If there’s one thing I heard absolutely everywhere when my kids were born, it’s that the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends a very strict policy when it comes to TV:
No TV under age 2, ever.
Well, now that my kids are 2 1/2 years old, I’ve come up with a reasoned and measured counterpoint:
GO SCREW YOURSELF, AMERICAN ACADEMY OF PEDIATRICS!
I spent two years feeling guilty and ashamed that I caved into the alluring glow of the magic box in the living room, but I’m here to tell you from the other side: my kids are FINE. They’re not drooly, brain-dead hyperpunks – well, not most of the time, at least. They are 2, after all.
I’m clearly not the first person to express this kind of sentiment, because just last year, the AAP softened its recommended policy on TV usage. The new mandate:
No TV under age 2, please.
In that spirit, I’d like to soften my counterpoint:
Go screw yourself, American Academy of Pediatrics, please!
Really? Is that the best advice you can offer parents? An abstinence-only policy? How about we try to be realistic instead? TV shouldn’t be a substitute for parenting, but there’s no reason it can’t be a small part of a healthy parenting regimen. Let’s focus on responsible TV usage.
Sure, there are miserable parents out there who leave their TV on 24 hours a day, but those people aren’t listening to the AAP, and they certainly aren’t reading parenting blogs.
This advice is for the rest of you. Here, in my opinion, are 5 perfectly acceptable uses for TV before your kid turns 2.
1. TV as distraction – I can hear the TV haters now. “A-ha! That’s all TV is! A distraction!” Well, yeah! And if you’re a stay-home parent, you need distractions. Maybe you have to call the pediatrician for 5 minutes, or you want to cook some mac and cheese without the kids knocking the pot of boiling water off the stove. Oh, let’s just be honest: this is about what to do when you need to poop. Everyone poops, right? You know that because you read to your kids as well, like all good parents do. So if you have to step out of the room for a minute, there’s no better way to distract your young’uns than with TV. If it’s only for a small chunk of time, it’s not going to hurt them, at least not nearly as much as pulling that pot of water off the stove would.
2. TV as triage – Pop quiz, hot shot: your baby wakes up in the middle of the night screaming her head off. She won’t eat, won’t burp, won’t go back to sleep. None of your go-to methods for calming her are any help. Is it time to rush her to the ER or page the on-call doctor? Not so fast! There’s one fool-proof diagnostic you can try first. His name is Elmo.
We did it all the time with my kids. Just when we were convinced we were witnessing a baby appendix in mid-burst, we turned on the TV. If the kid calmed down immediately (as they always did) then clearly this was something they’d be able to ride out.
Face it: New parents are terrible doctors, and babies are terrible patients. Sometimes, it’s hard to tell who’s crying harder when something goes wrong. If a few minutes of TV can defuse the situation before you wake your pediatrician up in a panic, I think that’s something even the AAP would sign off on.
3. TV as a coffee break – What kind of horrible boss doesn’t let you take a coffee break now and then? Well, guess what? As a stay-home parent, you’re the boss. Don’t be a slave-driver. When your hard-working employee’s frazzled and needs to decompress, pop in a DVD for 10 or 15 minutes. It not only gives you a chance to catch your breath, but it can calm your kids down, too, so when it’s time to turn it off, everyone feels refreshed.
Of course, as with any coffee breaks, you have to be careful not to abuse the system. If you show a 1-year-old the Little Mermaid in its entirety while you let Calgon take you away, then she’s going to get bored and cranky, and you’ve just blown the benefits of your coffee break. For a long time, our TV limit was 15 minutes a week. Yes, a week. It may not seem like much, but you wouldn’t believe how much I looked forward to those 15 minutes and how much I appreciated them when they were done.
4. TV as teacher – Let’s assume you’re not a total loser and you actually read to your kids. Good for you. But do you have any Harvard PhDs consulting on your selection of material? No? Then why not give the Children’s Television Workshop a crack at your little ones, too? I’m not saying TV can ever match the value of parental interaction you get from reading, but the right shows can reinforce the things you’re teaching them when you’re going through your favorite books. And let’s face it, Mom and Dad, you don’t exactly have the production values of The Fresh Beat Band.
