Context matters

I've often quoted the American Academy of Pediatrics and American Optometric Association when reminding parents about the quantitative limits we should place on our children's use of screens.  The more ubiquitous screens become in our daily lives, however, the less effective a simple number is in providing adequate guidance in making these important parenting decisions.  

In just a few years time, we've moved from clear quantitative guidance - no screens before 18 months, no more than an hour a day between age two and five, no hand-held devices before age five - to having to consider the complex interactions of a host of factors.  

Just last year, in fact, researchers from the Oxford Internet Institute and Cardiff University found that there was no correlation between parents’ adherence to screen time guidelines and their children’s psychological wellbeing, concluding that it's the way we allow our children to use these tools that is decisive in impacting their wellbeing.

• Is the experience passive, as in watching a TV show or movie, or active as in video-chatting with a grandparent - or somewhere in the middle like playing games?

• Is the activity balanced with healthy amounts of active, creative, and social activity? 

• And always, what is the redeeming value of the media itself?

Not all screen use is equal.  Thirty minutes watching videos is very different from thirty minutes programming a robot with a coding app.  When children are negatively affected by technology, it’s not just that they are using screens, but the way they’re using them.

I've been triangulating information from a variety of sources on this topic for many years.  My own take-aways are these:

• Parents need to direct, guide and monitor the use of all media.
• Devices themselves are neither inherently good or bad. 
• The right kind of screen time can have a positive impact on development.
• The amount of media consumption, age of use, time of day, and type of device are factors that do impact neurological and physiological development and performance (e.g., quality of sleep).
• It remains wise to "consume with caution" and consider the intersection of quantity and quality.
• We need to preserve media-free times, activities, and locations.

So, we need to conclude that simplistic guidelines no longer serve us independent of context.  The American Academy of Pediatrics now recommends the development of a Family Media Plan.  I agree that this is not only something we should all be intentional about, but something we need to revisit often.