San Francisco Chronicle
EDITORIAL
Raising baby couch potatoes
Monday, May 15, 2006
IT WAS ONLY a matter of time before someone would come up with a TV channel intended to snag the most helpless and vulnerable of viewers: babies.
Beginning last week, harried and sleepless parents with access to DirectTV need only shell out $9.99 a month for a 24-hour baby channel, called BabyFirstTV.
Read more: http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-05-15/o ... evelopment
Baby First TV -- 24 hour infant television for $9.99
-
Guest
what's wrong with parents?
You know, I'm all for protesting things like Baby Einstein videos, BabyTV, etc. Anytime something like this comes up, I consider it a moral imperative to stand against greedy corporations looking to make a buck off of children.
However, a part of me wonders whether attacking industry executives is really the right approach. Ultimately, these things wouldn't sell if there weren't a lot of irresponsible parents out there buying them. Yes, parents are very tired - believe me, I know! I have two small kids myself - but that doesn't excuse them from parking their kids in front of an electronic babysitter all day.
It's one thing for a grown adult to waste his or her life in front of a tv screen. It's another thing entirely to force that on a baby. Children are incapable of making an informed choice about such things and are at the mercy of their parents. And too many parents are choosing poorly.
Will campaigns against BabyTV really change that? I honestly don't think so. I guess it might make some parents feel a little guilty. But people are really good at rationalizing their decisions and ignoring things they don't want to hear. And what they want to hear is that it's really ok to stick their kids in front of a tv set so they can have a little time to themselves.
I think the real problem is the way we parent today. My friend from India who has a 6-month-old child has an enormous support network. Her mother, her aunts, even her distant cousins are always around to help her. When she needs a break, she doesn't feel the urge to show her kid some stupid video. Instead, she can hand him off to one of his many loving relatives who, she knows, will take excellent care of him while she cooks dinner, takes a shower or goes out with her husband.
Most parents in the Western world don't have that kind of support. They're trying to do it all on their own. If they can afford sitters to help out, they can actually buy a little free time for themselves (that's what my husband and I do). But what if they can't afford that? TV then looks like a cheap, attractive option. A Baby Einstein video can buy you a very precious half hour to, say, get dinner on the table without someone screaming at you and/or clinging to your leg the entire time.
Maybe the answer is to offer parents better alternatives. Maybe instead of saying, "We're AGAINST videos for babies" we should be saying, "We're FOR giving babies good, quality, developmentally appropriate activities while Mom and Dad have a well-earned rest." Such a goal could be achieved by, for example, actively promoting high-quality, affordable child care.
I'm not saying I have the answer, nor am I saying that we shouldn't protest BabyTV. But I do think we need to start thinking out of the box if we want to save children from a lifetime wasted in front of a screen.
However, a part of me wonders whether attacking industry executives is really the right approach. Ultimately, these things wouldn't sell if there weren't a lot of irresponsible parents out there buying them. Yes, parents are very tired - believe me, I know! I have two small kids myself - but that doesn't excuse them from parking their kids in front of an electronic babysitter all day.
It's one thing for a grown adult to waste his or her life in front of a tv screen. It's another thing entirely to force that on a baby. Children are incapable of making an informed choice about such things and are at the mercy of their parents. And too many parents are choosing poorly.
Will campaigns against BabyTV really change that? I honestly don't think so. I guess it might make some parents feel a little guilty. But people are really good at rationalizing their decisions and ignoring things they don't want to hear. And what they want to hear is that it's really ok to stick their kids in front of a tv set so they can have a little time to themselves.
I think the real problem is the way we parent today. My friend from India who has a 6-month-old child has an enormous support network. Her mother, her aunts, even her distant cousins are always around to help her. When she needs a break, she doesn't feel the urge to show her kid some stupid video. Instead, she can hand him off to one of his many loving relatives who, she knows, will take excellent care of him while she cooks dinner, takes a shower or goes out with her husband.
Most parents in the Western world don't have that kind of support. They're trying to do it all on their own. If they can afford sitters to help out, they can actually buy a little free time for themselves (that's what my husband and I do). But what if they can't afford that? TV then looks like a cheap, attractive option. A Baby Einstein video can buy you a very precious half hour to, say, get dinner on the table without someone screaming at you and/or clinging to your leg the entire time.
