Is TV that bad?

[JASMAK]

OP said tv 'in general' not just under 2

OP posted it in Baby Club originally so the assumption is that we're discussing TV for babies.

Ahhh...I am not in baby club as I have 3, 8, and 10 year old. This is why I was so confused why people were being SO anal.

 

[Larkspur]

OP said tv 'in general' not just under 2

OP posted it in Baby Club originally so the assumption is that we're discussing TV for babies.

Ahhh...I am not in baby club as I have 3, 8, and 10 year old. This is why I was so confused why people were being SO anal.

Ah, insulting those who don't share your perspective, that's always the way forward in a discussion.

 

[LDC]

Can I just ask, and I'm not trying to be stupid or insulting, but people always say "xyz study shows this" or "guidelines recommend this".

Do people just browse websites or something to find these things?

I NEVER read studies. I had a baby book when I was pregnant about how baby was developing each month and I have another one now that says what I should, expect from baby each month developmental wise (like learning to sit, weaning etc) because to be perfectly honest, before I had lo I had NO clue about babies!

I'm definitely not saying there is anything wrong with reading up, I just choose not to. I was just wondering is there a general website about recommendations or something? When I read through posts and people are citing things etc - and they always come from different resources not the same consensus source which makes me wonder about my following statement - i always imagine (for example with the tv thing because that's what this thread is about) that people think "ahhh tv, I'm going to research if that's good or bad for my child".

Some things I think are common sense or you should just go on your instincts?

I know, from again reading on here, that you need to be careful when citing certain sources because of the evidence etc that have been used (I've done grad and post grad psychology so I know about crappy studies) and that some, like government/WHO/DH etc are more reliable .

So is there like a section of these websites or something dedicated to babies and things like tv, weaning, sleeping etc?

Sorry to sound stupid! I just can't imagine people searching every little detail of their child's upbringing on the Internet to find studies/evidence that they're doing things by the book so to speak if there wasn't all of this stuff found in one place?

X

 

[Larkspur]

That's really not a silly question at all, LDC. The answer isn't totally straightforward though.

First of all, yes, some of the big professional organisations do have links on their websites. For example you can go here:

https://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-...AP-Health-Initiatives.aspx#SchoolandChildCare

...to find out the American Academy of Pediatrics' recommendations and support programmes on everything from breastfeeding, alcohol use in pregnancy and vaccination to childproofing and media consumption.

Something like that is kind of a one-stop-shop for advice from a reputable institution that regularly reviews scientific literature. A lot of these recommendations will be passed down through professional channels, like doctors and nurses.

Sometimes though, you need a bit more help/want to know more about something specific and a one-stop shop doesn't give you enough, so you can go to some of the specialist organisations, like La Leche League, CDC, etc, and they can give you a lot more of the 'why' behind the recommendations. They tend to have an 'approach' or a particular advocacy position. For topics like media consumption, there are organisations like CommonSenseMedia which are particularly devoted to the issue, or children's advocacy organisations like Children Now, which address it as part of their remit.

On most of these sites you can find links to studies and further information on pretty much whatever topic you're interested in. Stuff like sleep help tends to be more the domain of self-appointed 'professionals' who may or may not have a lot of scientific evidence behind what they 'teach'.

So, if you want to look studies up directly yourself, I find the best way is to search relatively neutral terms like, say "Sleep training infants" on Google Scholar. That way you'll find a range of studies that address the topic that won't necessarily be loaded either way (eg if you searched "Damage sleep training" you'd get a rather different set of results). Other people might have different advice for searching this way.

You might feel common sense will see you right, and that's an approach a lot of people take. My feeling is that common sense is not that common, by which I mean that you can take a lot of people from approximately the same demographic group and their 'common sense' opinions will vary hugely.

My OH, for example, is an intelligent and sensitive man who I was astounded to discover was under the impression that it was normal and fine to leave a 10-day infant to 'cry it out' in a separate room with the door closed. (This never actually happened, he just made the suggestion under stress at 3am one day.) 'Common sense' is a very nebulous term for a general feeling that's incredibly dependent on your own background, personality, media exposure, education level, interests, etc etc etc.

