9 ms·

This. I have 2 kids who are barely 5 and I already see my wife and family and everyone around us sending their kids to 3-4 activities EVERY WEEK. I have resiste

This. I have 2 kids who are barely 5 and I already see my wife and family and everyone around us sending their kids to 3-4 activities EVERY WEEK. I have resisted successfully so far. Doesn't mean I don't want my kids to be great at many things but take a chill pill all. It is not end of the world and kids will get to do things. My order of priority for my kids: 1. Get Enough Sleep 2. Eat good food. We don't do Juice or Soda at all. Chips etc. are ok once in a while. 3. No devices. My daughter started getting hooked on to Ipad and one day, we went cold turkey and put it away. She only gets to watch TV now. No more eyes stuck in an Ipad. 4. Dinner ON THE TABLE. Yes, this is so hard these days. We get lazy. But we have tried to enforce this and it has done wonders. 5. Talk to them. Teach them a few things while you interact with them. Give them chores to teach them the value of work. I have a simple one for mine: Turn on the porch lights in the evening. She loves it as "this is my job". Sense of ownership and responsibility. 6. Teach them to have empathy and how to treat others. This is so important. Don't overly reward them for good behavior but always say "You did a great job. I am proud of you" and that's it. Don't glorify it. 7. One activity. For us, it is Swimming. But you could choose any really. After this (already a lot, isn't it) , it is mostly "let kids be kids". Depending on their mood, our availability and the day, we can do outdoor activities, biking, playing in backyard or go for a drive. No pressure of planned activities. That's it for me. My wife doesn't quite agree but I have been able to keep it like this for a while.

