Screen Time: A Reality Check on “Reality TV”

As someone who spends most of my waking hours dedicated to finding and promoting the best ways to raise children to be happy, healthy, well-educated and successful adults, I feel compelled to say that reality television is definitely not it. I realize that this sounds dangerously close to stating the obvious, but I would argue only in the same way as pointing out that the emperor is, in fact, not wearing any clothes.

To make use of language from the reality TV lexicon, “at the end of the day” what we now have – for better or for worse – is an immensely popular and pervasive form of television that is so far from reality that it begs the question of why on earth we still call it reality TV.

At this point, I should clarify that it’s not like reality TV only recently just hit my television screen for the first time. Having all but taken over the airwaves since it first burst onto the scene in the early 1990’s in the form of MTV’s The Real World, it has since invaded my home just as predictably as it likely has yours. It’s bad enough that grown adults (myself included) find it hard to look away. What concerns me even more is that “reality” television is working against us as parents, unless you happen to firmly believe in excessive drinking, lying and deceit, premarital sex, frivolous spending, catty fist fights, racist and/or sexist remarks and worse. Scoff if you like, but reality television is making these behaviors seem commonplace, and thus providing a terrible filter through which our children are learning to see the world.

Now I’m not the first (or the last) to note irony in the fact that we persist in using such a blatant misnomer to describe the genre. But I felt particularly compelled to share my mounting concerns when the admittedly hard-not-to-watch Bachelor franchise decided to have the admittedly suave bachelor-du-jour surprise his legions of fans at their new-season viewing parties. In case you missed the episode, there were plenty of 20-something women glued to their sets, and they predictably squealed and swooned with cameras rolling when the new bachelor dropped in to join them unannounced.

What really got me, however, was when pig-tailed girls who looked all of thirteen at best, gushed into cameras that the reason they love said bachelor, and the whole Bachelor franchise for that matter, was because it gave them proof that prince charming and true love really do exist, and that dreams really do come true (or something to that effect). I’m sorry, WHAT?? This is when my protective parenting and pediatric defenses collectively kicked in. Since when did watching 27 evening gown and/or bikini-clad women use their feminine wiles to compete for a man become as acceptable as, say, a pajama party?

At one time, I would’ve hoped that what I’m about to say would be obvious, but now more than ever I’m concerned that the point has been lost in two decades worth of reality TV channel surfing: Reality is what we make of it, and as parents (much less a society), we have both the opportunity and responsibility to shape how our children view it. To this noble end, reality TV is not helping – at best giving us more teachable moments about how not to live than we could possibly ever need.

Reality – in the real sense of the word – does not mean that every action one takes needs to be neatly summed up as a step in one’s life journey, or summarized in an “end of the day” soliloquy. Reality does not require every pound gained or lost or tear shed to be broadcast, nor should it involve stopping conversations mid-scene to turn to the camera and narrate to the public one’s every thought, feeling and emotion. In fact, reality should not include perpetually having cameras pointed at one’s face (unless said camera is held by one’s mother, I should add for the sake of not having this used against me by my children). Reality does not (for all but the very few who aren’t likely to read this, anyway) involve first or second or third dates in exotic lands or carefree lives limited to gyms, tanning and laundry.

And here’s the kicker. You may think all this is obvious, or harmless, or simply not a big deal. But as with the viewing of television violence, we now know too much about the insidious nature of these sorts of images and their ability to shape the way our children see the world to ignore what’s right in front of our children’s faces on a 24/7 basis. I’m not by any means saying that adorable Juan Pablo is single-handedly responsible for bullying or poor body images. But what I am saying is that what we allow our children to watch – day-in and day-out, matters. And words matter, which brings me back to my point that we really should stop calling it “reality” television!

