Should a Pre School ask parental permission before showing a PG movie?

[Mush123]

My four year old has just told me that she saw the PG rated movie Tangled in her Pre School yesterday. I'm a little annoyed that they didn't ask permission.

Armchair funnily enough I was thinking the same! Maybe it's because I'm 18 years into this parenting lark and on number 4....

OrangeHat I'm not sure it's a case of parents saying that 2, 3 and 4 year olds SHOULD be watching this stuff, but I do think there is a difference between being sensible and being precious. IMO, as I said upthread, I would probably not put Nanny McPhee on for my 2 year old DD, even though it's a U classification. But at the same time I really would have no problem with someone that I have trusted to care for her, be it a friend, one of my older children or a nursery, letting her watch a PG rated Disney film. I would, however, be a tad peeved if they showed her Jaws, which also happens to be a PG. I wuold suspect that Jaws might scare the crap out of her, as it does (still) my almost 17 year old DD2 , but even at DD3's tender age, she is perfectly capable of recognising the difference between a real person/animal and a cartoon character.

Children react differently to books and films. But again, it depends on the individual child. But films are made to look more and more realistic. Books, at most, feature static image.

There's a range of development at this age too - many 2-4 year olds have trouble distinguishing reality from fantasy.

People are saying that preschools are not unreasonable if they show PG films to their charges,

And that parents who think that the preschool ought to have checked before showing a PG film are precious.

Thus they are saying that 2, 3 and 4 year olds ought to be watching these films. Why not show U films at preschool, if you have to show films at all, I don't really understand what the objection is.

People say it depends on the child, as with most things, I think it depends on the parent. The only reason we need guidlines/certs is because some people are too lazy or stupid to apply appropriate boundaries.

I would be pretty peed off that they'd shown a film and therefore used up DD's telly time. That's time I should have available for housework. I'm paying nursery to entertain her and provide social time.

I don't understand the insistence to expose young children to media which may scare them. I really don't.

Each child responds to different films/situations differently. Mine is pretty open to most films of a PG rating, including quite a few Tim Burton films (I mean, he loves The Nightmare Before Christmas, and cried for weeks when he lost his Sally doll)

But my 6 year old niece, or plenty of other children would be terrified by it. Likewise, I found Dumbo terrifying. My Mother found Fantasia terrifying. I still shudder at films with fires in them (childhood experience) but DS won't bat an eyelid.

DoMeDon, I understand your point, but how can it depend on the parent if it's the nursery showing the film?

Our junior school is not allowed to show anything more than a U- even for 11 year olds...

I was raised by the most unsympathetic people on earth :) The catchphrase around our house was always "give a person guts, and sh%t will do for brains." We were expected to be nails. I was not "raised to be a lily livered woose" yet as a child, I was. I was terrified of "scary things" and ghost stories. My best friend and I met because we were the only two crying at the campfire scary stories in Girl Scouts. :o (Still besties 20 years on...)

My point is, it's not always the parents. Some people are just more sensitive than others, and parents know their own children best. My son at 4 could probably watch something that would have made me a blubbering mess at 10.

Dont - I refer to people saying 'it all depends on the child' , I feel it depends on the parents perception of their child and world around them. Parenst do know their child better than others but are not child experts. Guidlines and certs shouldn't be nec - but when some think innuendo, swearing, etc is Ok in front of DC that is their perception not that of child experts and responsible parents. the 'never did me any harm' mantra makes me boak. Those shaking their heads at parents upset by a nursery showing a PG film are they type of permissive, 'I know better' parents who get on my wick.

Legally, the pre-school has done nothing wrong. The film classification applies only to rentals and sales as detailed here However the BBFC do recommend obtaining parental consent before schools show films to kids who are younger than the cert age.

Not saying it's necessarily right or wrong, that is down to individual parental choice.

And I think I'm quite a "permissive parent" but I certainly don't think that "I know better" than anyone else. I wasn't aware that the two things had to go hand in hand DoMeDon

I've just looked at the copy of Tangled that we have and it says it is a U!!

THe BBFC says this about PG films:

"Parental Guidance

General viewing, but some scenes may be unsuitable for young children

Unaccompanied children of any age may watch. A ?PG? film should not disturb a child aged around eight or older. However, parents are advised to consider whether the content may upset younger or more sensitive children."

In the light that they're expecting 8yrs and up to be fine with it, I would have thought that in a pre-school setting, a PG film should've had parental consent. But that's more my opinion than any law or guidelines, I'm guessing.

Yes but the film in question isn't a PG, it is a U.

IMDB lists it as a PG in the UK.

Am wondering where on earth my MIL got our copy from, as it says U, dodgy knock off

i think YABU about both cases.
its a disney film, id have no problem with it. as others have said, you trust the teachers with your kids lives every day.

regarding the stream paddle. I strip my 7yr old to her nix at the beach and rivers. Someone mentioned about risk - what were the kids wearing on their feet, what about handwashing. I've never made my kids wash hands after playing in the sea or a river. They dry hands on a towel if we have one, if not maybe a t-shirt. They then eat food with the same 'dirty' hands

I would be a bit annoyed as it seems a bit lazy of the pre school to show a DVD instead of arranging other fun group activities.
Also I love snuggling up with the family on a Sunday afternoon to watch a film together and like to be the first person to watch a particular film with them.
If my child had never seen the film before I'd have felt a bit cheated out of a first experience but I think that's more to do with being an adoptive mother and bring a bit over excited about watching Disney films with my kids!
I watched Tangled with my 2 year old who was very scared of the witch but it was my big tough 5 year old boy who was really upset after watching that film.
I needed to spend time with him afterwards to explain everything that worried him.
As an adopted child who is very aware of his background I think he found it a bit confusing.

DoMeDon, I understand your sentiment. There is an element of me that feels censorship pushes some directors to be as extreme as possible to reach a broader audience. Censorship arrived not long after films were made with the specific nature of being aimed at children.

However, I do agree that a parent should be the one deciding if they want a film shown to their child. Hence why I believe they should have sought consent from parents. I'm not sayiing they shouldn't have shown it at all, but the parents should have been aware it was being shown. Mumleigh's post echoes another sentiment that I'd forgotten amongst the debate. The film does show some analogies to adoption, and had I seen the film, aged 4, it probably would have caused issues with me. It certainly would have caused issues with my adoptive mother.

Madhairgirl, my copy (which has been played to death) is definitely a PG (listed reasons are mild violence, threat and brief sight of blood)