x3n0ph3n3 9y ago
> 3. No devices. My daughter started getting hooked on to Ipad and one day, we went cold turkey and put it away. She only gets to watch TV now. No more eyes stuck in an Ipad. Why exactly is TV (passive) better than an iPad (interactive)?
- seandougall 9y ago
  Our household got vastly easier, and our kids happier, when we did the opposite: got rid of the TV, and only watch shows on the iPad. The big TV screen was a constant suggestion looming over the living room. It's easier still when the iPad runs out of batteries; we just haven't managed to get rid of it entirely yet.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    I don't have any kids, but I still got rid of the TV. Passive, environmental entertainment is problematic. If you had a bowl of chocolate on your desk, it's easier to snack on them during the day - the same with media distractions. Now, anything I watch is something I specifically seek out - pull, not push. I do the same with video games, and I choose games that are more exiting, as opposed to long slogs - fixed-level/single-player FPS, or fixed length multiplayer sessions, as opposed to "stat-building" games, or candy-crunch "physiological manipulators".
    - thanatropism 9y ago
      But it's better to stretch your caloric intake over the day than have huge meals. I'm trying to do a schedule of snack bars over the afternoon and a small lunch now, over wanting to eat enough at noon to last until 9-10 PM.
      - balfirevic 9y ago
        It's not better (nor worse). For some people it makes it easer to eat less overall, for others it's the opposite.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  TV is less of a dopamine rush kind of thing. You need to be very careful with modern mobile games. I'll let my son play minecraft, do the "endless learning" games, Dr Seuss, movies, and a few other selected games. You need to avoid the skinner box games. Generally speaking, if it has a franchise endorsement (Star Wars, etc) it's garbage.
  - spraak 9y ago
    > do the "endless learning" games, Dr Seuss, movies, and a few other selected games. You need to avoid the skinner box games. I'd be glad if you could share some of the games you approve of as my child is recently more interested. And what are 'skinner box' games?
    - SerLava 9y ago
      Skinner box essentially means slot machine. A tremendous amount of games on phones are either glorified slot machines, or a normal game with some kind of slot machine tacked on, such as a loot system. Some even produce loot that can be traded for real money... You have to vet every game now.
    - Isomatik 9y ago
      In general, any game that has a manufactured annoyance that can be bypassed immediately by paying money/watching an ad. Usually achieved by a stamina system (You can play up to 5 levels in 30 minutes, or play another immediately by paying), balancing play so playing without "Premium" items feels sluggish and uncompetitive (but not so sluggish that the game is unfun), and having a lot of gambling style elements to overcome the first two (No gems? You can spin the prize wheel once a day! Also, you logged in 3 days in a row! Have some gems!)
    - glogla 9y ago
      Take a look at this video [1] for explanation, and possibly other Extra Credits videos if you're interested in game design. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWtvrPTbQ_c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWtvrPTbQ_c
    - 9y ago
- LeifCarrotson 9y ago
  The passive TV can be less psychologically powerful than the interactive iPad. Sure, kids can still sit slack-jawed staring at some cartoons. The TV producers have learned how to maintain attention with rapid cuts, bright colors, loud sounds, and all the rest extremely well. And that's some pretty scary super-stimulation. But it's still less addictive than the iPad app that can use all the same outputs and adds interactive, Pavlovian feedback. Push button, get some meaningless numbers to increase: maybe you'll get lucky and they'll increase a lot this time! Keep trying! Check back in 30 seconds when that unlocks again! Some interaction can be educational, but there's more to the decision than the educational value, it's also somewhat about the addictive potential. My 11-month old likes to hold a phone when he can get one. He turns it over with impressive dexterity in his little hands. He enjoys his reflection, and the weight and shape of the things. I'm sure he's observed that Mom and Dad pick up and use these things frequently, as much as we try to limit it around him. Each time he gets a phone, we take it away, and trivially redirect his attention on something else. It's terrifying to me that in perhaps 5 years, the attention capture industry will be aided by virtual-reality devices, and my little kindergartner will need to develop the willpower to someday control his use of these future addiction machines. (And now, I'll ironically push "reply" in hopes that I'll see my HN karma increase a few points due to this comment.)
