Hacker News Reader

Comment by stavros | Hacker News Reader

How can you tell? What's the thing that made you say "this is bad for her", and why is it not the same for you?

She was so focussed on it and started crying when we hid it after only a very short time. This is not normal a behaviour. This only happens with things that are very addictive (also for example sugar). I do understand that not everybody can do it like that, but if you can create such an environment it's much better for them (in my opinion).

My three year old would do the same thing if he was playing in his sandbox and I abruptly picked him up and carried him away from what he was doing though. In my experience managing transitions between activities is one of the most important things. If I let my him watch a video and I tell him "I'm going to turn off the TV when it ends", he just goes back to playing with his toys when it goes off.

Don't get me wrong, I think screen time can definitely be a problem. I just think it mostly comes down to whether or not the screen time is at the expense of something else more constructive.

Absolutely this. I think a problem arises when parents install their kid in front of the TV and use it as a childminder.

Mine just turned 3. She watches YouTube kids - navigates the TV just fine and makes her own choices. She’s also a dab hand at platformer games - I didn’t think I’d have someone to play Mario with just her.

But - and it’s a big but - she spends 95% of her time doing something else, be it exploring outdoors, playing with duplo/lego, art, looking at books, telling stories with her toys, whatever.

For her, TV and games are just another thing to do, and she picks them up and puts them down like anything else.

The other problem arises at the other end of the spectrum. For me, TV was verboten until I was at least 8 or 9 years old - and when I was finally allowed that forbidden fruit I gorged myself.

>> started crying when we hid it after only a very short time

I'd cry too if you showed me a bright colorful shiny fun new thing and then took it away after only two minutes.

Part of what you're seeing is the novelty. There does seem to be something about screens, but it's possible to have healthy screen habits as a young child. My 3 year old enjoyed a 25-minute episode of Wild Kratts on PBS Kids on our TV while we finished packing up for a trip to the aquarium today. No problems turning it off once the episode was over and it was time to go. It's not his first time watching TV though.

I agree, and the "not the first time" I think is key there. Setting expectations I think is crucial. For ours (5yo), we're clear about what he can watch and for how long. We control the device. "Two episodes before dinner" or so. Over time, he learns how this works. And we're not afraid to tell him that now isn't a good time for the TV.

It's not to say we never have any complaints over this, but when we do, it's rare and usually because something else is amiss (hungry, frazzled, tired).

But most instances it's like last night, where we were clear that we had time for two episodes of Tumble Leaf before dinner. At the end of the second one he announced "last one!" and got up off the couch as we picked up the remote.

My approach to these kinds of things is different: these are really important opportunities to teach moderation and to teach the social skills of learning to have fun things in moderation.

I think it's quite important to introduce these addictive things into their lives, in a way that teach how to enjoy them carefully and in small chunks.

Interesting, thanks for elaborating.

Understanding of what is happening is often very limited. When I read books or talk to her, I sometimes use words that are unknown to her, she only started asking for the meaning of them recently (she just turned 3). So she will probably only understand 20%-30% even when she understands conversations quite well at home. She is still missing cultural context. She is only starting to understand the difference between a living and a stuffed animal.

In an animation movie somebody might hit somebody else, which appears funny to an adult. A child might just take this as normal behaviour and repeats it the next time she sees somebody and doesn't understand why it's not funny.

Understanding the real world is difficult enough for her.

But that's an issue with the content, not the medium, right? There will be shows geared exactly towards kid that age that teach them the right lessons.

I allow her to watch me work (mostly text documents), and we often search for images of an animal or object that she wants printed (today we searched for stars). Also, she can video-phone the grandparents, which is not that addictive from my experience.

My screensaver (animated colours) is problematic. Watching a video of herself or the grandparents on the smartphone can be problematic as well, but at least they are typically only a few seconds.

So yes, it's a thing of the medium. But most media for kids are colourful, highly animated, childlike characters and voices. Optimized to catch their attention for a long time.

Also, the media for kids are barely matching the level of the kids state of knowledge. I use words she understands describing things she asks me about, a TV show never does that.

I won't argue that it is a universal truth but it has played out the same for my kids and my friends groups kids.

They treat it like a drug and lose all emotional regulation. I don't believe all screen time is bad, but it is something you have to teach them to regulate and 3 year olds and younger are just bad at regulating emotion in general. Teaching them to do this is just part of parenting. One of the most important things we can teach our kids is that it is okay to be bored. In fact it is great to be bored sometimes.

