Computers have been around since the 80's, and TVs a lot longer. I think we can be fairly sure that moderate TV watching or computer usage hasn't been a big issue for children as they have grown up.
Depends on how you view a "big issue." It's all subjective. Also, I want to make clear that I don't think that TV has had some catastrophic effect on people my age. I do however, think that many people I know have a very poor concept of themselves and as a media student I really do question mass media's role in that. See my posts on eating disorders and my experience for more information.
Once again, nobody at all is advocating this. You are arguing against the extreme's that nobody believes in.
No, actually, I'm talking about a phenomenon that is happening. While no one will stand up and say, "Yes, I BELIEVE that my child should often be pacified with my iPad or iPhone." Those aren't the words. But, what is happening if in reality, the moment your child gets fidgety on the bus/train or you need a break from them the first thing that comes out is the iPad/iPhone. At least that's my observation--people are quite dependent on these bits of technology and I think children are increasingly dependent as well. But, other people might be totally fine with that--they do see the many technological gadgets we have at our disposal as a great way to keep their kids entertained. Personally, I don't see a lot of the value in it for my own children but that's my right to choose just as they have their right to choose.
Once again, nobody is saying the iPad is always available to children and it should always be used when they are bored.
Nobody in this discussion has said that. Does that mean that that doesn't happen? The word "always" is quite absolute, isn't it? I don't think the word "always" was mentioned in my posts. I think you're painting my view to be more extreme than it actually is for sake of argument.
That is far enough, seems reasonable. But we all know children can get fixated on anything - sweets, TV, a favourite toy or book etc etc. An iPhone is no different in this respect.
That's why children have parents to establish boundaries. My son may be "fixated" on sweets but does that mean that when he reaches for some or requests them that he is usually getting them. My son is not fixated on TV because it's not a regular part of his daily routine--neither is it a regular part of ours. It's hard to fixate on things you don't have a habit of being exposed to. Toys (traditional ones) and books are in a totally different category, I think.
Really? Fair enough - most people my age claim to hardly watch TV any more - I know we are going to cancel our Now TV subscription in a couple of months because neither of us watch it.
Do you ever watch any entertainment? On your computer? Movies? The mode of delivery is different now but the concept is the same. While you personally may not be that interested in this type of entertainment I don't really think that holds true for a lot of people.
Once again, you're arguing against an extreme point nobody is making? Nobody here thinks children should be "dependent on it for their entertainment, engagement and stimulation". I don't see it as any different to TV, chocolate or a favourite pacifier.. kids will generally want more of all of these than we as parents are willing to allow. At the end of the day it is the parents job to moderate and enforce the rules, not be pushed around by our children. Banning something like an iPad outright because of the fear of addiction seems over the top to me.
Once again, this is not an "extreme"--it's clear to see that people do pacify their children with their iPads and smart phones--clear examples all around in HK. No one will say that that's the method they prefer but actions to me speak louder than words. I have friends who will tell you "Watching TV all the time isn't that good for children" but the TV is on all the time in their home and their children are constantly in front of it. They won't "argue" that "watching TV all the time is okay for kids" but their actions speak that they think it is.
I didn't ever say that I would be "banning an iPad outright because of the fear of addiction." That is really far from the way I think. Some people may think like that. I don't. If you read my other posts you'll see that I'm saying that
FOR US (as in,
my family) there is a time and place for everything and I don't think that the touted "benefits" of allowing my infant to have access to an iPad or smartphone outweigh the possible negatives. I think the iPad is very different than chocolate. First of all, I don't carry a bar of chocolate in my pocket all day long and think of it as a possible "pacifying device" in case my child is acting up. A pacifier is just that--an instrument intended for pacifying--that's it's design--and it is used with small children who find comfort from sucking--a natural reflex. Again, for us, there is a time and place for everything--so we also cut my son off the pacifier when he was about 2.5-years-old.
It's shouldn't be an either/or situation!
It often turns into one because iPads, are much more alluring than traditional play--or can be--traditional play requires children to invent their own games and build their own toys or organize their toys for play--iPad, for young children is a bit too ready-made for us. For example, if you set out a battery-operated toy that vibrates, whistles, spins etc. and then a pile of blocks, which one will really small children choose to play with--of course the one that stimulates them more. Is this a good thing? Hard to say. For us, we would like our son to have a concrete foundation in traditional play before he gets all this ultra-stimulation from gadgets.
This is the same reason why I chose to introduce non-sweet vegetables to my daughter first. Why? Because I want her to develop a taste for vegetables that aren't sweet. Will she like sweet vegetables and fruit? Of course she will! We won't have to work hard to make her love apples but spinach, broccoli and bok choi might be more difficult. Then we introduced sour fruits--again because we want her to develop a taste for them. Now we are just finally starting on sweeter fruits and vegetables. Does she like them? Yes, of course. But, the real key is that she also likes the other vegetables because that was all she knew for awhile.
I hope this explains my views better. If not, again, I just want to state that this is the way we do it. Whether you agree with it or see any value in it or not, is up to you. It's just another way to parent--which is no less or more valuable than any other way to parent--including the way you choose to.
