am I creating a TV monster?

silvie25mar · September 2012

DD is almost 6 months old, and to "entertain' or stimulate her at about 5 months, for some reason I chose to put on Dora or Bubble Guppies so she could see the color and possibly laugh and smile... and while she certainly does all of that... if she is fussy or cranky I put one of those on and she settles immediately and is happy. Am I creating a TV monster??? Ive read so many things about ADD etc.

joshandpanda · September 2012

man, I hope not cause I do the same thing... except he loves to watch drag racing with H lol...

thisismytruth · September 2012

I tend to lean towards believing the studies that say too much TV too early could potentially lead to ADD type issues. Not so much because I've done tons of research or because I'm quick to believe every study that comes along, but because my common sense tells me that this seems possible. Babies at this age are not capable of slowing down the flow of information that comes to them. It seems to me as though fast moving, loud, colorful shows would overwhelm my LO. Our TV stays off all day and DH and I really only turn it on after LO is in bed. I feel as though there are a lot more things that my son could be doing that keep him entertained but aren't as abrasive and overstimulating as watching TV.

Zimger · September 2012

I wouldn't do it all the time. I let DS watch Cartoons (usually sesame street) in the mornning while I finish getting ready. He likes it. It last about twenty minutes. Then he goes to school or out into the community with his dad during the day. We tend to listen to music at night.

Jinnifah · September 2012

I've used tv or the screen on my smartphone when I've been at my wits end with a fussy baby the colours ans sounds fascinate him.

But I try to avoid it whenever possible because it does seem logical to me that it's a bad idea. I really only have resorted to it to save my sanity a few times.

RioG1978 · September 2012

I actually think that "adult" shows (the morning news, talk shows, etc) during the day are probably less "harmful" (if you believe tv is harmful) than many of the kids shows. Some of them are stimulation overload, whereas something like a talk show isn't much different than when company is over and chatting in the living room. For an infant, at any rate. Once kids can understand what's on the tv, obviously those shows are no longer appropriate.

tina924 · September 2012

I just say its fine in moderation. I think the ADD studies were done with children where the TV was the babysitter. Most scientific studies focus on extremes. (I'm a daughter of research biologists) Its fine as long as it doesn't intefere with regular human interaction, which I'm sure is not what's happening with you. I rely on it just so I can pee and eat.

tarajayne · September 2012

If I didn't put my kids in front of the tv I would never get a shower. TV is not a bad thing if it's in moderation.

acia · September 2012

thisismytruth:
I tend to lean towards believing the studies that say too much TV too early could potentially lead to ADD type issues. Not so much because I've done tons of research or because I'm quick to believe every study that comes along, but because my common sense tells me that this seems possible. Babies at this age are not capable of slowing down the flow of information that comes to them. It seems to me as though fast moving, loud, colorful shows would overwhelm my LO. Our TV stays off all day and DH and I really only turn it on after LO is in bed. I feel as though there are a lot more things that my son could be doing that keep him entertained but aren't as abrasive and overstimulating as watching TV.

This.

I waited until DD was 2 before letting her watch TV, as per the "official" recommendation.

The study I looked at (a few years ago - so I could be a bit off) said something like watching TV before age 2 increases your child's chance of having ADHD by 10%. Since ADHD runs in our family (both sides), I'd rather not increase our odds if at all possible. And apparently it has something to do with the screen's "flicker rate" or refresh rate or something like that, so it doesn't matter what they're watching - it has the same effect.

I know it's really hard to avoid the TV... I know I rely on it a lot for my older daughter especially since my 2nd daughter was born - she probably watches an hour or two a day. But the TV is off if my younger one is in the room, or I'll turn her away from it. She's just as happy watching our fish tank, or looking at pictures in a book, or just watching my older child run around and be a monkey.