I drummed the ABCs into my kids for weeks, with mixed results at best. But after just a few viewings of a DVD called “The Letter Factory“*, my kids knew all their letters and the sounds they made.
I’m not suggesting that SpongeBob Squarepants is on par with Jaime Escalante, and I’d never say that TV is the best way for your kids to learn. But just because you do turn it on occasionally, it doesn’t mean you’re making your kids into couch potatoes. Encourage them to sing the songs, to repeat Dora’s Spanish back to the screen, and at the very least, to get up and dance when music is playing.
TV is only a passive experience if you let it be. Anyone who still calls it the “idiot box” hasn’t been paying attention.
* I never accept any endorsements on this blog and I have nothing to do with this company. But as a parent, I wholeheartedly recommend this DVD. It really did wonders for my kids.
5. TV as incentive/threat – You nurture your kids, you feed them, you tell them all the time how much you love them. And in the end, they still like Elmo better than you. Them’s the breaks. But you can use that to your advantage. Nothing snapped my kids in line faster than telling them, “Well, we were going to watch TV after dinner, but now maybe we won’t.” Yes, it’s petty and it’s probably terrible parenting for a thousand different reasons. But it works. And sometimes, you just need what works.
How does Lex Luthor get the best of Superman? By exploiting his weaknesses. (He cares about regular mortals. He wants to hide his identity., etc.) Well, your kids have their own forms of kryptonite – puppetry, repetitive jingles and the warm, welcoming glow of an LCD screen.
If you deny your kids TV, you’re denying them a major weakness and thus a major opportunity for you to get what you need out of them. You won’t get a rat through a maze if he’s never tasted cheese. I’m not saying you let him gorge himself. Just a nibble now and then is more than enough.
There it is. My case for responsible TV usage. Or maybe it’s my defense of my own TV usage when my kids were little. I did it. I defied the AAP. I stand by my actions and still consider myself a good parent.
I know the AAP is an organization of highly trained professionals who’ve dedicated their lives to helping children grow and thrive, whereas I’m just a guy with limited parenting experience and a WordPress account. Decide for yourself who you’d prefer to listen to. My mission is not to tell you what to do with your kids. But I want you to know that if you do let them watch TV before they’re 2, you’re not alone – and you’re not a bad parent.
Necessarily.
jerry-mahoney.com 
No TV ever is just unrealistic. I am 100% in the camp that *some* TV before 2 is perfectly fine. Thanks to Elmo, Calliou & Super Why my 2 year old can sing the alphabet, find the proper letter in a pile of letter magnets when asked, and is constantly pointing out and identifying “super letters” on signs all over town. She can also count fairly reliably to 13 (she is continuing to deny the existence of the number 3 or 5 despite our best efforts). A lot of this is because of the time we have put in reading and conversing with her, but I firmly believe TV has certainly helped. And the 20 minute break I know is coming as soon as that Calliou intro music starts has kept me sane, so even though I felt guilty early on, I sure don’t anymore!
Yes, Super Why is another one I love. Even when I’m not in the room with them, they’ll sit there and call out letters, playing along. A lot of this “No TV ever ever EVER” talk makes us all feel guilty, and that’s what I think is unfair. Glad you got over your guilt!
High 5 for Caillou. My son, now 3, loved Caillou for the longest time. I liked it because they use real words (what other kid’s show uses words like affirmative?) and show manners.
Now that I am a single mom, there is more tv watching than there used to be. I do sometimes feel guilty about it, but I have also seen it help spark my son’s imagination (he put three of the fat magic markers together to be his “flute”) and his interest in music and dancing.
I’ll have to check out Caillou. I’m a big fan of not talking down to kids, as I talked about in my anti-baby talk post a couple of weeks ago.
