Any day now researchers can be expected to conclude the best thing parents could do for children is to have none in the first place.

May need to find a new job

It wouldn’t be all that surprising amid the deluge of useless advice thrown at parents on how best to raise their kids.

The latest tip for mums and dads, in draft federal government guidelines reported this week, is that children should not watch television until they’re two years old.

Now there’s a simple rule about TV at our place: it only goes on for short periods after breakfast and dinner. This gives the grown-ups time to do things like get showered in the mornings and cook in the evenings.

The TV can also occasionally be switched on if mum or dad is on the verge of emotional collapse after a day of playing with blocks, sculpting small villages out of play-dough, reading Where Is The Green Sheep seven times, running chaotically around a park stooped halfway to the ground, handling toilet training, preparing meals and fetching snacks.

Our daughter has had this twice-daily TV routine for over a year, since around her first birthday. Now we’re told this means she could have stunted language development or a shortened attention span, though you wouldn’t detect either when she sings several verses of a nursery rhyme or demands yet another reading of Green Eggs and Ham.

These guidelines effectively say a parent should feel guilty for sticking the nipper in front of the box in order to preserve their sanity.

So add watching television to the ever-growing list of things parents shouldn’t do to children. It seems every week there is some new study or advice warning that normal parenting behaviour is going to turn their children into under-achievers or substance abusers or John McEnroe.

Here are just three examples of real research warnings to parents in recent weeks.

Background noise makes kids stupid. Parents in the many Australian suburbs under flight paths will be horrified to learn of international research cited by New Zealand audiologists showing background noise can impede learning.

Plastic water bottles make kids crazy. A chemical commonly found in the plastic compounds of drinks bottles and food packaging has been linked to heightened aggression and hyperactivity by a US study.

If a kid is sick, treatment could be dangerous.This month’s issue of the journal Paediatrics reports 500,000 children in the US end up in hospital every year with bad reactions to drugs. Doctors warned parents to pay close attention when their children start medication.

I want to stress this is not to take anything from the real implications of each of these studies but they are part of the torrent of do’s and don’ts directed at today’s parents.

It goes on. A teachers’ conference in Adelaide was told last week of a review of studies involving a total of 50,000 schools and 200 million students that had shown changing schools, television and school holidays had negative effects on education.

My favourite personal story of parenting advice is when a Montessori teacher told us children couldn’t learn the alphabet by rote. Instead, she argued, children should be introduced to the sound of letters instead of the letters themselves. Which is all a long way of saying that learning the alphabet the old A, B, C way doesn’t work.

“Bingo,” I thought, “that’s why I’ve never been able to get past L.”

And then there’s what to feed the kids. Allergies are on the rise – some studies say instances of food allergies are up 20 per cent over the past decade.

Thankfully there has been a research breakthrough that means kids can be cured by eating peanuts but starting with tiny amounts – about one one-thousandth of a peanut a day – according to research published earlier this year.

This is, of course, a great solution for any parent whose child has a food allergy. Just pick up an electron microscope from your local science equipment supplier. By the end of next week the little one will be up to seven one-thousands of a peanut. They can probably have a half a Snickers bar on their eightieth birthday.

It would be useful if someone could do some research on the effects of these studies - and the advice that comes out of them - on parents themselves. At the very least it would probably stop at least one research team toiling for a year or two to add another item to the list of things for parents to fear.

Don’t miss: Get The Punch in your inbox every day

39 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • TY says:

      05:10am | 13/10/09

      It’s just advice, not the law. If parents want to plonk their toddlers in front of the TV then they can. It’s their lives. But is there seriously anyone who would claim that a lot of TV is good for littlies and maybe keeping them away from it would be a good idea?

    • Trevor says:

      05:55am | 13/10/09

      It’s all a complete load of crap.  Do what feels right, adjust what you do as you choose. 

      These money used to fund these studies should be directed into finding the Parents who neglect or abuse their children.

      TV is neither neglect or abuse.

    • David says:

      06:03am | 13/10/09

      Obviously , the research industry is booming and there are a lot individuals trying to justify their employment . One hears , ad nauseam , ‘’ research ‘’ has shown this and that and all sorts of blatant bullshit . Someone will do research to show that getting out of bed is a major cause of death .

