Jump to content

Recommended Posts

On the proviso that no screens go into the bedroom....


What are people's thoughts or anyone know what the research says?


We are having big screen time battles and it has been suggested we hand responsibility over to our son to manage his own time on the understanding that he must also get his homework done and turn the computer off at a certain time.


If so what is appropriate time to have it turned off by and what parental control apps have people used that restrict use to between certain hours....


Can children manage this or will it just result in addiction?


(At present we are very strict to 1-1.5hr day on games)


Any advice welcome :)

Conversely, I believe restriction leads to addition - and there have been several studies which show how depriving a child of something makes it more desirable. So I am not surprised you are having battles.


We may be very liberal, but our 12 year old uses both a laptop and her phone in her room and we are not concerned. She understands IT safety, mainly spends her time snap-chatting and face-timing friends or learning teen stuff from youtubers (as I did with Jackie magazine). She has also paid for her own Netflix account - because we would not pay for it. She signed up with her own money so that she could follow the same TV series that all her friends talk about. At this age, more than anything, they want to fit in.


I think you need to listen to your son and re-evaluate your fears. After all, at what age would you consider giving your child the responsibility/freedom to manage his own free-time? You have to start somewhere!

Not all 12 YO are alike so you have to apply sense, rather than expecting self-management - you'll each have different expectations so would clash if you don't discuss it.


We're quite flexible. We all need downtime, but when phones/ tablets become the only activity of choice then there's a misbalance. Same with TV. It's nice to 'Netflix', but when it becomes an addictive box set it becomes a problem.


I insist we go out everyday, even to the shops. Can be quite hard to get them detached from devices but it's always good. We were climbing trees last week after school and at the adventure playground in Peckham Rye.


Sometimes we're just too tired so we just do what we want.... I don't mind mine up in the rooms but not all the time.


I've taught the kids backgammon and chess, so we also play that and other board games.


Try new things.


We also do exercise at home - wii fit - things I've found online (if I get excited about something, they're more inclined to get involved), hoola hooping, making cakes.... all sorts they huff and puff about initially, but then enjoy. I also put kids films, like The Lion King or Scooby Doo on in the background, which we've watched millions of times - and it always brings them back out of the device-obsession ;-)


If screen time is stopping you talking and doing things together, then it's too much.

But when they do go on the devices, I leave them to it and let them chill. Catching up with their friends is important.


Exercise is of course good for children's resilience and mental health - as is trying new things. So don't let it become the only thing they do to relax.

It's a hard one isn't it? We've had similar battles with our 13 yr old DS since he was nearly 12 (past couple years). He is much better this year (y8) than last year.


He is much more screen obsessed than his younger sisters, who are much better at self-regulating. If we let him, he would be on the xbox for 3-4 hours, before coming off to watch something on you tube on the computer, before possibly watching something on the telly. We've talked about how addictive gaming is, the effect of gaming (and screen time) on brain development/ good sleep patterns, and about how we have tried to let him self regulate and as he does not, we have to step in. So we have a rule of no more than 2 hours a day, and vaguely unlimited at the weekend, and then spend much of our weekend trying to think of wizard wheezes to keep him off the screens. (He does play rugby/ cricket in corresponding seasons.)


Having a set time means we don't argue about the time. He is not very good at remembering the 2 hours, so I did buy a timer, and that has helped too - the timer reminds him, rather than me 'nagging'.


I take Flocker Spotter's point about giving them the responsibility to manage their time. But we tried that with DS and he'd spend 12 hours if he could. I am trying not to be controlling, but trying to 'scaffold' my 13 year old learning self-discipline/ time management, and we do try and talk about it with him in those terms. A friend with 3 boys says age 12-14 were the worst for the screen obsession, so I am slightly holding on to that, and murmuring "this too shall pass" to myself.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Maybe Angelina did see them, however how many people and drivers didn't?  Just takes one to cause life changing for both.  Wouldn't it be more sensible if cyclists realised lights and reflective gear is not just to help them see but to potentially save their lives by making them visible to all. 
    • I agree with this, I'm afraid.  I see it every day within the industry - a lot of it is to do with the fact that the people working in it are younger now and don't realise how much they're being subconsciously indoctrinated by certain forces (social media and group-think), so they're now pathologically incapable of objectivity. Also, they don't read books, pick up the phone to experts, or generally know how to research properly.  On a lot of documentaries I've worked on, I've been leant on hard to peddle narratives that are not only heavily biased, but often outright inaccurate, and I've fought back where I can. It's really depressing,  I'd like to think that, at the BBC, I'd be immune from these influences, and allowed to project a 360 view, but it's sadly  not the case. You'd also be surprised at how toothless the BBC can be when presented with something that's irrefutable but could, say, upset Murdoch or the DM...  Hands up, I'm guilty of platforming extreme right-wingers, misogynists, anti-abortionists, racists, anarchists, pro gun lobbyists, rape-apologists... you name it, I'm all for putting them in a programme. Even though I deplore what they stand for, it's important to me to have a counter-view, and they almost always hang themselves.  (Job done.)  It's funny that certain people are up in arms about Rockets posting 'misinformation' in the Traffic threads, but  seem OK with it in broadcast, as long as it aligns with their views. You have to ask yourselves, what is it that you really want? If it's an echo chamber then just watch Fox News or CNN, however you lean. But then what's the point of it all? I fear the ship's sailed, so I don't know why I bother. 
    • That’s right, we could see them passing us at the stops and then as we overtook them. There was one moped without lights doing about 30mph.    Stupid is one word, but when it puts pedestrians at risk, it’s a different word. We’ll be raising it and hopefully get some publicity about road safety awareness 
    • Yes, your name and political views aren't mentioned there, you see. But what the title of the thread does refer to is a report in the Telegraph (and other right wing and, actually, left wing media) on an internal BBC memo that was considered by the BBC board on 17 October 2025 and which was so devastating the Director General himself considered he should resign.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...