The dangers of your faithful babysitter…

Bringing up children is not an easy task. I am often amazed at the glut of magazines available at any chain store – the “what you should know about” or “how to…” of child care. Diet related information, what sun creams should be used, which educational toys are best, which schools are suitable and how to discipline kids are often in the spot light.

In recent years governments have introduced laws about smacking children (this is no longer allowed) and smoking in the vicinity of children is frowned upon (and has also caught the attention of those who want more stringent controls). Parenting “advice” or “trends” abound. It is curious that no mention is made of TV as a major health and developmental issue. Like most things there is split opinion about the impact of TV on kids. If what studies claim have any truth in them then, perhaps, we should be more than a little worried… 

Dr Aric Sigman in his book Remotely Controlled claims that in many families TV has a greater hold and more persuasive powers over kids than parents do. I have noticed when I have been visiting friends with young children: mommy or daddy speaks and there is no acknowledgement of them let alone the words they speak as the child sits transfixed to the TV. In one instant the only time there was any recognition of the mother’s voice was when she eventually marched over, took the remote and turned off the TV!

Sigman warns that TV slows metabolic rates, stunts brain development, permanently hinders educational progress, increases the likelihood of children developing ADHD, is a leading cause of half of all violence-related crime, lowers adult libido and is a major cause of depression. It is a rather scary list!

The first thing someone said to me when we started to talk about children and TV was that it is “educational” and that’s why they allowed their four year old to watch TV – a lot of TV. James Law, Professor of Language and Communication Sciences at City University, claims that putting children in front of a TV thinking that it is going to teach them anything beyond movement of sound and light is silly. All that happens is that they get mesmerised; TV it is too chaotic for them to actually make sense of; they don’t have the level of sophistication it requires and therefore there is no educational value.

One of America’s most prominent child psychiatrists, Dr Alvin Poussiant, is very critical of the well-know kiddies programme Teletubbies.  He says that just because BBC publicised it as “good” for young children (and educational) means nothing. He says that the programme consists of unnatural figures with TV sets built into their tummies, engaging in unnatural high-speed body actions and unintelligible speech which might pass as entertainment but certainly gives no reason to believe that it confers any benefit whatsoever. Researchers at Britain’s National Literacy Trust have concluded that TV stunts the ability of children to speak. Young children do not understand what they are watching and so, they say, programmes like Teletubbies can further cripple language skills.

The American Academy of Paediatrics (AAP) recommended (in August 1999) that children under the age of 2 be exposed to no screen entertainment at all because it can seriously affect early brain development. The AAP say that early exposure to TV during critical synaptic (brain cell) development can lead to serious attention problems at the age of seven. This is, apparently, consistent with a diagnosis of ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder). ADHD is however not the only red flag for scientists. TV can also be linked to other kinds of damage. The TV on at home, even in the background, can interfere with the development of “inner speech” – the ability of a child to think through problems and analyse things and so retain their impulsive responses. Some scientists report serious effects on mathematics comprehension, reading recognition and comprehension in later childhood.

There is a plethora of other developmental effects that TV may be responsible for. These include sight and hearing difficulties, sleep problems and a greater risk of bullying and violence around the ages of six to eleven. Many children today are in occupational therapy for muscle tone issues – yet another side effect of being a “couch potatoe” and not running around outside playing hide n’ seek, swinging and kicking a ball.

One of the most intriguing links to TV exposure which I came across was the hypothesis that it leads to premature puberty in girls. It is suspected that the increased sexual images on TV actually foster maturity in prepubescent girls in a way that food stimulates salivation. Research in adults shows that watching sexual graphic material causes hormone releases in the body. Accelerated maturity in young girls is serious because studies of girls between six and eleven who have matured earlier suggest that they are more prone to depression, aggression, social withdrawal and sleep problems. Other researchers have said that earlier menstruation can be linked to drinking, smoking, drug abuse, lowered self esteem and suicide attempts.

Most of the issues I have mentioned above are physiological and psychological. There are other side effects – perhaps we can call them “social side effects”. These are questions like what kind of models are we putting before children – who are the heroes they aspire to be like? Do we really want our children to model themselves on the programmes they watch or the dubious characters in soap-operas? TV forms perceptions about beauty, moral issues and knowledge. Is what children are learning about these areas of life on our TV screens helping them to be well adapted players in society? TV also promotes the “cult of the individual” because the screen is most engaging when it focuses on individual faces and voices as opposed to groups. TV lures us into a self-centred culture in which we do not consider the effects of our behaviours on others, the individual is centre stage and there is glamour in expressing oneself at any given moment regardless of context.

Curiously many studies suggest results of TV engagement are revealed “later” in childhood. The effects are not immediate: some studies suggest that continued exposure to TV in childhood and adolescence can lead to educational under-achievement by the age of twenty-six.  This can negatively influence socioeconomic status and well being later on – a real domino effect that we do not always think about.

The Church, in her tradition, places much emphasis on Family Life. May, in the Catholic Church in South Africa, is “Family Month”. We are encouraged to focus on family life and family issues. The “domestic church” is the first and foremost formator of children. In the Sacrament of Baptism we begin by saying that the parents are the first teachers of their children in the ways of faith – and, of course we know, so much more. We have various groups which attempt to reflect on and promote family life. But are we really helping parents and doing enough practically? Writing in The Lancet in 2004 Dr David Ludwig said “Ultimately parents must reclaim from television the responsibility for educating and entertaining their young children”. If what research suggests is true then Ludwig is absolutely correct – we need to reclaim what TV has subtlety taken.

How do we, as a faith community, help stressed, economically pressured and often hard working and tired parents avoid the easiest babysitter and entertainment box around?  It’s much harder to answer this question when faced with the raw reality of life for so many parents – married and single. Any thoughts?