and depriving my child by not buying her anything technological?

[FigRolls]

My dd is 6. She is adept at using computers and tablets at school. Her friends already own or are receiving for Christmas iPads, iPods, iPhones, Kindles, Wiis, Nintendo 3DS and so on. Dd has asked for Lego and books. She loves playing imaginative games, being active and reading which are all healthy pursuits IMO. However, my friend thinks I'm depriving her and putting her at a disadvantage by not providing her with at leastone of these ggadgets to use at home. Aibu by not doing so?

You're not depriving her but there are a lot of benefits some of her peers will have access to that she won't,so long as you're aware. It's the same as those kids that have access to musical instruments.The others aren't deprived if they don't but the kids with access will get ahead in that area.

The IT provision in schools is utterly dire,so long as you're aware.Playing with tablets and packages which they do does not make them competent in the subject.There is masses out there that is worth kids doing at home.

We started at 6 but tbh I wouldn't worry until 8.Enjoy buying toys.We have a balance in our house,a bit of both.

I would delay buying children technology for as long as possible. It`s often addictive and has a devastating impact on their ability to concentrate. Do encourage your DD to read books, sing in choirs and play music. In my experience, that's what makes the difference at secondary school and uni, not the ability to play games on a tablet.

My kids had gadgets at 6 and have amazing concentration,are avid very competent readers(buying waaaay more books than apps with their pocket money),play the piano,thriving in school.....

It's balance that is needed and self discipline.

In fact my child who has no interest in IT or gadgets what so ever is the one with the lowest levels of concentration out of the 3.

It's parenting that is crucial.If you don't like saying no then clearly they're not ideal,bit sad though for the child.My DS 10 would happily stay in his room reading all weekend unless I booted him outdoors.Would never ban books though.

My DD is 6 and doesn't have any gadgets. It wouldn't occur to me to get her something like an iPad- I just assumed that it's such an adult thing to have, and found it quite odd when it started to be a 'thing' to buy children.

I don't really but the 'children need to be comfortable wit technology/it's educational' argument. I have little cousins who were given an iPad aged 4 and 7. DD went round to their house one day, and they let her have a go- she'd got the hang of using it in about four minutes. My aunt was also making noises about some phonics app being 'educational' for her 18 months old- fair enough,it did look quite good, but it was basically the same thing as the Alphabet phonics song, which you could sing to the child for free. Likewise the flashcard spelling app. You can pick up sets of flashcards for pennies

I'm not being smug, and I'm not saying children should play with their pinecones and leave the tablets alone, but I do think that the 'educational' argument doesn't really work. You don't need an expensive piece of gadgetry to teach your child the alphabet, and they aren't going to be technological whizz kids from playing the Pets in my Pocket game.

Its up to you isn't it. If your child doesn't want it, or you don't want to buy it, then YANBU. My 4 and 6 yr old have an ipod touch, which has loads of educational apps on. They also spend time doing other stuff, like practicing reading, playing out, playing the piano, building stuff and drawing. Personally I think my kids have a great balance in what they do. But we do whats right for our kids, it doesn't matter (within readon) what others do. If you don't want dd to have a tablet then don't buy her one.

and they aren't going to be technological whizz kids from playing the Pets in my Pocket game.

No probably not. But there are good apps and there are rubbish ones. Each to their own.

Marmalade it's not about getting the hang of an package in 4 minutes,that is all they do at school and there is so much more they could be doing: building,writing,designing etc.My DS 10 does all that at home,none of it at school.The tech he has at home fostered the interest and ability.

Aside from that there are some bloody fantastic apps out there:- Squeebles taught all my 3 their entire tables in a week,Minecraft(yes easy to pick up but they get to build and create without restrictions of time) the things my DC are planning with Minecraft,there is a fab movie making thing where they go round taking pictures/ film and work them into their own varying films of different genres all on an Ipod Touch......

Totally your choice and obviously you're not depriving her of anything.
However..
Having and using a good imagination is perfectly possible even with a roomful of technological gadgets.
DS is currently saving up for an iPod but has asked for Lego for Christmas. Not kits either, just basic lego so he can make his own stuff. Some ideas he gets from the web, some he just makes up as he goes along. He has an xbox too and is a total Minecraft head . He plays sport to Town level and loves photography. All healthy pursuits I think?
DD has a tablet and again loves Minecraft. She also loves playing her clarinet, Brownies and is currently reading The Twins at St Clair's.
Having regular access to technology doesn't automatically qualify a child for Zombie of the Year, it's strikes me as very odd that it's considered to be one or the other..

TBF dd2 has a co ordination problem she got a ds at 7 or mayb e it was 8 and it did really improve her concentration she was like a gnat before

you are right dobbie it isn't either or imo just if the children are not that fussed then they dont need it

Retropear I'm not disputing that they can be useful & enjoyable tools for kids- I've seen some of the apps and they do look excellent, especially for older children with a natural bent towards technology. What I find odd is the attitude, which seems to be more and more prevalent (and which the OP is asking about) that children who don't have access, at a very young age, to something which has only been out for what, two years?- are somehow disadvantaged/going to be left behind. Especially when a lot of children seem to use them mostly for playing games. Personally, I wouldn't buy my DD an iPad at 6, because I know she would just want to constantly build pretend pizzas or w/e, and it's an expensive thing to buy, just for that. However I would consider it at an older age when, IMO, she would get more use out of it.

Agree Dobbiesmum
OP I think you know you exactly what you are doing, let's not pretend otherwise

Gosh these threads are like parking threads...so many of them.

