Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Shopping

From everyday essentials to big purchases, swap tips and recommendations. For the best deals without the hassle, sign up for Mumsnet Moneysaver emails.

Flip

1 2

Original poster

am i alone in thinking 3-4 is too young for a nintendo ds?

44 replies

juicychops · 14/12/2008 20:31

maybe it is a good way to improve hand/eye co-ordination, but my ds is nearly 4 and i cant imagine trusting him to look after a £100 computer and getting my money's worth out of it

OP posts:

MrsMattie · 17/12/2008 19:23

I just think it comes all too soon, the 'glued to the computer screen' business. So nice to let them to their imagination and more simple pleasures before the big bad world encroaches.

Lizzylou · 17/12/2008 19:23

My DS1 (in reception) doesn't know anyone with one, though we have got him a Leapster for Christmas. I wouldn't get him one purely for the fact that they are so expensive they'd have to be his main present and I know he'd only use it sporadically. We got the Leapster with 5 games 2nd hand from Ebay for £15 delivered, so it's only part of his present.
If he likes it and uses it then we may look into a DS, or whatever. DH would love it, he is an IT geek

Lemontart · 17/12/2008 19:23

I waited until DD1 was 6 before I gave in and got her nintendo.. DD2 followed on within 5 months for her 4th birthday I am definitely more easy going with DD2 - and it shows. She is a more laid back child, typical second child syndrome. I try hard to treat DD1 with a similar approach but it is always in hindsight so tricky to treat evenly My parents did the same though. I remember not being allowed my ears pierced until I turned 16. I was thoroughly disgusted to find out my youngest sister (lot younger than me) had hers done for her 13th birthday..

Lemontart · 17/12/2008 19:25

MrsMattie - that is exactly my point!! They are not glued to the computer screen at all. It is a myth and one that I think a lot of parents like to use as an excuse for putting off allowing their children?s access to technology.

mygreatauntgriselda4christmas · 17/12/2008 19:26

Frogwatcher - My eldest only had organic food until he was 2.

My second child had her first chicken McNuggets at 9 months!!

The third one eats everything and anything that he finds when he is hunting and gathering and can smell out a piece of chocolate at 50 meters

I really believe that as long as 90% of what they do and eat is good for them, they will turn out OK

Being too precious and over protective can damage them in other ways - kids want more than anything else to feel loved and "normal" IMHO

mygreatauntgriselda4christmas · 17/12/2008 19:28

I'm glued to the computer screen right now!

Myrrhcy · 17/12/2008 19:29

Oh come on, children are surrounded by technology both at school and at home.

They are hardly being held back developmentally or socially by not having a nintendo

JollyPirate · 17/12/2008 19:30

My DS has a VTech Vsmile thingie which he calls "my DS". Feels much better for me than something which costs so much more and is more fragile - maybe when he's 8 or 9.

CoteDAzur · 17/12/2008 19:34

DD is 3.3 and has been using my Nintendo DS Lite for exactly a year, since she saw her cousins play Nintendogs. It is brilliant for when she needs to be calm and quiet for long periods of time, like on the plane.

She has been really careful with it. I can't say the same for the little plastic 'pencil' thingies, which she chews nonstop. They are quite cheap to replace, though.

Lemontart · 17/12/2008 19:35

I agree - they are not held back developmentally by not having them. My point is that technology is not an evil thing that "good" parents steer their precious children away from as something that ruins their childhood or their ability to enjoy the fresh air/good book. Why does it have to be so black or white? Why can?t there be a balance in all this and let children enjoy and follow their interests without stereotyping technology as the work of the devil and seen as part of the "big bad world"

will go away now - I think I have made my point and guessing the issue of technology and child access is one that could rumble round and round in circles. Peace to you all

Lizzylou · 17/12/2008 19:41

I think my DS2 would like a DS (and use it more) than my DS1. He is far more sedentary and able to concentrate, DS1 doesn't walk anywhere, he runs/hops/skips/jumps, it wouldn't be worth the money for him. DS2 loves lego/puzzles anything requiring concentration.
DS1 does love our Wii, but we rarely bring it out and loves playing on Cbeebies on the laptop.
I would love the braintraining stuff though, my brain has gone to mush!

Lizzylou · 17/12/2008 19:42

DS1 is 4.9 and DS2 is 2.9 btw, so am agreeing with Lemontart in that it depends on the child in question

MrsMattie · 17/12/2008 19:42

'Putting off allowing access to technology'??? Oh do me a favour!

frogwatcher · 17/12/2008 19:44

Nobody is saying they are being held back developmentally or socially by not having a nintendo - just saying that they are not being fed to the devil by having one (even at 3yo)! Am amazed that so few reception age children have them in your schools - there are a lot have them in ours. Each child is different, and each parent is different. Giving my child a nintendo at 3 does not make me a bad parent, or stop her doing other things. Its just that some of us feel that some young children can benefit from them, and in some circumstances it can help them fit in (like listening to High School Musical can when all their friends are singing it in the playground and it took another parent to point out to me that my dd was the only one who didnt know the words as I thought it was too old for her and had not given in to getting any cds etc). Im learning - slowly.

frogwatcher · 17/12/2008 19:46

But dont get me started on tvs in bedrooms .................. (joke - I am not starting another debate).

fourkidsmum · 17/12/2008 21:09

i think people are saying that no, "They are hardly being held back developmentally or socially by not having a nintendo," but nor are they being held back developmentally or socially by having a nintendo.

fwiw mine all have a nintendo - they are invaluable for car/train/plane journeys - and in fact numerous other electronic gadgets (no tvs in bedrooms though!). they are all extremely computer literate...yet they still manage to play with bats and balls, squodge around in the mud, paddle in streams, climb trees, play musical instruments...and they all have the reading/writing/numerical/reasoning skills expected of children at least three years older than they are.

and i was exactly the same...first one wasn't allowed chocolate or junk, but by the time a few more had popped out life was much more relaxed for all of us! and it appears to have done them no harm.

fourkidsmum · 17/12/2008 21:10

oops, i forgot to answer the question! ime a child of that age might get more enjoyment out of a leapster.

Clary · 19/12/2008 00:35

I just think £100 is such a lot of money for a toy.

Somehow it's worse (for me) to spend that on a 3yo than a 7yo.

I really jib at spending it for the 7yo actually.

It's not really comparable to hauling them ahead of the zeitgeist with a £5 HSM Cd, is it?

twentypence · 19/12/2008 01:43

If we start buying nintendo ds for 3 year olds they would have to have a leapster at 6 months.

Ds is still happy with his leapster at nearly 6.

Flip

1 2