and precious?

[Decanter]

As much as I can, I prevent my DCs from seeing news that may disturb or scare them, and that they do not NEED to see. E.g. I would tell (if asked, tbh) them in age appropriate terms about terror attacks, or refugee crises, or perhaps a prominent person's death but not about isolated murders etc. We do not read newspapers and never buy them or have them at home, and I am as careful as I can be about them seeing tabloid and trashy magazine covers (take a break) etc. when we are out. They are 4 and 7.

DD(7) told me today that she and a schoolfriend read about a "baby called Liam who was strangled and died". She was referring to the horrific case of little Liam Fee. Turns out her school provided the newspapers for them to cut bits out of etc. for craft.

I am a supporter of Child Eyes, the charity which campaigns for the censorship of sexualised images and headlines, and I believe that a young child reading stories of children being murdered are potentially as scary and anxiety-provoking to a young child.

Would I be U and precious, if I asked the school not to use newspaper for this type of activity?

You can't place them in a bubble. Your oldest will be in High School in 4 years!!

I used to be a primary teacher and whilst we didn't go so far as to cut out articles (not enough time!), we only used the broadsheets as the headlines and articles are, on the whole, much less sensationalist and less likely to catch a child's eye. I think my children's school does the same.

YANBU I wouldn't want my eldest knowing about children dying in such a violent way. She is very concerned about crime and violence anyway, that would give her nightmares for weeks. It upsets me and I'm an adult.

I protect my child as best I can from the news too. We talk things through in a way I can deliver it appropriately for her age (nearly 6).

For those saying 'what about if she hears it from friends?' I think that's a bit weird to use as an excuse to over expose children to the media. A conversation in the playground is hardly the same as reading a news article intended for adults, and the images in papers and on TV can be quite startling.

I dont think children can compartmentalise like adults can, or think rationally about acceptable risks. The news affects them differently.

It's really hard to get rid of stuff like this out of newspapers prior to doing craft activities in school. I have tried myself - after you've removed the inappropriate images, then removed the inappropriate news content, you're not left with very much.

Add into that the fact you need a lot of (free) newspaper for craft activities and you can see the problem.

The thing is, that for all the best will in the world, your child is going to see or hear about the more difficult aspects of the world. We all accept that you can't say 'oh they can't have sex until 16, so that's when we'll have the talk'. We all know that children are much younger when they need that information. Likewise, you can't hide all evidence of the news until they are of age. Guiding them through the understanding of that is the job of parents and teachers.

The morning after 9/11 (it was overnight news here in Australia), the first thing said in my classroom the next morning when I was about to take attendance was 'terriers blew up a plane bomb and wiped out New York City, BOOM!'. Followed by various other pieces of information, some correct, some sensationalist and some downright racist or incorrect. It HAD to be dealt with in the classroom at that point. I can't send Sally out because her mum doesn't want her to hear about bad things on the news, because Sally has already head the first comments, and now she needs to hear the correct information in an age appropriate way.

. A conversation in the playground is hardly the same as reading a news article intended for adults, and the images in papers and on TV can be quite startling.

ime what kids say in the playground can be far more sensationalist than the newspapers. Especially when they are young and haven't fully understood it.

You can't hide it from kids completely. The school can't go through every paper and take our everything that every single parent may find offensive.

The OP could be proactive. Buy newspapers. Edit them and donate to the school.

But it sounds very much like she wants the school to expend more time (which they don't have) because of her parenting choices.

You are being a bit precious....but then again I kind of understand it!
My husband is in the military, and we live in a military community. Last year my friend's husband was deployed overseas. My DD and I were over at their house for a play date, and the lunchtime news came on the tv. None other than "Jihadi John" was there on the tv. My friend's 6 year old piped up and said "bad men like that want to kill my daddy" was the most heartbreaking thing I've ever heard. Turns out he had over heard some of the older military children talking at the bus stop. My friend sat him down and told him that yes that is a very bad man on the telly, but daddy is very good at his job, and the bad people would have a big struggle on their hands if they wanted to hurt daddy and his friends.
I think it is right to shield children from sensitive subjects in the news and explain in age appropriate terms if and when they ask.

Why not keep them in a bubble?

It's not possible, stuff seeps through. I was brought up in a bubble and struggled enormously when the truth about the world came out. You can't stop children hearing about things once they go to school, by 9/10 I had heard about all the bad things (sexual abuse, very young sexual activity, horrible crimes) my parents were protecting me from, but from the mouths of other children and this sent my mind into over-activity.

The difference now is the availability of horrific images and I do keep these away from children to some extent, as I do from myself if I don't feel up to seeing horrible things last thing at night.

I think your child will be particularly bothered about what she sees BECAUSE you have shielded her so strictly, not in spite of it.