Maybe the answer is to offer parents better alternatives. Maybe instead of saying, "We're AGAINST videos for babies" we should be saying, "We're FOR giving babies good, quality, developmentally appropriate activities while Mom and Dad have a well-earned rest." Such a goal could be achieved by, for example, actively promoting high-quality, affordable child care.
I'm not saying I have the answer, nor am I saying that we shouldn't protest BabyTV. But I do think we need to start thinking out of the box if we want to save children from a lifetime wasted in front of a screen.
i agree
Well put!
Television is the easy option for most parents I think. The baby is planted on front of the TV while Mom or Dad are busy or urge free time. This becomes a habit as it's an easy, simple, cheap and, to be honest, lazy and selfish option. The baby grows up sitting on front of a television and get confused between the real world and virtual reality. Fair enough, a child should definatly have an imagination but not one that was PUT into their heads. The baby cannot decide not to watch the television so therefore becomes addicted at an early age. Ever turn a TV off on a four year old? I just tried it and it didn't go very well at all.
I think alot of parents are being selfish by having their child watching television just so they themselves can have a bit of free time. It's not fair to the child. If you don't want to look after your kids yourself, you shouldn't have had any to begin with.
Television is the easy option for most parents I think. The baby is planted on front of the TV while Mom or Dad are busy or urge free time. This becomes a habit as it's an easy, simple, cheap and, to be honest, lazy and selfish option. The baby grows up sitting on front of a television and get confused between the real world and virtual reality. Fair enough, a child should definatly have an imagination but not one that was PUT into their heads. The baby cannot decide not to watch the television so therefore becomes addicted at an early age. Ever turn a TV off on a four year old? I just tried it and it didn't go very well at all.
I think alot of parents are being selfish by having their child watching television just so they themselves can have a bit of free time. It's not fair to the child. If you don't want to look after your kids yourself, you shouldn't have had any to begin with.
-
Guest
parenting is really tough
Hi Merv,
Here's the thing. Being a parent is hard. I guarantee you it's much harder than you think. It's much harder than most people think it's going to be. When you decide to have a baby, you're thinking soft, warm, fuzzy thoughts about cooing, adorable cherubs. When you actually have a baby, you realize just how far off you were.
Suddenly, there's this screaming need machine that requires near constant attention. You have no time to cook. You have no time to clean. You have no time to shower. You've never felt so tired in your life. A friend of mine once likened having a baby to setting a bomb off in the middle of your life. I think it's a good analogy.
It gets a little better, of course, as the baby gets older. But still, babies require an enormous amount of time and energy. You learn to put your child's needs before your own almost all the time. You never have time for yourself. You never have time for romance. You never have time to do the simple things that made your life enjoyable and worthwhile before the baby came along.
I think many parents, perhaps most parents, have this awful moment - they'd never admit it in a million years, but it's definitely there - when they think to themselves, "Why didn't someone warn me how hard this parenting thing was going to be?!"
That doesn't mean you don't love your baby. And after a couple of years, you may even have another one, against your better judgement. Because you know deep down that your kids are worth all the mind-numbing hours spent breast feeding, changing diapers, preparing meals, washing clothes, packing lunches, etc.
However, there are days...
There are days when you just feel like you can't face reading The Cat in the Hat ten times in a row...again. There are days when you feel emotionally unprepared to deal with a toddler who will argue with you about each and every choice you make all day long. There are days when you want nothing more than to take a nice, long bath, read a good book and not give your kids a thought.
Those of us lucky enough to be able to afford babysitters enlist their help at these times. But what about those who don't have support systems or money for babysitters? How do they squeeze a little bit of time for themselves out of each day? They turn to the flickering goddess, the magical box that gives them a few moments' peace.
Personally, I think most parents aren't really lazy. They're just tired. They need some help. And since our society no longer provides that help, since there's no village to help raise their children, they turn to electronic helpers instead.
I've read some of your other posts, Merv, and I can hear and understand your frustration with your own parents about this tv issue. I commend you for realizing the truth about how awful television is, and I think it's great you're trying to convince your parents to get rid of their set. But I have an observation and a suggestion for you.
First, the observation. There's a very judgemental tone in the way you write about your parents. I think everyone does this. I find myself being much harder on my own parents than I am on anyone else in the world. For some reason, every little flaw in them makes me crazy. I sense that in your posts as well. You've rejected a fundamental aspect of your parents' lifestyle (as most young people do) and now, you just can't stand it that they won't convert to your way of thinking. Believe me, I understand that.