Not having a TV, makes sticking to the no TV rule quite easy. It’s not like there aren’t ready solutions to every single one of the problems TV is supposed to solve here, and those other solutions generally don’t involve flash hypnotic lights at and sound at your baby.
If you can raise your kid(s) without TV, then more power to you.
OMJesus your kids are so cute! 🙂 I’m a suburban gay so I grew up with the whole family dynamic of getting pregnant and married right out of high school. Sadly, try as I might I couldn’t get pregnant… Grrb… (Lol) I’ve had names picked out for my kids since I was 16.
I’m 19 btw… the baby fever is kinda sad
Thanks, Connor. I had babyfever from a young age, too, but if I have one piece of advice, it’s to enjoy the babies in your life – cousins, nieces, nephews, etc. – and take your time becoming a parent yourself. Being a dad is great, but it’s a responsibility you have for the rest of your life. Enjoy the lack of attachment for a while first, and then you’ll really appreciate it when it happens. — Not that you asked for advice! 🙂
LOL…STOP READING…..
I too fell victim to the TV dilemma…I too lived in NYC at the time, My (then) 1.5 yr old was subjected to Only PBS stations….(“too much violence in cartoons” said the experts.). At the ripe old age of 2 she sat in her kiddie chair eating a mini sandwich (crust removed) and chewed around corners to make a shape that included a handle:
I asked “what did you make darling?” She replied: “A Gun”…..
I caught a rerun of Mr. Rogers later and he was featuring puppets carrying bombs to go to war……..LOL
She’s a healthy happy 21 year old now at PSU studying psychology….hopefully she will become one of those Experts and change the channel on some of this NONSENSE they want us to believe in child rearing…….
P.S. You may want to leave Family Guy & Archer & South Park for a later date…lol
Great Post Mommy Man!
What a horrifying (and hilarious) story. Nothing would make me sadder than my kids making sandwich guns. I’ll definitely shield them from Family Guy, South Park and Mr. Rogers for as long as I can. 🙂
Oh god yes yes – you are so right on this. I feel like the experts think children are products to be tuned and polished to give optimum performance and their advice is given as if we’re all aiming to develop mini-Einstein’s. Maybe with all the pressure we’re meant to put on them it is just pump priming screwed up bags of neurosis ready for the next generation of therapists to suck a living from. TV has its place.
Great post!
Thanks! I’m bracing for backlash on this post. So glad that everyone agrees with me so far!
Could not love this more. Thanks for great writing on an important topic.
Thanks!
Super Why and the Super Readers is the only show our family’s three year old watches. He doesn’t even like other TV shows! I look forward to 1030-1100 every Tuesday and Friday! (He still hasn’t figured out that it’s on five days a week…and we’re not telling him!)
I think stations like sprout are to blame for the AAP’s recommendation. I know a few parents who just leave sprout on all day and their kids are TV zombies. My son will be 2 in a few weeks and as Daddy and Mommy both frequently work from home and are not morning people, after breakfast we turn on pbs so we can drink our coffee and become the happy upbeat parents we need to be. I use that time to send out emails and prep my yoga classes, my husband uses it to do his own business prep. Then we shut the tv off and go to the park or play in the yard or take a walk, etc. If it wasn’t for a little educational tv in the morning we would have to put him in daycare, and I think he’s better off here with slightly distracted parents then with strangers and a bunch of snotty germy toys.
TV the way you and your husband use it is exactly what I’m advocating. Limited and supervised. I’m horrified that anyone would leave their TV on all day. What angers me about the AAP recommendation is that they don’t trust parents enough to find a happy medium between “No TV, ever” and “Only TV, all day”. It insults us all at the hopes of reaching a few bad parents who let TV do their job for them.
As a new mother of a 6 month old boy, I have struggled with the guilt of introducing my son to the wonders of a little Saturday morning cartoon snuggle time or an interactive dancing animal app on my phone. That app has been a life saver during breathing treatments and when absolutely nothing else makes him happy when he’s sick. Just this morning he started laughing and giggling when certain animals appeared on the screen of my phone. I agree with you completely. My generation was raised by the tv and video games, and most of us didn’t turn into complete morons!