Originally posted on Omaha World Herald’s Live Well Nebraska

The truth about American Idol’s “Idol Bug”

I recently got around to watching a recorded episode of American Idol. Aside from all the melodrama associated with stress, sleep deprivation, and watching people who dream of living life in the spotlight compete against each other, I was struck by the fact that the episode was impressively reminiscent of the opening scenes from the movie Contagion. For anyone who hasn’t seen the movie, suffice it to say that the storyline is focused on the ensuing devastation invoked by the uncontrolled spread of a dangerous new virus.

Okay, so no one died on American Idol’s Hollywood Week episode. But I did experience the same sense of foreboding. Idol contestants shaking hands, exchanging frequent high-fives, offering each other lots of hugs, and just generally partaking in a whole lot of close contact also known as germ-sharing behavior. Worse yet, there was a clearly identified “Patient Zero” in the mix – runny nose, fever, fatigue and all. If germs were visible, I’m pretty sure any viewers who somehow missed the not-so-subtle foreshadowing by the shows producers would have been cringing along with me long before contestant after contestant proceeded to fall ill.

Hmmmm…If only germs were visible…Now there’s a thought. I majored in cellular, molecular biology, so I’ve admittedly had more opportunities to visualize germs than most. But the concept of helping people – even young children – be visually reminded of the presence of germs isn’t out of reach. In fact, there are even cool (and relatively inexpensive) soaps and science  kits that help children (and adults) visualize just how effective (or ineffective) they are at washing germs off their hands.

It is my sincere hope, however, that it won’t take actually visualizing germs for all of us to take stock in what simple measures we already know are effective in preventing the spread of germs. For a quick refresher, let me spell them out for you so you will have them at your (hopefully clean) fingertips! After all, the truth about the “Idol Bug” is that it was likely just another (admittedly nasty and poorly timed) virus making the most of making people sick.  More than just another virus, however, it was also a really good, attention grabbing reminder for the reported 19 million  that we’re still in the middle of cold and flu season, and that the sharing of germs that happened in Hollywood while the cameras were running could happen anywhere – especially to those who neglect to take the following actions!

Wash your hands with soap and water. Handwashing is particularly important not only before eating and after using the bathroom, but any time you or your children are sick or come in contact with people who are sick (or germy surfaces like grocery cart handles). And don’t just settle for a quick rinse. Lather up the soap and be sure to get all areas of the hands – both front, back and in-between fingers.

Cover your cough. I can tell you from lots of child-care-owning experience that it’s entirely possible to teach even very young children to not only cover coughs, but to do so with their arms rather than their hands. They may not get it right early on or every time, but over time they’ll pick up on this very important form of prevention. The fewer illness-causing germs that are coughed into one’s hands, the fewer that stand to contaminate surfaces or get shared directly with others.

Vaccinate. I often get asked longingly in interviews about whether or not we’ll ever discover how to prevent the common cold. I agree that this would be nice, as the symptoms associated with the common cold can certainly be quite pesky. But the severity of the common cold is nothing compared to all of the vaccine-preventable diseases (think measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, polio) we are now able to effectively prevent. Simply put, vaccination is deserving of its recognition as one of the biggest public health success stories of the past century.

Avoid contact with those who are ill. Within reason, that is. That means that when you’re sick, it’s best to limit contact with others whenever possible – especially in the first days of an illness, when you have a fever, the flu, or other significant symptoms likely to spread germs and infect others (such as a lot of coughing).

Disinfect contaminated surfaces. Think snotty tissues on the nightstand, door knobs, telephone receivers, or any other high-traffic surfaces that are likely to have come in contact with unwashed, germy hands.  Germs can live for hours (and in some instances, days), so don’t forget to disinfect contaminated surfaces.

Originally posted on Omaha World Herald’s Live Well Nebraska

Parenting News Flash: TV Under 2 isn’t exactly educational

Recent advice from the country’s largest advocacy group for children leaves me concerned that what I’m about to write is going to be met with poor reception. Following extensive review of more than 50 research studies, the American Academy of Pediatrics released its October 2011 Policy Statement: Media Use by Children Younger Than 2 Years. I would like to think that all parents of young children tuned in, but for those of you who missed it – here are some of the highlights.

