3 ms·

Play groups explicitly ban phones because otherwise some parents are always on their phones. This was not possible before smart phones. Being at a play group i

Play groups explicitly ban phones because otherwise some parents are always on their phones. This was not possible before smart phones. Being at a play group is mutually exclusive with actively doing work as a workaholic. With smart phones you can be a bad parent while being in proximity with your child. Its a new issue. I think in the old days bad parents were forced to be good parents sometimes because they had to look after their children. Now bad parents can be bad parents 24x7 and children are picking up on it.

dragonwriter 8y ago
> With smart phones you can be a bad parent while being in proximity with your child. Its a new issue. Having observed quite a number and variety of parents in proximity with their children over the years, I can quite confidently state that being a bad (in the sense of neglectful) parent in proximity to a child does not require a smartphone and is not a new issue. And obviously being an even worse (abusive) parent in close proximity to a child really doesn't require a smartphone, and is equally not a new issue. > I think in the old days bad parents were forced to be good parents sometimes because they had to look after their children. No. You never had to look after your children except out of a desire not to be a maximally neglectful parent, either out of sense of duty or desire to avoid adverse social consequences. That hasn't changed. > Now bad parents can be bad parents 24x7 They always could, and those “best” at being bad parents often were.
- tlarkworthy 8y ago
  > No. You never had to look after your children except out of a desire not to be a maximally neglectful parent, either out of sense of duty or desire to avoid adverse social consequences. That hasn't changed. This is my main point. It has changed. If you leave your young child at home and go to work, you are criminally neglectful. If you stay at home and read your phone but otherwise ignore them, you are not criminally neglectful.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > This is my main point. It has changed. But, it hasn't. > If you leave your young child at home and go to work, you are criminally neglectful. True. > If you stay at home and read your phone but otherwise ignore them, you are not criminally neglectful. False. It may be harder for authorities to get the first lead which triggers an investigation which identifies criminal neglect in that case, but it is still criminal neglect. With or without the phone, which is immaterial; you can stay home and drink liquor all day while neglecting your child. Or stay home running an in-house brothel. Or stay home reading a book with the kid shut up in another room. Or, well, lots of things that don't need a smartphone, many of which are depressingly well attested in the records of actual child neglect cases. There have been high profile cases of people who stayed home with their children and severely neglected them being identified, investigated, prosecuted, and punished...since before smartphones were a thing. And, even in the ones after smartphones, I've never seen smartphone use identified as a significant factor.
iNate2000 8y ago
I'm not sure what play groups have to do with phones. Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose, I thought the play group was to get children together for their own entertainment. And it's perfectly possible to be near your child with your nose buried in a book or a magazine.
- civilitty 8y ago
  I think he means play groups for infants and toddlers younger than elementary school age - before they have the ability to develop friendships on their own in school and so forth.
fao_ 8y ago
> Play groups explicitly ban phones because otherwise some parents are always on their phones. This was not possible before smart phones. Yes, it was. The parent could be chatting to other parents and ignoring their child, the parent could be reading a book or magazine and ignoring their child. The phone has just made it less explicitly signalled. If you want to read a book at a place you have to bring it to that place, you have to consciously select out a book and carry it with you; whereas your phone is light and you carry it everywhere, so it is easier to slip into that behaviour.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> With smart phones you can be a bad parent while being in proximity with your child. Its a new issue. Having observed quite a number and variety of parents in proximity with their children over the years, I can quite confidently state that being a bad (in the sense of neglectful) parent in proximity to a child does not require a smartphone and is not a new issue. And obviously being an even worse (abusive) parent in close proximity to a child really doesn't require a smartphone, and is equally not a new issue. > I think in the old days bad parents were forced to be good parents sometimes because they had to look after their children. No. You never had to look after your children except out of a desire not to be a maximally neglectful parent, either out of sense of duty or desire to avoid adverse social consequences. That hasn't changed. > Now bad parents can be bad parents 24x7 They always could, and those “best” at being bad parents often were.

tlarkworthy 8y ago
> No. You never had to look after your children except out of a desire not to be a maximally neglectful parent, either out of sense of duty or desire to avoid adverse social consequences. That hasn't changed. This is my main point. It has changed. If you leave your young child at home and go to work, you are criminally neglectful. If you stay at home and read your phone but otherwise ignore them, you are not criminally neglectful.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > This is my main point. It has changed. But, it hasn't. > If you leave your young child at home and go to work, you are criminally neglectful. True. > If you stay at home and read your phone but otherwise ignore them, you are not criminally neglectful. False. It may be harder for authorities to get the first lead which triggers an investigation which identifies criminal neglect in that case, but it is still criminal neglect. With or without the phone, which is immaterial; you can stay home and drink liquor all day while neglecting your child. Or stay home running an in-house brothel. Or stay home reading a book with the kid shut up in another room. Or, well, lots of things that don't need a smartphone, many of which are depressingly well attested in the records of actual child neglect cases. There have been high profile cases of people who stayed home with their children and severely neglected them being identified, investigated, prosecuted, and punished...since before smartphones were a thing. And, even in the ones after smartphones, I've never seen smartphone use identified as a significant factor.

iNate2000 8y ago

I'm not sure what play groups have to do with phones. Perhaps I misunderstand the purpose, I thought the play group was to get children together for their own entertainment. And it's perfectly possible to be near your child with your nose buried in a book or a magazine.

civilitty 8y ago
I think he means play groups for infants and toddlers younger than elementary school age - before they have the ability to develop friendships on their own in school and so forth.

fao_ 8y ago

> Play groups explicitly ban phones because otherwise some parents are always on their phones. This was not possible before smart phones. Yes, it was. The parent could be chatting to other parents and ignoring their child, the parent could be reading a book or magazine and ignoring their child. The phone has just made it less explicitly signalled. If you want to read a book at a place you have to bring it to that place, you have to consciously select out a book and carry it with you; whereas your phone is light and you carry it everywhere, so it is easier to slip into that behaviour.