Thanks for pointing out another valid use of TV. My kids were terrified of the nebulizer and wouldn’t sit still for it… unless we turned the TV on. Again, it was only for 5-10 minutes at a time and if it kept them from panicking, I was happy to do it.
I’m on board with everything you said in this post. We tried honestly to avoid TV, but we needed our “coffee breaks” and uninterrupted toilet time. We bought those “Little Pim” DVDs, and it’s nice to know that I’m reinforcing the (moderate, at best) Spanish I’m trying to teach my child when I put her in front of the TV. Like I mentioned on Twitter, my 11-month-old even knows her ABCs. We’ll sing “A…B…” and she’ll chime in “C!” Then we’ll sing “D…E…” and she’ll sing “F!” And so on and so forth. Don’t tell me that Sesame Street didn’t contribute to that a little bit. That would be a lie. -Violet
I avoided TV as much and as long as I could, and I’d do the same if I had another kid. But a little bit of TV at crucial moments was a lifesaver to me as a parent, and I don’t think it hurt my kids one bit. I’d bet if you sat your kids in front of Sesame Street 24/7 but never interacted with them, they’d struggle to learn the alphabet. But getting the video plus the reinforcement from Mom(s) and/or Dad(s) can do wonders. That your daughter knows the alphabet at 11 months old shows you’re doing something right. 🙂
Yeah, even though there’s a strong correlation between TV consumption and ADD, it’s so darn convenient. What’s a little ADD, if you can shit in peace.
Also, who needs singing to your babies? am I right? You can just plop them in front of a TV, and you don’t have to learn how to sooth them yourself.
Forget all of the research that says that babies learn nothing cognitive from television, that you can sit your kid in front of a foreign language program for as long as you want and they’ll never learn a word of Japanese, that Baby Einstein was sued because their programs were definitively proven to not enhance children’s mental capabilities, if it says .PHD on the box, I’m sold. This must be more educational than interacting with a real human being.
Parenting is hard, and no parent is perfect. If a parent feels it’s necessary to employ TV as a shortcut, I’m not going to judge them. However, celebrating TV as some wonderful parenting companion is just indulging in self-delusion.
Kids should probably watch any TV at all between the ages of .5 to 5. That’s of course, only if you want what’s best for them.
I’d be curious to know where you heard about this “strong correlation” between TV consumption and ADD. Was it the study published in “Pediatrics” in 2004, because that one, though often cited, didn’t even measure ADD. Check this analysis for details. Or is it just a general sense you have, because you’ve heard it repeated so much?
I’m glad you raised this point, because it’s exactly the kind of constantly repeated but totally unsubstantiated hysteria parents face on a daily basis. I find it ironic that what presents itself as concern for children’s education is fueled by so much misinformation. The NYT article I linked to states, “So far, there is no evidence that exposure to any of these gadgets causes long-term developmental problems, experts say.”
And I say in my post itself, “I’m not saying TV can ever match the value of parental interaction you get from reading, but the right shows can reinforce the things you’re teaching them when you’re going through your favorite books” and “I’d never say that TV is the best way for your kids to learn.”
Whoever said I don’t sing to my kids, or that I never learned to sooth them? You can’t just blindly equate moderate TV usage with all kinds of parental neglect.
Maybe you should be less concerned about TV and more conscious of the effects of prolonged exposure to snark.
second link on a google search.
http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2007/09/08/tv-adhd/
“The study is not proof that TV viewing causes attention problems because it may be that children prone to attention problems may be drawn to watching television. Because this study did not seek to prove a causal link between television and attention span, its researchers can’t draw conclusions about which way the data relationship goes.
Also, because the study was historical in nature and relied on parents’ reporting of the amount of time their children watched, and did not test for the parents’ reporting accuracy, the data obtained may not be reliable.”
