Children watching Peppa Pig on phones in restaurant

[SilverLeafClover]

We went for lunch with friends yesterday at the Fifteen restaurant near Newquay. I only mention the place because it has an amazing view of the beach and the sea, which made it all the more surprising that as soon as we sat down, my friend and her husband handed their children (both NT, aged 4 and 6) two phones. For the duration of the meal, the children sat zombie-like and watched Peppa Pig on the screens.

I will admit, I judged.

The parents did not speak to their children and the children were just glued to the screens. My three children aged 8, 5, 3 are not angels but managed to sit through a short meal (main course and then ice cream, no staters, no coffees) without needing screens. I talked to my adult friends and kept an eye on my children, pointing out stuff that was happening outside, large boats passing by, surfers, dogs etc.

Am I am a Luddite? Or am I right to think unlimited access to screens during a meal out is not right?

I don't get the sn arguments. The op has said that the children have no sn and I can well believe that. The majority of children do not have sn so the majority of children you see sat glued to devices do not have sn.
One of my dc has asd and I severely restrict screen time. I feel that he has learned to cope with social situations and sensory challenges better by being exposed to them and coming up with strategies that help whilst remaining involved rather than shutting off altogether. I understand there are different views on this and that some kids with severe needs may need a device to be able to access certain situations at all. But asd doesn't automatically equal needs an Ipad to survive.
Maybe this was a one off for the ops friends and they don't usually overuse screens. It's still bloody weird behaviour not to encourage your kids to socialise with the other children there or even speak to them at all for the whole meal. And I think most of the people on here would actually judge that. Anyone who says they don't make judgements on what they see is lying and judging the op negatively for judging

I do judge. I judge smug santimonious parents the most though. I judge people who come on parenting forums just to make other people feel shit about their parenting choices.

I judge posters who call other posters shit and lazy parents.

I save my biggest judgement for people who eat at St Jamie's.

And to the people sniping at the op about commenting to her dc about boats etc. That's not gold medal parenting. It's completely normal behaviour to interact with everyone you are eating with and not treat the dc like an inconvenience you had to drag along to your adult only event.
The op said she chatted plenty to her friends too but some are saying that they would be irritated by her chatting to her children? I'd actually feel really uncomfortable having meal with people who had brought their children but were ignoring them. If 2 families get together with their respective children its not adult time. By all means chat away but you need to consider things like moderating your language and including your kids. If you want an adult meal then get a sitter and have one. Bringing your kids along and ignoring them is a shitty thing to do.

You don't get that a discussion has evolved and that all those commenting are speaking from their experience and giving their own opinion of what they think of children on screens in restaurants in general? And that people are giving their own experiences of why it may be acceptable and why they shouldn't rush to judge? I don't get how you don't get that tbh.

I might give my kids screens in restaurants but I tell you something I don't do; I don't go onto public forums and slag my friends off and invite thousands to others to slag them off too. No, I would never do that.

And the comments about people who don't use screens having no consideration for other diners, snipes about the op talking to her kids about the normal things you talk to kids about being irritating or performance parenting. Suggesting that the other kids were probably given screens because they don't like her children/they are awful company. They weren't parenting judgements or designed to make anyone feel bad at all were they!

If the op was that concerned about her friends children why did she not speak to the children herself and try to involve them? Did she ask them any direct questions? Or have I missed that?

They're in response to sneery judgment and seemingly an inability to think outside posters own narrow sphere. You attack people's parenting choices and you may get equally attacking responses in return. I have never seen any thread saying that screens are the way forward and we should ALL be using them to keep our kids quiet, ever. Seen plenty like this one though. Makes people defensive. Were we all supposed to go "OMG! You're right I am SUCH a shit, lazy parent, I will never do it again"?

It's an anonymous forum. Can't speak for the op but if I was posting this I would have changed a lot of details to keep it anonymous while keeping the gist the same (the location - might not even be Jamie's or Newquay but somewhere else with a nice view). The 'friends' may be relatives, the number of kids, the day it happened etc. Maybe it was silent Paw Patrol instead of Peppa?
People are sat in restaurants up and down the country right now with their kids staring zombified at screens so it would hardly be identifiable. So who exactly is effected if the op discusses it on here?

I do hope that some people who do overuse screens might have a look at the research after reading a thread like this if they aren't aware of the harm it can do.

As you say, you cannot speak for the OP, so you cannot say any details have been changed, that's just what you'd do, so I am afraid I see little point in entering a discussion based on some premise you've created to justify the rather shit action of slagging friends that you like enough to go for a meal with on a public forum.

