A quick look at the two chosen magazines will confirm that the definition of quality is somewhat subjective. Before this, common sense, at least for me, told me that there were objective flaws and negative consequences for child care. The answer, or lack thereof, is a little more nuanced than I imagined, but it has less strengthened my belief that daycare with appropriate context, timing, and care can have a net positive effect. The most interesting fact to me was the fact that studies consistently showed that high-quality daycare (despite all its different interpretations) seemed to give children an advantage in terms of academic achievement and cognitive ability. We may not understand all the mechanisms at play when it comes to children, but knowing that high-quality care enhances these qualities would almost make it seem like an obligation for parents to place our children in these centers, even if for minimal exposure. I was a little disappointed that there was no conclusive evidence one way or the other regarding risky behavior and social development. There appears to be some correlation between higher hours and higher risk behaviors, but it does not apply to children of lower socioeconomic status. There are many inferences we can make here based on what we know about children's development and parents' habits in these situations, but until we have more actual knowledge on the topic it would be irresponsible to try to influence any sort of policy on the matter. Overall my point was this: When used correctly and done out of concern for the child's well-being rather than as a way to ignore responsibility, daycare can be a vital resource for both child and parent. My research on the topic has confirmed my position with some new points to make in case the topic ever comes up