  - jacobush 9y ago
    Karma +1
  - spraak 9y ago
    > (And now, I'll ironically push "reply" in hopes that I'll see my HN karma increase a few points due to this comment.) Have my upvote! ;) (And now, I'll push "reply" with fear that my HN karma will decrease due to a meta-comment about up/downvoting)
  - cracell 9y ago
    Not all apps are like that. For instance Sago Mini makes amazing apps that do not use addiction techniques to hook you. They are just fun and let your explore however you want. https://sagomini.com/apps/ https://sagomini.com/apps/ I completely agree that some apps are inappropriate for various ages though. Pretty much anything that purposely tries to addict the user should only be played by people who can handle the it. Some adults can't.
- codegeek 9y ago
  Personally, I prefer TV because we get to see what they are watching. Second, I am a bit concerned with a device like Ipad so close to their body (this could be just me but I am not sure about long term effects of this to a child who is barely 5). Not to mention that TV has limited options (kids pretty much watch cartoons) but with Ipad, the possibilites are endless. My daughter already knows how to unlock the ipad, start different apps and play youtube on the ipad etc. I am not against restricting anything honestly but when I saw that my daughter started telling us "leave me alone. I am watching ipad", that was the signal that she is getting addicted. Mind you, she is not even 5. With TV, it is not that bad as they watch it while doing other things like roaming around the living room etc. Much less addictive in our specific case at least. YMMV.
  - wahern 9y ago
    "leave me alone. I am watching ipad" Imagine you lived in a house with no doors. People could come and go as they please, and they did. There wasn't any corner or closet where you were guaranteed solitude. Moreover, you were _stuck_ in that house, as you had no means to leave of your own accord, even just to walk down the block alone. I think my son first barked, "stop talking", to us before he was 2. That first time he was just tired of being peppered with questions and wanted to be let alone. No devices were involved. Sometimes he says that or something like it when he's being reprimanded, which is of course not acceptable. But in any event I've always tried to appreciate the sentiment. I appreciate (and require) solitude more than my wife, so perhaps I more sensitive to that need, or at least more credulous.
    - Spooky23 9y ago
      That's awesome. Get your kid to do that with blocks, pen and paper or a toy.
- thanatropism 9y ago
  TV is social. Everyone is seeing it, which creates a whole world that can be talked about. As it is the world has too many +4 sigma cognitive skills (which will be partly IQ but also learned throughout life) with below-median social skills. It would be much, much more useful to have then be +3 sigma for cognitive skills and +1 sigma social skills. Useful for them and useful for society.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    I don't think it's the case with TV today. Not anymore. There are too many channels, and also significant amount of people decided not to have TV. Watching Game of Thrones is social, whether you do it on TV or on-line. Watching a random TV program on a random TV channel is about as social as watching a random YouTube video.
Shank 9y ago
> After this (already a lot, isn't it) , it is mostly "let kids be kids". Some of your list is just basic quality of life. Sleeping? Eating at the table? Talking to them? This is all general parenting. > My daughter started getting hooked on to Ipad and one day, we went cold turkey and put it away. She only gets to watch TV now. No more eyes stuck in an Ipad. How is TV better than an iPad? I mean, seriously? At least with an iPad there's a plethora of different apps, and a good percentage of them will be more enlightening than watching the ever diminishing quality of TV these days. How much of this is just paranoia about "too much screen time" but reframed for a 21st century approach? > My wife doesn't quite agree but I have been able to keep it like this for a while. Parenting is a two person effort. Don't shut out the mother's thoughts on it just because you disagree.
- rayiner 9y ago
  > How much of this is just paranoia about "too much screen time" but reframed for a 21st century approach? All of it. An entire generation raised glued to the TV is now flipping out about screen time. It would be funny if I didn’t have to deal with other parents all the time.
