How to use this Page

Opinions are like bellybuttons, everyone has them. Who knows? Live interaction is always best. We survived for many, many, many moons without devices. I’m already frustrated by those who cannot walk anywhere without a device. People have lost spatial etiquette, stand there blocking the streets, subways, stairs, etc. all spaced out with that onscreen glowy haze. Talk so loud like I really care to know their personal business. These devices triangulate my relationships eg when someone calls while friend and I are dining out. People are *addicted*. Why do that to little babies, toddlers? Why not hand them a bottle of scotch instead? As the wise say: everything in moderation. ps I dislike when kids wear sunglasses so the parents can look cool. Let them see ALL the colors.

to be very, very cynical: sounds like more “whatever you do, moms (and it’s typically moms), you’re doing it wrong.”

with a side of “just what do they think people were doing with babies 50, 100, 150, 250″ years ago. I think an iPad is better than laudanum, and if it means you can take a shower, so be it. http://www.childminding-success.co.uk/registration/history-of-childminding/

Here’s what I don’t get: iPads are interactive if you’re capable of manipulating them, right? Otherwise how else would they be different from, say, the now-debunked Baby Einstein vids? They’re just more tv screens if you plunk them in front of a baby that has next-to-no motor control and can’t get a finger to the screen, right? My kid’s still figuring out analog buttons not because he doesn’t sort of get cause and effect but because at 9 months he still can’t consistently get a finger on a button when he wants to. Am I missing something?

If there is an appropriate use of screens for children under two the Apptivity seat is the farthest thing from it and the screen time debate is an important one. On the other hand, many young children communicate regularly with their grandparents via Skype or Face Time. That is still a screen but those involved find it to be a highly meaningful, enriching experience. Children with disabilities learn to use iPads as a method of communication. The debate is more nuanced than screen time vs. no screen time.

Pardon the NSFW language, but this New Yorker piece from earlier this week seems apropos:

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/shouts/2014/03/new-parenting-study-released.html

I am a huge lover of devices, but cannot see the advantage of over-exposure to them vs. the world for the toddler set. I’m sure science will tell us the impact later on… yet I’m also sure that there’s a tide here that fighting against probably won’t yield results. Which leads to the question of what next? Change the developing brain (as no doubt reading vs. oral storytelling did) and…???? Getting ahead of that curve rather than spending the next decade determining if it’s a bad trend would be where my attention would go, were I in the field.

I think it mostly has to do with the personal preferences of the parent. It seems pretty safe to assume that early exposure to devices will make children more dependent on devices and make them more likely to be avid future gadget-buyers (good for that industry), but it doesn’t seem clear whether those habits have negative cognitive effects. I know lots of successful adults who like being plugged in at all times. I don’t know whether it hurts their brains. All I know is that they aren’t my favorite people, professional success aside. And I would want my children to be my favorite type of people, which means less screen time. But I can see how parents who love and enjoy (and/or make lots of money off of) gadgets couldn’t reasonably tell their kids it’s bad for them.

OK. Where did you find that photo of the Mom and baby in bowlers? Why not just put the babies outside under a shady bush? That will give them something to watch and to interact with. And if they swallow a few bugs, you won’t have to feed them. Save a lot of money that way.

Re: Finding the bowlers – Google image is a wonderful, magical place.

I think the “Apptivity Seat” is a particularly bad idea for infants, but I also think it would be unfair to conclude that ePicturebooks aimed at toddlers are all best avoided by using the “screen time” argument. In the final analysis, it’s not about the medium, it’s about whether or not the parent participates in reading the book to the infant — the very best scenario whether the story is on a screen or printed on paper.