I mean, take this for example: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-rel...ramatically-from-five-years-ago-82132757.html

This says (and I've seen similar figures elsewhere that on average American kids 8-18 are using media devices for 53 hours a week. ON AVERAGE. That means a lot of kids are using them a lot more than that.

Now call me conservative, but there doesn't seem to be a lick of common sense in that. And yet - that's just reality. Normal. That's what a lot of parents think is totally fine.

That's why I personally don't trust common sense. I think raising a child is one of the most important and challenging things you can do and personally, I think it's worth it to spend more time doing some reading and research than going with an 'instinct' about what's right, which is inevitably going to be shaped by the opinions and preferences of those who are closest to me (relatives, friends) or loudest (media, teachers, advertisers).

 

[MommyJogger]

Here it states it is MORE than just tv that makes children who watch tv score low on language/communication.

In her initial analysis, Schmidt found that babies who spent more time in front of the TV performed worse on language and motor-skill tests at age 3 than those who watched less. But once Schmidt and her team controlled for other factors — the mother's educational status and household income — the relationship between TV-viewing and cognitive development disappeared. That means that TV-viewing alone did not appear to influence babies' brain development; a parent's education and finances mattered more. "Initially it looked like TV-viewing was associated with cognitive development," says Schmidt, "but in fact TV-viewing is an outgrowth of other characteristics of the home environment that lead to lower test scores."

Read more: https://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1882560,00.html#ixzz2d1sLOgjc

Time actually reported that rather poorly and the first author probably smacked herself when she realized which quotes were used. Her study showed that additional TV viewing (as in above the average for each assessment age, which was 0.9h at 6mo of age) wasn't associated with poorer cognitive development. So first, her study didn't show what your press release said it did. And second, the study was performed poorly anyway. Most measurable effects of television viewing in the first 2 years don't appear until after age three. And the tests they used to measure cognitive development are ones that tend to seed the results of the next assessment if the one performing the assessment doesn't know what they're doing, meaning the smart moms payed attention during the tests and probably used the tests to inform their play and interaction during the period between assessments. The study comes from a lab who has made their living looking at obesity indicators, not from a lab that routinely performs mental evaluations.

 

[JASMAK]

OP said tv 'in general' not just under 2

OP posted it in Baby Club originally so the assumption is that we're discussing TV for babies.

Ahhh...I am not in baby club as I have 3, 8, and 10 year old. This is why I was so confused why people were being SO anal.

Ah, insulting those who don't share your perspective, that's always the way forward in a discussion.

yikes. are you serious? I was joking. I think you are taking this way too seriously. It's a debate... Geez.

 

[JASMAK]

Here it states it is MORE than just tv that makes children who watch tv score low on language/communication.

In her initial analysis, Schmidt found that babies who spent more time in front of the TV performed worse on language and motor-skill tests at age 3 than those who watched less. But once Schmidt and her team controlled for other factors — the mother's educational status and household income — the relationship between TV-viewing and cognitive development disappeared. That means that TV-viewing alone did not appear to influence babies' brain development; a parent's education and finances mattered more. "Initially it looked like TV-viewing was associated with cognitive development," says Schmidt, "but in fact TV-viewing is an outgrowth of other characteristics of the home environment that lead to lower test scores."

Read more: https://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1882560,00.html#ixzz2d1sLOgjc

Time actually reported that rather poorly and the first author probably smacked herself when she realized which quotes were used. Her study showed that additional TV viewing (as in above the average for each assessment age, which was 0.9h at 6mo of age) wasn't associated with poorer cognitive development. So first, her study didn't show what your press release said it did. And second, the study was performed poorly anyway. Most measurable effects of television viewing in the first 2 years don't appear until after age three. And the tests they used to measure cognitive development are ones that tend to seed the results of the next assessment if the one performing the assessment doesn't know what they're doing, meaning the smart moms payed attention during the tests and probably used the tests to inform their play and interaction during the period between assessments. The study comes from a lab who has made their living looking at obesity indicators, not from a lab that routinely performs mental evaluations.