But here's the suggestion. Try to be sympathetic toward your parents instead of judgemental. Instead of preaching to them about the negative effects of television (which, by the way, will never change their way of thinking one iota) try to find ways of helping them out. Take your 4-year-old sister out somewhere for the afternoon so your parents can have some time alone. Cook dinner for the family. Clean up the house for them. (Of course, you may already do these things but if not, it's a thought). Come up with fun activities for your whole family to do together - things that don't involve television. Instead of telling them *not* to watch tv, try to convince them to actively do something else. It's much easier to break a bad habit if you replace it with something good.
I guess this is what I'm getting at, not just for you, Merv, but for everyone who reads these message boards. If we really want to end the worldwide obsession with tv, we have to start early. Somehow, we have to get babies and children away from screens. Frankly, I think the problem with parents is the root of the problem with television.
Protesting those who market to babies, while laudable, won't change the realities of parenting. And preaching at parents won't change their minds or their behaviors. I'm not saying we shouldn't tell people about the dangers of tv - we definitely should - but I don't think that's going to be enough.
To convince parents to turn off tv, we have to stop calling them lazy (even if they are) and start offering them better alternatives. We have to rebuild support networks for families. We have to find a tv-free way to give parents that break they need and deserve. I'm not sure how we do that, but I think if we really want to accomplish something here, this is the way we need to go.
Here's the thing. Being a parent is hard. I guarantee you it's much harder than you think. It's much harder than most people think it's going to be. When you decide to have a baby, you're thinking soft, warm, fuzzy thoughts about cooing, adorable cherubs. When you actually have a baby, you realize just how far off you were.
Suddenly, there's this screaming need machine that requires near constant attention. You have no time to cook. You have no time to clean. You have no time to shower. You've never felt so tired in your life. A friend of mine once likened having a baby to setting a bomb off in the middle of your life. I think it's a good analogy.
It gets a little better, of course, as the baby gets older. But still, babies require an enormous amount of time and energy. You learn to put your child's needs before your own almost all the time. You never have time for yourself. You never have time for romance. You never have time to do the simple things that made your life enjoyable and worthwhile before the baby came along.
I think many parents, perhaps most parents, have this awful moment - they'd never admit it in a million years, but it's definitely there - when they think to themselves, "Why didn't someone warn me how hard this parenting thing was going to be?!"
That doesn't mean you don't love your baby. And after a couple of years, you may even have another one, against your better judgement. Because you know deep down that your kids are worth all the mind-numbing hours spent breast feeding, changing diapers, preparing meals, washing clothes, packing lunches, etc.
However, there are days...
There are days when you just feel like you can't face reading The Cat in the Hat ten times in a row...again. There are days when you feel emotionally unprepared to deal with a toddler who will argue with you about each and every choice you make all day long. There are days when you want nothing more than to take a nice, long bath, read a good book and not give your kids a thought.
Those of us lucky enough to be able to afford babysitters enlist their help at these times. But what about those who don't have support systems or money for babysitters? How do they squeeze a little bit of time for themselves out of each day? They turn to the flickering goddess, the magical box that gives them a few moments' peace.
Personally, I think most parents aren't really lazy. They're just tired. They need some help. And since our society no longer provides that help, since there's no village to help raise their children, they turn to electronic helpers instead.
I've read some of your other posts, Merv, and I can hear and understand your frustration with your own parents about this tv issue. I commend you for realizing the truth about how awful television is, and I think it's great you're trying to convince your parents to get rid of their set. But I have an observation and a suggestion for you.
First, the observation. There's a very judgemental tone in the way you write about your parents. I think everyone does this. I find myself being much harder on my own parents than I am on anyone else in the world. For some reason, every little flaw in them makes me crazy. I sense that in your posts as well. You've rejected a fundamental aspect of your parents' lifestyle (as most young people do) and now, you just can't stand it that they won't convert to your way of thinking. Believe me, I understand that.
But here's the suggestion. Try to be sympathetic toward your parents instead of judgemental. Instead of preaching to them about the negative effects of television (which, by the way, will never change their way of thinking one iota) try to find ways of helping them out. Take your 4-year-old sister out somewhere for the afternoon so your parents can have some time alone. Cook dinner for the family. Clean up the house for them. (Of course, you may already do these things but if not, it's a thought). Come up with fun activities for your whole family to do together - things that don't involve television. Instead of telling them *not* to watch tv, try to convince them to actively do something else. It's much easier to break a bad habit if you replace it with something good.
