The Influence and Importance of Day Care Centers in Tokyo

During the early 20th century, the number of day care centers increased exponentially in metropolitan areas such as Osaka and Tokyo and their role in the growth of Japan were unmistakably important. These day cares provided basic services such as education and medical attention for children age three to seven from low income families at little or no cost. Since many families had both parents working full time, a majority of children were sent to these day cares and thus a large portion of the population were greatly influenced by the different day care centers. Kathleen Uno, in her article Passages to modernity: Motherhood, childhood, and social reform in early twentieth century Japan, described the different aspects of child care present at that time, its influence on the masses and the importance of their support.

Child care was huge during this era because the working class did not have the time needed to work and support their family while taking care of their children. The day cares were free therefore it relieved the parents from any financial burden of paying for child care. Also the day cares provided medical attention and education for the children, which were provided for free by the day cares, but probably, would have cost the parents of children not in the centers an extra fee (Uno, 150). These three services provided for no charge helped boost the standing of the working class because they suddenly were not tight on money and were able to use their money to increase their quality of life. The medical attention and the education also had a huge impact on bettering the working class since they were now having healthy, educated children who were able to work and support their family. Educated children were also able to pursue higher educational opportunities and become a better citizen which helped the government who were looking for healthy, educated people to join the military.

The biggest conflict that arose from these child care centers during the Taisho era is the opposing views and purposes of them. Ogawa Shigejiro’s idea of caring for infants was one view which was discussed heavily in Uno’s article. Uno writes that Ogawa fought for child cares to shift their emphasis from children to infants because of the increase in infant mortality (Uno, 154). Ogawa believed that saving the lives of infants were more important than educating children as it lowered infant mortality and made improvements for the working class. Ogawa also believed that parents who send their children to these day cares should pay a fee because free day care may lead to parents neglecting their parental duty to take care of their kids. As opposed to his idea of infant care which got little support, Ogawa’s idea of paid day care center was supported by many of his contemporaries (Uno, 156). Even as Ogawa pushed for these ideas to pass, most day cares rejected his ideas and continued to provide free child care for children age three to seven because of how expensive day cares may get if they provided care for infants and because Ogawa was relatively new in the area of day care centers (Uno, 156). Also, since the standards and aims of the day cares have been well established, Ogawa’s new ideas did not gain much support. Other ideas which were being pushed during this era were the KSKH emphasis on providing day care services and Futaba Yochien’s emphasis on the educational services (Uno, 150). Uno states that almost all day care centers provided both services, but usually emphasized one or the other.

Day cares were probably most important because of its ability to influence the masses. Since most parents sent their children to these day cares, the parents were available for the day care proponents to speak with. Day cares organized guardian meetings, or hogosha kai, to get in touch with the people at home (Uno, 157). The centers provided information and services on child raising, restructuring family life, and hygiene (Uno, 157). These meetings instilled many of the important values that Japanese families at the time needed to improve their life. This was important not only to the families, but for the government as well because these values and ideas supported the government’s idea of raising healthy, educated children which the government wanted to build a powerful military. Of course the day cares were not concerned about the ideas of the government and were only thinking of their own aims for bettering neighborhoods and improving family life, but it did not hurt that the ideas were supported by the government.

In all, these day care centers provided social aid for the lower class which influenced many of the reforms that benefited society as Uno explains in her conclusion. This seems like an accurate description of these day care centers because of how successful they were and how much support was provided. Even though some important ideas which could have potentially improved the lower class, such as those of Ogawa’s, were not advocated, much of the ideas and aims were for the better. From child care to education, the centers provided much of the assistance the lower class needed for their children to better their lives. As well as these families, governments also benefited as these day cares helped produce better, stronger citizens that created good candidates for the military. Looking at these day care centers in a bigger picture, it seemed that it played a vital role in modernizing Japan and providing the basis for future social reforms and practices.