Under 2's and TV

quintwins

I canceled my sky 6 months ago and i still don't think my kids have noticed, they have a few fav dvd's and will play games on my ipad.

I acually don't watch alot of tv and right now my 2 year old is outside jumping in puddles, when my older kids were younger there was more t.v but only because there twins and i did find i needed to ocupy them while i made dinner or went to the toilet as they were very demanding.

KitKat00

My friend's children watch a minimum of TV, I think its just to keep them occupied when the toys are boring them. But they are quite active and prefer to run around and play with toys than sit in front of the TV which is a blessing. She doesn't have an I-phone or any of these things, only a TV and computer and they don't go near the computer anyway so their screen time is quite limited which is a good thing I think. Teletubbies do no one any good (thankfully she can't access it on the TV where she is) so they are better off without this crap to be honest

MrsC2be

As a previous nursery assistant I can tell you that a bit of TV time does no harm. Obviously the amount of time the child is subjected to is a caution to be considered however the colours and the songs, the counting and the words that the child programme's use, are all part of the child's skills that they need to build. They can get the same colours and words etc from books but its not quite the same from watching it on the screen. Most children's shows host real people and day trips (possibly to a farm etc) and from this they can see the real animals and they will learn different emotions from these aswell. Its all educational for the kids and when they arent watching TV and playing with their toys, they put into practice what they have seen on the TV, this is then relayed to real life.

Penny-Pincher!!

My DD is 18 later this year and she used to watch limited TV of learning programs and loved Barney. We watched animal programs and kids learning programs but did limit to 1hr per day.

Never did her harm. She's got 12 GCSE's, DOE award, Microsoft certified in 2 areas and is just finishing her 1st year of a level 3 diploma which is equivalent to 3.5 A levels.

I dont agree with using the TV as a babysitter though.

Even now at 17, she prefers to read than watching TV and if watching TV, she'll be watching something specific and not channel changing IYWIM.

bylromarha

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18149510

Aric Sigman is the main one shouting under3s should have little or no screen time.

For what its worth, my 2 had a little bit of CBeebies/DVDs from about 18 months. Rarely held their attention for more than 15 mins. Always watched it with them and was a life saver at times to help amuse the elder when feeding the younger.

Think the most important thing when both under AND over 2 year olds is for the adult to be in charge of the off switch.

WestonDave

I suspect the problem is not necessarily how much TV but the balance. If TV is the only or most stimulating thing a kid gets in weeks, then its a problem, if a few hours of TV a week is an incidental in an otherwise varied and interesting life then its probably not a problem. Our two were allowed a small amount of vetted TV (i.e. we'd choose certain programmes and record them on the PVR rather than letting them watch live) but had plenty else on including a big garden to roam. Both at 7 and 5 are doing well at school, both like books and listening to stories on tapes and hundreds of other activities (making balls of mud and chucking them at the house wall being the latest fad!) so I simply don't buy the total ban theory.

If on the other hand the only stimulation a kid gets is from the screen then I can see how they could develop problems relating to people and behaving in real rather than fantasy life.

FATBALLZ

mildred1978 wrote: »

Last seminar I went to concluded that some screen time is actually beneficial.

Moral of the story is that the organisation running a seminar will tell you whatever they want you to believe.

Think the answer to this question is common sense really, as long as what they are exposed to has an educational value, isn't excessive and the TV isn't used as a babysitter, you're probably fine.

jellyhead

But if the TV is used as a babysitter, then it's best that parents are steered towards better quality TV. When my eldest was assessed for special needs the paediatrician told me to avoid cable channels with adverts, previews for other shows and very fast-paced cartoons and stick to DVDs of Disney films or BBC shows. Mine didn't watch TV at that age anyway, but he said he gave the advice to every parent he saw.

sulkisu

angelil wrote: »

I've heard there is to be NO screen time for under 2s full stop. This not only includes TVs but also smartphones, Nintendo DSs etc. It equally extends to even being in the same room as a parent using one of these devices.

Sounds extreme, but I've also attended seminars on the subject and given the effects that screen time can have on children that I've heard about during these, I'd be inclined to follow this advice.

God, I'm in trouble then! I have a 16 months old son (with two more on the way) and the TV is nearly always on . I'm no expert and far be it from me to contradict the experts, but I do think it's far more complicated than this. My partner and I are both reasonably intelligent, loving, hands-on, interactive parents and I am sure that this will have far more of an impact on my children's futures than time spent glancing at a TV screen.

Make-it-3

I find a lot of children's programming absolutely banal, so can't bear to have it on.

We do have ITNG on the iplayer as part of my daughter's bedtime routine (I make my OH watch it with her) and I do think she has learnt from it, characters names, songs and dances etc. And its great for getting her into her sleeping bag when the tombliboos do so too.