I guess this is what I'm getting at, not just for you, Merv, but for everyone who reads these message boards. If we really want to end the worldwide obsession with tv, we have to start early. Somehow, we have to get babies and children away from screens. Frankly, I think the problem with parents is the root of the problem with television.
Protesting those who market to babies, while laudable, won't change the realities of parenting. And preaching at parents won't change their minds or their behaviors. I'm not saying we shouldn't tell people about the dangers of tv - we definitely should - but I don't think that's going to be enough.
To convince parents to turn off tv, we have to stop calling them lazy (even if they are) and start offering them better alternatives. We have to rebuild support networks for families. We have to find a tv-free way to give parents that break they need and deserve. I'm not sure how we do that, but I think if we really want to accomplish something here, this is the way we need to go.
-
Shakedown1980
- Posts: 60
- Joined: Sat Feb 11, 2006 3:37 pm
- Location: Helsinki,Finland
- Contact:
Re: parenting is really tough
To Guest:
Actually it's ironic that television is responsible of eroding social relationships,thus destroying the social network that could help parents take care of their children.Now instead of meeting more reguralilly,people old and young just sit in front of the tv(often alone).
so tv has created the problem,which it ironically also has become the solution,thus creating this vicious circle,which it's hard to get out of.
In my opinnnion,people should have the information to decide whether they still want to let their children watch it,or watch it themselves.So yes campaigning against such greedy poachers of babytv is the right way to approach it.
on the other hand,a lot of parents are addicted themselves.You know what the most common response of an addict of any sort is?
DENIAL!!
if the parents can't accept the fact they self are addicted to it,they will continue thinking it's an harmless way of spending time,thus allowing their children to watch it as well.Also a lot of people,just keep their own beliefs about tv and reject any evidence that is contradictionary to that belief.
Still not everyone is like this,and even if the protest against baby tv and tv in general just help few dozen people to stop watching,it would be worth it.
and since a lot of adults are addicted to tv themselves,i have to disagree on you that,when given more time,would they do something else like read,spend time together,learn a new language.Maybe they would,but more likely they would watch more television,and perhaps separeratly.
people have managed to have and raise children thousands of years before television ever arrived.Has our society really become such a place,where it can't be done anymore without the help of television?
I akwknoledge that parenting is very tough,but are you claiming it's so tough,and impossible that people just can't do it without television anymore? That just can't be true!! Because there are a lot of people who still do without television,wheter they are poor or rich.It CAN BE DONE!
so what's my conclusion to this:WE need to protest against babytv and such,it has an purpose,it's usefull.Yes we need to start thinking ways of helping parents,BUT we need to emphasize that they need to do something else with the time it gives them,than watch tv,otherwise,what's the point?.And yes we all could be a less judgemental,and try to get along a bit better(without tv
)
P.S check out the study how people grow addicted to television,to realize how powerful this addiction is.
P.P.S parents should also know,that when they take that free time for themselves and sit their kids in front of the tv.They will become even more harder to cope with(tv makes them more agressive/tired etc etc),thus again tv creates the vicious circle,when they are harder to cope with=more tv=more problems!! so it's very bad economy!! it's like inflation of currency,for a while,you're all good,and then BANG!
Actually it's ironic that television is responsible of eroding social relationships,thus destroying the social network that could help parents take care of their children.Now instead of meeting more reguralilly,people old and young just sit in front of the tv(often alone).
so tv has created the problem,which it ironically also has become the solution,thus creating this vicious circle,which it's hard to get out of.
In my opinnnion,people should have the information to decide whether they still want to let their children watch it,or watch it themselves.So yes campaigning against such greedy poachers of babytv is the right way to approach it.
on the other hand,a lot of parents are addicted themselves.You know what the most common response of an addict of any sort is?
DENIAL!!
if the parents can't accept the fact they self are addicted to it,they will continue thinking it's an harmless way of spending time,thus allowing their children to watch it as well.Also a lot of people,just keep their own beliefs about tv and reject any evidence that is contradictionary to that belief.
