for love or money: the sociology of babysitting

If you're interested in the topic of the field exam I'm just finishing up, read this. My paper is so far titled For Love or For Money: somethingsomething. Its theme? The value of care. Is caring its own reward? Should we pay top dollar for care, and will that make it better? Should we test to be sure that our children are loved, in addition to receiving caring services? How much does that cost?

Case in point. In January, when I used to stay home with Edie part time, I needed a babysitter for about 12 hours a week. I placed ads for ten bucks an hour babysitting services, what I understood to be the going rate from a former student emphasizing in early childhood education. In practically no time at all, without even seeing the ad, a different former student said that she would love (note the word: love=good) to sit for Edie - and her schedule even fit our schedule.

I haven't written about this because this person reads my blog (and so does her Mom). But the sociological lesson I believe is a good one. Said student was visibly surprised at the ten dollar pay rate, so much that she agreed to do it for eight. I sort of felt bad reducing the initial promise for pay, a negotiation faux pas, where I should have started with less with a chance to increase later. But she was truly honestly fine with the $8, especially because she really wanted to help us out*.

Love as commoditity. What's interesting, and really what has always bothered me, about this is that we paid less to gaurantee better care. Paying the full $10 to someone answering our ad would have meant a stranger in our house taking care of our daughter. Maybe she would have been fantastic, maybe not.

Not to commodify care for a child, but in essence we replaced two dollars an hour with a gaurantee of love. Sociologists of care distinguish "caring for" versus "caring about." The first means that caring services are accomplished. The second means that someone genuinely has feelings for a person. For our money, we got both. We received $26 per week of love, and it was worth it.

We pay more now. I'm going overboard with the analogy, of course. But it's true that we deliberately paid less for better care. These days we take Edie to an in-home daycare four days a week, but we still pay Edie's favorite babysitter (thank you Ellen) on occasion. Sarah and I are working more and we can afford the full $10 per hour. But since our sitter is worth that extra $2 of love, really we are getting a $12 an hour value for her services, no?

All of this to make a point. When it comes to care, do you really get what you pay for? It would seem that the people you love are the ones better at the service, and paying your friends and family seems counter-intuitive. But what if you pay really a whole lot of money? Would private daycare be the best care Edie could get?

And the questions keep on coming. It's a good day to be a sociologist in the field of care.

* I should point out that when Edie was born she offered to watch her for free, so actually this is a signifcant increase in payment for the service.