Ah well....I don't really care anyways, tbh. Because MY opinion, which is what this debate is about...what we feel as parents, is that a little bit, is OK

 

[overcomer79]

Well my dd has watched tv (sue me!). I guess it's a toss up between leaving her in her crib to scream a fit all alone or allowing her to be down with her brother (4) on a rainy day when we can't get out and do anything. Where do you honestly draw the line? She isn't interested in it but she is exposed.

 

[MommyJogger]

Well my dd has watched tv (sue me!). I guess it's a toss up between leaving her in her crib to scream a fit all alone or allowing her to be down with her brother (4) on a rainy day when we can't get out and do anything. Where do you honestly draw the line? She isn't interested in it but she is exposed.

I really don't want to cause offense, but this is the kind of thing that confuses me. Because those really aren't the only two options surely? There are hundreds of rainy day activity ideas on google and pinterest. What do people who don't have TV do on rainy days after all? I'm really not trying to say "shame on you" or any such thing, but to ask "where do you draw the line" indicates that there is no other option but to leave her in her crib screaming or let her watch tv and that's really just not the reality of the situation.

 

[overcomer79]

Well my dd has watched tv (sue me!). I guess it's a toss up between leaving her in her crib to scream a fit all alone or allowing her to be down with her brother (4) on a rainy day when we can't get out and do anything. Where do you honestly draw the line? She isn't interested in it but she is exposed.

I really don't want to cause offense, but this is the kind of thing that confuses me. Because those really aren't the only two options surely? There are hundreds of rainy day activity ideas on google and pinterest. What do people who don't have TV do on rainy days after all? I'm really not trying to say "shame on you" or any such thing, but to ask "where do you draw the line" indicates that there is no other option but to leave her in her crib screaming or let her watch tv and that's really just not the reality of the situation.

Be confused all you like. I'm not making a blanket statement. I do try to limit my kids watching tv. My son just wants to run and be destructive. I'm sorry he's all boy. Sometimes it's the only way to have some wind down time with him. I don't understand your circumstances nor do you mine. As for the ideals on pinterest, I don't see putting all that crap together when it seems no one would be interested. Just my two cents. I'm not a SAHM so it's not like I have very many rainy days to do with. On the weekends, we are usually out doing things more than we are at home. I think everything balances well in my house. It's just what works with my family. Not all is the same.

 

[Shadowy Lady]

My kids have full enriched lives. They all belong to a sport club, well, K is in ballet. They got to child care twice a week (quality childcare). The older two have school most days, then swim club three times a week. They ride their bikes until dinner is ready, and after dinner until bathtime. I read stories, play with them, take them on hikes, to beaches, to parks, they have been overseas, and on numerous vcations and ski trips. They have playdates regularly. i highly doubt a few hours of TV is going to screw them up or make them dumb. When its raining, or they are tired....yes, they most certainly can and do watch tv or play video games (age appropriate).

To add....I grew up without a TV. Its was harmful and embarassing. I couldnt join in conversations, complete homework, and I still dont know what people are talking about. I hav nver seen Bambi. I just saw Cinderella the first time recently. I was teased and FELT dumb!! This is the world we live in. The people we interact ith daily. I am still upset about that part of my childhood (birth to 16 when we got our first tv). I am sure no one gets it, but it was a big deal.

My parents were very strict with TV growing up (and bedtime, and junk food amongst other things) and I actually remember not being allowed to watch TV till I was 6 or so (though I know it's not as long as 16). We had a TV but my parents usually watched after we went to sleep.

Not having a TV hasn't affected me in anyway whatsoever though. It doesn't change anything in the way I socialize with people as we don't tend to talk about TV shows we watched growing up. The only thing it has done is that I don't watch TV much to this day, I may watch one of my fave shows on Netflix twice a week and then the news in the morning for 10 mins but that really is it. Even as a teen I don't recall watching more than 2-3 hours of tv per week which was a lot less than other teens I knew.

