To think it's ok to let 3 month old 'watch' tv?

[McSnail]

My three month old child is mesmerised by the images on tv - it can keep her occupied for half hour slots, which is an absolute godsend. It means that I can do things like go for a wee, make a cup of tea, get dressed and clean the top layer of filth from the tip that my flat has become since having a baby (you know how it is)

Anyway - bloke got all pissed off today about this (he generally thinks tv is the devil, but it doesn't stop him watching it when there's something on that HE likes)

Muttered something about how he doesn't want to poison her with 'that shite' - yes, it was 'Loose Women' so he does have a point - but he's not the one who spends hours entertaining and breastfeeding her..

I appreciated your posts gonnabehappy, thank you. My favourite BBC reported research finding of late was this past summer's report that massage doesn't make you feel better.

I also find myself leaping for the radio dial to turn off news in the presence of dc, as most of it seems to be murder and child abuse.

I do find the very current tv/media research to be very good.

Do you have a link to the research criticism you mentioned?

gonnabehappy - evacuation was an absolute disaster for the generation who underwent it...there is masses of research that shows long term ill-effects on mental and physical health. This does not mean that every individual evacuee was damaged - for some it may even have been a good thing, or at least neither positive nor negative. But on the whole, it was a dreadful policy with dreadful, long-lasting effects...and on the whole, the children whose parents decided to come and fetch them back home to the risks of the bombs were better off.

I think you have a point about the AAP - they do have a lofty tendency to make recommendations, which is why I did not repeat their 'no TV at all for under-twos' advice here, and instead gave links to research and discussion documents, so people could read and judge for themselves - I prefer a more nuanced approach personally (very little TV indeed for small babies, and limited TV for toddlers, and no claims that it is educational at this age, 'cos it really is not) - not a call for a ban.

Research completed in 2002 is by no means out of date unless you happen to know that babies and toddlers are watching less TV now. Did I not link to other recent research, too?

I think the Christakis study is really interesting, and worrying. I don't think it actually proves anything causative though, as far as I understand it. And it's also a shame there's no data in there on the type of programming. It's definitely food for thought for me though. I am guilty of letting DS (16m) watch about an hour of Cbeebies a day in two chunks. I thought we didn't need to worry about this as we're mostly with him while it's on and we do 'discuss' what we're watching, plus he gets tonnes of interaction the rest of the time.

But now I wonder really...

My DD was 'allowed' to watch ITNG once a day (sitting on DH's lap) from about 9mo. From about the age of 1.5/2yo she was allowed to watch TV after tea (5.30 - 6.30ish) as a wind-down. Then DS came along and it all went to pot! DD watched TV 3 times a day (one programme each time) whilst I BF DS, and had it on a bit in the evening too.
Now DS is 7mo, DD (3.5) watches it for approx 30 - 60mins after lunch (it is the only way I can get her to rest after p/t school - and if she doesn't its tantrum-city by about 4pm) when DS is asleep and I am on MN having lunch !
DS is in the room when DD watches telly after tea, and he occasionally glances at it now and again. I'm not too worried about it though (have got too many other motherhood guilt things that rank higher!).

BTW, I REALLY don't think you have to worry about them catching a glimpse of your programmes whilst BF. But I stopped putting the TV on (for me) when DD was about 6mo as she started really paying attention to it.

ALso, I know this is no excuse, but I know a HUGE amount of mums who have cbeebies on more or less all day. And I think you KNOW deep down when its too much. After about 30 -45 mins my DD gets a 'glassy' look on her face and stops communicating. Then I know its time to turn the telly off!

McSnail - YANBU, I passed out reading this thread at about page 2 but please don't take some of the comments too seriously.

My PFB enjoys watching TV, he likes Helicopter Heroes and Andrew Marr's The Making of Britain. I don't feel he's been damaged or over stimulated by it. He also spends a lot of time staring out of the window and looking at light fittings, there's probably some research that will say that damages him.

As with everything, in moderation TV is OK, as long as for the majority of time your baby is being interacted with, spoken to and played with I can't see an issue. Jeez, being a Mum is hard enough!