  - cracell 9y ago
    Educational TV has come so far too! Daniel Tiger is amazing at teaching social skills compared to any show available in the 90s. From research it seems the biggest issue with kids watching TV is just that it takes time away from other forms of learning. Which means limit it but no need to get rid of it.
    - JshWright 9y ago
      I can't say enough good things about the SciShow Kids YouTube channel. My four year old calls Jessie (the presenter), her "science teacher", and routinely surprises me with information she has learned there. They're a great length (usually 3-5 minutes), so you can 'tune' the time. https://www.youtube.com/user/scishowkids https://www.youtube.com/user/scishowkids As far as PBS shows go, Nature Cat is a favorite (and well written enough to be enjoyable for parents as well).
Chris2048 9y ago
> Give them chores to teach them the value of work How does this teach the value of work?
- danans 9y ago
  If it's incentivized by their receiving something of value to them after the completion of the chores.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    What do they receive in this case?
    - danans 9y ago
      Depends on the age. For an older kid, maybe extra spending money. For a younger kid, maybe a special outing, or a special treat like a frosted cupcake.
- HeyLaughingBoy 9y ago
  Not the OP, but I'll reframe that as "teach them the value of accomplishment" because I've always had an issue with the concept of work being its own reward. One of my 7 year-old's chores is refilling the bird feeders. He really likes doing it and is excited when new birds come to visit. There's a clear work->reward path there.
  - Chris2048 9y ago
    > He really likes doing it and is excited when new birds come to visit But will he feel the same about flipping burgers? I agree - it's a dangerous thing to teach work is it's own reward. Work can be enjoyable, but not always.
- Jemmeh 9y ago
  Teach them that it takes work to run a house. Dinner doesn't just magically appear, dishes don't wash themselves, your socks don't pair up on their own. Makes them more grateful and also capable of taking care of themselves.
GuiA 9y ago
7. One activity. For us, it is Swimming. But you could choose any really. I think it’s good to have 2 activities, one for the mind (eg chess, chinese lessons, painting, etc) and one for the body (eg swimming, soccer, a martial art, etc)
TheMissingPiece 9y ago
I generally agree except re: screentime... I think managed screentime without overbearing expectations from the parents is way better than obsessing over the time spent. I worked with kids for 10+ years pre tech and the kids who had strict "no tv" guidelines were generally _obsessed_ with tv, whereas the kids who had parents with a more relaxed approach were pretty indifferent to tv.. Anecdotes, sure, and some kids had zero tv and were incredible kids, and vice versa... but this is just my observation over many years.
- m3rc 9y ago
  I wasn't allowed any TV when I was a child and I definitely had a similar experience, any time I was near to a TV my eyes were glued on it and my attention was completely held. When I was a little older (highschool) I got my hands on as much media as I could and subsequently desensitized myself to it and now don't have the same effect, but I'm not quite convinced that was the "better" option. It lets me operate in the world a little better (I'm not entranced by TV's in restaurants like when I was 12) but is desensitization and normalization of that much stimulus a "good" thing?
  - ensignavenger 9y ago
    If you plan to live in a world with that much stimulus, it probably is a good thing to learn to filer it.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
cracell 9y ago
I know some people strongly disagree but my toddler learns tons from her tablet. She has Amazon Freetime and can pick and choose whatever apps she wants to play (we can remove apps and control what age range is available). The apps on it have taught her about animals, letters, words, problem solving, and tons of other things she otherwise would've had less exposure to. We also play together with her on the tablet and of course do lots of playing/learning without electronic devices at all. Books, blocks, play figures, the usual stuff. But tablets are an extremely powerful tool for learning so it seems silly to me when people completely cut them out for the "good" of a child.
foxhop 9y ago
We needed to go cold turkey off the ipad too. Its different from computers or television. The apps they choose to play are like literal drugs, constant events and things to tap on. Anyways after the cold turkey we now have 40m of video games per day, if they talk kind to one another and listen quickly. They can choose what they play. They always choose the damn "addictive" tablet apps.