On the other hand, being a parent is hard and keeping your sanity is important in order to be a good parent. So if it helps you be a better parent all other times, it could be worth it.

The issue is when screens are used to in place of parenting. Parents using it as a way to fuel their own screen addiction.

On the other hand, for me airplanes are a special case and all rules go out the window to help keep the kid calm.

Hard disagree with ‘great to be bored’ - being bored is one of the worst possible feelings, that you’re wasting your time doing nothing when there is almost certainly something you would rather be doing.

As a child I used to hate the feeling of boredom, knowing that I could be doing something I wanted to do. As an adult I am hardly ever bored, and it’s a strict improvement, never have I ever found myself wishing I could just go back to being bored.

Boredom is such a negative emotion that learning to manage it effectively becomes an essential life skill. Learning to set yourself up for success / be prepared required forethought to anticipate the possibility of boredom and come prepared to deal with it. Acting out on boredom is childish, learning to keep yourself occupied so you don’t become bored is mature.

> Hard disagree with ‘great to be bored’ - being bored is one of the worst possible feelings, that you’re wasting your time doing nothing when there is almost certainly something you would rather be doing.

You <---> The point

Being bored is what inspires a kid to daydream for themselves and/or get off their arse and try something new.

Being constantly "entertained" by a TV or fondle slab is an anathema to creativity and independent thought. For children and adults.

So really, boredom itself isn't what's good, it's actually used as something uncomfortable that encourages kids (or adults) to go find something interesting to alleviate the discomfort.

For the record, I've also told my daughter that "boredom is good for her", but this is clarifying my thinking on it.

Learning to sit with your thoughts for a while is a good life skill.

There was a time people used think the same about books.

Books can also be harmful if abused. They can be used excessively as escapism. They can contain dangerous harmful messages and manipulation. They can be addictive just like anything else can. Content matters a lot, and anything that makes delivering content easy comes with the risk that it will deliver something harmful. Books, TV, and social media have all been used intentionally to spread harm and encourage addiction. Most adults have at least some chance of protecting themselves, but children don't have those defenses developed.

It's a good idea to be aware of every form of media children consume.

That's still consumption of images rather than participation in reality. Kids can absolutely read in excess as a form of escapism. Books are easier than dealing with real life when someone else does the thinking and problem solving for you. Certainly great for learning in moderation but you won't learn interpersonal skills or how to ride a bike just by reading about them.

I don't think there was. But even if so, there was a time people used to think the same about drinking antifreeze, too.

There absolutely was. "reading addiction" was a medical diagnosis in 18th/19th century Europe. And if you read some of the essays about negative effects of reading from this time, it's pretty striking how similar it is to modern views on TV. There was even a German term of that time "Leseseuche" which literally translates as "reading plague".

- Propylene Glycol -- Antifreeze that is also used as a food additive.

- Ethylene Glycol -- Antifreeze that is toxic.

https://www.healthline.com/nutrition/propylene-glycol#TOC_TI...

you ought to read some of the early attacks on the printing press. It sounds like your grandpa complaining about TikTok

their vision is still developing and staring at a screen is not good for eye development.

it removes stimulation and interaction with the environment and replaces it with sedentary and no physical interactions.

While the exact reasons are not common knowledge, knowing TV is bad for toddlers is.

> their vision is still developing and staring at a screen is not good for eye development.

Is that true? The American Association of Pediatrics doesn't list that as a concern on their page "Health Effects Of Young Kids Being On Screens Too Long" (which is focused on children aged 2-11). Do you have a source I could review for that claim?

https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/media-and-children/cente...

---

(The AAP page about media recommendations for 0-2 also doesn't say anything about eye-development, but _does_ recommend entirely against screen-time for that age-group except for video conversations with people)

https://www.aap.org/en/patient-care/media-and-children/cente...

to clarify, too much “near work” for the eyes is a risk for myopia. That includes reading books all day.

My point is, watching an educational tv program like PBS for 30 minutes in the evening will not be the cause for your child wearing glasses.

The biggest predictor of good vision from the scientific studies is lots of outdoor time. This is most important from ages 6 to 11.

https://www.myopiaprofile.com/articles/how-outdoor-time-infl...

It’s bro-science all the way down. What if your environment is a boring room?

not that guy, but it would cause our kids to completely emotionally deregulate, and become fixated on the TV for a while.

and most TV is not great for people. there is a reason depression and anxiety correlate with TV time

Reply on news.ycombinator.com