09/02/2026
Maryland is proposing to lower the minimum age for child care teachers in centers and large family child care homes from **19 to 18**.
I am opposed to this change—not because every 18-year-old is incapable, and not because turning 19 suddenly produces wisdom or maturity. Some 18-year-olds are extraordinarily responsible and well prepared.
My concern is deeper:
**What standards will Maryland use to determine that an 18-year-old possesses the academic preparation, emotional maturity, judgment, patience, and professional readiness required to care for, nurture, supervise, and educate young children?**
Before this change is implemented, I believe Maryland families deserve clear answers to some difficult questions:
**1. What evidence supports lowering the age requirement?**
What data has Maryland reviewed concerning the performance, safety record, classroom management, judgment, retention, and effectiveness of 18-year-old child care teachers?
If such evidence does not exist, upon what basis was this change determined to be sound child-development policy?
**2. If age is being lowered as a requirement, what meaningful competency standard is being strengthened in its place?**
Coursework matters. Training matters. But neither automatically measures patience under pressure, emotional regulation, emergency judgment, conflict management, or the ability to supervise several young children at once.
How will Maryland determine readiness beyond simply saying an applicant has reached age 18?
**3. Is this really about a child care workforce shortage?**
If providers are struggling to recruit and retain qualified staff, we should say so plainly.
But then another question follows:
**Are we solving an adult labor-market problem by changing a standard involving the care of children?**
If the underlying problem is inadequate wages, benefits, working conditions, professional status, or high turnover, why are those issues not being addressed with equal urgency?
Children should not become the adjustment variable through which we solve a workforce problem.
**4. Why are there no additional safeguards for newly eligible 18-year-old teachers?**
Why not require additional mentoring, supervised classroom experience, competency evaluation, observation, or a transitional period before independent responsibility is given?
If Maryland believes well-prepared 18-year-olds can do this work, then a structured pathway into the profession should not be unreasonable.
**5. Which Maryland communities will be most affected by this change?**
Will newly eligible 18-year-old teachers be distributed evenly across the state—or will they become concentrated in lower-income communities, understaffed centers, rural communities, or programs serving families with fewer resources and fewer alternatives?
Has Maryland studied that possibility?
A policy may be statewide on paper and still fall unevenly upon communities in practice.
**6. How can the proposal state that there is “no economic impact” if workforce expansion is part of the rationale?**
If lowering the age requirement increases the available labor pool, assists employers with recruitment, allows centers to fill vacancies, or affects staffing costs and capacity, then there are economic implications.
Maryland should explain precisely what it means when it says there is “no economic impact.”
**7. What happens after the regulation changes?**
Will Maryland track outcomes involving newly eligible 18-year-old teachers?
Will it monitor complaints, safety incidents, licensing violations, turnover, retention, classroom quality, and other measures?
And if problems emerge, what mechanism exists to reconsider the policy?
This is not a small matter.
Child care teachers are not merely watching children until their parents return.
They are entrusted with developing minds, vulnerable bodies, emerging identities, language development, social development, emotional formation, and physical safety.
Maryland's child care workforce crisis may be real.
The struggle of providers to find qualified employees may be real.
The difficulty families experience finding affordable child care is certainly real.
But the vulnerability of children is also real.
The question should not simply be:
**“How can we enlarge the child care workforce?”**
It should also be:
**“What must Maryland require of those to whom we entrust our children?”**
Those are not necessarily the same question.
The public comment period remains open until **September 8, 2026**.
Whether you agree with my position or not, Maryland parents, grandparents, educators, child care professionals, faith leaders, and citizens should know this change is being proposed—and should make their voices heard.
Public comments may be submitted to:
**Keisha Maxwell**
Administrator of Policy and Special Projects
Maryland State Department of Education
**[[email protected]](mailto:[email protected])**
Reference: **Proposed Action 26-111-P**
Our children deserve more than an administrative change.
**They deserve an answer.**
