AIBU that reducing under 5s screen time is way more complicated than just issuing guidelines?

[Lovelygreenpen]

This guidance is welcome. We need to know facts and risks to make informed choices. But choices often aren’t made entirely freely. Think about healthy eating and exercise guidance and how complicated these can be to follow due to costs and time.

How would following this under 1 hour rule change your daily routine?
Most parents need to work all the hours with COLC and decades of rising housing costs. working life also often expands to expect parents to be in contact from home outside of paid work hours.
How are busy parents supposed to manage? How are solo working parents specifically supposed to manage? Any family with more than one child?
And what about the screens used in childcare settings?
What are the responsibilities of the makers of the crazy overstimulating content for babies and kids?

We know women often have to do more domestic labour than men, even where they live with a male partner. Also, that the makers of the content aimed at kids specifically employ addictive techniques.

So how is this pressured wider environment going to change to make this recommendation more realistic?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1d936n7445o

I was at a restaurant the other day and a family came in that appeared to be 2 grandparents, 2 parents and a fairly young baby -I'd guess no more than 7 or 8 months old.

They put the baby in a high chair where he was perfectly happily looking about.
After 5 minutes, one of the adults got out a tablet, which played annoying music and had something with flashy lights and put it in the front of the baby to look at and listen to.

There was literally no reason for this (and it was disruptive to other restaurant goers). But the parents did it anyway.
And I bet by the time that child is 3, the parents will be saying that screens are a necessity and it wasn't as easy as just not to give them one.

I think it is doable. DH and I work full time. This morning I was wasting breakfast while my 5 year old played with his cars/trains and we had a little chat. He might watch a Disney film on a Saturday afternoon or a Friday when he’s back from school but otherwise we’ll set him up with toys if we’ve things to do or get him to ‘help’

He is likely neurodivergent and we find that too much screen time impacts his behaviour and sleep so we’ve just naturally kept it as a treat. At meal times if we’re out we might take his colouring book and a car or train and he will play and chat

Books, toys or an audio story?

"the mistake we're all making is to eradicate boredom in children" absolutely this, @FinallyMummy . When children are bored it is ok, they become more creative. I love your story of your son doing his shop and scan! Cute!

I think that you’re taking this too seriously Op. It’s guidelines not the law and the parents who should take note will be the ones who won’t give a fuck.
There are primary school students who use social media and this stems from access to screens much younger. Don’t you agree that kids in buggies on screens was always going to lead to bad consequences later?

Not all content is equal. If your child watches quality content then you should chill. It’s the kids whose attention spans are being zapped with YT and SM style short videos who need looking out for but those guidelines don’t have any effect on those households.

While you have given some examples of exceptions, most kids are given screens to make their parents lives easier (that includes me btw) . Kids don’t need their parents entertaining them 24 hours a day and I suspect that kids occupy themselves much less than in the past. Many parents will see the answer as giving a screen but these are so addictive that kids learn that screens are how you occupy yourself. Tech leaders don’t allow their kids online for very long at all. Steve Jobs’ kids famously only had like 30 mins a day on smartphones until they were 16 because they know that it’s a slippery slope of addiction. Yet us mere mortals have created a world where our children’s eyeballs make more money for the tech billionaires. That’s often an addiction for life considering how many parents are glued to phones too.

Yes, some of those parents will be using phones for practical reasons like banking, photographs and maps but phones are addictive and it’s a lot easier to help our kids not be addicted if they aren’t given so much access in the early years.

People have known lots of screen time is bad for years - even before the advent of every household having multiple screens, iPads, mobile phones etc.

I can’t see how further government advice makes any difference - the ‘problem’ kids left all day unsupervised in front of screens will still do so. The problem with the parenting is deeper than them not knowing it’s a negative.

My own rules - only one TV we all use. I have an iPad but it’s only to be used by kids when travelling. No YouTube kids as I think the programmes are mad.

I find old fashioned live tv is best - they eventually would get bored anyway (or it be something they dislike), and no hyper-fixating on one thing (as you can with eg paw patrol on Netflix with 1000 episodes).

I think an hour a day is an ok guideline though - there’s not much reason to be watching more than that. In the morning it is surely avoidable, and then in the evening that’s probably a third of their time before bed.

Even then, 'tv' can mean different things. My kids don't really use tablets, but our tv is a smart one (they pretty much all are now, right?) which means they can use Youtube on it - and we've had to introduce new boundaries around that, because I'm happy for them to watch tv for an hour before dinner, but not for that hour to be absolute nonsense or covert advertising. On the other hand, my 8 year old uses YouTube to watch genuinely interesting and educational content, so I don't want to remove the app from the TV altogether, so now we've agreed on some YouTube channels that he can watch, with anything other than that us needing to agree to. Which is all more things that as a parent you need to monitor and intervene over - and lots of people clearly aren't and may well think it's ok because their kid is just 'watching tv'. I think some people think that if you're using YouTube kids it sort of does that for you - it absolutely does not.

Parents who struggle with this should ask their mums and grandmas what they used to do. We never had tv at breakfast - just the radio or a kids cassette tape of songs. When home they would play with the toys. I found I had to put up with mess when they were little but that was a small price to pay really. We always had loads of books in the house, many from charity shops. My children used to watch the night garden before their bath. They would probably watch about half an hour in the afternoon but that definitely wasn’t every day. They never had a tablet or mobile.

This.
It's nothing new that parents have busy lives. What is new in the last 15-20 years is parents addiction to screens and the use of screens to control very small children.
Parents have always worked and always been busy, families were usually larger in the past. Parenting without screens takes a little more imagination and effort.