Children who are naturally curious, who are taught properly about the world around them, who have parents that explain and interpret and help them to understand things like headlines and news stories....these children are not upset or anxious about such stories. The ones who are not prepared, whose parents think they aren't aware and so can't help them process the new informations....these are the children who are upset.

You have it arseways, in a nutshell.

Tigger :o

Obviously the news can be very upsetting, but watching it WITH your parents, for example, when they are there to help explain things to you, makes it less scary.

Funnily enough, the "horrific" things that stick with me from childhood, with one exception, are all things I read or saw in fiction (e.g. TV drama) or stuff friends told me.

OP, do your kids know that you follow the news? I'm just wondering, if you don't get newspapers or have the news on when they're around, do they know that you're a good person to ask about this stuff? I'm thinking of the older one, I'm sure the younger one thinks you know everything :)

Thank you OP

DH agrees about the children's news subscription being a good idea. I'm torn between The Week Junior, First News and something I only just heard of called Newsademic.

I have to say as a primary school teacher, I wouldn't have used that bit of the news paper. The financial times is ideal for art and crafts, or better still a large pvc sheet. I do always check for any rudies too!!!

I seriously used to go through the newspapers before art lessons removing all the page 3 pictures.
But news items?
You could send in multiple copies of The Financial Times, very good absorbency too, excellent for papier mache.

Decanter I feel the same as you about my 7 year old DS he does not need to hear constant news about children being killed. I switch the news off around him for now where I can. When we were kids things like that were just on the 10 O clock news when we were in bed. Channels like SKy sensationalise bad news as much as possible. That might make me precious but I don't care

I really do think that there is an air of parents being all "right on" about this kind of stuff, and it baffles me. I was a bit quick to nearly accept that I was BU at the beginning of this thread, but have given it a lot of thought and I really do think it's an issue. Bloody hell they are only kids for 5 minutes, why on earth would any parent think children being violently murdered by their parents is acceptable reading fodder at 7?! As for all the posters replying "what about politics, what about their friends, why are you molly coddling them?" , I think most of them are a wee bit goady tbh as I made it clear in my OP that we are not anti-news, and that we do educate our kids on current affairs which are age appropriate. There is an acceptance of the damage that can be done when young kids are exposed to porn etc, I don't understand why there isn't more of an uproar about this type of sensationalistic journalism. Never mind being precious she might have a nightmare etc., responses would be interesting if 5 years down the line she brutally murders another kid due in part to too-young exposure to graphic violent incidents.
Would you all let your 7 year olds watch a movie where a child is violently murdered by a parent? No? Why?

You have made some good points Decanter
I've been pondering on your post a bit too.
I posted earlier (yesterday) & although l didn't disagree. I now agree.
I work in a school, we don't have any newspapers at the moment - l will be reminded of this when we do though.

Thanks nanette, hopefully DCs school will feel the same

I shield my DCs from the news. Not in supermarkets etc but if it comes on in the car I turn the radio down, we watch it in the evenings when they are in bed and I turn the newspaper over at home so they don't take any notice of the front headlines. I don't see why they need to be exposed to the horrors that are regularly on the news. I don't really want to explain what a paedophile is just yet. Other stuff I would explain but there is no way to know what's coming up so I don't expose them to it. DS does watch Newsround on CBBC and really likes it. I didn't know they did newspapers for children so I have just signed up to First News to see what that's like (first 3 editions for £1). DS will probably like that as he tends to like real life stuff.

I personally wouldn't go in to the school though. Although if my child had mentioned the particular story you are talking about and it seemed to be bothering them then I may mention it as the teacher may not have even thought anything about it.

no, yanbu, a 7 year old doesn't need to know all the horrors of the world. I wouldn't let a child watch the TV news, myself.
But it is asking a lot of the school to edit every newspaper they use for craft etc

Are you expecting the school to go through the newspapers and remove any articles that are unsuitable for 8 year olds?
There would be nothing left!

Totally agree with you OP.

Yes awful things happen, no we can't shelter our DC from everything but we can make sure they encounter these things in a way that won't damage them - explain in m age appropriate fashion. Though to be honest I wouldn't want my DC exposed to that kind of story - let alone if it was there in black and white in detail.

When I was young - about 11 so older than your DC - I was properly traumatised by the news of some high profile murders of children. I wish I hadn't found out about it. It took me years to sleep alone - literally years.

YANBU.

I'm mid-thirties & stopped reading most of the news 4 years ago & I stopped watching it totally. It's harrowing & I can't cope with the daily onslaught of horror.

Yes it's the real world. Yes I'm a grown up. No I wouldn't let my DC see any of it. We did NOT have 24/7 news when I was growing up. The news was for grown ups. I distinctly remember that.