Still not everyone is like this,and even if the protest against baby tv and tv in general just help few dozen people to stop watching,it would be worth it.
and since a lot of adults are addicted to tv themselves,i have to disagree on you that,when given more time,would they do something else like read,spend time together,learn a new language.Maybe they would,but more likely they would watch more television,and perhaps separeratly.
people have managed to have and raise children thousands of years before television ever arrived.Has our society really become such a place,where it can't be done anymore without the help of television?
I akwknoledge that parenting is very tough,but are you claiming it's so tough,and impossible that people just can't do it without television anymore? That just can't be true!! Because there are a lot of people who still do without television,wheter they are poor or rich.It CAN BE DONE!
so what's my conclusion to this:WE need to protest against babytv and such,it has an purpose,it's usefull.Yes we need to start thinking ways of helping parents,BUT we need to emphasize that they need to do something else with the time it gives them,than watch tv,otherwise,what's the point?.And yes we all could be a less judgemental,and try to get along a bit better(without tv
)P.S check out the study how people grow addicted to television,to realize how powerful this addiction is.
P.P.S parents should also know,that when they take that free time for themselves and sit their kids in front of the tv.They will become even more harder to cope with(tv makes them more agressive/tired etc etc),thus again tv creates the vicious circle,when they are harder to cope with=more tv=more problems!! so it's very bad economy!! it's like inflation of currency,for a while,you're all good,and then BANG!
-
Guest
still...
Hi Shakedown,
Well, you make some good points. It's definitely true that most parents out there are addicted to tv and in denial about their addiction. And it's also true that some parents - perhaps most of them - would use additional free time to sit in front of the tube rather than interacting with each other or doing something good with their time. Also, of course you're right that no one actually needs a television to parent, and I happen to agree with you that tv, which seems to make your life as a parent easier in the short run, actually ends up being a source of problems in the long run.
You're also absolutely right that some parents *are* swayed by anti-tv books, protests, tv-turnoff campaigns, etc. These are all good and useful things. Personally, I decided to give up television not so much for myself (though I've benefited from the decision immeasurably) but for my children after I read a book called Consuming Kids about the harmful effects of marketing on children. So I know from personal experience that such things do raise awareness and can change minds.
Fair enough.
I guess I'm just suggesting that we really try to think of ways to go beyond that and reach out to people who aren't so easily persuaded. Of course, some people will never change their minds no matter what you do or say. But for those people out there who could be persuaded to give up or limit television, I'm wondering what exactly it will take to get them there. And all I'm saying is that negative messages - "You're lazy or bad because you let your kids watch tv" - turns off some people who might otherwise be persuaded to make some changes in their lives.
As I said, I think if you want to eliminate a bad habit, you have to replace it with a good one. I think the message we have to adopt is "Instead of watching tv, why not do X instead?" You and I and probably anyone else reading this can, no doubt, think of a million things that X could be. But for some parents, this question never even enters their minds. They were raised on tv and they don't know how to live or parent any other way. We have to teach them somehow if we hope to break this cycle you're talking about.
A good example was the thing WhiteDot did for Christmas. The question was posed: What will you be doing for Christmas instead of watching tv? And people had lovely stories about how they spent the holidays. I think this is great. It shows others that it's actually possible to have a lot of fun - gasp! - without tv.
Similarly, I think we should share stories of wonderful things kids can do, with or without parents, that don't involve television. Again, it might seem obvious to us that there are millions of good, educational things kids can do without tv, but some parents never even consider these possibilities.
Well, you make some good points. It's definitely true that most parents out there are addicted to tv and in denial about their addiction. And it's also true that some parents - perhaps most of them - would use additional free time to sit in front of the tube rather than interacting with each other or doing something good with their time. Also, of course you're right that no one actually needs a television to parent, and I happen to agree with you that tv, which seems to make your life as a parent easier in the short run, actually ends up being a source of problems in the long run.
You're also absolutely right that some parents *are* swayed by anti-tv books, protests, tv-turnoff campaigns, etc. These are all good and useful things. Personally, I decided to give up television not so much for myself (though I've benefited from the decision immeasurably) but for my children after I read a book called Consuming Kids about the harmful effects of marketing on children. So I know from personal experience that such things do raise awareness and can change minds.
Fair enough.