First, let’s start with a few facts about the current state of our children’s media diet. A full 90 percent of parents report (admit?) that their children under the age of 2 watch some form of electronic media – on average consuming 1 to 2 hours of television a day. For 1 in 7 of these young children, we’re talking 2 or more hours a day of media. By age 3, nearly one-third of our nation’s youngest have televisions in their own bedrooms. While these numbers may not be entirely surprising, given the ubiquitous nature of ipads, iphones, ipods, computers, laptops and TVs, they should nevertheless be disturbing given what we know about the potential effects of screen time for babies and toddlers.

There are several important questions we all should now be asking before taking even one more baby step towards the TV set.

  • Are infant- and toddler-directed programs educational?
  • Is there any harm in letting babies and toddlers watch TV (and other screens)?
  • What is “secondhand TV” and why should I care?

Let’s start with the question of educational value. In the words of my pediatric colleague (and the lead author of the policy statement) Dr. Ari Brown, the phrase “educational TV/videos for children under two” is an oxymoron. That’s because in order for anything to be educational, children need to “get it.” This inherently involves understanding both the content and the context. Given that young children have been shown to fundamentally lack the ability to distinguish between programs shown backwards from those shown forwards, one would be hard pressed to suggest educational benefit from watching. Sure these TV-viewing infants and toddlers laughed at viewings in both directions – suggesting some entertainment value – but entertainment does not equal education.

That’s not to say that there’s no such thing as educational television, or that educational television can’t be entertaining. Studies have actually shown proven educational benefit for children over the age of two from quality shows such as Sesame Street. It’s just that if you happen to be one of the majority of parents who have been led to believe (most likely by extensive explicit and/or implicit marketing) that TV programs and/or videos are going to enhance your baby or toddler’s intellect, you need to tune into the fact that it’s simply not.

Okay, so screen time isn’t the answer to making your baby smarter. What about those parents who readily admit they use the TV (and various other screens) as a sure-fire reprieve from entertaining their babies/toddlers just long enough to make dinner, take a shower, make a phone call….you know – all those things that just about all parents of young children struggle to find time to do in the day. I get that, and readily admit that TV did, on occasion, get used as a babysitter in my own household.

But the fact of the matter is that there are several key concerns regarding the time toddler and infants spend in front of screens, not the least of which involve language development. We already see expressive language delays in the short term. And the fact that we don’t yet know for sure about screen time’s long-term effects on language should not rule it out. In the meantime, there is a valid concern that screen time interferes with “talk time” – especially given findings such as the fact that 84 percent of parents talk less when the TV is on, and 74 percent use fewer new words. This is huge, considering that we’re talking about the most crucial time for language development.

There’s also reason to worry about the quality of sleep our children are getting. While most studies thus far have looked at media effects on older children, we know that healthy sleep habits impact just about every other aspect of all children’s health. Remember that a reported 30 percent of kids under 3 have TVs in their bedrooms. We clearly need to tune in to the possibility that their sleep may be suffering as a result.

Even during our children’s waking hours, the time that babies and toddlers spend in front of screens may simply not be time well spent. Not if it ends up displacing reading, playing, and entertaining oneself. We know that free play is hugely important for young children’s development, as are 3-dimensional, real world interactions with parents and other caregivers.

I would imagine with all of that, many of you may now be tempted to adjust your child’s media diet just a bit – and that’s great. But before you simply commit to eliminating an episode or two of toddler TV from your child’s daily viewing schedule or limit how often your baby watches his admittedly captivating video, don’t forget to take into account your own viewing schedule. That’s right – the evidence presented by the AAP is equally worthy of your attention when it comes to having your own shows on in the background. In other words, as parents we also need to take into account what is now being referred to as “secondhand TV” – an unintended exposure that is occurring in an estimated 40 to 60 percent of households across America. While parents may report “the TV is on but no-one is watching,” the fact of the matter is that someone is watching. Someone, as in our children. One study found that young children playing in a room shifted their gaze to the television that was left on in the background three times every minute!

