BABY SENSE

Oh yay – polarizing topics.

Let’s cut right to it. There are a lot of opinions on “how to best raise kids” in terms of toys, devices, and screen time – you name it. 100’s of companies claim their thing is better than some other thing or proclaim super enhancement via their magic product design or subscription box. It can be hard to know what’s legit, especially since very few companies look at the science broadly enough or interpret it well. Let’s explore a few ways to find clarity in decisions on the often muddy topic of toys/devices.

A mental model that many dads have found useful is looking at the use of technology or electronic toys through two main filters.

1) Impact on Parental Engagement – what helps/hinders the relationship (and sometimes parents just need a break).
2) Impact on Baby Exploration and Attention – what helps/hinders development – and in what DOSE.

From there, since context tends to be unique to each family unit, we season to taste with some common sense.

Below is the deeper dive.

FLASHY PLAY THINGS

When it comes to the toys with all the lights and sounds, well, there are concerns by researchers and practitioners that these kinds of toys tend to 1) reduce parental interaction with child, 2) reduce child interaction with the parent, and 3) tends to reduce focus and exploration efforts on part of the child – since the toy is doing the “work”. On the flip side, these toys are great at engaging the attention of a baby and that can be very useful in many contexts.

Another toy/device lens is how opened ended it is. All toys are on a spectrum of open ended vs single purpose. The more open ended, the more room for the kid to explore (ex: wooden blocks). The more closed, the less room to explore and imagine (ex: a toy police car that drives itself and makes all the sounds). One approach here is to consider how much “work” the toys are doing for the kids vs the other way around. In general, the more a child has control of the toy and how it’s used, what it can do, how it sounds, the more the exploration benefit. Small studies have indicated that simpler, more open ended toys (vs closed) appear to provide more benefit for problem solving, language development, attention, and more.

This is NOT saying to avoid electronic toys. Electronic toys can be excellent tools in many scenarios. The key is variety. There is almost no robust research that shows any specific tech eneabled toys to be “harmful”, per say, but rather that less tech appears to have more benefits than more tech. It’s a subtle nuance, but again – look to the impact, look to variety, look to dose. All toys create different kinds of experiences, some higher quality, some lower. It’s like food… we need it to fuel the body. Higher quality is usually better, but might not always be accessible or of interest or tolerable. And in terms of what is being consumed – variety can be useful and everything has a context. Sometimes an extra donut is just the treat that’s needed (speaking about the adults here).

Try This

Consider treating toy selection and quantity of toys with some thought. This may include looking at why you might feel certain ways about certain toys. Many parents make purchases because they “didn’t have this as a kid” and don’t consider what certain toys might teach or habits they might create – good or bad. This is totally fine, “joy purchases” are a part of life, but for some dads it might be helpful to look a bit deeper before pulling the trigger on the latest whizbang baby gadget. Is the room more full of things that help or hinder?

It can also be useful to develop an awareness of how you are being marketed to. I’ve spent time with marketers/designers at mattel (fisher price) and others and they all candidly admit that many of the toy companies chase features and compete on having more lights and more sounds than the others (even though they know what the research says). Their data suggests that when someone sees two similar toys – they’ll buy the one with that extra light or sound. This is what sells – and most profit driven businesses focus on revenue by any means. How something is marketed is useful in making informed purchases.

PSA on Electronic Toy Batteries. Please only purchase toys that have a screw closure for batteries. Avoid toys with poorly designed or easy open battery cases (see clip type below). Coin cell batteries, if ingested, can burn a hole through the esophagus within minutes and cause life threatening injury within hours. Short video showing coin cell battery battling a piece of ham -> [YouTube, 58 seconds]

“SCREENS” AND THINGS

We have screens all around us these days – on walls, in cars, on the wrist, and in the pocket.

A few years ago the official AAP guideline was “no screens under 2. period.” – a guideline that, for the families that took it seriously, surely upset remote family members that wanted to FaceTime.

As research catches up to the breakneck speed of modern tech (ref: first iPad released in 2012), the guidelines adjust. The current AAP guideline discourages screen time for babies under 18 months old, with exception of video-chatting. For kids 18 to 24 months old there is an additional exception for “quality programming” for the shows. The AAP also acknowledges that there is no one size fits all guideline. For instance – where does dad watching the Super Bowl with kiddo fall? Is this “screen time” or is this a social/cultural event that happens to come through a screen? That’s for each person/family to determine, but to help here are a few ways to think about it.