You are an intelligent person and want what's best for your baby - some people on here need to chill

Oh, and PFB "watched" the entire 1st and 2nd series of The Tudors in his first month - it was the only way I could stay awake for the 3.00am feed.

He seems OK so far.

My older two watch tv on and off. My oldest didnt really watch tv until she was three and my son was 1 (we had sky put in!).At that time she would watch but my one year old ignored it.
Now that one year old is 3 and in love with spongebob squarepants BUT my new 10 month old acts as though the telly isnt even on! She ignores it totally.

Are my children odd to ignore TV until about say 2 years old? Seriously my baby looks right past it but never at it

I'll ask again - probably in vain

Read the links given, and make your own minds up. Read why TV is considered harmful to babies (not talking about a few mins here and there, or TV being on while the baby is feeding, but taking the cue from the OP whose 3-mth-old was 'mesmerised' in regular, half hour slots). Read about the effect of the ever-changing images; read about the effect of background noise; read about the vulnerability of the infant brain....and then instead of telling people to 'chill' you'll be able to have an intelligent, informed discussion. I can see this would be a novelty for some people .

Yes, we all know about the studies, we've all read them and been told, we do get it. Babies brains are vulnerable, I do agree. I taught school for 12 years, and could tell the difference between kids who were plonked in front of the telly all day, and kids who weren't. Points well taken on all that.

The flip side, however...last night ,my two year old held up a piece of chicken on her fork, said 'meat', and signed the word for butcher shop. She DID NOT learn that from us...she learned it from that Justin guy on CBeebies...which my 3 and 2 year olds both are allowed to watch at lunchtime and at teatime. I have never been one to have the telly on all day long, but Baby Einstein and CBeebies were two things that have kept me somewhat sane, and gave me a chance to do a couple of quick things during the day.

TV is damaging if you sit them in front of it all day long, and don't play/talk/interact with them. My two are bright, talked well early and would rather play outside than do anything else, so I don't think what little tv they have watched has done them any harm...they've actually LEARNED a few things from watching, which means it can't be all bad...

usamama: "Yes, we all know about the studies, we've all read them and been told, we do get it"

I don't think so....not 'we all'

No one is saying (apart from a few) that TV is all evil, that no baby should ever be aware of it, and that there is nothing to be gained from some programmes (though the 'educational' programmes you mention do not perform well in research with under-2s).

I agree with you - except it does not have to be 'all day long' for harm to be done, not at all.

Message withdrawn

Just read the links and am very sad that the damage has already been done. DS is 2 in a couple of weeks and we've left him in front of CBeebies for short periods of time to make lunch/sort laundry/wash up etc. It was always age-appropriate stuff (ITNG/Tikkabilla/Something Special etc) and I do believe that he has learnt a lot from TV (sign language being a good example)

Won't copy the whole article, but this paragraph really shocked me:

"In the study of more than 2,000 children, Christakis found that for every hour watched at age one and age three, the children had almost a ten percent higher chance of developing attention problems that could be diagnosed as ADHD by age 7. A toddler watching three hours of infant television daily had nearly a 30 percent higher chance of having attention problems in school."

DS is having his TV view severely restricted.

I'm sorry...I have read all these reports, but I am not convinced, and that's just by looking at my own two kids who are quite obviously NOT damaged in the least bit by the TV that we've allowed. I think it has to be about balance...my two are allowed tv, but we also engage in a variety of other activities that are interactive. Their language has never been hindered, they are active, curious and they've never had any issues with behaviour or attention at preschool. I know these studies exist, but I can't believe that a little bit of tv is going to damage them for life...not when I look at my own two kids and how well they're developing.

OP - sorry haven't read all the thread (but tiktok I did look at some of your links).

So it sounds as if bloke has some merit to his case (this time). My reading is that occasional ITNG type viewing with you is okay, but that doesn't help with your particular challenges. So, my suggestions are:

Tell bloke that he can't leave for work in the morning until he has enabled you to have a shower and get dressed. Appreciate this may mean you both rearranging your morning routines, but it really is the way to do imho.

DS loves watching me going for a wee - pop them somewhere safe/clean (bathmat always worked for me) or you can go with them in the BabyBjorn if you're feeling that way inclined.