DawnLilly · September 2012

When it's just DS and I it's easy to keep the tv off because we only have two channels and I don't care to watch judge Judy or the price is right. Love daytime tv. DS stays at great grandma's two days a week, "He just loves Law and Order" This upsets me. Her house isn't very big and the play pen is right under the TV. I don't expect everyone to turn TVs off when he comes in a room and I understand that he doesn't understand what's going on but I'd like to keep him away from tones. He understands tones so I don't like him around real dramatic or sad shows and I don't like him around real excitable or stimulating kids shows. If its "benign" I don't mind it being on like a talk show or football. I don't set him in front of it but if he turns to see it I'm not that worried.

sadsadie · September 2012

Um...AAP says no screen time under two for a reason. If you want to go against solidly researched medical advice that is your choice, but remember, you have no one to blame but yourself later on when your child has developmental issues/ night terrors/obesity.

I suggest you sit down and read carefully about the potential hazards and harm you are signing your child up for...

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/10/12/peds.2011-1753

BelleWithABlade · September 2012

sadsadie:
Um...AAP says no screen time under two for a reason. If you want to go against solidly researched medical advice that is your choice, but remember, you have no one to blame but yourself later on when your child has developmental issues/ night terrors/obesity.

I suggest you sit down and read carefully about the potential hazards and harm you are signing your child up for...
https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/10/12/peds.2011-1753

Eh you should actually read that paper if you are going to post it. It doesn't show that television causes developmental issues or night terrors or obesity in babies. There is evidence that in older children who watch TONS of tv (like hours a day) have higher chances of obesity. There are correlations to language delay and attention problems with babies who again watch TONS of tv, but there no way to know causation. I do think the night sleep problems due to watching while going to sleep is concerning, but again, that doesn't seem to be what PP are talking about. The AAP is right to recommend limiting TV or avoiding because they can't say for sure, but really there is no evidence that 20 minutes of Dora is going to harm your child while you shower.

Congrats sanctimommy above who can do everything without needing to distract your kid. You are a way better mom then all of us. You should teach classes.

ClaireOtoms · September 2012

BelleWithABlade:

Congrats sanctimommy above who can do everything without needing to distract your kid. You are a way better mom then all of us. You should teach classes.

I am not 100% comfortable with LO watching tv at 5 months. I certainly don't sit him in front of it all day long, or even daily, but an episode of Baby Einstein once every few days is kind of a treat for him. He really enjoys it, and as a few pp have said it is really helpful if he's been super fussy and I'm at my wits end. It's also one of the only ways I can keep him on his tummy for longer than 30 seconds. DH doesn't have any problem with LO watching tv, and they will spend time together fairly frequently watching a ball game or a cartoon.

I think we sometimes go to extremes about caring for our babies. Most things in moderation will not harm our children. In fact I think it may be better to model moderation when it comes to consumption (tv, "junk" food, etc) than to completely deny them. If they have no exposure to them they may go overboard once they get older.

DawnLilly · September 2012

I think we sometimes go to extremes about caring for our babies.nbsp; Most things in moderation will not harm our children.nbsp; In fact I think it may be better to model moderation when it comes to consumption tv, "junk" food, etc than to completely deny them.nbsp; If they have no exposure to them they may go overboard once they get older. nbsp;nbsp;

This. Everything in moderation. If someone comes back on me and says "Oh, so crack is okay in moderation?" That's not what I meant and you know it :P

sadsadie · September 2012

BelleWithABlade:
sadsadie:
Um...AAP says no screen time under two for a reason. If you want to go against solidly researched medical advice that is your choice, but remember, you have no one to blame but yourself later on when your child has developmental issues/ night terrors/obesity.

I suggest you sit down and read carefully about the potential hazards and harm you are signing your child up for...
https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/10/12/peds.2011-1753

Eh you should actually read that paper if you are going to post it. It doesn't show that television causes developmental issues or night terrors or obesity in babies. There is evidence that in older children who watch TONS of tv (like hours a day) have higher chances of obesity. There are correlations to language delay and attention problems with babies who again watch TONS of tv, but there no way to know causation. I do think the night sleep problems due to watching while going to sleep is concerning, but again, that doesn't seem to be what PP are talking about. The AAP is right to recommend limiting TV or avoiding because they can't say for sure, but really there is no evidence that 20 minutes of Dora is going to harm your child while you shower.