Straight from the article. One study of that nature hardly equals scientific certainty. Guess what’s also happened alongside the modern uptick in ADD/ADHD diagnosis? Medicaid/CHIP paying for the extremely expensive medications, upswings in Medicaid/CHIP doctors due to expansions of the programs, etc. Also, better screening and diagnostic tools. Some of it is better diagnosis, some of it is wider diagnosis (for good and for bad) and sure, maybe a tiny bit of it is TV, but guess what? A tiny bit of the broken arms in children is letting them play on the playground. Does that really mean we stop such a behavior (especially when it’s supervised and moderated) over a risk that we can’t even quantify exactly?
Thanks for pulling that quote — and for making my point better than I could’ve. 🙂
Sorry, way old article to comment on, but I really hate that we’re let ADD become this mysterious unexplained villain in modern society. Also really like the blog and am consuming the archive.
ummm… I don’t think anyone was advocating 24hr tv parenting, i think you missed the point, by quite a lot… too much of anything is a bad thing, a little tv from time to time never hurt anyone. I highly doubt the author of this blog spends his days ignoring his children while they watch tv. Parents who are home with their kids all day need a break once in awhile, and believe it or not kids need a break from mom and dad too. I can’t stand seeing the tv constantly on in the background while the kids play around it all day, but a little bit to calm down at the end of the night or to provide a distraction when a parent needs to get something else done really is not such a bad thing.
I think you missed my point, by quite a lot:
Let me post it again
“Parenting is hard, and no parent is perfect. If a parent feels it’s necessary to employ TV as a shortcut, I’m not going to judge them. However, celebrating TV as some wonderful parenting companion is just indulging in self-delusion. ”
The title of the article wasn’t: “5 times when letting your child watch TV can be a life-saver”
It was: “Screw You, American Academy of Pediatrics! 5 Reasons TV is our BFF”
so you’re making a comment on an article based on the title? maybe you should read the whole thing…
I read it up until this part:
“TV as teacher – Let’s assume you’re not a total loser and you actually read to your kids. Good for you. But do you have any Harvard PhDs consulting on your selection of material? No? Then why not give the Children’s Television Workshop a crack at your little ones, too? ”
This is just presumptuous hogwash. Kids learn from you. TV may memorize them, but that’s not the same as educating them. Just because some PHD collaborated in a DVD doesn’t change this whatsoever. A group of researches proved that the “baby Einstein” line of DVDs actually had negative effects on the children’s cognitive performance. Dizney actually sued them to retract their research, but lost, and was eventually forced to remove both their claims of helping with cognitive development and their “educational” label. Baby Einstein, like all other infant TV was nothing more than a distraction that killed time which could’ve been used for more enriching activities.
Honestly, I thought it was a bit counter intuitive. I’d think that you could let your kid watch Spanish soap operas all day, and they’d learn to speak Spanish, but the research is conclusive: They can watch a thousand DVDs on a foreign language, but they won’t learn the language unless it’s spoken to them by a human. It’s just the way baby’s work.
Anyway, we agree that it may sometimes be justified, over the course of parenting, for a parent to employ TV as a distraction. This article goes over the top.
the title is over the top, its meant to grab your attention, that’s what a title does, no one but you is talking about baby einstein, that stuff is complete crap. The childrens television workshop is responsible for shows like sesame street, and yes, those shows do teach things. My son comprehends things that absolutely amaze me. Its not just memorization. Plopping your kid in front of the tv so you can play video games is not the same as sitting them down with the occasional educational show. You have to follow it up with good parenting, which is exactly what this article says if you read it instead of overreacting to a title.
It’s all about age appropriateness. There’s nothing wrong with a kid watching sesame street when they’re ready, and television can be educational… but not for babies.
He goes on to elaborate that these “are 5 perfectly acceptable uses for TV before your kid turns 2.”
He’s merely validating the path of least resistance.
