Childcare for farm families

A key strategy to keep children safe yet largely absent from farm programming

Dados Bibliográficos

ID22073173
AutoresFlorence A Becot (0000-0002-0085-5661, Marshfield Clinic, autor correspondente), Florence Becot, Shoshanah M Inwood (0000-0002-0941-0394, The Ohio State University), Shoshanah Inwood, Andrea Rissing (0000-0001-5523-7484, Arizona State University)
Ano2022
Volume10
Páginas1043774-1043774
Data de publicação2022-11-08
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoFrontiers in Public Health (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 2296-2565 • E-ISSN: 2296-2565
EditoraFrontiers Media SA (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/fpubh.2022.1043774
PMID36424962
OpenAlexW4308592389
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas12
Referências citadas70

Despite long-standing safety recommendations that non-working children be supervised off the worksite by an adult, little is known about farm families' ability to comply. We conducted a review of 92 documents and 36 key informant interviews in three U.S. states (Ohio, Vermont, and Wisconsin) to assess how farm service providers and farm organizations address the intersection of children and childcare with farm work and farm safety in programming. Through their programming, these two groups deeply influence farm families' social systems, affecting farm safety and farm business decisions. Study design and result interpretations were grounded in the women in agriculture literature, which examines the needs and realities of farm women (often the primary caregivers). Most documents reviewed did not address children, and even fewer addressed childcare. Interviews confirm findings of the document review. Despite awareness that farm families juggle work and children, few interviewees explicitly integrated children and childcare topics due to a messy and complex set of individual- and structural-level factors. We identified four possible, overlapping explanations for this tension: valuation of care vs. farm work; farm programming's traditional emphasis on the farm business; alignment of the programming with the agrarian ideal of the family farm; and the mismatch between farm programming scope, resources available, and childcare challenges. We conclude with two main implications for farm safety programs and farm children safety. First, farm programming's reinforcement of the social and cultural expectations regarding children's involvement in the farm operation from a young age could be counterproductive from a farm safety standpoint and miss an opportunity to provide alternative models of childrearing. Second, the invisibility of the lived realities of raising children may lead farm parents to distrust farm programming and deter them from participating

Agriculture · Business · Family farm · Geography · Political science · Public relations · Service provider · Agriculture and Farm Safety · Diverse Educational Innovations Studies · Engineering · Human-Animal Interaction Studies · Marketing