I think it's about conditioning, if you don't do something to start with you won't miss it much.

 

[JASMAK]

My kids have full enriched lives. They all belong to a sport club, well, K is in ballet. They got to child care twice a week (quality childcare). The older two have school most days, then swim club three times a week. They ride their bikes until dinner is ready, and after dinner until bathtime. I read stories, play with them, take them on hikes, to beaches, to parks, they have been overseas, and on numerous vcations and ski trips. They have playdates regularly. i highly doubt a few hours of TV is going to screw them up or make them dumb. When its raining, or they are tired....yes, they most certainly can and do watch tv or play video games (age appropriate).

To add....I grew up without a TV. Its was harmful and embarassing. I couldnt join in conversations, complete homework, and I still dont know what people are talking about. I hav nver seen Bambi. I just saw Cinderella the first time recently. I was teased and FELT dumb!! This is the world we live in. The people we interact ith daily. I am still upset about that part of my childhood (birth to 16 when we got our first tv). I am sure no one gets it, but it was a big deal.

My parents were very strict with TV growing up (and bedtime, and junk food amongst other things) and I actually remember not being allowed to watch TV till I was 6 or so (though I know it's not as long as 16). We had a TV but my parents usually watched after we went to sleep.

Not having a TV hasn't affected me in anyway whatsoever though. It doesn't change anything in the way I socialize with people as we don't tend to talk about TV shows we watched growing up. The only thing it has done is that I don't watch TV much to this day, I may watch one of my fave shows on Netflix twice a week and then the news in the morning for 10 mins but that really is it. Even as a teen I don't recall watching more than 2-3 hours of tv per week which was a lot less than other teens I knew.

I think it's about conditioning, if you don't do something to start with you won't miss it much.

Yeah, I hadly watch tv now too. I watch maybe one show a week, and the news.

 

[MommyJogger]

Be confused all you like. I'm not making a blanket statement. I do try to limit my kids watching tv. My son just wants to run and be destructive. I'm sorry he's all boy. Sometimes it's the only way to have some wind down time with him. I don't understand your circumstances nor do you mine. As for the ideals on pinterest, I don't see putting all that crap together when it seems no one would be interested. Just my two cents. I'm not a SAHM so it's not like I have very many rainy days to do with. On the weekends, we are usually out doing things more than we are at home. I think everything balances well in my house. It's just what works with my family. Not all is the same.

I'm absolutely shocked by this, actually. What a negative caricature of a self-fulfilling gender stereotype.

 

[meli1981]

For those against their kids watching tv, what about the computer? I think theyre one in the same really, but ide rather my kids watch tv than be on the computer 24/7

 

[MommyJogger]

For those against their kids watching tv, what about the computer? I think theyre one in the same really, but ide rather my kids watch tv than be on the computer 24/7

I feel moreso about computers actually. They suck you in, lol. I wish I had never become addicted to the computer. I feel most strongly about phones/ipad/iWhatevers. Nothing pisses me off more irl than people walking around or riding the bus or sitting in traffic staring down at their phones. If I interview one more 20-something who pulls out their phone while we're talking or listening to presentations or setting up rotation experiments, I'm going to punch them in the face. I totally get it if they say "hey, I have to be available to receive an important message, sorry if I interrupt us with a brief phone call or text", but to randomly pull out their stupid phones and check their facebooks or email while I'm explaining to them how to avoid poisoning, chemical burn, and ruining the experiment just makes my blood boil. Interview over, gtfo. Rant completed.
ETA: sorry if this offends anyone, I'm on a college campus. I watch phone zombies walk out in front of buses daily. A little trigger happy on the subject.