    • Old Clive says:

      06:41am | 13/10/09

      I was raised without T.V., my favourite show was ” The search for the Golden Boomerang ” which was backed by shyhoskies “Waltz of the flowers”. I didn’t have any toys because they were confiscated for the war effort,i suspect for the rehabilitation of american soldiers. Is it any wonder that I can’t rtelate to much of the crap that is going on in this modern world. I wanted to learn to play the piano when I was 8 years old, I finally started when I was 73 after raising my children and working all my life paying taxes to receive my old age pension of 25% of the normal wage. I think that should be the formula for all pensions.
      My first toy was a yoyo, it taught me about life, it works on spin the main weapon in the modern politicans armoury.

    • Gladys says:

      07:35am | 13/10/09

      Quite right, Trevor and David. What would these self appointed so called experts know about bringing up kids? Academics, pah! I’ll bet many of them are lesbian feminists who will never have children. I was raised myself by being shut in a room with the TV from an early age with cartoons and, on Sundays, the American holy roller preachers. In the afternoons, it was days of our lives. And so on. Mum was busy, making sure everything was alright for when the milkman called and afterwards, when Dad came home. She also had her tennis club, the Liberal Party womens auxiliary, and the parish council. I appreciate the sacrifices she made so that I could grow up in a more moral world.

    • COF says:

      07:45am | 13/10/09

      TY: “It’s just advice, not the law.”

      True, but when the government gives advice, it only takes a few years before “well meaning citizens” start throwing it in your face. They might as well make it illegal when that happens.

      Is it so hard to leave people alone, even when they offend your sensibilties?

    • JB says:

      07:47am | 13/10/09

      A word of advice from an old parent of 44 with a 20 year old & an 18 year old, to all the young parents out there. Ignore all the so called experts & hype. If you listen to all the gaga our thre - pretty soon you’ll be gaga. Do the best you can. Mostly kids need love, support & care. That’s it! No big secret. Ignore the nay sayers & doom & gloom predictors & enjoy your kids.

    • Sera says:

      08:29am | 13/10/09

      My parents did not have a TV in the house untill I was eleven. I cannot remember what I did when I was two, but I could read by age three and was reading Secret Seven novels at age 6. I have a normal IQ, but because of my reading ability I was skipped a grade at school, recieved perfect marks for English in year 12, and a few high distinctions at university, and now I am embarking on a research career in psychology! So less TV for kids may mean they’ll grow up to produce more research like this.

    • Rod says:

      08:34am | 13/10/09

      “Here is the up sheep, and here is down sheep.” Bloody hell I wish Mem had put the green sheep on page 3 of that book. Then it would be more like ... “Ahh, here’s the green sheep already, fast asleep. How cute. Now shut your eyes, it’s eight o’clock.”

    • Adam says:

      08:36am | 13/10/09

      Research shows that the best way to make a living without doing any actual work is….......        to do research!

    • 'erbert says:

      08:38am | 13/10/09

      Gladys, LOL. My father was a milkman, so we could be related.

    • DG says:

      08:45am | 13/10/09

      JB, add attention to that list and I think that you’ve just about got it covered.

      For many, many thousands of years the human race has developed, grown and evolved without this “research”. Sure there are some people that are incapable of looking after children, but for the vast majority of people having and raising children is just another part of life - you do what you’ve got to do.

      We have to ask ourselves “What is the purpose of this Research? and who Benefits?”. Invariably it is some group with agenda - be it the evils of day care, TV, snacks, risk of injury - that funds or carries out the research to prove their point. I’m not suggesting that they don’t have the best of intentions, but it’s still just an agenda. Who benefits? I’m sure that they would argue that everyone does, but the reality is that the human race will probably continue without it - that’s not to say that their research isn’t useful, but in the case of something that is so clearly subjective, and with so many factors on the development of a child, it’s almost impossible for research to distinguish between good and bad parenting.