Fair enough. I’ll admit the title is a bit sensationalist to grab people’s attention. I actually named it something else originally, which you can see in the URL. I’m still not thrilled with the title. Maybe the ideal would be something like “A Rational Parent’s Guide To TV Usage” or something like that. I’d hate for people to misconstrue my point based on the title, as you seem to have done. I may yet change it again.
I stand by my point, though. Conscientious TV usage, kept to a minimum, can be a valid part of parenting in the real world, rather than a substitute for parenting, as it’s so often presented to be. If you read the whole post, I think I make that pretty clear. If you still disagree, then we’ll agree to disagree.
I generally agree with what your saying… minus the educational part.
with my first, I adamantly did not let him watch tv before 2. In fact, at 18 months, he did not care to watch any. I’d try and bribe him away from the hot stove I was making dinner on, but he’d never sit through anything. By 2 1/2 he was Elmo-lovin’ among the best of ’em. Our second wouldn’t sit in front of the tv until she was almost 3. Just didn’t care. Unless she was in your lap. Our youngest, however, is 20 months and would probably watch all day if you’d let him. *Sigh* Oh the choices in parenting. I’m guessing that I’M still the one parenting instead of the TV that they’ll turn out ok.
Wow, I’ve never heard of a kid who didn’t LIKE TV. My kids saw their first TV when they were about 4 months old, at their older cousins’ house. It was Sesame Street, and they squealed and sang the whole ten minutes or so it was on. We had never seen them so happy or full of life. It was the first time we thought, “Hmm… maybe something that makes them this happy isn’t so completely evil after all.”
oh yes, exactly!
Another awesome hilarious post! I mean, I grew up on a little (or was it a lot) of TV and I turned out fine! 😀 There are some really great educational shows, as well as some disturbing ones, and your selection above is great! One of the shows I know, really helped her son with his motor skills issues in being able to pronounce consonants and vowels better.
Thank you for sharing your words of wisdom with us. 😀 It shows the human side of parenting (versus all these unrealistic ideals at times I think). 😀
Pink.
Thanks, Pink! I watched a TON of TV as a kid, and while I won’t let my kids watch nearly that much myself, I think I turned out OK. 🙂
Absolutely! HAHA.. where would we be without Care Bears, Thunder Cats and GI Joe! 😀
Thank you for sharing. I brag about your post to my friends all the time! 😀
Pink.
My niece is about to turn 2 and she is more technologically advanced than any kid I’ve ever seen. She uses an iPhone well, and is way into using it to watch videos. I grew up using computers, and thank my parents every day because I believe that the the sole reason why I am able to use electronics like second nature. We just won’t let little Bean become a TV zombie, and the AAP will be happy with that… Maybe.
Yeah, I’ve heard of preschools that make parents sign a pledge saying their kids won’t see any “screens” (TV, iPad, computer) until they’re 7. Can you imagine? I think that’s just crippling them technologically. I love seeing my kids work the iPad, and I know that these are skills they’ll use throughout their lives.
LOVE!!
http://nobetterforum.blogspot.com/2011/01/preschoolers-tv-or-not-tv.html
Sesame Street has been my saviour recently for me. Landon wants to crawl everywhere, get into everything and his attention span lasts 2.3seconds. But for that one hour of Sesame Street he will sit in his jumper and watch or sit on my lap and stay still. We have like 20 episodes on DVR and i think i have memorized every one of them and know all characters now!
I applaud you guys for taking care of twins cause when i have Landon all day for 12 hours on my day off, while Amy works I am mentally exhausted. I couldnt imagine doing that with double trouble! You both are awesome parents!
Thanks, Tim, and back atcha! We actually haven’t watched a lot of Sesame Street on TV, but we watch clips of it on YouTube all the time. They loved Elmo for a while, and now they’re really into a Grover sketch where he delivers a really big hamburger to the restaurant customer. They talk about it all the time. I think on top of everything else, Sesame Street has made my kids funnier. They “get” jokes because of it. What could be wrong with that?