- novaleaf 9y ago
  i personally feel 40min/day is too much. I have 2 young kids (7 and 5) and used to do similar to you. The problem with allowing some amount per day means that's all they can think about, because before "media time" (tv, tablet, or computer) they anticipate it, and after "media time" they miss it. I switched my kids to "no media during weekdays" and after about 3 or 4 days of withdraw, it's much, much better. now they have time to play, do homework, and practice piano during the week without the constant complaining that they used to exhibit.
  - TeMPOraL 9y ago
    Well, I personally feel 40min/day for a 7yo is bordering on too little. Personally I had mostly unsupervised and not strongly limited access to a computer since about 9, and I definitely owe at least my career and my English skills to that. I mean - how can one expect a kid to learn to do anything creative/productive with technology, if one gives them so little time that learning and creating isn't a viable option?
    - foxhop 9y ago
      It's tricky to strike a balance. I'm on the computer for literally like 14 hours a day so I'm def not a good example. As a kid I had a lot of access too. I'll keep in mind your thoughts.
  - buxtehude 9y ago
    Sounds like a great plan. Surprised you are being down voted.
brianwawok 9y ago
Current rule is 1 activity at a time. Little one spends 30 minutes a week in Gymnastics. Maybe someday it will turn to ballet. Who knows. You have to set some kind of limit, or you get activity creep. Oh you need a sport. And something musical. And something social. Blah!!! Maybe 1 isn't the perfect number, but 5 seems a bit unhealthy for almost anyone (unless the kid is really thriving in it I guess)
- Dylan16807 9y ago
  5 of those a week is only 30 minutes a weekday. What's the problem with that? Hidden hours in preparation and transportation? 30 minutes is not even a tenth of a school day.
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    When they are 5, it's the lost time in transit and gaps of wasted time. When they get older there's a 4:1 prep:activity ratio. If your kid is going to play majors or minors in little league, you're doing multiple leagues, workshops and practicing. When he isn't doing that, you're dealing with little league politics. Multiple activities means you never eat dinner at home, may not see siblings for days as well. You also never see your spouse. If your 7 year old is at dance until 7, you're stopping at chipotle and not getting home until 8. Your spouse is tucking in the 5 year old, who needs to go to bed at 7:30 to wake up at 6 to get to before school care.
otakucode 9y ago
I never understand the 'no devices' thing. It seems wrongheaded. Not just from the 'an inability to be a sophisticated user of technology will be a gigantic deficit to them in a multitude of ways' standpoint, but it seems like it's trying to take away a solution the child has found to a problem their parents created in the first place. Many parents complain that their child doesn't want to go outside and play, that they just stay inside on their tablet or in front of a videogame console. Most of those parents, if you ask them, fully intend to go WITH their child if they DO decide to go outside and "play". They intend to watch over their child, make sure they don't do anything too risky, make sure they don't use 'dirty words', and stand on hand to judge their every move. Kids gravitate to devices because they give the kid power. They are the only outlet in our society where THEY get to make things happen, THEY get to decide what to do next. In every single other arena of their life, those choices are taken away from them by people who think they know better (and people who do not consider control itself to be inherently harmful, which it is). I would imagine that if you give them other situations in which they are unobserved, unregulated, and empowered, the device use would fall off of its own accord. It's like the 'rat park' studies that upended addiction research in the past. Sure rats hit a bar to get cocaine until they die - if they're in a cage. But put them in an outdoor area with other rats with lots of things to do and they'll never get addicted in the first place. And if you put a rat that IS addicted in that environment, they wean themselves off of the drug naturally.
velobro 9y ago
The quality of TV is atonishingly terrible these days. Back when I was a kid I would watch countless documentaries on Animal Planet, Discovery, History, Science, and TLC. Now literally all they show are reality shows.

