To think current concerns over screen time is bordering hysteria

This screams snobbery.

I'm the first university graduate of my family. Several of my uni friends were from "uneducated" as you put it, WC families. Two of them were from single mother families where the mum would clean around school hours (shocking, I know).

They both did as well as me at university, and I did better than several MC children from graduate families.

Screens, no screens, graduate parents or not. The drive of the child and if their parents to give them better than they had is what matters.

How are they watching TV without a screen?

@Remainsamystery344

I take your point about not being forced to rub along with different groups of people, and this being reinforced by algorithms, but doesn’t the work place also provide that opportunity?

It should do, yes, but increasing numbers of people work from home and also there seems to be a real reluctance among lots of people to engage socially with people at work.

I've seen posts on here where people take great umbrage at the idea of socialising with colleagues as if it is some sort of invasion of their privacy. I remember a post a few months back someone posted about being invited to lunch by their boss and people were scandalised about how "intrusive" this was. I understand people's reluctance to engage in fake fun and OTT team building and the desire to prioritise time at home with their families, but the idea that there should be a hard red line between work and home is a new thing and I think its part and parcel of the same phenomenon. There's a retreat from socialising across the board and a sense that life outside the home and family is scary or dangerous.

Which is partly why I think having more women in the workplace, despite the problems this creates, is overall a good thing. People closing down their social worlds, minimising contact with people outside their own families is thoroughly unhealthy in my view. Social media isn't the only factor here but I think it amplifies this sense of "me and my tribe" and the wider social polarisation which is going on.

All this talk of banning social media for under 16s is like making it a forbidden fruit, it would be better to put pressure on the companies to introduce age appropriate graduated social media with better security to make it safer. Make it compulsory for parents to have to give permission to add friends & for them to be able to see their children's activity remotely with alerts if anyone who hasn't been passed by the parents tries to contact or interact with the child. Both parents & children need educating about the dangers of social media, maybe make it compulsory for them to undertake an online training course when signing up & further courses as they graduate from one stage to the next, if they don't want to take the course they can't sign up.or graduate.

DS1 is a gamer, but has never really done social media, isn't interested in it and thinks it's stupid. DS2 is more into it and it's his screen time I worry about more and have had to limit because of that. So I do think it depends what the screen time is for.

I used to work in CAMHS and it really was disturbing the number of children we saw who had no capacity to self regulate without a screen, didn't know how to play with toys, no imaginative play, no interest in interacting with other children, boredom would provoke not just the usual crankiness but real distress and tantrums/meltdowns. Parents would come wanting an autism diagnosis or ADHD, and of course a proportion of these children did have SEN. But in most cases, we were able to change behaviour by gradually weaning them off handheld devices such as tablets and phones and radically limiting other screen time, supporting families to learn to play with their children and find other strategies to regulate. And where children were interested in things like Minecraft, getting involved in it with them and integrating their interest into other activities. There are Minecraft board games, Lego, colouring books, craft kits etc, things that can be done as a family. One of our amazing play therapists even produced a Minecraft activity book with things like recipes in. The biggest and hardest behaviour change though was the adults. They needed to get off their phones in order to support the kids to do it, and set an example. A screen addicted child isn't going to change their behaviour if the parents stay on their phones all the time instead of interacting with them. And children want connection with their parents. It's not bloody normal for a child to only want to stare at a screen, that's not innate in any child, even where there are neurodevelopmental differences. It's 100% learned behaviour.

Screen time does not have any benefit for preschool children. Parents who think this are kidding themselves. If you need to use a tablet to get an hour's peace for some housework, cooking, on a car journey or whatever, then we all have to do what we have to do to get by. But don't kid yourself it's in any way good for them. It isn't.

I find the screen debate tricky. Personally I think screens are not ideal, especially phones and tablets which can be consumed individually and mindlessly. Watching TV with an engaged parent who is discussing the content with you and engaging with the story is different (even if it’s Paw Patrol!).

We made the choice to have no screen before 2 at all and at 5, my child can watch 20 minutes of TV a day at weekends. She has never held a phone or a tablet, so it is possible. But we only have one child and we are two parents (though we both work full time senior jobs with no family support either) so we can divide and conquer more easily. I can certainly imagine that a single parent will find it more difficult. But I think the research coming out does show that this the right approach.

I also think the comparison with children who grew up with TV and video games but not phones and social media is not quite right. There is something different about the content of phones and tablets, let alone social media in the wiring of children’s brains IMO.

I think there are a few different issues around screens which overlap obviously.

kids who previously would have been a bit emotionally neglected, and I don’t mean this in an extreme way. But parents who are overwhelmed or struggling previously their kids played out or entertained themselves and now they spend endless hours on a screen. This impacts lots of things but the most obvious to me, is their movement skills. I have definitely seen kids movement ability decline over the last 15 years. It’s a real worry for their future health. there are kids who don’t know how to play, it’s heartbreaking.

then there are normal kids who have restricted screen time but it’s still all designed to be addictive.

Then there is lots of issues around safety .

So no I don’t think it is hysterical. We should all consider the screen use in our house.