Sesame Street….I loved that show, not sure if it was my favourite or the kids! There are so, so, so many restrictions on us as parents – I think that you and Drew have obvious good instincts and you will make always make good choices as long as you keep their best interests at heart. My children watched their fair share of television, played video games and spent time on the internet – they somehow managed to be contributing members of society.
Ah, video games – I admit I’m looking forward to the day when the kids can play Mario Kart with me. Drew won’t play, and it’s no fun alone! 🙂
LOVE this!!! There are so many guidelines and “rules” out there, you really do just have to do what works for you and your family.
Amen!
Pingback: Bad Mommy « Daisy and Violet
Hilarious post! I just found your site and am loving it. I also love that you aren’t afraid to admit what we all do – we put on the tv for our kids when we need to do something! I call it our “relaxing time” in our house.
Thanks! Do you still have your WordPress site? I clicked the link but it says it’s no longer there.
TV is awful for children. It’s being used to brainwash them. All you see lately is death, death, death and gay, gay, gay. So awful. So shameful. Think of how brilliant our kids would be if there were actual educational shows on instead of this putrid display of psycho social manipulation. You have to be blind not to see that every single show has a gay character. It’s just so overdone. Such a selfish myopic agenda. And it’s all about sex.
yup, sesame street, porn, its all the same.
I’m guessing we disagree about a lot more than just TV. Thanks for reading the blog!
Love this line-You won’t get a rat through a maze if he’s never tasted cheese. Love everything you write. Great stuff!
Thanks 🙂
Hi there! Just letting you know that I’ve tagged you for the Kreativ Blogger Award. If you accept, which entails listing some facts about yourself and passing the award along, check out my most recent blog entry for the details. 🙂
Jules
http://thej85.wordpress.com/2012/04/10/bubbles-and-kreativ-ity/
Thanks, Jules! I really appreciate it, though I’m far too lazy to do the response post. 🙂
Pingback: Abstraction Distraction: TV for those under 3 « dadmanblogging
This is amazing! WordPress just recommended your blog to me, and yes, yes, YES! This was the second post that I read, but I am hooked. I always felt terrible letting my kids watch TV, the guilt from all the people out there that say it is bad and lazy parenting. But sometimes you just need a break. A break. No crying, whining, fighting, screaming, jumping, touching, running, falling…break.
We watch SuperWhy now, it walks the kids through a short story (about 15 minutes per episode) and encourages them to use problem solving, spelling, and sing the alphabet. Challenging enough for my 3 year old, alphabet-y and colourful enough for my 1 year old. 15 minutes? Hello undisturbed poop.
Nice to meet you! Glad WP led you here, and I can’t wait to check out your blog. 🙂
I love SuperWhy. The kids really interact when that show is on. They shout letters at the screen, and they get up and dance when the songs come on. It’s very sweet and definitely one of my go-to shows when we turn the TV on.
Research shows that the effects of television under the age of 2 years old won’t be fully evident until around age 6 or 7. For every 1 hour of television a child watches during the day it increases your child’s chance of attention disorders by 10% (for those of you that were distracted…2 hours=20% increased risk, 3 hours=30%). The academy doesn’t make blanket recommendations without there being evidence to support it.
I’m not sure what research you’re citing. I didn’t find anything like that when I researched this post. I guess I can only hope you’re wrong, since 0 TV just isn’t realistic to me.
Brilliant, witty, smart! Thanks for this post! 🙂
Love it. Agree on all of them — at one point in my life TV was what saved my sanity. My 5-yr-old daughter still won’t let me give away many of DVD’s she watched as a baby/toddler (Baby Einstein and Wiggles still live here, and all four of mine are well into elementary school).
When my kids start asking me about buying gold or the need to pay down my IRS debt, that’s how I knew they’d watched enough. (BTW, it was the ads that made me run back to “rabbit ears.”)
I’m just getting time to read more posts on your blog. Might have to do the “random post.” You have MUCH!
Pingback: Speaker Spotlight: Jerry Mahoney | Press Publish
I enjoyed reaading this