I guess I'm just suggesting that we really try to think of ways to go beyond that and reach out to people who aren't so easily persuaded. Of course, some people will never change their minds no matter what you do or say. But for those people out there who could be persuaded to give up or limit television, I'm wondering what exactly it will take to get them there. And all I'm saying is that negative messages - "You're lazy or bad because you let your kids watch tv" - turns off some people who might otherwise be persuaded to make some changes in their lives.
As I said, I think if you want to eliminate a bad habit, you have to replace it with a good one. I think the message we have to adopt is "Instead of watching tv, why not do X instead?" You and I and probably anyone else reading this can, no doubt, think of a million things that X could be. But for some parents, this question never even enters their minds. They were raised on tv and they don't know how to live or parent any other way. We have to teach them somehow if we hope to break this cycle you're talking about.
A good example was the thing WhiteDot did for Christmas. The question was posed: What will you be doing for Christmas instead of watching tv? And people had lovely stories about how they spent the holidays. I think this is great. It shows others that it's actually possible to have a lot of fun - gasp! - without tv.
Similarly, I think we should share stories of wonderful things kids can do, with or without parents, that don't involve television. Again, it might seem obvious to us that there are millions of good, educational things kids can do without tv, but some parents never even consider these possibilities.
-
whitedot
Benign neglect
Telling a tired parent that instead of parking the bouncy chair in front of the TV, she herself must get on the floor and entertain a baby is definitely unproductive.
As a parent you have NO obligation to be Sponge Bob for your children. In fact, just ask teachers what a generation of children growing up expecting to be entertained has done to education.
With the TV option, parents are afraid that kids will complain and be bored. We think that a child cannot entertain him/herself alone -- but that is wrong.
Years ago, there was a pediatric fad called "benign neglect", where parents were urged to park the children somewhere safe (like a bedroom) and ignore them -- this stimulated their imaginations and gave them a precious gift: the skill of entertaining themselves. Setting a child up in the playroom with a block set and walking away has worked well for me. This doesn't mean that I leave the house, or that I force the child to play alone for six hours daily. But I do take advantage of the wonderful imagination of children. Their little brains are built to look at a trail of blocks and see a train. That's how they work. Parents are the ones with no imagination, sadly.
Instead of benign negliect, we have "malign technology negelct." Once again, a machine is the booby prize for the lack of actual human contact.
Having been in this crusade for nearly 12 years, I can say that public opinion has shifted on this issue. Middle class parents are starting to believe that television is an abused and bad choice -- for other people. I have always been unashamed to imply that my TV-Free children will be better equiped to "compete" with their kids as adults, and that gets through to them. I try to imply to other parents, when I'm asked, that a television in the child's bedroom is actually a signal of deprivation -- not luxury. Of course, I'm alway icily polite about it. When someone comments that my kids play the pinao well, I always say, "Well, without a television, they're bored into playing the piano."
Jean Lotus
Mother of Five TV-Free kids.
As a parent you have NO obligation to be Sponge Bob for your children. In fact, just ask teachers what a generation of children growing up expecting to be entertained has done to education.
With the TV option, parents are afraid that kids will complain and be bored. We think that a child cannot entertain him/herself alone -- but that is wrong.
Years ago, there was a pediatric fad called "benign neglect", where parents were urged to park the children somewhere safe (like a bedroom) and ignore them -- this stimulated their imaginations and gave them a precious gift: the skill of entertaining themselves. Setting a child up in the playroom with a block set and walking away has worked well for me. This doesn't mean that I leave the house, or that I force the child to play alone for six hours daily. But I do take advantage of the wonderful imagination of children. Their little brains are built to look at a trail of blocks and see a train. That's how they work. Parents are the ones with no imagination, sadly.
Instead of benign negliect, we have "malign technology negelct." Once again, a machine is the booby prize for the lack of actual human contact.
Having been in this crusade for nearly 12 years, I can say that public opinion has shifted on this issue. Middle class parents are starting to believe that television is an abused and bad choice -- for other people. I have always been unashamed to imply that my TV-Free children will be better equiped to "compete" with their kids as adults, and that gets through to them. I try to imply to other parents, when I'm asked, that a television in the child's bedroom is actually a signal of deprivation -- not luxury. Of course, I'm alway icily polite about it. When someone comments that my kids play the pinao well, I always say, "Well, without a television, they're bored into playing the piano."
Jean Lotus
Mother of Five TV-Free kids.