Removing screens from children who are already addicted is hard but not impossible. You have to put something else in it's place and that is play. My children were born in the late 90s and didn't encounter screens other than TV until they were about 10. They played with each other, with toys and with friends.
As a parent it was often necessary to direct their play, give them ideas, play with them, set up toys or projects, so yes much more input from the parent.
I wonder if the trend for only children makes this more difficult?

Restaurants were quite hard work especially as mine were never interested in colouring. It meant a constant effort to engage, play word games, entertain while at the table.

If children wait until they are older before encountering technology they will not miss out and will gain far more in social skills.

The OP's posts all sound AI generated?

“Kids in public areas like buses, trains or NHS waiting rooms are always frowned on for making any noise or being active. I see their parents hand their phones over on low volume to help their kids sit still and be quiet, for the sake of other people’s reactions.”

You know what I used to do to keep my kids quiet in public? Take along a few small toys/books to keep them occupied. Talk to them about what we could see around us and make our own little games (reminding them to use a quiet voice because there a lot of people etc).

They’re only teenagers now so this wasn’t the ‘olden days’. Of course, sticking them
in front of a screen is a lot easier but it’s the lazy option.

This is probably going to sound really smug but I’m a solo parent to a toddler with a full time job and my closest family live over an hour away. She watches one episode of a Julia Fonaldson adaptation every week or two and that’s it. When I need to cook or (occasionally!) clean she plays with toys in the living room and I look in on her every few minutes or she’s under my feet in the kitchen. My down time is mostly when she’s in bed.

This. I think a bit of calm tv is okay but the loud, brightly coloured addictive nature of phones and tablets should be nowhere near a child. I have a friend who has never given her 5 year old access and he plays, reads, does all the things we did as children when phones and tablets weren’t a thing. It’s doable.

I used to be on the fence about the harms of phones etc but I see how addicted adults are (myself included). If it affects adults that way imagine what it does to a child’s developing brain…

A book or a solitary sensory activity like playdough, colouring, swinging, or spinning int he playground would do a much better job at regulating emotions.

This. I used to teach mine how to behave in a waiting room, I'd take a toy or a book. Most waiting rooms have children's toys, I've found, but it's easy to have something in your bag. You're teaching them self management as well, and appropriate behaviour.

Parents have to parent. The government aren't there in the house with you and the kids. Parents have to make choices and live with the consequences. That's life 🤷

I own up - it's affected my concentration! I had to make sure I still read books!

This, and that was less than a generation ago!

Before cutbacks, Sure Start was an excellent programme, providing actual practical support for families with young children.

If the government put more funding into that, it would be likely to have a knock-on effect on reducing screen time.

Because the parents are on their phones instead of parenting

It’s guidance. Like healthy eating, exercise etc. Arguably something to work towards rather than simply say, no, not possible.

I also think that overuse of screens decreases attention span which makes life at school etc harder. While it’s hard to go cold turkey, the answer isn’t more screen time to decompress.

I don’t think that kids today are expected to be quieter in public than kids before smartphones were invented. It is hard keeping kids occupied in places like restaurants and GP waiting rooms but it’s not good for children. I noticed OP that you added the bit about volume being on low too. That’s antisocial and contributes to people growing up and not caring about other people’s feelings as long as they aren’t inconvenienced.

This is it. I am fed up of the amount of quite frankly crap parenting that goes on and the apologists who make every excuse under the sun for these people. I think we need to start shaming this stuff a lot more rather than blaming the government or wider society. If your parenting is screwing up your children's lives then it should be your number one priority to sort this out. Buy a banana instead of a chocolate bar (the banana costs less). Stop using screens as a baby sitter. Help your child with the basics of education and gaining independence including toilet training and speech. If you can't do this without heavy government intervention then quite frankly you shouldn't be having children in the first place

I agree 100%, I think you’re damned if you do or damned if you don’t with screens in those environments. It’ll be either she’s got her child on a screen/can she not keep her child quiet.
I had a thread last year (scared to mention) and I said if I’d had my DD sitting on an iPad, tablet, this wouldn’t have happened as she’d have been quiet/sitting etc. I had multiple replies saying if that’s my level of judgment as a parent, crass remarks. I was meaning whatever you do it won’t be good enough and I think those comments showed that.

We also don't have screens in waiting rooms etc., and did exactly this when mine were younger (they're young primary now). I would say that I find people's tolerance for even very quiet talking, such as me reading a book to them, or for the fact that they are learning, and so sometimes might suddenly be loud (but immediately shushed) to be... very variable, and I pretty regularly was made to feel that we were a bother just existing (however, I would also note that I was quite regularly praised by strangers in places like cafes for not having them on screens and interacting instead - which I always found well-intentioned but depressing!).

I think there is actually some impact from screens being so widespread, in that people are now less tolerant of the alternative. There were times when my kids were the only ones not just on a phone, and some people made it very clear that they considered me pretty selfish to not be doing the same. To be clear, I have never allowed my children to walk around in those environments, or to talk above normal volume - but I think that because screens make silent children possible, a lot of people resent that not being the case.

Again - I know I keep banging on about this - being forced into it is easier in some ways. We're churchgoers and this meant my children from the off got used to an environment where they needed to be quiet, but also in an environment where I found that people were very, very understanding of the fact is was something they were still learning. I do think it made a big difference.

“I think you’re damned if you do or damned if you don’t with screens in those environments. It’ll be either she’s got her child on a screen/can she not keep her child quiet.”

There’s a third way (that parents had no choice but to use before the invention of smartphones) that involves interacting with your child, providing your own entertainment eg books/toys, teaching them how to keep their voice low when there are people around.