Television, Children and Making Decisions Rationally
In an online discussion on TV and unschooling, Vijay Owens gave some wonderful responses about children learning to make their own choices, and in the faith she has in her children's learning. The other mom's quotes are italicized and indented; the others are Vijay's. —Sandra
If we don't let our kids determine for themselves what is crap and
what isn't how will they ever know the difference? Will they always look
to someone else to tell them what their opinions are if we choose to
do it for them? I want my kids to have their own opinions.
Do you think my not having a TV will prevent my kids from having their own opinions?
That's not what I said. I just want to get in the habit of letting my
kids make up their own minds in general. Food, bedtime, books, tv,
whatever. Within reason. Obviously this is not an "anything goes"
situation, I use my judgement. If you want to make up their minds for
them on the issue of television, that is your choice.
Do you think there's not other kinds of crap to
weed through in life besides what's on TV?
Of course there is crap in other areas of life! Some books are crap, but
that is just my opinion. It doesn't mean that I think they shouldn't
exist, or that people shouldn't read them. Many times I've started to
read a book and then thought, you know, this just isn't doing it for me.
So I put the book down. I don't burn it, or write angry letters to the
author or publisher, I just put the book down. Same with TV. If I think
a show has potential and I start watching it, if I don't like it I turn
the channel or I turn it off. I don't give away my TV or tell other
people that they should to, or that they are somehow damaging their
children by letting them watch Sesame Street.
Some toys are crap IMO, but if my daughter wanted one I might just buy
it for her. So she can figure it out for herself. Or maybe she would
love it. So bonus, she gets a toy that she likes, and I get a daughter
who has her own thoughts and opinions that are different from mine. That
is okay with me.
Should I intentionally
expose my young children to crap on the theory that they need to
learn to discern crap from good stuff?
I don't *think* I said you should intentionally expose them to crap, I
try to expose my daughter to things that are healthy and educational now
when she is young (which is all she likes at the moment anyway, as I
mentioned) in the hopes that when she is old enough to decide what to
watch she will know the difference. It's like food. I was never allowed
to have any sugar or candy or sweets when I was little. So when I got an
allowance, I spent the whole thing every week on sweets. I got fat. I
was unhappy. I think it would have been better if a cupcake was just a
cupcake instead of the holy grail of foods.
Same with TV. After watching nothing but Baby Einstein and Sesame Street
for a while, she may try these "crap" shows and not like them because
there is no substance to them. Like the difference between some nice
casserole and some cupcakes. She may like these fluffier shows. But I
don't think that many unschooled children given the choice to watch
anything they want (within reason) or to eat anything they want would
choose a diet of only cupcakes. I could be wrong, I'll keep you posted.
| Note from Sandra Dodd in 2017, ten years after this page was created:
I'm glad Vijay put "crap" in quotation marks. Looking at the exchange in retrospect, it was quite a crapstorm! Because the forum in which it originally arose is gone, I can't check back to what started it, but just in this section, that word was used nine (9) times. It's disturbing.
But there is a page on my site which I coded in as SandraDodd.com/crap and (it turns out, coincidentally) it's also about TV. More specifically, it was a mother insulting her child's interest.
It's linked at the bottom of this page.
|
If you think about what's on
TV, even those educational shows have had millions of dollars poured
into researching how to get your kids glued to the screen, and in
most cases how to get them to buy something.
Really? Well it's not working because she's not glued to the screen.
Plus I am wracking my brain and I can't think of what the heck they are
selling on an Elmo's world DVD — other than more Elmo DVDs, lol.
Seems to me unlimited TV
viewing could lead to just the opposite of free thinking --
brainwashing by the corporate culture.
Ooh, brainwashing, now we're really getting into it. Hm. Unlimited TV
viewing leads to brainwashing...I'm going to go with no. Show of
hands?
[Vijay earlier]:
I'm not talking about letting them watch graphic sex or realistic
violence when they are young enough to be traumatized, but about
watching age-appropriate cartoons, movies, or sitcoms or
educational
shows and things along those lines and letting them figure out what
appeals to them and what doesn't.
In case someone missed my reason for mentioning Mander's and
McKibben's books earlier, let me just say that content is NOT the
whole story behind why I don't have TV. It has to do with brain
research, what happens in young children's brains when they watch TV,
and lots of other stuff. If anyone is really interested in finding
out, there are plenty of resources and books to read.
Oh now we're getting into the studies. Okay, I'll play. I especially
like the one at www.tvturnoff.org/research.htm entitled "TV May Increase
Risk of ADD in Children" where they said that kids who are allowed to
watch a lot of TV (regardless of the content) at a young age may have
suffered ill effects in part because of neglectful parents who provided
an environment that aggravated behavioral and attention problems. Oh,
and they also mention that ADD has a high heritability factor.
So it's partly the parents using the TV (including violent, sexual or
otherwise inappropriate content) as a babysitter that damages these
young minds, and the lack of a stimulating environment outside of TV,
not *just* TV itself in my opinion. I don't think there are many (if
any) unschooling parents in this group who neglect to provide a
stimulating environment for their kids or who allow their toddlers to
watch shows with inappropriate content.
They have actually demonstrated in these same studies that Sesame Street
and other educational shows (far from leading to ADD and other similar
problems) actually *increase* children's attention spans and learning.
What that tells me is that people are actually *underestimating* the
negative effects of the inappropriate content and rapid-fire editing of
commercials and other programs. Because the children whose parents only
allowed educational shows would actually balance out the others in the
study, KWIM? So if they are positing that every hour of TV per day that
a kid under age 2 watches increases by 10% their likelihood of
developing ADD, it's more like 20% or 30% if you take away the kids in
the study who watch educational shows.
The difference between the average Saturday morning cartoon and Sesame
Street is very apparent to me. Sesame Street characters speak slowly and
clearly, and the scene only changes every few minutes. OTOH, there are
sometimes 20-25 cuts — maybe more — just in a 30 second commercial on
regular Sat am tv. Which is not to say that I won't ever let my daughter
watch them, but just not right now. Which is fine with her because she
doesn't care for them anyway, even the PBS cartoons like Clifford and
Sagwa that don't have commercials or lots of rapid editing.
[Vijay earlier:]
It has been my experience that children and teens who watch TV indiscriminately and unceasingly are those whose viewing is restricted.
I don't restrict viewing, I just don't have a TV.
How is that not restricting their viewing? I don't understand how you
could possibly restrict it any more than by not having a TV.
My kids watch TV at other people's houses occasionally. I don't forbid it. But my experience with other parents who do have televisions and who do restrict it is not in line with yours.
Well that just goes to show you that you should *never* make sweeping
generalizations, lol. I think all people who make sweeping
generalizations are always wrong. ;-)
So I rely on specific examples. I am not going to make the error of
stating or thinking that one or two specific examples would prove
anything, it's just to say, "Here's what I'm basing my decision on.
Hundreds of unschooling families have decided not to restrict TV viewing
and they've explained why it works for them. Their explanations struck a
chord with me, and I've decided to try it myself." Like I said, I'll
keep you posted on how it works out for me. If my daughter ends up with
ADD you can say I told you so, how's that?
[Vijay earlier:]
They live in constant fear that someone is about to march in and turn the TV off, so they watch hungrily no matter what is on (my 15 y.o. sister is like this).
Sounds like a sad existence. I don't think it's an inevitable result
of restricting television, though.
I agree, I don't think that's the whole story either. I think it's
partly a need to escape from reality. I plan to help my daughter have a
life that she doesn't feel the need to escape from.
[Vijay earlier:]
If you want to talk to them, you have to stand in front of the TV
or turn it off because they turn into zombies and cannot snap out of
their trance.
Yeah! That's what happens with TV. It affects your brain waves, and
it especially affects developing brains.
I guess I need to read up on this more. I keep hearing this, and I don't
know what to make of it. Doesn't everything we do affect our brain
activity? Being excited, or scared, or bored . . . looking at a
painting, listening to music, going for a walk in the woods, reading a
book . . . aren't all of these things part of brain activity? Just
because something is colorful and flickers and is made up of millions of
tiny pixels of light I don't see how it would negatively affect our
brain waves. You don't seem to have a problem with computers, and those
flicker and are made up of millions of tiny pixels of light . . . what
is your stance on movies?
[Vijay earlier:]
In theory, unschooled kids don't *need* TV for the same
reasons and thus can take it or leave it.
In theory, maybe. When you're raising kids it's interesting to think
about theories, but at some point you have to look at what's actually
around you.
But I DO look at what's actually around me. Well, what's *actually*
around me literally is just a bunch of trees and fields and dogs and
chickens, but I mean that I learn from these groups what other families
are doing. I resent the implication that I am making all of these
decisions in some kind of vacuum without giving careful thought, or
doing any research. I am starting to get a little insulted that you
think I am gambling or experimenting with my daughter's brain or
well-being without "looking around me" first.
I think some kids are more vulnerable to TV than others;
by that I mean the addictive aspect of it. I haven't grilled all the
parents around here about their practices regarding TV, but I can
think of two unschooling families off the top of my head that I know
a little bit about. Both of these kids I've known for years, and both
are older teens (16-18). One mother restricted TV when her son was
young; her son really likes TV now, and since he's 18 she doesn't
restrict now, and he probably watches it more than she would like,
but he's not a zombie and he doesn't constantly sit in front of it.
For instance, he has a job.
I'm glad that it worked out for them. I am the last person who thinks
that there is a one-size-fits-all solution for every family. You must
have me confused with someone else. I was the one who said that
choosing to have a TV or not or choosing to restrict it or not is a very
personal choice that every family has to make for themselves, remember?
I agree that there are some people who are more prone to addiction that
others. My mother, uncle and grandmother were all alcoholics. I dodged
that bullet, but it is clear to me that there is a genetic component. My
husband and I both have a problem with food, one that we hope to not
pass on to our daughter.
So far, letting her tell us when she's hungry, decide what she wants to
eat, and stop eating when she's full seems to be working pretty well.
She's a big girl (95% for height and 75% for weight) but not fat (well,
a little baby fat of course, she's still a baby) and I hope she never
becomes obese through eating for the wrong reasons. Just as I hope she
doesn't become a TV zombie through watching TV for the wrong reasons.
The other kid, who is 16, was never
limited at all around anything including food and TV, and he spends
most of his time watching TV and eating junk food, and appears to
have very few interests outside of that. What do these examples
prove? Nothing, really. Certainly not anything I could generalize
about.
Exactly! These examples on their own don't prove anything. Maybe he
watches TV to excess because he is depressed. Maybe he craves junk food
because he has a nutritional deficiency that manifests itself in a
craving for salt or sugar, it's not uncommon. Maybe he is just going
through a phase, as teenagers do, and he's suddenly going to find his
purpose in life, lol, and put down the cheetos, turn off the TV and cure
cancer. Who knows? I don't judge.
[Vijay earlier:]
--It's just
like reading a book and having someone explain what the picture is
when
you point. Nobody that I've ever met says that they don't allow
books!
Actually, there are schools of thought that believe even books limit
the imagination of a child. They would advocate oral, live
storytelling.
Well, I don't often do this, but I have to say :-P to those people. I
mean come on. There are also people who think that the earth is flat,
or that their Mother Ship is coming back for them, or that the men
landing on the moon was faked.
I'm not one of those people, but they are there, and I
see the difference between reading a book to a child and telling that
child a story. There's certainly a difference between reading a book
to a child and watching a TV show with a child.
Actually, when the "show" in question is just a series of images set to
classical music (baby einstein) it is very much like paging through a
picture book with music playing on the stereo. I was talking very
specifically about certain educational DVDs, not TV shows in general.
She has no interest in TV shows. Yet. 🙂
[Vijay earlier:]
I would hate to be the only kid on the
playground who had never watched television because I would feel
like
all of the other kids had a common point of reference that I just
didn't
get.
But you're not worried about your kid not having school as a common
reference point? Interesting.
No, I'm not worried about that, it's different in my mind. I would even
"let" my kid play with the kids who go to school or who don't have TV,
lol, because I'm sure they'd find other things in common besides school
or TV. But I am just saying. *I* would have felt bad if I was on the
playground as a child and everyone was talking about the funny thing
that happened on Welcome Back Kotter, or if they were all singing the
theme to Good Times together and I was the only one who wasn't in on the
joke. KWIM? I would have survived my childhood if we didn't have a TV of
course, but as a pretty shy kid I wouldn't have had a way to break the
ice in certain circumstances. "Hey, cool Charlie's Angels lunchbox, did
you see the one . . . "
[Vijay earlier:]
I've tried to get her to watch
Reading Rainbow or Clifford, or I've had the Today show on and she
won't
even glance at the screen.
Have you tried Teletubbies? I bet she'd love it. They spent millions
figuring out how to pull in one-year-olds.
No, haven't yet. They don't have it on our local PBS station. I'm
content with Elmo and Baby Einstein for now, and more importantly my DD
is content with them for now. Maybe I'll see if they have a VHS of it at
the library so I don't waste my $ on something that she won't watch.
Right now we're spending a lot of time outside, but maybe in the winter
time she'll want to watch more TV.
[Vijay earlier:]
Of course this is a personal decision for everyone to make for
their own family
I agree.
Cool. I may not get back to this group until tomorrow, so please don't
think I'm snubbing you if you don't hear from me for a while. It is sooo
nice out and DD will be up from her nap any time now.
Best wishes,
-Vijay
This exchange seems to have been from November 2007 (maybe). Because I can't find it, it must have been in a now-defunct forum (there are a few). —Sandra
|
P.S. in 2017...
"Have you tried Teletubbies? I bet she'd love it. They spent millions
figuring out how to pull in one-year-olds."
Wait, wait, wait—"they" who spent HOW much and why!? Teletubbies was a BBC production.
In April 2017, I found this line and realized it had not been challenged. A discussion arose in which someone defended the claim (not very well) and then it turned out the woman disrupting my topic was childless, and not married, but thought she should qualify to discuss it because she hopes to unschool her own children someday, she is close with her nephew, and she's a nanny.
Those are not NEARLY qualifications for knowing the benefits of TV in an unschooling family.
If facebook is still there, if Radical Unschooling Info is still there, the discussion might still be there, and most of it was good. |
Back to the TV page
Making Choices / "Have To"
Raising a Respected Child
What can happen when a mother says a child's preferences are "crap" or "stupid"