-
whitedot
Babies hooked on TV watch inappropriate programming later
Read more: http://www.wistv.com/story/4945260/expe ... =printableExperts analyzing kids' TV habits
(Washington, DC-NBC) May 24, 2006 - There's new research out today on just how much young kids are watching TV and using computers. It's a lot.
The question is: is all that media having a positive or negative impact? In Washington, experts talked about that Wednesday.
If you're wondering how much TV is safe for your child to watch, the American Academy of Pediatrics says none if they're under two, and no more than an hour or two a day if they're older.
-
whitedot
Child Entertainer Raffi Condemns Baby First TV
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06160/696948-237.stm
Raffi to share 'child honoring' message at Point Park symposium
Friday, June 09, 2006
By Ervin Dyer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
For decades, through his popular children's music and books, Raffi Cavoukian has been practicing what he preaches: That the world can do more for the lives and souls of children.
Now, with his newest book "Child Honoring: How to Turn This World Around," he wants to teach the world about the need for a "compassion revolution."
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06160/696948-237.stm
Raffi to share 'child honoring' message at Point Park symposium
Friday, June 09, 2006
By Ervin Dyer, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
For decades, through his popular children's music and books, Raffi Cavoukian has been practicing what he preaches: That the world can do more for the lives and souls of children.
Now, with his newest book "Child Honoring: How to Turn This World Around," he wants to teach the world about the need for a "compassion revolution."
Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06160/696948-237.stm
-
whitedot
Group launches protest vs baby first tv
Group Protests "Educational" TV Channel for Babies
by Megan Tady
"The Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) is protesting a new subscription television channel that promises parents will "watch their baby blossom" if they plunk them in front of the television."
Read more: http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/3298
by Megan Tady
"The Campaign for Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) is protesting a new subscription television channel that promises parents will "watch their baby blossom" if they plunk them in front of the television."
Read more: http://newstandardnews.net/content/index.cfm/items/3298
-
whitedot
Child Expert Groundswell vs. BabyFirst TV
TV and tykes just don't mix
Area child-rearing experts just say 'no' to BabyFirst TV, and television in general.
Television, that unavoidable staple of human existence -- now made even more life-altering at the earliest possible age with the advent of BabyFirst TV -- continues to create a stir among parents and child educators.
Read more: http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs. ... 4/-1/RSS07
Area child-rearing experts just say 'no' to BabyFirst TV, and television in general.
Television, that unavoidable staple of human existence -- now made even more life-altering at the earliest possible age with the advent of BabyFirst TV -- continues to create a stir among parents and child educators.
Read more: http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs. ... 4/-1/RSS07
-
Guest
I'm sorry if I'm getting off subject here, but I have to respond to what someone said further up the thread.Suddenly, there's this screaming need machine that requires near constant attention. You have no time to cook. You have no time to clean. You have no time to shower. You've never felt so tired in your life. A friend of mine once likened having a baby to setting a bomb off in the middle of your life. I think it's a good analogy.
That doesn't mean you don't love your baby. And after a couple of years, you may even have another one, against your better judgement. Because you know deep down that your kids are worth all the mind-numbing hours spent breast feeding, changing diapers, preparing meals, washing clothes, packing lunches, etc.
However, there are days...
There are days when you just feel like you can't face reading The Cat in the Hat ten times in a row...again. There are days when you feel emotionally unprepared to deal with a toddler who will argue with you about each and every choice you make all day long. There are days when you want nothing more than to take a nice, long bath, read a good book and not give your kids a thought.
Dear guest,
I don't think you're approaching this whole parenting thing with the right mindset. Being a parent means that its not about you. Its never about you. Its about the kid, so get that through your head first! I'm a parent too and while its definitely not an easy job by any stretch of the imagination, I don't approach it with feet dragging and sloth. Its a tremendous challange... and priviledge... to raise a young person. Your child's wonderment, curiousity, and unconditional love for you is far far greater than any of the pains of having to read "Dr. Seuss" for the 500th time! Just think that you are the #1 person in your kid's life. Right up there with God Himself. Thats pretty awesome to think about. What a tremendous and wonderful opportunity it is to have to raise a child to adulthood, molding them into responsible good healthy individuals with the hope that one day they too will raise their own families and present you with grandchildren. If ever there was an honorable thing on this planet, raising children has to be it. So don't mope and whine about how tough it is. You sound so defeated. Look long term -- you're raising a child, a person that God has entrusted to you. What a wonderful thing indeed.
