to feel a bit patronised by the "Talk to your Child" campaign to get me to buy a rear facing buggy

[witchandchips]

Don't get me wrong, I have wasted many hours searching for such a thing that is affordable and non wanky + the premise of the campaign makes sense. But it is the judgy judgy judgy notes of the articles and the complete apparrent dismissal of issues like needing to get on the bus or having to wheel two under two into shops that get my goat, It seems just another stick for the daily mail to beat us by.

poppy34- if you have older children, 2 hours is standard...

The research does not fit any of the funding charities criteria as laid out in the link. Shame really as the objectives of the charity actually seem quite good.

When mine were babies (many many years ago) I had a McClaren Superdreamer. You could take the seat off and face it either forwards or backwards, and either way, it was possible to fold it one-handed whilst clutching the baby in the other arm.

It wasn't too heavy to heave on and off the bus or train, and you could recline the baby/toddler in it whether they were facing forwards or back.

It sounds like this antique is what's needed nowadays - lol!

whos BB?

Soooo...babies that are rear-facing sleep more. How is that conducive to talking to them and developing their speech?

i agree sunny

chequers- just another example of what a stupid bit of reserach this is. seriously, the woman from dundee university could barely string 2 sentences together on the radio!

i think this got so much coverage precisely because it would get people thinking- NOT because there's any validity in the argument.

My aunt is an optician and says that traveling forward is important for eye/brain development.

My aunt is an optician and says that traveling forward is important for eye/brain development.

BB = Big Brother. Bullshit baffles - always amazes me when the govt wants to divert attention away from the main topic ie Baby P, and it's total failings, it will introduce something new to deflect attention. Maybe I'm wrong?

fair enough beforesunrise - but aren't they enjoying the view, chirruping to you etc (for reasons stefka says). Kids I see out and about seem to be quite happily looking about, playing with their toys or talking - I admit that eye contact is lost but not necessarily interaction

I was really cross about the article in the Guardian on Saturday. I have a MacLaren. DS gets chatted to plenty by all the significant adults in his life. A lot of his buggy journeys are quite short, a few minutes walk, if we're on the bus and we're lucky one or both of us will get to sit sideways on to him. If he's in there for as much as two hours (occasionally that may be the case) he's asleep for a lot of it. And I don't believe that someone who keeps waving at people in the street or singing to himself in his buggy is stressed.

Think the whole 'children in forward facing buggies are neglected' line is daft, personally. I used to talk to ds all the time to reassure him I was there, when he was tiny, and just for the hell of it when he was older. He was never unhappy in his buggy.

And I've never said 'honey, are you OK' to him - sounds like someone talking to a partner, not a child!

Fine, get manufacturers to make a wider variety of buggies if you want, but you don't need to patronise parents.

gawd...yet another thing i did wrong

ds and dd have no hope

maclaren are redoing the superdreamer. will find the link.

its gonna be pricey though

I knew it wodl be - another bloody excuse to screw every last penny out of naive concerned parents.

I really have to leave this now don't I? I am getting far too upset considering mine are closer to needing buggies for their own children than themselves

I don't get it, is that going to be backward facing? What on earth are they mucking about with strollometers and lights for, why don't they just make something cheap and light?

Thanks misdee - I've had a quick look at that link - and I can't help wondering why a buggy needs a console in the handle, or LED lights??

Why can't buggy manufacturers realise that what most parents want (in my opinion, at least) is a relatively inexpensive, reliable, tough buggy that does the things that they need it to do - ie, different positions for baby/toddler, rain protection, ease of folding/unfolding, not too heavy or bulky when folded, swivel wheels at the front, shopping tray/net underneath......

i know. its too 'flash' for my liking. but its based on the original superdreamer.

i tink its more for the american market though. have found the price tag $900

This is nothing to do with 'the government' and absolutely nothing at all to do with baby P!

"There was something else: babies in buggies that face-in are twice as likely to be sleeping, than if they are facing away"

mabanana-i agree.i think people just want to mention baby p on every single thread.

Agree this is just guilt-trip. Personally I value DD's twice daily 15min bursts of forward-facing buggy time as precious respite when I don't have to talk to her, as she is entertained by the view.

heaven forbid I should have brief periods in the day when I am not tirelessly striving to improve her vocabulary...

(and my poor neglected DD was talking in sentences by 18mth )

Just read this bit from the report in the Guardian:
"To prove Attenborough's point, Thirza Ashelford, the principal of Norland College for nannies, has made a film of a 25-minute buggy journey, from a child's point of view. "It is mind-numbing in its boringness and compelling in its ghastliness. .."

Erm, well if a nanny is telling us it it true then I guess it must be .

I think we have had our fill now of nannies telling us how to be mothers.