Make a cup of tea - well that, doesn't take very long, does it? Can fill the kettle while holding the baby, and then just have to put them down to actually make it. Make the most of your cups of tea while they're not mobile is my motto.

Cleaning - again, tell bloke that he can help in this department too.

For general chores, DS loves going in the BabyBjorn and will happily keep me company for up to an hour of pottering around the house (that's normally all I can manage tbh). He just gets bored if I'm doing something too repetitive (laundry folding), but now he's a bit older (8mo) I just put him down with his toys and sit down and fold away while we watch and chat to each other.

Hope that helps!

IMovetheStars - the stats are not as devasting as you think!

If (say) 5 per cent of kids who watch no/very little TV at age 1-3 are diagnosable ADHD at age 7 (and I don't think it's anything like as high as this, but it makes the maths easier!) then a 10 per cent rise means that 5.5 per cent of kids who do watch an hour a day between those ages are diagnosed ADHD...so out of 1000 'no TV' kids, 50 of them have ADHD and out of 'hour a day' kids, the number is 55.

It's also not direct cause and effect.

The three year old watching 3 hours of TV is likely to have other problems - most of us would accept that 3 hours is way too much, not least because it leaves less time in the day for other important interactive stuff.

None of this is the same as a baby/toddler watching a few mins at a time of CBEeebies or INTG, especially if a parent watches with him and can use the screen stories and images as conversation and play, which many of us do, just naturally.

OK - doing this fast as on a deadline!

Tiktok - I do think you have made some good points (as I have repeatedly said) but I think quite honestly that mums and dads have enough to beat themselves up with, especially in those early years. Be informed - oh yes totally agree, but make choices dependent on what is best for your family at that time - yes I think this is important too.

When my eldest was a screaming baby (bad enough for a professional child minder ex paediatric ward sister friend of mine to refuse to have him for a few hours at a time) I put him in his cot and let him scream while I sat on the doorstep having a cigarette! Was that wrong - yes of course it was. But it get me through the day. PS and he does not seem to have major attachment issues as a late teen.

Someone asks for critique links. Christakis is an excellent researcher. Looking at his own reports and the self critique in them is a good start (academics own misgivings tend to be left out of media reports!) I hope this link to a complete article rather than a summary works pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/reprint/113/4/708.

Google scholar will bring up a number of articles both building on and critiquing this seminal work. 2002 is out of date, most people acknowledge that the speed with which media has changed over the past five years renders some research obsolete unfortunately for people like me almost before it is published! The major change as regards tv viewing and under twos is the speed pace and impact of any adverts; and that with wall to wall on demand programming there is a greater tendency for the always on in the background. But nonetheless as I have agreed there is excellent evidence that too much tv is not good! On the other hand people like David Buckingham focus on media literacy. We now use screens in almost every aspect of life and the most useful focus, in my opinion, is to look at the whole.

This link is to a review published by Ofcom - yes I know to perpetuate TV viewing - but the credentials of those who compiled it are impeccable and while looking at young people as whole does mention preschool although not infants. [[http://www.ofcom.org.uk/consult/condocs/kidstv/litreview.pdf

This oft used study (often used by journalists anyway!) suggests that mother child interaction is reduced when the television is on openurl.open.ac.uk/sfxlcl3?sid=google&auinit=AL&aulast=Mendelsohn&atitle=Infant+television+and+video +exposure+associated+with+limited+parent-child+verbal+interactions+in+low+socioeconomic+status+house holds.&id=pmid:18458186

Look at the setting though! It was an out of context piece of research carried out in a hospital which of you would chat as inanely to your babe in a public (and recorded) setting as you do in your living room! Actually again this is a good study - I just wanted to point out that no research is perfect and we should not accept findings specially when reported by journalists, as absolutes, but also the context and research methods invariably confound results to some extent.

Tik tok - to be honest I think you have been rather insulting, indeed patronizing. It is a shame because you have so much to offer the discussion. I think the problem is that no one here is saying TV is a 'good thing' for you to marshal your arguments against. Instead the general tone is be aware and don't worry too much - at least that is the message I have tried to convey to OP. I can understand how she feels - we all so want to be perfect! I agree with the poster (I am sorry I have totally lost track of names etc) who said a less stressed mum is likely to be better for the babe.