Guest wrote:
"I don't think you're approaching this whole parenting thing with the right mindset. Being a parent means that its not about you. Its never about you. Its about the kid, so get that through your head first!"
No relationship is ever about only one person. It always takes two. Personally, I think it's unhealthy in any relationship to believe that your own wants and needs count for nothing whereas the other person's wants and needs are all-important, even when we're talking about parents and children. Clearly, parents often end up putting their children's needs ahead of their own because children are frequently unable to satisfy their own needs. However, I have learned from personal experience that to take good care of my children, I also have to take care of myself. Parenting *is* about me insofar as I am unable to be a good parent if I completely deny my own needs.
I dearly love my children. I love spending time with them, taking care of them, just being there for them. I am well aware of what a privilege it is to raise a child. I'm also a human being with basic needs just like any other human being on the planet. When I became a mother, those needs didn't just disappear.
I need a little time to myself every day - to reflect, rest and recharge. If that need isn't met, I suffer and my children suffer. It's that simple. Furthermore, my husband and I need a little time every week when we can just be a couple without the kids. That's why we have a date night almost every Friday evening. If we didn't have that time together, our marriage would suffer, and therefore our children would ultimately suffer. Taking care of myself and taking care of my marriage is part of taking care of my children.
When parents find their own needs are habitually neglected (as is often the case when parents lack support networks), it is completely normal that they would feel overwhelmed and frustrated. In fact, I don't know a single parent who hasn't at one time or another felt discouraged or just plain tired. I think it's much healthier to express those feelings than to keep them bottled up inside and perhaps end up taking them out on the kids. I would argue that the appropriate response to honest expressions of frustration and discouragement would be one of compassion.
Telling an exhausted parent not to "mope and whine about how tough it is" is an unsympathetic and unhelpful thing to do. Also, calling that parent lazy ("...I don't approach it with feet dragging and sloth...") is actively hurtful. If the rest of society shows as little compassion as the person in the previous post did, no wonder parents are turning to tv in desperation.
As I've stated elsewhere, parents need to be reaching out to and helping each other, not tearing each other down. And if we hope to convince parents to stop using tv as a babysitter, we must start helping them instead of attacking them.
"I don't think you're approaching this whole parenting thing with the right mindset. Being a parent means that its not about you. Its never about you. Its about the kid, so get that through your head first!"
No relationship is ever about only one person. It always takes two. Personally, I think it's unhealthy in any relationship to believe that your own wants and needs count for nothing whereas the other person's wants and needs are all-important, even when we're talking about parents and children. Clearly, parents often end up putting their children's needs ahead of their own because children are frequently unable to satisfy their own needs. However, I have learned from personal experience that to take good care of my children, I also have to take care of myself. Parenting *is* about me insofar as I am unable to be a good parent if I completely deny my own needs.
I dearly love my children. I love spending time with them, taking care of them, just being there for them. I am well aware of what a privilege it is to raise a child. I'm also a human being with basic needs just like any other human being on the planet. When I became a mother, those needs didn't just disappear.
I need a little time to myself every day - to reflect, rest and recharge. If that need isn't met, I suffer and my children suffer. It's that simple. Furthermore, my husband and I need a little time every week when we can just be a couple without the kids. That's why we have a date night almost every Friday evening. If we didn't have that time together, our marriage would suffer, and therefore our children would ultimately suffer. Taking care of myself and taking care of my marriage is part of taking care of my children.
When parents find their own needs are habitually neglected (as is often the case when parents lack support networks), it is completely normal that they would feel overwhelmed and frustrated. In fact, I don't know a single parent who hasn't at one time or another felt discouraged or just plain tired. I think it's much healthier to express those feelings than to keep them bottled up inside and perhaps end up taking them out on the kids. I would argue that the appropriate response to honest expressions of frustration and discouragement would be one of compassion.
Telling an exhausted parent not to "mope and whine about how tough it is" is an unsympathetic and unhelpful thing to do. Also, calling that parent lazy ("...I don't approach it with feet dragging and sloth...") is actively hurtful. If the rest of society shows as little compassion as the person in the previous post did, no wonder parents are turning to tv in desperation.
As I've stated elsewhere, parents need to be reaching out to and helping each other, not tearing each other down. And if we hope to convince parents to stop using tv as a babysitter, we must start helping them instead of attacking them.