So with that news flash, what’s a parent to do? Pediatricians fully understand that screens are everywhere, and it is entirely unrealistic to avoid exposing young children 100% of the time. But it is well worth your time to acknowledge that in many instances, there are better things for them to do to help them learn and develop. The AAP recommends the following strategies for making this happen.

  • Set media limits for children under two, bearing in mind that the AAP discourages media use for this age child.
  • Opt for supervised independent play rather than screen time to occupy your child when you aren’t able to sit down and actively engage in play. A simple set of nesting plastic cups on the floor can work wonders for engaging toddlers while their parents prepare dinner.
  • Keep TVs out of all children’s bedrooms
  • Recognize that your own media use can have a negative effect on your children. Help your child avoid secondhand TV exposure.

Originally posted on Omaha World Herald’s Live Well Nebraska

Katy Perry, Elmo & Sesame Street: An Important Discussion about the Sexualization of Girls

For anyone who may have missed the recent parenting news of the day, pop superstar Katy Perry recently taped a guest appearance on Sesame Street in which she was filmed running from Elmo in a short little low-cut dress and veil. Her yet-to-officially-air frolic with Elmo and friends quickly made its way to You-Tube, triggering a virtual firestorm of national media attention and the subsequent cancellation of the episode’s airing. The fundamental question being raised? Whether Perry’s revealing attire was inappropriate for children’s television.

After listening to one too many national commentators conclude that we’ve all become too prudish as parents and asking, “what’s the big deal?” I feel compelled to stop everything else I’m doing to help parents raise happy, healthy children and answer this admittedly rhetorical question. The fact of the matter is that while it may be superficially amusing to deem this “Cleavagegate” and laugh at the resulting Saturday Night Live skit of Perry donning a breast-emphasizing Elmo t-shirt, there’s something very, very fundamentally wrong about our culture’s acceptance of a scantily-clad 20-something year old female flaunting her highly sexualized assets on what is arguably America’s last bastion of wholesome children’s television.

While I’ve just outed myself as what some would call a prudish parent, I guarantee you I’m not alone in my beliefs. As parents, I strongly believe we need to avoid being lulled into complacency while our children are being steadily fed a media diet of increasingly sexualized images. While sexual well-being is an unquestionably important part of healthy development, a 2007 national report from the American Psychological Association’s Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls concluded that sexualization of girls and women is both pervasive and has wide-ranging negative effects.

So what’s a parent to do? First and foremost, don’t trivialize all of the messages our youngest girls are getting – all of which repeatedly and cumulatively teach them that what really matters is how “hot” they look. You can also take the following steps, adapted from the APA Task Force Report, to teach girls from a very young age to value themselves for who they are, rather than how they look.

  • Tune in and talk to your children. Pay attention to what they’re seeing on TV, in magazines and in the world around them. Discuss what they see in such a way that they learn that looks aren’t the most important quality.
  • Question choices. Don’t hesitate to discuss clothing choices with your daughters so they understand why too short, too revealing, and/or too tight just isn’t appropriate.
  • Speak up. Commit to noticing disturbing images and influences, and then speak up and discuss them with your children. Don’t be afraid to say no to your children, or to any products, campaigns or companies that send the wrong message(s).
  • Educate. Many parents simply aren’t comfortable talking about sexuality with their children, but it’s important. I suggest checking out So Sexy So Soon  and From Diapers to Dating to get yourself started.

While I wish that this was all there was to be said on the subject, the sexualization of girls will inevitably continue to be a force to be reckoned with. And it seems that Katy Perry and her wardrobe choices are here to stay – now reportedly being given a warm welcome by The Simpsons.

While that may be true, we simply don’t have to sit back and allow our children to watch! As parents, we really do have the power to raise our children with respect and a healthy body image, so long as we start by acknowledging that it really is a “big deal”!

Originally posted on Omaha World Herald’s Live Well Nebraska