I will continue to allow my children to use screens as much as they need to in common with many others on this thread. I doubt few posters will change what they do because most of them sound like they're working with what they've got to keep life running as smoothly as possible for their personal situation.

But most kids don't NEED them. And overuse can be harmful. At best every social occasion an nt child spends absorbed in an Ipad is one where they are being denied the chance to learn how to entertain themselves and make waiting easier, develop social skills etc. So every time you get it out you are increasing the 'need' for it in future. And also it becomes expected hence tantrums which parents placate with screens. That's how they become overused.

But most kids don't NEED them.
You are quite right DD4 doesn't need to go on my phone ever. But sometimes I need her to just so i can have 15 mins without her telling me all the lovely little things that have just popped into her head.
She is lovely, i adore her. But honestly, sometimes i really really do need her to shut up!

And a 4 yr old is not capable of sitting quietly for a few minutes when asked? That is a problem (and a common one nowdays) and not one that will be solved by her never having to entertain herself without a screen in front of her.

I literally don't know a single person who uses screens in a problematic way with their children. I really don't. I don't see slack jawed children gazing mindlessly at iPads. My DD mostly does jigsaws and drawing on it, my DS writes scripts and edits mini movies he makes and watches videos related to his interests obsessions. I think much of the problem is in the eye of the judgmental clueless beholder.

MsGameandWatch Fri 14-Apr-17 14:09:49

Yes indeed, since time immemorial, until the brave new dawn of iPads and mobile phones, every single human with children cowered in their homes too terrified to leave.

Not what I was saying at all

Exactly what you argued, and look at you pedantically pointing out a mistake of ONE letter...what letter? The A of the all or the E of the We?

Do feel free to ignore anything further you (I) post after that. I'll take my near 30 year career and experience in supporting children and young people with social, physical, and developmental, needs, and FOTTFSOF. I get that you're fighting your own battle for the benefit of your children, as we all do in our clumsy and stumbling way.

The OP stated a POV that never mentioned non NT children. I don't want to fight with you, Ms...and can feel your cry of it's not fair from here (it's not, I agree).

In my late teens I was changing, with total care and respect, the pads of young physically disabled adults every day. My personal code was to assist each person to the same (high) standards I hoped would be afforded to a relative of my own.

It's a long way from NT children being handed a mobile phone/ipad to amuse them, while their parents chat and eat unencumbered from the demands of hangry, SM aware, offspring.

Go back and check your own posts for where you corrected another poster. I didn't bother to read the read the rest of your rant.

And a 4 yr old is not capable of sitting quietly for a few minutes when asked?
Not reliably no. But as she's not your child @TheRealPooTroll what do you care?

Why should a 4 year old have to sit quietly and bored out of their mind? I spent my childhood reading, if I was waiting for a bus I was reading, if I was sitting on the beach I was reading, if I was bored listening to the adults round me I was reading. If I didn't have a book I would be reading labels, trying to read the newspaper of the man sitting across the way or studying a menu to the point I could recite it. People are different, maybe my mothers friends went home and said I was rude because I didn't want to talk drivel to their kids who were interested in pop music or sport and I wasn't. It doesn't seem to have done my any harm in life and I suspect the same will be true of these children. You don't have to practice being bored, it comes quite easily and naturally to anyone with an enquiring mind.

Same Granny. Exactly the same - reading wrappers, signs, random pamphlets. My ex SIL from the age of about 12 onwards never went anywhere without a book. I wasn't allowed to do that. The mind seeks stimulus at times of boredom. It's down to the parent how or if they want to provide that and how.

Why should kids have to be bored? Because being able to just sit and be for a few minutes is a good skill to have. Because being bored encourages kids to be creative? What's wrong with looking out of a window and using your imagination. Kids aren't bored for long.
7 hrs a day is the average amount of time kids today spend staring at screens. That's phones, tvs. Ipads etc and not including the time older children spend on computers at school/doing homework. That is 7 hrs a day kids are typically not paying attention to what is going on around them which is how they learn. This adversely affects brain development - particularly in very young children. I have seen the effects of this in primary schools.
So no it doesn't directly affect me or my family if it's not my kids. But it's still sad. Do you not care about things that don't directly affect you/your family?

I was going to answer you at length but my kids have just asked to go down to the beach and climb the rocks that are there and take some photos. We will probably be down there a couple of hours. Somehow despite their supposedly problematic iPad usage they've managed to put them down and request that we do this, just like every other day that we get out and about. We are a very active family, everyone comments on it, how they did not know where I get the energy to do what I do with them as a single parent. Today though at lunch I have no doubt we were judged massively given how this thread has gone. I might come back and post a lovely photo of the beach later...taken on the iPhone obviously

What does NT mean?