I don't have on now either lol. Was a choice not money related

It's the content. Modern content particularly on YouTube but also TV shows like Miss Annie are deliberately created to be overstimulating and addictive. They use physiologists to do this and openly talk about it at industry events such "you have to have x cuts per minute and mix animation and live action to keep them hooked". This about 2+ year old children.

Then the delivery method screens held close to the face instead of TVs, LED (blue light) instead of CRT (warm) and the quantity and of screen time all have effects of children's development

This is unlike the comparatively gentle cartoons and kids shows we watched on the family TV which were part of a schedule that's stopped. And there were concerns about too much screentime and shows being too stimulating then, not all parents allowed all shows or unlimited screentime.

Agree 100%

My kids loved tots tv ! And if they didn’t watch it because we had something else on they didn’t fling themselves on the floor and have a meltdown. My son has a 2 year old and they’re determined to avoid screens they don’t even like her watching a cartoon on tv. She loves looking at books and is ahead with all her milestones. Her cousins are a few years older and aren’t much more ahead in development it’s really sad

I have an 8 and 4 year old and have always limited screen time to an hour per day. I font mind then watching cartoons but won't allow too much gaming, tablets or YouTube. It's just my preference and what I think is best for my kids. I know a parent who allowed her kid screens all the time and the poor boy was addicted. He couldn't even make eye contact.

Ha yes, if you're expected to watch The Bill you soon find reading a book or even homework is the better alternative. TV was on all the time in my house, I watched kids TV after school and Eastenders and that was about it really as my parents controlled the content.

I was answering someone elses point about how TV is vastly different in terms of its affect on childrens brain development compared to small handheld devices and SM scrolling (for shorthand, Im including a lot of things in there)

Because many posters keep saying, 'well if telly is ok, why not screens'.

Im not sure how many toddlers with these things in front of their faces are watching Netflix

But even if I go back to my point about how TV programmes are contained, slower paced, a story, conversation, a beginning and an end, if they are viewed consistently on small screens that also contributes to higher increases in myopia now being seen in children.

Are you comparing watching Netflix on a tablet/phone to watching Netflix on TV?

Or comparing YouTube type stories/threads/shorts to watching TV?

Because children are mostly watching the latter. And the way they are produced for fast-paced, short-span, instant gratification is completely different to how TV programs are produced. They are very damaging. I would much, much, much rather my children watched Netflix on TV all day long than 30mins a day watching YouTube shorts/tiktok stories/threads. (Neither will happen but TV is definitely the better option).

If you’re talking 100 years ago, well in those days usually only one parent worked
or if both were working then the child (if over 9 or 10) was probably working too.

100 years ago children of 9 or 10 and up to 14 were at school. Or at least in education.

Yes, in terms of physical issues myopia is increasing in children for this reason

But in terms of other differences between telly and social media/screens is that if its a programme, it has a beginning and an end, its got a story or concept or conversation with it in which flows from one to the next, often depending on what is being watched there are adverts

How people can compare the two with a straight face I do not know.

Fucking hell you've confused the 90s with the 1930s 🤣 what bollocks.
... gen X here , born mid 70s, my parents both worked full-time as did the vast majority of my friends parents.

We are seeing it in every classroom, all over the country, day in day out. Those of us that are decades into our teaching career have seen the change over the last 10 years. YouTube, in particular, is the devil for primary age. It absolutely destroys attention spans. There is so, so much evidence (research based and anecdotal) to prove that. The links for tiktok/SM and mental health in teens is more than just correlation. There is proven causation.

20 mins of learning games a day - fine.
An episode or 2 of bluey - fine.
Endless (or any imo) scrolling of absolute shite on YouTube - incredibly harmful

And yes, there is a difference between TV and screens. I can't remember the exact science but it was something to do with focal distance and impact on vision.

The thing about TV is that it's open and can be a shared activity, one where conversations can be had and the parent keep an eye on content. It's also static, you can't take it with you so there's a break from the screen.

Phones and iPads are private, non-inclusive, and can be taken everywhere.

The same could be said about books, except I can't recall ever seeing anyone walk down the street (and cross it!) with their nose in a book. Nor is there any research that says reading books is harmful. That I know of.

The wiring of the brain in the formative years needs to be protected at all costs

Totally agree with this!

Absolutely laughable argument. Embarrassing to the people who have posted this and similar.

To be fair when I was a kid I used to get told off for 'always having my head in a book' or 'all that reading will strain your eyes'.adults never shut up going on about reading tok much!!

I don't think the explosion in screen time and the explosion in mental health problems is a coincidence.
YABU

A 3 or 4 year old should not be spending time on an ipad at all let alone 2 hours, that is shocking that you think it ok

At 10 years old I would expect parents to monitor and ration the amount of time spent on handheld screens. By the time they get their own phones at about 12/13 or so its harder but given they're normally removed at school, and should be removed by bedtime in my view and held downstairs, they wouldnt be able to pack in 8 hours of use. A much older teen is harder to monitor but by them they're brain development is very far advanced compared to a small child

The wiring of the brain in the formative years needs to be protected at all costs.