Right - having discovered mumsnet (and it is great) my output has diminished considerably! I will not check again until this evening. I will not check again until evening - hmmm who am I trying to convince I wonder?!

gonnabehappy - this is the 'Am I being unreasonable' folder. It's allowed to be robust in arguments, and yes, I allow myself to be a bit scathing in this folder - maybe that comes across as insulting or patronising, but actually, in this context, I'm not bothered!

No one is saying TV is a good thing? Not true! Plenty of posters are saying that TV is a good thing - educational, even. So some of my posts have been directed at them. I agree also that a less stressed mother is good for the baby, and it's a shame that in this society we have fewer options available to support the mother who needs a break.

You're clearly thoughtful and informed and I agree we should not accept reports of papers as absolutes - I dont think I have ever suggested that people do anything other than judge for themselves after reading the whole story. Good science is sceptical and open-minded and aware of its limitations.

I think it's patronising to tell people 'not to worry too much' - but that's ok in this folder I cringe at the 'whatever gets you through the day' advice, because that is not the only thing that matters.

'Dosage' matters, of course it does. If your baby was always left to scream, every day, several times a day, over a period of months, while you went outside for a cigarette, then that would not have been a good thing and it might have had lasting effects. But the occasional incident, in the context of a loving and communicative relationship - no big deal. I'm sure you and I agree on that.

Same with TV. A few mins here and there, even for a baby, will be just fine. Just don't tell me it's flippin educational....

tiktok - what do you think of programs like Something Special, which I've watched on a daily basis with DS since he was about 6mo. We've both learnt to communicate basic sign language to each other (much to DP's disgust as he can't understand us

I don't know it, only of it....wouldn't presume to judge. It's for babies and children with special needs, and it has won awards.

I note the programmes are short, and that you watch it with your baby and learn together - so that sounds pretty good!

It seems a bit reductive to just lump 'TV' all in together to me. Which is why, as I said before, I think it's a shame there doesn't seem to be much analysis of content.

The content, speed and visual imagery in different programmes massively varies, so if there is an impact on the developing brain, I think this is relevant.

I think TV for tinies is like global warming. May not be 100% proven, but why take the risk of severe and irreversible damage on that basis?

Bugger, though. In The Night Garden & Waybaloo are the only off switches he has.

I haven't read a lot of people saying that it IS educational, though...that's the thing, tiktok. We've said what can be gained from watching age appropriate tv, but that's about it. Mine watched Baby Einstein because they were AGE appropriate, not because I thought they would be Mozart copycats!!

Also, in my years as an educator, and now as a grad student of information science, all kinds of media literacy can have value and even BE educational, and that does include some television programming that is age appropriate; news programs targeted at younger audiences, for example, or language learning programs, which are sometimes targeted at children as young as 2 years old. So, though I know what you're saying about quite a lot of children's tv not having educational value, don't discount it all...

usamama - couple of posts on here claim educational value, and this is certainly a selling point of the Baby TV channel and the DVDs you can buy for tinies.

I agree - age appropriate viewing for over-2s can have benefit, used with the parent.

I don't discount all children's tv - I don't know how I can make my views clearer! There is some good stuff out there - fun, informative, interactive.

But Baby tv is not necessary, not educational, and has the potential to be harmful - though a few mins every so often is not likely to harm and small bursts watched with a parent ditto.

I am mainly talking about the OP whose 3 mth baby was watching 'mesmerised' for regular half hour slots.

OK I could not resist it!

Think the best evidence in favour of tv is that child and mum learning sign language (although Buckingham has something to say about that too...and I promise I do not get royalties for his work).

Just imagine... a world where everyone could sign....drifts off dreaming of world peace...off to hospital with eldest son now, guess that is partly why I am so sidetracked by thread!

Might start one about older children and Internet...could be very very interesting.

Cheers everyone - lots of things to think about.

Tiktok - guess you are right about me misunderstanding - still getting the hang of this online communication thing!