 

[Larkspur]

For those against their kids watching tv, what about the computer? I think theyre one in the same really, but ide rather my kids watch tv than be on the computer 24/7

I feel moreso about computers actually. They suck you in, lol. I wish I had never become addicted to the computer. I feel most strongly about phones/ipad/iWhatevers. Nothing pisses me off more irl than people walking around or riding the bus or sitting in traffic staring down at their phones. If I interview one more 20-something who pulls out their phone while we're talking or listening to presentations or setting up rotation experiments, I'm going to punch them in the face. I totally get it if they say "hey, I have to be available to receive an important message, sorry if I interrupt us with a brief phone call or text", but to randomly pull out their stupid phones and check their facebooks or email while I'm explaining to them how to avoid poisoning, chemical burn, and ruining the experiment just makes my blood boil. Interview over, gtfo. Rant completed.
ETA: sorry if this offends anyone, I'm on a college campus. I watch phone zombies walk out in front of buses daily. A little trigger happy on the subject.

LOL, I guess this betrays my own addiction but I saw something on Facebook today that said:

"Today I saw a guy walking along the street by himself, not looking at his phone. I hope he was okay."

... and I thought, "YES".

 

[MommyJogger]

For those against their kids watching tv, what about the computer? I think theyre one in the same really, but ide rather my kids watch tv than be on the computer 24/7

I feel moreso about computers actually. They suck you in, lol. I wish I had never become addicted to the computer. I feel most strongly about phones/ipad/iWhatevers. Nothing pisses me off more irl than people walking around or riding the bus or sitting in traffic staring down at their phones. If I interview one more 20-something who pulls out their phone while we're talking or listening to presentations or setting up rotation experiments, I'm going to punch them in the face. I totally get it if they say "hey, I have to be available to receive an important message, sorry if I interrupt us with a brief phone call or text", but to randomly pull out their stupid phones and check their facebooks or email while I'm explaining to them how to avoid poisoning, chemical burn, and ruining the experiment just makes my blood boil. Interview over, gtfo. Rant completed.
ETA: sorry if this offends anyone, I'm on a college campus. I watch phone zombies walk out in front of buses daily. A little trigger happy on the subject.

LOL, I guess this betrays my own addiction but I saw something on Facebook today that said:

"Today I saw a guy walking along the street by himself, not looking at his phone. I hope he was okay."

... and I thought, "YES".

lol! I wonder every now and then when I'm standing in a sea of people and I'm literally the only person not looking at a phone if some of them think I'm the freak. I feel like a crotchety old lady compared to some of them. I just want to beat some sense into them with my walking stick (I literally had a walking stick I used for the 2-mile trek I had to make from my car once each week to teach a class). I've never seen so many people look up from their phones and make way, either because I had a stick or because they might catch "the pregnant" if they passed too closely.
I keep getting older and these undergrad bitches stay the same age.

 

[Larkspur]

For those against their kids watching tv, what about the computer? I think theyre one in the same really, but ide rather my kids watch tv than be on the computer 24/7

I put them roughly in the same basket but to some degree I'd sooner give a kid computer access than TV. At least with a computer there's a degree of intellectual and motor engagement. They're not just sitting there absorbing the stream of images and sound, they're thinking and engaging and responding and getting results for their engagement. My brother and I used to play adventure games (A Bard's Tale! The Secret of Monkey Island) that involved a lot of problem-solving, and I think they were quite good.

Obviously I would control the quantity and quality of what they engaged with, and I still don't think there's any use for it before, say, three, but I don't think of computers as quite as bad as TV.

Angry Birds, though? NO. Just no.

 

[Larkspur]

I keep getting older and these undergrad bitches stay the same age.

This line of thinking in a male tutor leads to a mid-life crisis and a sports car, haha.

 

[MommyJogger]

I keep getting older and these undergrad bitches stay the same age.

This line of thinking in a male tutor leads to a mid-life crisis and a sports car, haha.

Ha! A sports car sounds lovely. When I started grad school and students would ask my age, I always got "Oh, that's the same age as me and you're the professor?". Yesterday I got "Wow, that's pretty old. And you're still in school?"
Yes, a sports car would be nice.