All I can say is let your child guide you OP. There's no point in buying a child something that they have not expressed an interest in.

But don't judge others whose children have expressed and interest.

It's all a bit 'meh' really.

& FWIW, the most tech savvy person I know, who was earning something like 50 grand a year at the age of 21, designing computer games, didn't even have a computer in his house until he was 13

You're only six once. There is plenty of time to catch up and play with technological gadgetry later. You are not depriving her in the least.

Good for you OP!

I have been watching these threads with interest.

I was wondering whether to get one or not, and I decided against it.

I have a friend who is an educational psychologist and she was very against them and a teacher friend who is the same.

The problem is, people say " My child is very good at this and that and has a good imagination" you never really know what would they be like if they had not had the gadget.

As far as I am aware these early years are crucial to all sorts of development and unless there are SN or other issues, there is no need for children this young to have these tablets. Its purely for fun. They back aDD OR back up education but they are not needed in any way shape or form.

Most DC without tablets have access to lap tops, and smart phones anyway.

After long and painful deliberation I had decided to hold off getting my DD a tablet, I know its what she really wants, but I feel lots of things would be pushed aside for it that I do not want to be.

I do not think when she is older she will look back and accuse me of being a bad mother for holding out one or two more years!

Even with a film on in our house my DD is racing around, but with tablets I think they are pretty much sedentry.

But Elf if the child is properly supervised and has a restricted amount of time on the gadget then they really have no choice but to get up and do other things do they?
I mentioned my DS in my pp, he plays a sport at a fairly high level. He hopes next year to get try outs to take it to the next level so he'll be training all Winter to bring himself up to the required standard. It's not something he can train for indoors, mainly because we've banned him from bowling down the hallway (the front door can't stand the pressure), and with it being quite weather dependant he has to practice at certain times. His spending an hour on Minecraft in the evening will have no bearing on how good his cricket is.
Equally DD spending some time watching Youtube or playing on an app will have very little affect on her clarinet practice if she does that first.
It's not the gadget, it's how it's controlled by the parents.

You know that 'technology' isn't just computers and such like. An abacus is technology (just older technology). So is a fork (it's a technological device for eating, just a very long established one). Technology doesn't just apply to stuff that came about after you were born.

However, these type of threads are never actually a real question. They're generally about the assertion of superior parenting dressed up as a question. For that reason alone I'd say you are being unreasonable (I don't actually care if you give your children only sticks and lentils to play with or every electronic device you can get your hands on).

But Elf if the child is properly supervised and has a restricted amount of time on the gadget then they really have no choice but to get up and do other things do they?

that you can take the thing off them and they will go and do something else

Dobbie

I mentioned all the usual arguments to my friend, restricted time, not allowed in bedrooms. She is not an expert but as an educational psychologist she would not buy one for her DC, and after talking to teacher who shared same views I decided to hold off for another year.

There are lots of good reasons why I wanted to get one for my DD including a boring and long car journey every single day. I was told its good for children to be bored occasionally, that they do not get enough chance to simply "think" and that we have more information thrown at us than Renaissance man had in a life time.

I am just telling OP my decisions on holding back on an pad per see and why.

Ok, I actually kind of do know how "that child would turn out if they didnt have the gadget"

Dd and ds1 did not have gadgets at age 8. Actually they had a very old ps1 and a few games. They are now 15 and 14

Ds2 had, at 8 an iPod touch, a third share in an iPad and a DS.

No difference at all.

They all had the same level of concentration, the same imagination, the same ability to play on their own, all liked drawing, singing, bike riding, sports.

I honestly think that of course if an 8 year old has no interest in tech, then fair enough. But the world moves on.

Back when I was a teenager we didnt have Internet access, mobile phones, social networking, texting, bloody Instagram. But things develop and there's no point pretending otherwise and feeling superior because you do not allow your child to use it.

My DCs use the Internet for 90% of their homework.
I don't tell them they can't do that because it is commonplace and as they get older and go out to work they are going to need to use done form of tech at some point.

There are no brownie points for not allowing your DC to use this stuff. No, of course you are not holding them back by not having an iPad at 6.
But the reality is, the world is much more centered around technology now and that is not going to change.

Arbitruy.

I think your wrong, I think OP is just feeling the pressure to buy the big thing this xmas which is the Hudl or similar.

We have been feeling the pressure too, and I have already brought xmas. To add this massive present on top would be a huge extravagance for us. And I am not sure how I could top it next year. My heart would love to really make her xmas and buy one, I know out of everything its the thing she would love the most, if we go to any place where innotabs are on display etc she will go run straight to them. My head knows its right to hold off.

Re Technology etc....There was a good article someone linked recently to a BBC thing saying the best toys - are the ones where there are no limits, there was a special terms, but I think they meant something like a plain doll that could become many in carnations was better than say a buzz lightyear figure who would only be Buzz Lightyear,

or a spoon that could become a wand, a sword, a person, was better than an actual sword....

So a fork, could become many things whereas a game on an hudl, could not.

YABU if you are deliberately excluding her from technology and plan to keep that up. It will make her the odd one out eventually. Also, she will miss out on some great educational software - lots encouraging massive creativity (eg the Brushes app on an ipad for painting as used by David Hockney) and mind stretching. But you are not depriving her.

I am another who wonders why it's all or nothing for technology - love it or hate it. It is largely a medium for gaining access to information, just like books are. Some books are great, some are not worth the paper they are written on. Software is just the same.

Lego and books are great toys. So too are ipads. If I had to make a choice, not sure which way I would go tbh but probably I would opt for the ipad as you can put books onto it. OTOH lego is my favourite toy ever!