      It’s possible that there are any number of factors that affect a childs development. My brother (the middle of 3) didn’t really talk until he was 4, Dr’s decided any number of things were wrong with him - developmental issues and the likes. It wasn’t until well after he started talking more that they realised that he was a shy kid and, with 2 loud brothers, he’d just never had a need to talk. Neither my youngest brother nor myself understood why the middle one was getting all this speech therapy - he had always talked to us. The moral of the story - just because a kids doesn’t behave the way you expect doesn’t mean that there is something wrong.

      Please, keep in mind the research and the stats are determined by assessing children that don’t know that they are being assessed, may have many other influences on their development and may not understand the purpose of the test. They are carried out and reported with an agenda in mind - usually undisclosed. Take their advice with a grain of salt - it’s interesting at best.

      If there is something wrong, by all means seek help, but don’t respond to the hype when raising a child. Generally you will know your child better than any one else will.

    • suze says:

      08:50am | 13/10/09

      Ironic how experts can preach to parents how to raise our kids yet at the same time condone the use of drugs like Ritalin for kids with ADHD that causes psychosis.  So would the “experts” rather parents lose the plot all together with eventual meltdown when they can’t themselves have a time-out from the demands of young children? Surely this can lead to abuse especially when kids are under the age of 2 and parental fatigue sets in.
      How many of these experts firstly “have” children? secondly, how many of these “experts” actually care for their children?
      Sorry, but talking baby and child ga ga 24/7 is not healthy for the mind. Adults need mental stimulation also.
      This is just parenting fascism, aren’t we under enough pressure. And of course there’ll be those who will nag “If you can’t look after your children don’t have them”. And if everyone followed that advice there would be NO children. Common sense, of course TOO MUCH TV is not good for you but give us parents a break!
      It’s either a TV in the house or silence. Which will benefit my child more?

    • Mark says:

      08:54am | 13/10/09

      My boys both watched TV. We did though provide them with a diet of educational as well as entertainment and sports television. We now have two well developed boys who are socially accepted by friends. They compete at all endeavours large and small. They are now very good communicators at all levels; sometimes a little too communicative. Television was at times a de-facto parent. And it did a good job. It taught them some good general knowledge. Developed language skills and gave them a rounded view of the world. I have some friends inflicting home schooled teenagers who have never seen any television onto an unsuspecting world. They have no social skill, little understanding of normal teenage life. Whilst I don’t think that a diet of Hannah Montana is a pre-requisite a little variety outside of the home viewed from behind the safety of a television does less harm than plunging your kids into a world with no knowledge. I believe the secret is the diet. There is lots of junk to consume. Eat some of it but don’t make that the diet.

    • Sam Chowder says:

      08:59am | 13/10/09

      When I was a kid I used to look at ants and bugs all the time but they only did 11 episodes

    • Nat says:

      09:04am | 13/10/09

      @Sera 0:29am

      I am the mother of an 8 year old daughter.  She, too, was able to read by the age of 3 and once she commenced Kindergarten was put into a composite class to enable her to complete year 1 work as she already knew what was being taught to the kindergarten children.  As a student who is now in year 2 (another composite class with year 3 students actually), we have been told each year at parent teacher interviews that her reading ability is around 3 years advanced for her age.  Obviously we are yet to see whether she will received perfect marks for English in year 12.

      All this from a child who had the Nick Jnr channel on 24/7.

      Who knows, maybe she will grow up and embark on a career in Psychology?  Hopefully not in research though.  Maybe to help all those children who grow into adults and won’t take any responisibility for their lives being a mess, blaming their parents for allowing them to watch television as toddlers instead.

    • KidGuru says:

      09:07am | 13/10/09

      ..must have skipped the year they taught “i before e”...

    • Liz says:

      09:18am | 13/10/09

      Come on now don’t be silly!  You know there’s sense in there on all these things, anything taken to extremes is dangerous even journalsim!

    • Stephen Pickells says:

      09:23am | 13/10/09

      Wasn’t it Geoffrey Blayney who said recently that watching television helps to develop communication skils?

    • iansand says:

      09:51am | 13/10/09

      I didn’t have TV at home until my teenage years.  I could not join in half the conversations at school because I had not seen the shows, or watched the sport.  Not a good result for socialisation.

      Balance and moderation is the answer.

