Thecorrectline has, I believe, six children and has raised 11 foster children. On top of that, she is the author of several NY Times best-selling books on the roles that technology plays in parenting and recently joined the President’s Council on Fitness, Sport, and Nutrition (PCFSN).
I, on the other hand, have no children but do happen to have two cats and know several people that have produced children, so while Thecorrectline’s opinions may be dismissed with casual snarkiness, my opinions clearly have the gravitas and authority needed for a discussion like this. So, to be clear, this chair is an abomination and all those who buy it are, I assume, also guilty of feeding their children fast food rather than breastmilk, of buying age in-appropriate LEGO, and of not giving their children vaccines.
You’re right of course. I just meant there’s probably not much difference between the baby sitting there with the iPad and sitting there without it, because he will ignore it. This is in contrast to, say, four year-olds, whose attention gets so focused on the things they miss what’s going on around them.
Your special forces counter-toddler specialist experience was, as you well know, more or less about driving a desk, paperwork, and playing golf with Colonel Paxton. Stay humble and don’t make yourself out to be more than you are, sheesh.
It’s also more fun and gratifying. A lot of the discussion here makes it sound like taking care of kids is an awful chore. I enjoy it. Actually, I think most parents wish they could spend more time with their kids.
No, I never sat them down in front of the TV. Yes, I played with them with busyboards and similar. ECE&D wasn’t as advanced in those days, but the “Newborn-to-Toddler” age range best practices of zero screen time and maximum personal interaction hasn’t changed.
Yes. It would be a mistake to make this all about distracted child versus attended child. Of course, meaningful interaction with loving adults and other children is absolutely ideal, and yes, the potential is absolutely there for this to subtly mainstream the idea of plopping and ignoring a child.
The real problems, though, are with physical development and play for a baby. Seeing and perceiving space and distances, paralax, develop the eyes, looking past toys occasionally to longer distances exercise the eyes. (same is true for adults too…) Grabbing, pulling, pushing and whacking are all part of gross and fine motor skills, and learning about action and reaction. Babies will also sense soft and 3D toys with their mouths.
I remember “busy boxes.” While I don’t like the idea of giving up the tactile/physical learning that those provided, I don’t see any harm in also offering electronic equivalents which can progress to more complicated interactions.
My question would be the quality of the the software. Frankly, I’d be surprised if there’s anything really good enough yet to justify this effort.
Wow, why are you making a personal attack just because you disagree with someone? Admirably, your target replied only with additional, solid information about infant development, with a suggestion that you could benefit from investigating this topic more. It is a fascinating (and important) area of knowledge. There may not be research yet on this kind of iPad baby device, but on a common sense basis, I think most parents would realize they should avoid or strictly limit it.
That’s because child digital hyper-saturation, on a societal level, is a much greater problem than frazzled mothers. Frazzled mothers is a valid problem, but it tends to negatively effect the mothers more than the children, and is true in only a minority of cases. It often seems a majority of children are overexposed to highly stimulating digital entertainment (games, cartoons, mental junk food) - and this is really bad for creative thought, attention span, etc.
