and the relationship between identities and behaviour for mothers with pre-school children: Some implications for policy from a UK study. Journal of Social Policy, 33, 455–478. Scholar
  12. Hobson, B. (2013). Work-life balance: The agency and capabilities gap. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hochschild, A. R. (1995). The culture of politics: Traditional, postmodern, cold-modern, and warm-modern ideals of care. Social Politics, 2, 331–346. Scholar
  14. Holdsworth, C., & Morgan, D. H. J. (2005). Transitions in context: Leaving home independence and adulthood. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Kovács, B. (2014). Nannies and informality in Romanian local childcare markets. In J. Morris & A. Polese (Eds.), The informal post-socialist economy: Embedded practices and livelihoods (pp. 67–84). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Kovács, B. (2015a). Managing access to full-time public daycare and preschool services in Romania: Planfulness, cream-skimming and “interventions.” Journal of Eurasian Studies, 6, 6–16. Scholar
  17. Kovács, B. (2015b). Romanian families: Changes and continuities over recent decades. In Z. Rajkai (Ed.), Family and social change in socialist and postsocialist societies (pp. 250–299). Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
  18. Kremer, M. (2007). How welfare states care: Culture, gender and parenting in Europe. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1989). Rediscovering institutions: The organizational basis of politics. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  20. Morgan, D. H. J. (2011). Rethinking family practices, Palgrave Macmillan studies in family and intimate life. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Pfau-Effinger, B. (2006). Cultures of childhood and the relationship of care and employment in European welfare states. In J. Lewis (Ed.), Children, changing families and welfare states (pp. 137–153). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
  22. Pfau-Effinger, B., & Rostgaard, T. (2011). Care between work and welfare in European societies. Work and welfare in Europe. Y. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  23. Pungello, E. P., & Kurtz-Costes, B. (2000). Working women’s selection of care for their infants: A prospective study. Family Relations, 49, 245–255. Scholar
  24. Saxonberg, S. (2014). Gendering family policies in post-communist Europe: A historical-institutional analysis. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Vincent, C., & Ball, S. J. (2006). Childcare, choice and class practices: Middle class parents and their children. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Aarhus UniversityAarhusDenmark

Personalised recommendations