Try This

Consider an early Family Media Plan, [Article, 2min]. This is a discussion to have and revisit from time to time about boundaries for screens and devices – for babies/kids and family members. Typically at this age, it’s around “no screen areas and times” for the parents (such as at the dinner table maybe) and having the talk about times when sanity might require putting a screen in those tiny hands. Realistic agreement ahead saves stress later.

In no way is this an attempt to undermine the AAP or all the research that has shown screen time to likely have a negative impact on development from 0-18months. This is simply where common sense comes in and knowing that sometimes we may need to invoke the forbidden fruit in order to regain some sanity or simply share a quiet moment with the partner.

It all comes down to the pattern – what they see you do and what they experience – with some regularity. Consider what perception of reality/life is being formed – what things become normal or expected. What example is being set? Having some boundaries can help set that tone and help them build healthy relationships with the people and things around them.

For example: Feeding a baby can be a challenge. It’s too easy to use screens as a distraction to slip some veggies in the pie hole. In this case specifically, screens while eating do distract the body from learning about food and the social aspects of food. It creates distraction instead of learning to work through new experiences. Screens during meals has been shown to lead to things like picky eating – because the screen is doing the “work”.

It’s also easy to calm a screaming baby with a screen distraction – almost like a pacifier. But what are we “optimizing for” in this? What is the pattern/expectation they learn. Is the goal “happiness” and we never want them to cry… or should we try, even when it’s hard, to help them get though some temporary crying/screaming. I wouldn’t let a baby put something in an electrical outlet just because they wanted to and screamed about it. It’s not much different. Screens are powerful tools and worth a plan around their use. As a regular distraction, are we helping or hindering them learning some frustration tolerance over time. Some of these questions might require some inner reflection or tough conversations. In the end every kid, every age, every situation is different. Best I can do is share what science currently knows along with some practical ways to think about it. In the end, each family has to decide what’s best in the contexts of the family (and some families won’t have as much luxury of choice). No judgement – if this is hard, that’s because kids are hard, but tech is just a tool, and it all comes down to how it’s used.

Screens everywhere, high tech toys. The science on these things and effects on newborns and young children is still in process, is sometimes in conflict, and has yet to address things like impact on vision development, the timing/intensity of light exposure (known to negatively impact adult human sleep patterns), sounds patterning, and a myriad of contextual real world (outside the lab) considerations – like screen time meeting coronavirus.

As the world changes, the guidelines change as needed. What is known from the AAP is that “today’s children are spending an average of seven hours a day on entertainment media, including televisions, computers, phones and other electronic devices”. In the 1970’s it was about the age of 4 years that a child in the US would regularly watch TV – today that age is 4 months on average.

There is research that attemtped to see if babies can learn from iPads, but they instead showed fine and gross motor skill decline. This is because many of these device require only poking and swiping vs more complex manipulation of an object like blocks or a zipper.

Since we are living in an ongoing experiment of sorts – there is concern that digital devices are creating a generation of challenge avoidant young adults – who can’t tolerate boredom. Many people are seeing this happen as kids resort to screens and digital devices to kill boredom instead of working through boredom with a musical instrument, book, or paintbrush. Could those lost moments have led to a creative endeavor, a breakthrough, learning the value of hard work through struggle. Are we limiting the amount of brilliance in a population, killing off future creatives, all so we don’t have to be bothered with discomfort or deal with boredom? These are important questions to ask – questions we don’t have answers for yet.

Yet Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, the CEO of Google, and many of the creators of tech products we use and love – limited the use of their own products in their homes and with their kids. They knew the problems these can create in developing minds.

Here is a 12 month old trying to use a magazine like an iPad.

Attention is a limited resource. The point here is to be aware of what attention we are training, and how we can keep the power by using technology as a tool not as a crutch.

This isn’t meant to stir fear, but rather generate awareness that any dad can use (or not use) to build their own plan in their own home. The best we can do is to have good information to inform decisions, then make those decisions within the context of our family, and adjust as needed.

This section has tidbits from around the web that are typically on Dads minds.

Media Guidance

Common Sense Media is the leading resource for science based ratings of media and television programming. They start at age 2 years, but this is here more to note that it exists.

Ted Talk: Media and Children

Meet Dr Dimitri Christakis, a leading media researcher, pediatrician, and father. He’s the Director of the Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development at Seattle Children’s Hospital. A very well done Ted Talk -> [YouTube, 16min 11 sec]

Thoughts from Maria Montessori

Toys for Children: Go for quality, go for less quantity, go for open ended, rotate toys based on interest of the kid. [Article, 3min]