Congrats sanctimommy above who can do everything without needing to distract your kid. You are a way better mom then all of us. You should teach classes.

Hey, if I'm a sanctimony for standing up for what's in the best interests of kids I'll gladly accept the title. It's hard to do the right thing...but usually quite worthwhile.

RioG1978 · September 2012

the tv refresh rate is actually something I could see being concerned about, and its impact on developing brains. I don't know much about that.

But like others said, there's a difference between 3 hours of Disney movies back to back and a baby scooching around on their play mat so they can see the lights of the tv.

acbfreire · September 2012

I believe I read somewhere that one of the main problems with TV is that children watch passively instead of learning how to entertain themselves. I bring LO to the bathroom with me if I am alone and she watches me shower and I talk to her.

If you don't overdo the TV it may be okay...

French Dads Are Best · September 2012

BelleWithABlade:
sadsadie:
Um...AAP says no screen time under two for a reason. If you want to go against solidly researched medical advice that is your choice, but remember, you have no one to blame but yourself later on when your child has developmental issues/ night terrors/obesity.
 
I suggest you sit down and read carefully about the potential hazards and harm you are signing your child up for...
 https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2011/10/12/peds.2011-1753
 
Eh you should actually read that paper if you are going to post it.  It doesn't show that television causes developmental issues or night terrors or obesity in babies.  There is evidence that in older children who watch TONS of tv (like hours a day) have higher chances of obesity.  There are correlations to language delay and attention problems with babies who again watch TONS of tv, but there no way to know causation.  I do think the night sleep problems due to watching while going to sleep is concerning, but again, that doesn't seem to be what PP are talking about.  The AAP is right to recommend limiting TV or avoiding because they can't say for sure, but really there is no evidence that 20 minutes of Dora is going to harm your child while you shower.  
 
Congrats sanctimommy above who can do everything without needing to distract your kid.  You are a way better mom then all of us.  You should teach classes. 

Hold on there, the AAP says NO screen time whatsoever under the age of two and you dismiss their recommendation? You say basically that they say this to be on the safe side because the evidence is not conclusive? How much evidence do you need? A little drink of wine from time to time during pregnancy wouldn't have an adverse effect, right? Everything in moderation, right? So how much alcohol did you drink during your pregnancy? If the answer is none, then there should be no screen time under the age of two. I hope you follow my reasoning.

ClaireOtoms · September 2012

French Dads Are Best:
Everything in moderation, right? So how much alcohol did you drink during your pregnancy? If the answer is none, then there should be no screen time under the age of two. I hope you follow my reasoning.

This is the dumbest thing I've ever read on the internet.

ETA: "The wording of the policy specifically discouraged media use in this age group, although it is frequently misquoted by media outlets as no media exposure in this age group." This comes directly from the article. It doesn't sound like "ZOMG if you let your baby look at a TV screen he will be RUINED!!" It seems to me the recommendation is to limit it as much as possible.

acbfreire:
I believe I read somewhere that one of the main problems with TV is that children watch passively instead of learning how to entertain themselves. I bring LO to the bathroom with me if I am alone and she watches me shower and I talk to her.

I honestly don't intend for this to come across as snarky, but if our LOs need to learn to entertain themselves, isn't keeping them by our side constantly, even long enough to pee, just as bad as sitting them in front of the tv?

French Dads Are Best · September 2012

ClaireOtoms:
French Dads Are Best:
Everything in
moderation, right? So how much alcohol did you drink during your
pregnancy? If the answer is none, then there should be no screen time
under the age of two. I hope you follow my reasoning.
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read on the internet. ETA:nbsp; "The wording of the policy specifically discouraged media use in this age group, although it is frequently misquoted by media outlets as no media exposure in this age group."nbsp; This comes directly from the article.nbsp; It doesn't sound like "ZOMG if you let your baby look at a TV screen he will be RUINED!!" It seems to me the recommendation is to limit it as much as possible.

Why do you find this comment dumb? Please explain. The AAP is specific in their recommendation of no screen time under the age of two. They are not misquoted by media; I'm not talking about media reports, but about AAP's own recommendations.

sadsadie · September 2012

ClaireOtoms:
French Dads Are Best:
Everything in moderation, right? So how much alcohol did you drink during your pregnancy? If the answer is none, then there should be no screen time under the age of two. I hope you follow my reasoning.
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read on the internet.
ETA: "The wording of the policy specifically discouraged media use in this age group, although it is frequently misquoted by media outlets as no media exposure in this age group." This comes directly from the article. It doesn't sound like "ZOMG if you let your baby look at a TV screen he will be RUINED!!" It seems to me the recommendation is to limit it as much as possible.
acbfreire:
I believe I read somewhere that one of the main problems with TV is that children watch passively instead of learning how to entertain themselves. I bring LO to the bathroom with me if I am alone and she watches me shower and I talk to her.
I honestly don't intend for this to come across as snarky, but if our LOs need to learn to entertain themselves, isn't keeping them by our side constantly, even long enough to pee, just as bad as sitting them in front of the tv?

I think what French Dad meant is that it is terribly ironic that people seem really paranoid about avoiding anything potentially harmful during pregnancy (example given was alcohol...which most people cut altogether in pregnancy even though drinking in moderation has been proven to have no adverse effects), but once the kid is born they engage in all kinds of unnecessary but potentially harmful behaviors/activities (like letting babies watch TV or play iPad apps). It's really quite sad.

Lim sorry, but there are other ways you can keep your baby busy/squeeze in a shower without resorting to TV. I wish the "no screen time" recommendation was one more North American parents would heed.

ClaireOtoms · September 2012

French Dads Are Best:
Why do you find this comment dumb? Please explain. The AAP is specific in their recommendation of no screen time under the age of two. They are not misquoted by media; I'm not talking about media reports, but about AAP's own recommendations.

It's dumb because you are comparing two things that have nothing to do with each other. Regardless of how you interpret the article, the argument you are making is asinine and inaccurate.

acbfreire · September 2012

ClaireOtoms:
French Dads Are Best:
Everything in moderation, right? So how much alcohol did you drink during your pregnancy? If the answer is none, then there should be no screen time under the age of two. I hope you follow my reasoning.
This is the dumbest thing I've ever read on the internet.
ETA: "The wording of the policy specifically discouraged media use in this age group, although it is frequently misquoted by media outlets as no media exposure in this age group." This comes directly from the article. It doesn't sound like "ZOMG if you let your baby look at a TV screen he will be RUINED!!" It seems to me the recommendation is to limit it as much as possible.
acbfreire:
I believe I read somewhere that one of the main problems with TV is that children watch passively instead of learning how to entertain themselves. I bring LO to the bathroom with me if I am alone and she watches me shower and I talk to her.
I honestly don't intend for this to come across as snarky, but if our LOs need to learn to entertain themselves, isn't keeping them by our side constantly, even long enough to pee, just as bad as sitting them in front of the tv?

I am not even going to comment on the analogy between alcohol and screen time... Indifferent

I let my baby entertain herself during the day and it is not by watching me shower. Of course I know that if I am talking to her that she is not entertaining herself. I was trying to convey that you can shower without needing to resort to a screen. I do not feel comfortable leaving LO alone somewhere while I shower b/c I can't hear or see her...

ClaireOtoms · September 2012

acbfreire:
I let my baby entertain herself during the day and it is not by watching me shower. Of course I know that if I am talking to her that she is not entertaining herself. I was trying to convey that you can shower without needing to resort to a screen. I do not feel comfortable leaving LO alone somewhere while I shower b/c I can't hear or see her...

Ah, this makes sense.

Suern9870 · September 2012

I wouldn't do it. TV for kids is just a bad habit all around. Although, I'll admit I do let my 5 year old and 3 year old watch an occasional show, but definitely not my 4 month old. I think you're starting down a slippery slope; a few minutes now could easily increase into an hour or more before your LO is 1. And just wait until he/she is old enough to ask/ demand to watch a show, it'll be an ongoing battle to limit TV time.

sadsadie · September 2012

ClaireOtoms:
French Dads Are Best:
Why do you find this comment dumb? Please explain. The AAP is specific in their recommendation of no screen time under the age of two. They are not misquoted by media; I'm not talking about media reports, but about AAP's own recommendations.
It's dumb because you are comparing two things that have nothing to do with each other. Regardless of how you interpret the article, the argument you are making is asinine and inaccurate.

Way to debate your point; dismissing an opinion that differs from yours as "asinine and inaccurate" really is effective!

The comparison between two things that could potentially harm/interfere with a child's development (screen time and alcohol) is actually quite a good analogy, and an interesting way to think about it. I think you can validate this as a comparison because of the way you have been brought up/socialized to think of these two things (alcohol and babies is always a no-no, TV is fine because everybody watches it). As a commenter down thread noted, the whole TV time thing is a very slippery slope, and babies that are exposed to a few minutes here and here can quickly turn into kid's that are watching (and being negatively impacted by) significant amounts of screen time.

ClaireOtoms · September 2012

sadsadie:
Way to debate your point; dismissing an opinion that differs from yours as "asinine and inaccurate" really is effective!

Ok, let me be more specific. The reason her argument is ineffective is because it is a false comparison; in order to agree with her statement, which basically says if you wouldn't drink alcohol during pregnancy you wouldn't let your LO watch tv under the age of 2, you have to agree that both alcohol during pregnancy and television under the age of 2 are harmful even in moderation. These are two completely separate health issues, and both are controversial topics with no absolute answer. One is not automatically true because the other is, so to agree with her argument you must already fundamentally agree with the two separate opinions she presents as fact. She is, essentially, preaching to her own Mommy Martyr Choir.

French Dads Are Best · September 2012

ClaireOtoms:
sadsadie:
Way to debate your point; dismissing an opinion that differs from yours as "asinine and inaccurate" really is effective!
Ok, let me be more specific.  The reason her argument is ineffective is because it is a false comparison; in order to agree with her statement, which basically says if  you wouldn't drink alcohol during pregnancy you wouldn't let your LO watch tv under the age of 2, you have to agree that both alcohol during pregnancy and television under the age of 2 are harmful even in moderation.  These are two completely separate health issues, and both are controversial topics with no absolute answer.  One is not automatically true because the other is, so to agree with her argument you must already fundamentally agree with the two separate opinions she presents as fact.  She is, essentially, preaching to her own Mommy Martyr Choir.

Hallelujah! The gods of good opinions and paragons of debating power condescended to explain to us, common mortals, the meaning of their oracles!

OK, jokes aside, I would have preferred you to present your arguments and logic rather than insult my opinion. Now that you have done so, I would have to say that I mostly agree with you: we all make our choices in spite of what is recommended by the health authorities and other people, just because we feel that our choice is safe for the kids. Some will have an occasional drink during pregnancy, others will set the infant in front of the TV from time to time; we all hope for the best. And this was my initial point: it is incredibly difficult to follow to the letter all these interdictions, so we make choices based not on evidence, but on preference. Good luck and all the best.

ClaireOtoms · September 2012

French Dads Are Best:
Hallelujah! The gods of good opinions and paragons of debating power condescended to explain to us, common mortals, the meaning of their oracles! OK, jokes aside, I would have preferred you to present your arguments and logic rather than insult my opinion. Now that you have done so, I would have to say that I mostly agree with you: we all make our choices in spite of what is recommended by the health authorities and other people, just because we feel that our choice is safe for the kids. Some will have an occasional drink during pregnancy, others will set the infant in front of the TV from time to time; we all hope for the best. And this was my initial point: it is incredibly difficult to follow to the letter all these interdictions, so we make choices based not on evidence, but on preference. Good luck and all the best.

LOL...ok, that was funny.

Totally not how I read your orignial argument, though.

Want a personalized experience?

am I creating a TV monster?

Re: am I creating a TV monster?

Choose Another Board

Search Boards