    • RT says:

      09:52am | 13/10/09

      ‘erbert, I hardly think I’d be related to someone so lacking in self respect that they’d drop the first letter of their own name.  What are you implying exactly? And your use of LOL - are you referring to me as a ‘little old lady’? Because apart from the impudence, let me assure you that I am a large, fit and sprightly woman and I could teach you the manners your parents clearly never did.

    • Mem fan says:

      09:57am | 13/10/09

      you only had to read “Where’s the Green Sheep?” seven times in a row?
      jeez!
      my daughter would NEVER have allowed that.

    • Phil says:

      11:25am | 13/10/09

      Our TV is usually on a combination of kids channels on foxtel and ABC Kids between 9am and 6pm.  Our two and a half yr old watches it some of the time and other times is happy to wander off and play elsewhere (including outside).  She knows her ABCs, can count to 20 in english, up to 10 in Spanish (thanks to Dora the Explorer for that one), has colours and animals nailed, can finish puzzles for ages 3+ and can sing pretty much any common nursery rhyme you can name ... assuming she’s happy to perform(!). 

      Is TV stunting her development?  I might be biased, but what a load of rubbish.

    • Sera says:

      11:28am | 13/10/09

      @Nat - to be a psychologist you HAVE to do research. First a research project in 4th year (honours) and then another in the masters program.

    • Bob says:

      11:49am | 13/10/09

      I thought the goverment was meant to be there to run the day to day operations of public systems. Wasnt aware we pay them to tell us how to live. Thought that was Religions job. Didnt we have something in our constitution to seperate the two?

    • ImaWestie says:

      12:01pm | 13/10/09

      What’s worse for the kids:
      * watching TV
      * being put in a playpen for the amount of time they used to spend watching TV

    • JA says:

      12:18pm | 13/10/09

      ...Garbage in, garbage out…


      be selective and discerning, thats all

    • Andika says:

      12:27pm | 13/10/09

      It seems like everyday, Rudd & Co like to slowly takeaway another freedom.

      I never would have thought that someone would discribe a child reading as and inactive activity. This is the type of crap you’d expect the Taliban to use.

      message to Rudd & co - Piss off!

    • cranky says:

      12:58pm | 13/10/09

      To quote my own parents… ‘everything in moderation’.

      My child is 2.5 watches probably an hour a day in total of Wiggles DVDs and old Muppets videos and sometimes ABC Kids, which, as author or article points out, is so I can shower, cook dinner or keep my relationship on track by having an adult conversation with my partner… Rather than stunting his development, he has a vast vocabulary and has so since he was 2, vivid imagination, can count and knows his colours, animals, different makes of cars, utensils, items of food etc etc… And I suspect this has as much to do with TV and the fact that the primary adults around him speak to him in sentences and correct English - not baby talk.

      He’s incredibly loved and he knows it. We think TV can be fun. We love watching old Muppets episodes together. Go back and check the one with John Cleese, Peter Sellers, Harry Belafonte or Alice Cooper. Hilarious.

      Enough of the crap from the “experts”. The only expert about your children is you.

      Having said that let’s not forget that not every parent blessed with the requisite amount of emotional or basic intelligence… but I don’t think those people are reading research or listening to what the government says. They’re down at the pokies/pub/track/beauty parlour.

    • E says:

      01:18pm | 13/10/09

      I dont know about the research either way, but theres no way I would want a baby/toddler exposed to advertising. We are expecting our first in 4 months, and will be disconnecting the free to air poison tube.
      DVD’s and downloads only, and mum and me can get the news on the ultra-tube, traditional media is dead, long live the bittorrent smile

    • H says:

      01:30pm | 13/10/09

      Not completely arguing with your article her Paul, but just a question…I think a really important question….Why is that debates about what’s good for kids immediatley go to the difficulties this causes parents?....Or to put it another way, why does does it appear that our primary concern about parenting is the difficulties it causes us adults, rather than our primary concern being the best interests of children?

    • Jodi says:

      02:01pm | 13/10/09

      Completely agree ‘H’! The comments posted here are awfully embarassing. And to be honest I doubt it if the authors of the study really give two hoots about how other people raise their kids. They’ve just found a correlation between language competency and less television viewing time. Finding a statistical correlation is hardly ‘preaching’ to parents about how to raise their kids. So why do people get so damned defensive??