x3n0ph3n3 9y ago

> 3. No devices. My daughter started getting hooked on to Ipad and one day, we went cold turkey and put it away. She only gets to watch TV now. No more eyes stuck in an Ipad. Why exactly is TV (passive) better than an iPad (interactive)?

seandougall 9y ago
Our household got vastly easier, and our kids happier, when we did the opposite: got rid of the TV, and only watch shows on the iPad. The big TV screen was a constant suggestion looming over the living room. It's easier still when the iPad runs out of batteries; we just haven't managed to get rid of it entirely yet.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  I don't have any kids, but I still got rid of the TV. Passive, environmental entertainment is problematic. If you had a bowl of chocolate on your desk, it's easier to snack on them during the day - the same with media distractions. Now, anything I watch is something I specifically seek out - pull, not push. I do the same with video games, and I choose games that are more exiting, as opposed to long slogs - fixed-level/single-player FPS, or fixed length multiplayer sessions, as opposed to "stat-building" games, or candy-crunch "physiological manipulators".
  - thanatropism 9y ago
    But it's better to stretch your caloric intake over the day than have huge meals. I'm trying to do a schedule of snack bars over the afternoon and a small lunch now, over wanting to eat enough at noon to last until 9-10 PM.
    - balfirevic 9y ago
      It's not better (nor worse). For some people it makes it easer to eat less overall, for others it's the opposite.
Spooky23 9y ago
TV is less of a dopamine rush kind of thing. You need to be very careful with modern mobile games. I'll let my son play minecraft, do the "endless learning" games, Dr Seuss, movies, and a few other selected games. You need to avoid the skinner box games. Generally speaking, if it has a franchise endorsement (Star Wars, etc) it's garbage.
- spraak 9y ago
  > do the "endless learning" games, Dr Seuss, movies, and a few other selected games. You need to avoid the skinner box games. I'd be glad if you could share some of the games you approve of as my child is recently more interested. And what are 'skinner box' games?
  - SerLava 9y ago
    Skinner box essentially means slot machine. A tremendous amount of games on phones are either glorified slot machines, or a normal game with some kind of slot machine tacked on, such as a loot system. Some even produce loot that can be traded for real money... You have to vet every game now.
  - Isomatik 9y ago
    In general, any game that has a manufactured annoyance that can be bypassed immediately by paying money/watching an ad. Usually achieved by a stamina system (You can play up to 5 levels in 30 minutes, or play another immediately by paying), balancing play so playing without "Premium" items feels sluggish and uncompetitive (but not so sluggish that the game is unfun), and having a lot of gambling style elements to overcome the first two (No gems? You can spin the prize wheel once a day! Also, you logged in 3 days in a row! Have some gems!)
  - glogla 9y ago
    Take a look at this video [1] for explanation, and possibly other Extra Credits videos if you're interested in game design. [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWtvrPTbQ_c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWtvrPTbQ_c
  - 9y ago
LeifCarrotson 9y ago
The passive TV can be less psychologically powerful than the interactive iPad. Sure, kids can still sit slack-jawed staring at some cartoons. The TV producers have learned how to maintain attention with rapid cuts, bright colors, loud sounds, and all the rest extremely well. And that's some pretty scary super-stimulation. But it's still less addictive than the iPad app that can use all the same outputs and adds interactive, Pavlovian feedback. Push button, get some meaningless numbers to increase: maybe you'll get lucky and they'll increase a lot this time! Keep trying! Check back in 30 seconds when that unlocks again! Some interaction can be educational, but there's more to the decision than the educational value, it's also somewhat about the addictive potential. My 11-month old likes to hold a phone when he can get one. He turns it over with impressive dexterity in his little hands. He enjoys his reflection, and the weight and shape of the things. I'm sure he's observed that Mom and Dad pick up and use these things frequently, as much as we try to limit it around him. Each time he gets a phone, we take it away, and trivially redirect his attention on something else. It's terrifying to me that in perhaps 5 years, the attention capture industry will be aided by virtual-reality devices, and my little kindergartner will need to develop the willpower to someday control his use of these future addiction machines. (And now, I'll ironically push "reply" in hopes that I'll see my HN karma increase a few points due to this comment.)
- jacobush 9y ago
  Karma +1
- spraak 9y ago
  > (And now, I'll ironically push "reply" in hopes that I'll see my HN karma increase a few points due to this comment.) Have my upvote! ;) (And now, I'll push "reply" with fear that my HN karma will decrease due to a meta-comment about up/downvoting)
- cracell 9y ago
  Not all apps are like that. For instance Sago Mini makes amazing apps that do not use addiction techniques to hook you. They are just fun and let your explore however you want. https://sagomini.com/apps/ https://sagomini.com/apps/ I completely agree that some apps are inappropriate for various ages though. Pretty much anything that purposely tries to addict the user should only be played by people who can handle the it. Some adults can't.
codegeek 9y ago
Personally, I prefer TV because we get to see what they are watching. Second, I am a bit concerned with a device like Ipad so close to their body (this could be just me but I am not sure about long term effects of this to a child who is barely 5). Not to mention that TV has limited options (kids pretty much watch cartoons) but with Ipad, the possibilites are endless. My daughter already knows how to unlock the ipad, start different apps and play youtube on the ipad etc. I am not against restricting anything honestly but when I saw that my daughter started telling us "leave me alone. I am watching ipad", that was the signal that she is getting addicted. Mind you, she is not even 5. With TV, it is not that bad as they watch it while doing other things like roaming around the living room etc. Much less addictive in our specific case at least. YMMV.
- wahern 9y ago
  "leave me alone. I am watching ipad" Imagine you lived in a house with no doors. People could come and go as they please, and they did. There wasn't any corner or closet where you were guaranteed solitude. Moreover, you were _stuck_ in that house, as you had no means to leave of your own accord, even just to walk down the block alone. I think my son first barked, "stop talking", to us before he was 2. That first time he was just tired of being peppered with questions and wanted to be let alone. No devices were involved. Sometimes he says that or something like it when he's being reprimanded, which is of course not acceptable. But in any event I've always tried to appreciate the sentiment. I appreciate (and require) solitude more than my wife, so perhaps I more sensitive to that need, or at least more credulous.
  - Spooky23 9y ago
    That's awesome. Get your kid to do that with blocks, pen and paper or a toy.
thanatropism 9y ago
TV is social. Everyone is seeing it, which creates a whole world that can be talked about. As it is the world has too many +4 sigma cognitive skills (which will be partly IQ but also learned throughout life) with below-median social skills. It would be much, much more useful to have then be +3 sigma for cognitive skills and +1 sigma social skills. Useful for them and useful for society.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  I don't think it's the case with TV today. Not anymore. There are too many channels, and also significant amount of people decided not to have TV. Watching Game of Thrones is social, whether you do it on TV or on-line. Watching a random TV program on a random TV channel is about as social as watching a random YouTube video.

Shank 9y ago

> After this (already a lot, isn't it) , it is mostly "let kids be kids". Some of your list is just basic quality of life. Sleeping? Eating at the table? Talking to them? This is all general parenting. > My daughter started getting hooked on to Ipad and one day, we went cold turkey and put it away. She only gets to watch TV now. No more eyes stuck in an Ipad. How is TV better than an iPad? I mean, seriously? At least with an iPad there's a plethora of different apps, and a good percentage of them will be more enlightening than watching the ever diminishing quality of TV these days. How much of this is just paranoia about "too much screen time" but reframed for a 21st century approach? > My wife doesn't quite agree but I have been able to keep it like this for a while. Parenting is a two person effort. Don't shut out the mother's thoughts on it just because you disagree.

rayiner 9y ago
> How much of this is just paranoia about "too much screen time" but reframed for a 21st century approach? All of it. An entire generation raised glued to the TV is now flipping out about screen time. It would be funny if I didn’t have to deal with other parents all the time.
- cracell 9y ago
  Educational TV has come so far too! Daniel Tiger is amazing at teaching social skills compared to any show available in the 90s. From research it seems the biggest issue with kids watching TV is just that it takes time away from other forms of learning. Which means limit it but no need to get rid of it.
  - JshWright 9y ago
    I can't say enough good things about the SciShow Kids YouTube channel. My four year old calls Jessie (the presenter), her "science teacher", and routinely surprises me with information she has learned there. They're a great length (usually 3-5 minutes), so you can 'tune' the time. https://www.youtube.com/user/scishowkids https://www.youtube.com/user/scishowkids As far as PBS shows go, Nature Cat is a favorite (and well written enough to be enjoyable for parents as well).

Chris2048 9y ago

> Give them chores to teach them the value of work How does this teach the value of work?

danans 9y ago
If it's incentivized by their receiving something of value to them after the completion of the chores.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  What do they receive in this case?
  - danans 9y ago
    Depends on the age. For an older kid, maybe extra spending money. For a younger kid, maybe a special outing, or a special treat like a frosted cupcake.
HeyLaughingBoy 9y ago
Not the OP, but I'll reframe that as "teach them the value of accomplishment" because I've always had an issue with the concept of work being its own reward. One of my 7 year-old's chores is refilling the bird feeders. He really likes doing it and is excited when new birds come to visit. There's a clear work->reward path there.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  > He really likes doing it and is excited when new birds come to visit But will he feel the same about flipping burgers? I agree - it's a dangerous thing to teach work is it's own reward. Work can be enjoyable, but not always.
Jemmeh 9y ago
Teach them that it takes work to run a house. Dinner doesn't just magically appear, dishes don't wash themselves, your socks don't pair up on their own. Makes them more grateful and also capable of taking care of themselves.

GuiA 9y ago

7. One activity. For us, it is Swimming. But you could choose any really. I think it’s good to have 2 activities, one for the mind (eg chess, chinese lessons, painting, etc) and one for the body (eg swimming, soccer, a martial art, etc)

TheMissingPiece 9y ago

I generally agree except re: screentime... I think managed screentime without overbearing expectations from the parents is way better than obsessing over the time spent. I worked with kids for 10+ years pre tech and the kids who had strict "no tv" guidelines were generally _obsessed_ with tv, whereas the kids who had parents with a more relaxed approach were pretty indifferent to tv.. Anecdotes, sure, and some kids had zero tv and were incredible kids, and vice versa... but this is just my observation over many years.

m3rc 9y ago
I wasn't allowed any TV when I was a child and I definitely had a similar experience, any time I was near to a TV my eyes were glued on it and my attention was completely held. When I was a little older (highschool) I got my hands on as much media as I could and subsequently desensitized myself to it and now don't have the same effect, but I'm not quite convinced that was the "better" option. It lets me operate in the world a little better (I'm not entranced by TV's in restaurants like when I was 12) but is desensitization and normalization of that much stimulus a "good" thing?
- ensignavenger 9y ago
  If you plan to live in a world with that much stimulus, it probably is a good thing to learn to filer it.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

cracell 9y ago

I know some people strongly disagree but my toddler learns tons from her tablet. She has Amazon Freetime and can pick and choose whatever apps she wants to play (we can remove apps and control what age range is available). The apps on it have taught her about animals, letters, words, problem solving, and tons of other things she otherwise would've had less exposure to. We also play together with her on the tablet and of course do lots of playing/learning without electronic devices at all. Books, blocks, play figures, the usual stuff. But tablets are an extremely powerful tool for learning so it seems silly to me when people completely cut them out for the "good" of a child.

foxhop 9y ago

We needed to go cold turkey off the ipad too. Its different from computers or television. The apps they choose to play are like literal drugs, constant events and things to tap on. Anyways after the cold turkey we now have 40m of video games per day, if they talk kind to one another and listen quickly. They can choose what they play. They always choose the damn "addictive" tablet apps.

novaleaf 9y ago
i personally feel 40min/day is too much. I have 2 young kids (7 and 5) and used to do similar to you. The problem with allowing some amount per day means that's all they can think about, because before "media time" (tv, tablet, or computer) they anticipate it, and after "media time" they miss it. I switched my kids to "no media during weekdays" and after about 3 or 4 days of withdraw, it's much, much better. now they have time to play, do homework, and practice piano during the week without the constant complaining that they used to exhibit.
- TeMPOraL 9y ago
  Well, I personally feel 40min/day for a 7yo is bordering on too little. Personally I had mostly unsupervised and not strongly limited access to a computer since about 9, and I definitely owe at least my career and my English skills to that. I mean - how can one expect a kid to learn to do anything creative/productive with technology, if one gives them so little time that learning and creating isn't a viable option?
  - foxhop 9y ago
    It's tricky to strike a balance. I'm on the computer for literally like 14 hours a day so I'm def not a good example. As a kid I had a lot of access too. I'll keep in mind your thoughts.
- buxtehude 9y ago
  Sounds like a great plan. Surprised you are being down voted.

brianwawok 9y ago

Current rule is 1 activity at a time. Little one spends 30 minutes a week in Gymnastics. Maybe someday it will turn to ballet. Who knows. You have to set some kind of limit, or you get activity creep. Oh you need a sport. And something musical. And something social. Blah!!! Maybe 1 isn't the perfect number, but 5 seems a bit unhealthy for almost anyone (unless the kid is really thriving in it I guess)

Dylan16807 9y ago
5 of those a week is only 30 minutes a weekday. What's the problem with that? Hidden hours in preparation and transportation? 30 minutes is not even a tenth of a school day.
- Spooky23 9y ago
  When they are 5, it's the lost time in transit and gaps of wasted time. When they get older there's a 4:1 prep:activity ratio. If your kid is going to play majors or minors in little league, you're doing multiple leagues, workshops and practicing. When he isn't doing that, you're dealing with little league politics. Multiple activities means you never eat dinner at home, may not see siblings for days as well. You also never see your spouse. If your 7 year old is at dance until 7, you're stopping at chipotle and not getting home until 8. Your spouse is tucking in the 5 year old, who needs to go to bed at 7:30 to wake up at 6 to get to before school care.

otakucode 9y ago

I never understand the 'no devices' thing. It seems wrongheaded. Not just from the 'an inability to be a sophisticated user of technology will be a gigantic deficit to them in a multitude of ways' standpoint, but it seems like it's trying to take away a solution the child has found to a problem their parents created in the first place. Many parents complain that their child doesn't want to go outside and play, that they just stay inside on their tablet or in front of a videogame console. Most of those parents, if you ask them, fully intend to go WITH their child if they DO decide to go outside and "play". They intend to watch over their child, make sure they don't do anything too risky, make sure they don't use 'dirty words', and stand on hand to judge their every move. Kids gravitate to devices because they give the kid power. They are the only outlet in our society where THEY get to make things happen, THEY get to decide what to do next. In every single other arena of their life, those choices are taken away from them by people who think they know better (and people who do not consider control itself to be inherently harmful, which it is). I would imagine that if you give them other situations in which they are unobserved, unregulated, and empowered, the device use would fall off of its own accord. It's like the 'rat park' studies that upended addiction research in the past. Sure rats hit a bar to get cocaine until they die - if they're in a cage. But put them in an outdoor area with other rats with lots of things to do and they'll never get addicted in the first place. And if you put a rat that IS addicted in that environment, they wean themselves off of the drug naturally.

velobro 9y ago

The quality of TV is atonishingly terrible these days. Back when I was a kid I would watch countless documentaries on Animal Planet, Discovery, History, Science, and TLC. Now literally all they show are reality shows.