This article is excerpted from a talk John S. Hutton delivered last month at the Cincinnati Nature Center. In a single generation, as through a massive software upgrade, childhood has been transformed.
This upheaval is unprecedented, eclipsing our own evolution and leaving us fumbling for a user's guide: cable TV in the 1970s, video games in the 1980s, Internet in the 1990s, smart phones, social media, ebooks, apps and broadband convergence of all of these in the 2000s.
We - and more alarmingly our kids - cannot escape technology anymore, despite fundamental human needs and stages that are not always compatible. Most grownups recall relatively low-tech childhoods: books, backyards, even times when there was literally nothing on TV. Boredom was not considered life-threatening; imagination was a reliable remedy. In the 1960s, the average age kids started watching TV was 2.8 years. It is now 9 months and decreasing.
A 2009 Kaiser Foundation survey found that kids 8-18 watch screen-based media on average 7½ hours per day, 11 hours per day if device "multitasking" is factored in. A recent study from Common Sense Media showed kids under 2 watch more than 3 hours per day, three to nine times more time than they spend being read to. About 70 percent of American kids have at least one video screen in their bedroom, and more than 30 percent of kids under 2 have one. The only activities that rival screen-based media come at school, where computers are ubiquitous, and sleep, which is increasingly challenged by it.
This screen time explosion represents a triumph of marketing over public health. Despite advocacy by pediatric and parenting groups, e-media for young children have grown into a multi-billion dollar industry, enchanting grown-ups and kids alike. It has cast an invisibility cloak over evidence-based guidelines from the American Academy of Pediatrics, in effect since 1999.
Notable among them are: discourage any screen time for kids under 2, viewing for older kids limited to one-two hours of quality programming, and no video screens in children's bedrooms.
According to a recent survey, however, less than 10 percent of parents were familiar with these, and only 15 percent had discussed them with their doctor.
While "electronic babysitting" is a common explanation for heavy use, by far the top reason parents purchase screen-based products for their kids is a single word: education. Stricken by unrealistic expectations and fears of falling behind in the Internet Age, parents believe that screen-based media are not only benign, but necessary for learning.
Marketers have seized this, as a stroll through any big box baby/toy section attests. This "educational halo" provides peace of mind as caregivers perform household duties, rest, or update Facebook pages as mellow tots gaze and learn about the rain forest. Unfortunately - and deceptively - with the possible exception of Sesame Street for older kids, no educational claims made by any of these "smart baby" products are backed by evidence. Quite the contrary: There is mounting evidence that early and excessive use can be harmful.
There are two main categories of screen-based media marketed to children: virtual and academic. The former is a surreal, expanding catalog of e-versions of beloved growing-up icons: pets, playmates, adventures, even story time with human readers as optional. The Baby Einstein franchise is a prime example, promising mastery of water, the sky, and the world without prying eyes from the screen. Ironic, since the real Einstein did just fine with puddles and star gazing.
The academic category is packed with curricula and gadgets aglow with visions of genius babies learning more, younger, faster. Claims range from unrealistic - geometry for toddlers - to silly - "read like a Jedi!" - to near-fraudulent. The popular Your Baby Can Read! DVD series exemplifies all three, promising infants who "read before they can speak," confusing basic language acquisition with reading and suggesting a novel resume item.
Electronic toys employ a similar strategy, creating an illusion of learning while kids bang noisy buttons. One of the latest - baby apps - offers to liberate "Digital Natives" from crayons, pages, and keyboards in favor of smudge screens, uploading them as small grown-ups into the New Economy.
Children are not small grown-ups - a happy thing. Old Economy developmental stages are hardwired into their DNA. Key drivers of learning are as analog as ever: interaction with caring, engaged grown-ups and ample opportunity to explore the world in a multi-sensorial, child-fueled, sense-of-wonder way. Genuine creativity, curiosity, and the learning they foster flow from simple ingredients: a piece of paper, a cardboard box, blocks, books, time. If technology were required to create tech-savvy adults, Steve Jobs could never have grown up to found Apple.
Electronic media are not only an inferior means for children to experience and learn about their world, they can be toxic. This is especially true for kids under 2. Paralleling the rise in use are pediatric epidemics, including obesity, ADHD and academic difficulty, each with screen time as a risk factor.
For example, bedroom TV is a major and preventable contributor to child obesity. Inadequate sleep, strongly linked to viewing behavior, increases risk for almost every issue of concern to pediatricians. Risks are dose-dependent, with more and earlier use predicting worse outcomes. Reducing screen time and substituting active behaviors, however, reduces these risks.
That young children would not benefit from electronic media the way grown-ups do is not unexpected. Developing brains, wired to process "the real world," are simply not ready. Anything that diminishes the quality of human interaction tends to impair development.
By displacing active pursuits, promoting dependence and lowering an anesthetic veil over the robust adventure that is early childhood, e-media mostly get in the way. And so, contrary to trends in the economy, here is one job too important to be outsourced: parenting.
Technology is here to stay. Eventually, all kids will be immersed in it, with no turning back. Rather than succumbing to the angst-amped allure of devices and handing them to babies, we should view accessibility and ease of use as assurance that waiting is not only OK, but crucial. Cool, even.
Our kids are not at risk for falling behind in computer skills, nor are they likely to ever be. Where they are at risk for falling behind is in "natural" skills. Such skills are central to becoming a functional grown-up: social ease, connection with the natural world, empathy, persistence, invention, imagination.
These tend to be taken for granted - "all kids are creative" - but this is wishful thinking. Nurturing a child's "natural" skills requires consistent attention to developmental needs and stages involving brain, body and senses. It is imperative - and fun - to unplug, tune in, and embrace the real world with our children.