    • ts says:

      03:20pm | 13/10/09

      hey sera…
      minus the psych, your bio sounds a hell of a lot like mine… taught myself to read by 3, skipped a year of school, got high distinctions at uni blah blah.
      however, not only did i look forward to watching some rage and sat morning cartoons as a yougster i also moved schools. a lot.  my younger brother and sister watched the same tv as me but rarely read now. each to their own. 
      let parents raise their kids how they think is best, end of story.

    • acker says:

      03:56pm | 13/10/09

      For all the issues about day care centres, why not start kids at school as 3 year olds.

      They get socialised and educated by teachers rather than day care nannys.

      Add to that Social Security payment penalties for absenteeism as absenteism without Doctors Cerificates and good reason is often an early indicator for a plethora of possible at risk problems including child abuse. And also often leads to education deficiencies later on with that childs learning.

      I would also like to see kids given breakfast when they get to school

      Not because I disagree that it is the parents responsibility to make sure they are fed before they get to school.

      But because I know parents are out there that are not feeding their kids a proper breakfast, some are out there giving them Cola and Lollies for Brekky, some are not giving them any breakfast at all.

      Either way they are sending a kid to school who is likely to disrupt a classroom and the education of other kids their to learn, possibly mine or yours.

    • Annh says:

      08:37pm | 13/10/09

      According to Stephen Dubner and Steven Levitt, authors of Freakonomics, something like 90% of how your child will turn out is determined before they are born by genetics, socio-economic status, their position in the family etc.  mostly things out of your direct control.  For instance a child is more likely to be a reader if there are books in the house, even if you never read one to him/her.

      So relax, enjoy the ride.  You’ve already made your child.  Fads in child rearing come and go.  Do what feels right to you.  A little TV won’t kill them.

    • Jolanda says:

      09:16pm | 13/10/09

      Sera if what you say is true about your development and your achievements and you say you have a ‘normal IQ’ then I would have to question what you call “normal”.?  How we bring up a child is so controversial as it depends so much on the individual child and a person’s belief’s and culture.  Every child and family is different.  With regard to education one concern that some parents have is that the minimim benchmarks that have been set for our children by the Government are too low and they are dropping the standards.  Most parents do not believe that 50% or less is a pass, or an acceptable result,  yet there are those in our Government and Education system who do! 
      Education - Keeping them Honest
      http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/
      Our children deserve better

    • davido says:

      12:40am | 14/10/09

      Well said Ian. I too was raised without a tv and it made it very difficult at school.

    • Lucy says:

      01:05am | 14/10/09

      It’s not just studies on children, it’s everything.  One minute I’m told to drink cows milk (‘it’s natural’), then I’m told that I should drink soy milk because cows milk promotes allergies and soy milk can prevent problems associated with female hormones as I get older.  The next week I’m told that soy milk gives you cancer. 
      Alcohol is even worse. ‘26 glasses a week prevents alzheimers’.... ‘more than 1 glass a day gives you cancer’... ‘red wine prevents cancer’.... gah!

    • Bitten says:

      10:10am | 14/10/09

      Intelligent people know the only thing you MUST not do as a parent, is treat your kids like sh*t. Apart from that, just strap a pillow around the kid and hope for the best.

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

#markwebber just wasted petrol faster than everyone else in monaco #f1

Anthony Sharwood

In my sports column on The Punch tomorrow: why Eurovision was easily the best game on the weekend. Mummy bloggers, you'll like this one!

Daniel Piotrowski

The Logies could learn a lot from Eurovision #lamethings#sbseurovision

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ellehardytweets: Already despondent about the next fifty one weeks. #sbseurovision

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

Abbott’s crass logic: trash the Parliament in order save it

An email was sent to almost every politician in Australia this week saying that someone should cut off…

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

Our special forces don’t always need special treatment

We admire them, but we’re not entirely sure why. We allow them to operate in the shadows; we rarely…

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

A good holiday is about unrest, not rest

Like a fat full-stop, it lay in my hand. A small orange – not exactly fresh, but purchased anyway…

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter