Over the last decade or so there has been mounting concern about the effect of television and videos on young children.

A huge increase in television programmes now available which are particularly aimed at young infants has occurred, despite warnings from experts that children younger than 2 years should not watch any television at all.

Along with the plethora of such programmes has come more and more evidence of the potential adverse effects of television exposure on young children.

Researchers in the U.S. are now saying because infants in low-income families are watching television or videos, with a supposedly ‘educational’ basis, their mothers rarely speak to them.

Lead author Dr. Alan L. Mendelsohn says many of the programmes marketed as educational have limited data to support such claims and these claims were even less so if no co-viewing with a parent took place.

Dr. Mendelsohn and his colleagues set out to measure the verbal interaction between mother and infants associated with media exposure and maternal co-viewing; to do so they carried out an analysis of 154 low socio-economic status mothers-infant pairs who were taking part in a long-term study on early child development.

It was revealed that over one 24-hour period, 149 of 154 mothers reported that their 6-month-old infants had a total of 426 exposures to television or videos.

These included 139 exposures to educational programs for young children; 46 to non-educational programs for young children; 205 to programs for school-aged children, teenagers or adults; and 36 to unknown programs.

The researchers found that of those 426 television and video exposures, mothers talked to their infants during only 101 of them.

They say their findings support their hypothesis that interactions were most commonly reported in association with educational content, especially programs that had been co-viewed; however half of the exposures consisted of programs not intended for young children.

Even when they were intended for young children they did not involve frequent interactions when they were co-viewed.

The researchers say the findings are important, because parent-infant interactions are associated with long-term developmental-behavioural outcomes and they say verbal exchanges happen more often with reading and playing with toys.

The researchers say given the large amount of media exposure and low verbal interaction, more research is called for to determine whether such media exposure is of benefit to young children.

They say programs with educational content were no more likely to be co-viewed than were other programs and the research does not support the development of infant-directed educational programmes on the basis that they increase co-viewing and interaction.

The study is published in the current issue of the Archives of Pediatrics & Internal Medicine.

Source: News-Medical.net, Australia
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=38136

It’s one of the first things every new parent wants to know: How do I calm my crying baby, especially at bedtime. Many have heard we should just let them “cry it out.” But is that really best for your baby?

“A long-standing myth is the idea that if you pick up a crying child, you are really hurting this child. You are spoiling the child, you are reinforcing the whining, this crying and you’re going to create this crying baby and you should just kind of keep your distance. Then they will become strong and independent,” said Dr. John Gottman, Gottman Institute. “Just the opposite is true. We have learned that if the parent is a source of comfort, children feel comforted and safe and they go off by themselves and become strong and independent.”

OK, so we shouldn’t just let them “cry it out.” When they’re older, apparently we should also work harder at “talking it out.” “Time-outs,” say experts, are not the best way to discipline your little one.

“One of the things we encourage parents to do instead of time outs is time ins, which is a way of supporting a child to stay in a relationship rather than feeling abandoned in some way, to begin to think that there’s somebody that wants to work through things with them,” said Dr. Kent Hoffman, Marycliff Institute.

So don’t just send your child to his room. Really talk through the problem, until it’s resolved. And what about overall communication with your child? Most of us grew up with mom or dad running the show and junior just expected to follow along.

But the experts say parent-child communication should not be a one-way street.

“If they are understood by the parents and communication goes both ways, what happens really is the channel of communication is always kept open so the children, if they are in trouble, if they are going through a difficult experience, they can talk to their parents about it,” said Gottman.

From talking to toys: Do kids really need all those elaborate ‘educational’ toys to thrive? The experts say not at all. When it comes to toys, they say the simplest ones are often best.

“Now blocks have never, ever made the claim that they teach language or even, for that matter, make young engineers out of kids. It’s just about fun,” said Dr. Dimitri Christakis, Seattle Children’s Hospital. “But that kind of interactive play is really vital to children’s cognitive development. And it’s very much missing from the kind of media products that are targeting infants right now.”

And what about those media products? Can TV, especially so-called educational children’s shows, really be good for babies?

“There isn’t any evidence at all that infant TV viewing is helpful or beneficial to them in any way,” said Christakis. “In fact, the best available evidence suggests that it’s harmful.”

Remember the phrase “Father knows best?” Well, maybe not always. The experts say one of the best gifts a parent can give a child of any age is to simply say, “I was wrong, I’m sorry,” then work together on making it right.

Source: KING5.com, WA
http://tinyurl.com/3w3d7m

Mums can improve their kids academic performance by encouraging them to read more, says an expert.

Sharon Darling, president and founder of the National Centre for Family Literacy has suggested that incorporating a daily reading habit is essential for childrens future academic success.

Many moms wonder what they can do to help their children be successful in school. The answer is surprisingly simple, said Darling.

Many of the things parents do with their children as they work, play, read and talk together have an impact on the skills needed to become a confident and competent student.

Singing songs, making up silly rhymes, talking about what you see, pointing out letters and words in the environment and reading together are just a few activities parents can do, she added.

Creating reading rituals by setting aside a special time and place every day so that they enjoy stories without interruptions.

Moreover, cuddling closely with your child to foster a sense of security can actually eliminate stress that scientists believe produce hormones, which blocks learning.

Mealtimes can be the best opportunity to enhance learning skills.
Various programs have shown success in incorporating mealtime with literacy. In Southern California, the McDonalds Family Mealtime Literacy Nights have resulted in parents using its strategies and materials at home to improve literacy skills.

You can talk to your kids while driving across town or on vacation and looking for signs with words that begin with the same letters as childs name. Each person remembers what the other items were and adds an item that begins with the next letter of the alphabet.

Use techniques for reading that have been proven to increase effectiveness in reading time, providing sound effects to capture their attention, making connections between the spoken and written word because hearing sounds in words is a basic skill needed for reading, talking about the story to reinforce comprehension and memory skills and reading again and again as it helps children recognize and remember words.

Source: Thaindian.com, Thailand
http://tinyurl.com/6oy4zr

Check-out marketing is genius - strategically placed goodies at the point of purchase, designed to entice the wandering eyes of children. Add parents who are tired, running late or too scared of a public tantrum to say no, and you’ve got yourself a sale.

My three-year-old son recently weaselled his way into a toy mobile phone at the register, but it was tech talent, not pester power, that earned him the score.

With the ease of an expert, he flipped open the phone and began an imaginary phone call to his grandmother, announcing he had a new “mobo” and arranging a time to visit. It was hard not to reward such creativity.

The gadget now joins his already impressive tech collection - a toy laptop, portable DVD player, digital set-top box, walkie-talkie and a Nintendo Wii, which his father argued would be great exercise thanks to its motion-sensing remote.

Granted, our junior geek comes from a tech-savvy family, but he’s not uncommon among his generation. Tots of the 21st century have been wired from the womb, with the rise of interactive tech toys such as LeapFrog’s learning system, computer tuition that now begins at kindergarten and “switched on” parents role-modelling the digital age of computers, mobiles and portable media.

The question is: how good is that early tech exposure for our kids, and are the bytes and buttons holding them back from important development that can’t be gained on a machine?

Private tech educators such as Computer Gym and ComputerTots, which run weekly half-hour computer classes at pre-schools across the country, argue there are educational rewards from the preschool PC program where three and four-year-olds learn how to open a document, surf the net and navigate through software.

ComputerTots director Sheri Borman, a trained psychologist and mother of three, says their computer classes are preparing pre-schoolers for primary education, introducing them to the building blocks of mathematics and reading.”

The menu that they navigate through is a left-to-right progression like reading, and you can give a character like a robot a sequence of instructions, which is an important part of mathematics,” Mrs Borman says.

The former crisis counsellor refers to more than a dozen research studies that demonstrate pre-school children who are exposed to technology in a structured way have better schoolreadiness skills, better verbal skills and better cognitive skills. In one US study, four-year-olds with computer skills had IQs that were on average 12 points higher.

“Most of the time it’s working on a computer, but it could also be using a digital microscope or a video camera.

“It’s about submerging the children in a technological culture because we don’t want children to be intimidated by (software such as) Adobe Photoshop; we want them, even at kindergarten level, not to be fearful of trying technology.”

Computer Gym’s director Chris Bouwmeester says its pre-school computer classes reach 2000 children nationally, but demand has changed very little in the past 15 years.

What has shifted is parental expectation that early childhood education will include computers.

“One of the biggest restrictions facing parents is having appropriate software that remains engaging for children. Parents might have one or two such titles, but it’s hard to cover the range of topics that we do - that’s one of the reasons parents appreciate the service,” Mr Bouwmeester says.

What both kiddie computer groups agree on is that the ultimate benefit of the tech classes for tots lies not in the curriculum but in the personal interaction and social experience.

“Our teachers are with the children and can build on the learning experience they are getting - very different from plonking a child in front of a computer and letting them go for it,” Mr Bouwmeester says. “The lessons are valuable for children because they are in a group - having a great laugh and sharing discoveries and experiences.”

Leading pediatric researcher and author Professor Frank Oberklaid, who is the director of the Centre for Community Child Health at the Royal Children’s Hospital, says before the age of five a child needs one thing above all else to fully develop their brain - people.

“What children need more than anything in those early years is relationships so they can learn to socialise, take turns, deal with frustrations. That’s infinitely more important than anything else,” he says.

What concerns him about the rising interest in tech toys and tuition is the unfounded belief that parents are giving their children a head start in learning.

“Do children of today need to learn computer skills? Yes, of course. It’s the new literacy,” Professor Oberklaid says. “But there’s a real concern about “hothousing” - exposing two, three and four-year-olds to stimulating activities like Baby Einstein and flash cards that help teach your child to read by three. There’s no evidence that ‘hothousing’ makes any long-term difference (to education).”

He says the commercialism of “hothousing” is simply preying on the guilt of middle-class parents who want to give children the best of everything, with technology the latest arena in which to compete.

“I’m concerned about the pressure on parents,” Professor Oberklaid says. “Hugh Mackay calls it the ‘overscheduled’ child. I’ve seen it in my patients. Technology is one more pressure on guilty parents.”

Child psychologist Evelyn Field believes working parents and our culture of “busyness” has created a generation of passive parents, who often turn to “cyberia” for baby-sitting.

“Parents are scrambling towards technology. They’re busy and tired and under pressure and a lot of them don’t have the time or energy. They’re putting children in front of the screen, and you can’t blame them,” she says.

Ms Field says the problem with unsupervised tech time is that young children can miss out on wide-ranging experiences such as creative play, exercise and friendships.

“Life changes all the time. Even if you watch the fish pond or the clouds every day, it’s going to change, but you don’t have the same variety of combinations on a digital screen,” she says. “It’s so important that kids get sensory experience to build the brain in the first three to four years of life.”

Dr Joe Tucci, CEO of the Australian Childhood Foundation, says the latest research shows that excessive tech consumption by children can lead to depression, anxiety and aggression.

“Technology tends to be an isolating experience,” he says. “Some of the problems we’re seeing with aggression and ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder) in kids can be traced back to socially limiting experiences that technology forces kids to have.”

Child psychiatrist Professor Philip Graham, of London’s Institute of Child Health, also notes an increase in children’s mental health problems over the last quarter of the 20th century - which coincides with the dawn of the computer age and rising consumerism.

He says a recent survey in Britain showed that adults are concerned about the negative impact of materialism on children, incuding devices such as iPods, computers and mobile phones.

“Children have always been acquisitive and always will be, but increasingly they are defined by what they own rather than what they are,” he told Livewire.

Dr Tucci says that while some of these tech toys offer important stimulation, they’re also priming toddlers to be consumers before their time. “Yes, it’s cute and it’s role-playing, but equally it’s also preparing children to be consumers, and that’s the rub.”

All the experts agree that the healthiest way to introduce young kids to technology is with supervision and limits - no more than two hours of technology time a day with a balance of activity both indoors and outdoors, alone and in a group, involving both structured and free play.

Dr Tucci warns that to combat ballooning rates of child obesity, brain games need to be curbed to allow for real life action. “Unlike activities like sport or reading, technology has the potential to swamp children because it is so exciting with all of the colour and movement,” he says.

“We have to ground children in the physical space to learn about their bodies. Otherwise we’ve got a job in front of us to make exercise as exciting and interesting as technology.”

Dubbed the “genius” in her play group, two-year old Annika displays the makings of an IT whizz, having already mastered redial on her mother’s mobile, the CD-ROM and the TV remote.

“If she wants to talk to her Nanny she just presses and holds number 3 on my mobile,” says her mum, Donna Evans.

“Yesterday she rang my mother-in-law. I have to put the mobile phone out of her reach now.”

While Annika’s parents are happy to foster the tech interest, they’re also wary of overexposure. “We make sure she’s not a drone in front of the TV. We also incorporate a lot of the imaginary toys, like the kitchen appliances, so that she’s role playing and not just pressing buttons.”

Ms Evans admits she likes the learning benefits of Annika’s tech talent - as long as it remains enjoyable.

“Sometimes I feel like I’m pushing her learning, but she has the potential to be bright quite young and the tech stuff really gives her an interest in learning. I just don’t want an expectation placed on her to perform.”

The couple are also considering the unstructured education of Montessori, which doesn’t introduce computers until primary level.

“The Montessori perspective is that young children before the age of six need to learn with their hands,” Montessori trainer Amy Kirkham says.

“Computers tend to be more abstract, which is why we don’t use them until primary school.” Young mum Sandra Griffin says her friends always joke that her three-year-old son, Matt, is going to be in IT when he grows up.

He’s already mastered the computer, he has a list of his favourite websites and performs regular virus checks on the PC.

Thanks to the online games he plays he knows his colours, the alphabet, patterns and some basic maths, including counting to 20.

“I honestly believe that computers are a valuable tool in teaching kids,” Ms Griffin explains.

“Not only has it helped with Mattie’s knowledge and brain development but it also helped his fine motor skills and increased his attention span to the point where at just three years of age he can concentrate on one activity for an hour.”

The only downside is what it’s costing the family in gadgets - including a Nintendo DS for the next birthday - and $70 for each game after that.

Source: Sydney Morning Herald, Australia
http://tinyurl.com/3p7a7s

I wrote a glowing review of the new Grand Theft Auto game in the Chronicle today. Like most of my video game coverage, the writing is aimed in large part for people who don’t play. I figured out a long time ago that there are a lot more non-gamer parents and grandparents reading the print edition of the Chronicle than 18-year-olds or even people my age.

I loved the game, and have long believed that the GTA series is grossly misunderstood and demonized by people who don’t understand it. It reminds me of the people who said that listening to Elvis would make us all sex addicts and that Dungeons & Dragons was going to make me a serial killer. Still waiting for that to happen …

When I started writing about video games in 2002, I felt like there was no one else in the mainstream media that felt the way I did. But now I can recommend a lot of places where parents can get video game coverage that doesn’t seem like it’s written in a foreign language and isn’t run by some right-wing religious nuts who just want to ban games that they haven’t played.

Here are some of my favorites …

Whattheyplay.com: Started by two guys who helped start the video game site 1UP.com, Whattheyplay is the only parenting site I know that was founded and is run by gamers. They stick to just the facts, clinically listing the specific sex, violence and other content in video games. They also run a lot of features to help demystify games for non-gamer parents — such as advice on how to get hard-to-find consoles like the Wii. Here’s an article I wrote about them.

Commonsensemedia.org: I don’t agree with everything they do, but their core mission — educating parents about games and other kid-oriented media — is extremely important. Politicians and anti-game activists should stop trying to criminalize video games and treat them like other forms of art. Common Sense seems to get that and advocates for parents with a minimum of judgement.

N’Gai Croal’s video game blog: I don’t usually plug the competition, but the fact is that maybe 10 percent of my job involves writing about games, and I’ll never do it as comprehensively or successfully as this Newsweek writer/blogger. N’Gai Croal’s blog Level Up has become an important bridge between the mainstream media and hard-core gamers, writing intelligently and concisely about important issues. He’s also a very entertaining writer. Whether you play games or have kids who do, bookmark his site.

Source: San Francisco Chronicle, USA
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=29&entry_id=26113

Computer games and fast food have been blamed by doctors for a startling rise in the number of children being treated in hospital for sleep disorders.

Eating too much sugary food is also blamed for preventing children from dropping off to sleep.

Newly released NHS figures show that the number of under-11s referred to hospital specialists for insomnia, sleep-walking and sleep-related breathing problems has rocketed by 26 per cent over the past five years.

But the true numbers affected could be much higher because the figures reflect only those seeking medical help.

Studies have linked poor sleep to Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). And lack of sleep harms children’s ability to learn at school.

Psychologist Chireal Shallow, of the Naturally Nurturing clinic for children’s sleep disorders in London, said: “There are likely to be thousands more children whose parents do not seek treatment.

“A lot of the problem is guilty parenting where kids are allowed the rule of the roost because Mum and Dad come home from work late.

“The light, sound and movement of television or computer screens is stimulating and keeps children awake and there should be at least an hour’s gap before going to bed.”

Nick Seaton, chairman of the Campaign for Real Education, said: “It’s absolutely crazy for parents to let their children go to bed any time they like.

“Parents need to exert more authority and remove computer games from bedrooms to make sure kids have the best start in life. I’m sure teachers would be delighted.”

The NHS statistics show nearly 3,000 children under 11 had their sleep monitored overnight by specialists during 2006 compared with only 2,200 in 2002.

Of those, 1,733 were boys.

Professor Jim Horne of the Sleep Research Centre at Loughborough University, said that children aged five to eight are particularly vulnerable to sleep problems as a result of ‘electronic distractions’ because having a rigid bedtime routine is so important to them.

“If they sleep better, the ADHD symptoms disappear.”

Jane Howell, 34, from Morden, South West London, struggled for years to get her son Marcel, now 13, to sleep.

After spending most of the day at school in front of a computer, Marcel would spend the evenings watching television but then found it hard to drop off, often not falling asleep until just a few hours before he had to be up again. “Eventually the problem got so bad that Jane approached a sleep clinic. “She said: “The clinic asked me about his routines and said computers, televisions and mobile phones were a distraction.

“They told me to minimise the time he uses computers and after 8pm it’s now wind-down time.

“He now has much more energy and is sleeping better. As parents you have to be hard on your kids. They want to do their own thing but you have to be strict.”

Dr Rob Primhak, a consultant paediatric respiratory physician at Sheffield Children’s Hospital, said there was now a shortage of specialists due to the numbers coming in.

“There has been a huge surge in demand,” he said.

Mandy Gurney, of the Millpond Children’s Sleep Clinic in London, said: “Not getting a good night’s sleep can have the same effect as four units of alcohol, so imagine what it is like for a child.”

Source: Daily Mail, UK
http://tinyurl.com/4ktvhr

Boys at nursery should be allowed to play with toy guns, despite claims from women’s groups that it makes them aggressive and could lead to long-term damage.

Researchers want unofficial bans on pretend weapons in Scotland’s nurseries to be scrapped, claiming they play an important role in a child’s development.

Government agency Learning and Teaching Scotland teamed up with a Perthshire primary school to carry out the study.

It found that playing with toy guns promoted boys’ learning and inclusion, boosted their imagination and prevented the playtime sport from being driven ’underground’.

Women’s groups said the return of pretend weapons to nurseries “re-inforced age-old stereotypes.”

But Murdo Fraser, MSP, the Scottish Conservative deputy leader, welcomed the findings and said: “This is one in the eye for the politically correct brigade.

“Little boys will always want to play with make-believe weapons and it has been completely misguided to try and ban them from schools and nurseries.

“I’m glad to see good sense prevailing at last.”

And Eleanor Coner, information officer for the Scottish Parent Teacher Council, said boys were only playing an exciting game and did not understand the adult connotations.

She added: “It is in a little boy’s make-up to want to do that sort of thing. We are thinking that they are shooting each other.

“They don’t know they are shooting each other, they are just making a noise and shouting ’bang’ because that’s exciting.”

Jenny Kemp, of women’s support group Zero Tolerance, however, believes toy guns in nurseries is a bad idea.

Miss Kemp said: “Young children need to learn from an early age that violence is preventable.

“Nursery teachers have a clear role to play in this. They need to intervene when boys or girls want to play in aggressive ways, and to help children understand that there are different ways of showing that you are strong or brave.

“Re-inforcing age-old stereotypes about boys’ so called ’natural’ interest in guns and fighting is not helpful.

“What is needed is a real effort to break down the sterotypes that hold children back and can have lasting and damaging effects on their life chances.”

Nursery teacher Cath Livingstone reversed a toy gun ban for the study because she felt children were being forced to play away from the adults.

Miss Livingstone said: “No matter what was said, guns just went underground. The shooting and martial arts continued when some of our boys believed they were away from adult supervision.

“By playing banned games, they were breaking the rules. They appeared to feel they needed to be deceitful in order to pursue an activity to which they felt drawn.”

The research was carried out at Abernethy Primary School Nursery Class in Perthshire. The majority of early learning centres have banned toy guns to try to prevent youngsters growing into tearaways.

But Ms Livingstone said there was no rise in bad behaviour when they were allowed back into the classroom.

To prevent fighting, any youngsters playing with pretend weapons were not allowed to touch other children. Children were only allowed to ’shoot’ those involved in the game.

Ms Livingstone added: “The children, and in particular the boys, have become more open with the adults in the setting and happier to discuss and so construct their knowledge about the world.

“They have also become more considerate of others, aggression has not been an issue.”

Source: UK Express, UK
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/41066/Let-boys-have-guns-say-experts

A proposal to restrict the sale of violent video games in Massachusetts has caused famed horror author Stephen King (…), who admits he is no fan of video games, to speak out against what he refers to as the government’s surrogate parenting.

“According to the proposed bill, violent video games are pornographic and have no redeeming social merit,” he wrote in an Entertainment Weekly column. “What makes me crazy is when politicians take it upon themselves to play surrogate parents. The results of that are usually disastrous. Not to mention undemocratic.”

Designated HB 1423, the state legislation would limit the sale of violent video games to anyone under the age of 18. “Which means, by the way, that a 17-year-old who can get in to see Hostel: Part II would be forbidden by law from buying (or renting, one supposes) the violent but less graphic Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas,” King pointed out. “If there’s violence to be had, the kids are gonna find a way to get it.”

Instead of a state-mandated restriction on violent game sales–many of which have been found to be unconstitutional in the past–King suggested that parents make an effort to take a more active role in raising their children as video games are not the only readily available source of violence in America.

“There’s a lot more to America’s culture of violence than Resident Evil 4,” he explained. “Parents need to have the guts to forbid material they find objectionable…and then explain why it’s being forbidden. They also need to monitor their children’s lives in the pop culture–which means a lot more than seeing what games they’re renting down the street.”

Source: Shacknews
http://www.shacknews.com/onearticle.x/52090

Fine line between normal use and going overboard

A few weeks ago, Walnut Creek Intermediate’s auditorium was crammed with parents eager to hear therapist Steven Freemire’s take on Wii, iPhones and cyber-addiction.

He started the talk with a few examples drawn from friends’ and patients’ experiences, including the following scenario: It’s a sunny Sunday afternoon, and a Walnut Creek teen is indoors, gazing unblinking at the flickering screen. For hours, she buffets the game-controller buttons, eager to reach the next level and the next and the next. Finally, six hours later, she tears herself away and goes on with her day.

“Problem?” Freemire asked.

Seventy hands shoot up.

In truth, however, the answer is no. This particular girl has a great circle of friends, gets consistently good grades and plays competitive soccer. And after an intense week, capped off by a Saturday spent on the soccer field, she was simply decompressing on a Sunday - her one day to relax - with a new video game.

“Six hours could be a danger,” Freemire said. “It wasn’t in this case.”

Less than a year after the American Medical Association backed away from labeling video-game addiction a mental illness, the debate rages on, particularly for the families of the 10percent to 14percent of avid gamers who have become so obsessed with video games, Facebook and other computer- based pastimes that their virtual lives are damaging their reality.

“There’s a fine line between addiction and the fact that most of our lives are spent on online,” said Larry Rosen, a California State University, Dominguez Hills, professor who wrote Me, MySpace and I: Parenting the Net Generation.

“Kids? Their whole social life is online. They’re IMing, and if you throw in texting and (school) work, it’s 50 hours a week. Is that addicted or are they just responding to their world?”

The line is crossed, he says, when grades drop, chores go undone, and children disappear from the family dinner table, wooed by the allure of that glowing screen.

It’s not just teens, of course. While we most frequently associate cyber-addiction with video games, adults are notorious for their dependency on BlackBerrys, compulsive e-mail checking and the “just one more thing” approach that keeps them online half the night, Lafayette therapist Dominic D’Ambrosio said.

A 2006 Stanford School of Medicine study found that 14percent of the nation’s Internet users - adults, not kids - found it difficult to stay off-line for several days, and nearly 9percent had lied about their Internet use to spouses, friends and colleagues.

And according to a Harris Interactive poll conducted last year, the average adolescent plays 13 hours of video games each week. Teen boys average 18 hours.

Interestingly, young gamers worry about their own level of addiction. About 44percent of the young gamers in the survey reported their friends were “addicted,” and 23percent of the boys said they worried about themselves, as well.

Determining addiction is about more than just adding up the hours, said Douglas Gentile, an Iowa State psychology professor who directs research at the National Institute on Media and the Family.

Gentile adapted gambling addiction criteria from the American Psychiatric Association’s diagnostic manual on mental disorders to paint a vivid pathological portrait of kids - and adults - whose obsession with and need for increasing amounts of game play to reach the same level of thrill, spills into the rest of life, sabotaging relationships, school, work and eventually health.

But if families and video gamers themselves knew what to watch for, experts say, problems could be alleviated before they become destructive.

Yet, self-regulation is key, Freemire said, because trying to ban the Internet is like banning food. It’s too ingrained in daily life at school, at work and at home, precisely because of its positives.

Text messages become notes of reassurance flowing between kids at college and their siblings back home. Facebook, Skype and Web cams bring faraway friends and family close. And Joseph Ross’ grandparents swing by his Pleasant Hill house each week to play.

“They always want to do the Wii bowling,” said Joseph’s mom, Julie. “My dad’s 83, and we can’t keep him away from the Wii.”

Source: Los Angeles Daily News, CA
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_8825402

‘Kids don’t need protection, we need guidance.” That quote from an unnamed British child appears in Safer Children in a Digital World: The Report of the Byron Review. The review, initiated by British Prime Minister Gordon Brown in September and conducted by clinical psychologist Tanya Byron, was released late last week in Britain and was front-page news there. Child safety, the Internet, video games - these are hot topics.

However, the report has been largely ignored in Canada. I spent several days this week calling federal and provincial officials, looking for someone who had at least heard of the thing and could comment on its relevance here, and it did not bear much fruit. Still, after reading the report’s 226 pages, I think one thing is clear: A lot more people in Canada, parents especially, should read it too.

Dr. Byron was asked to analyze the risks and benefits presented by new technologies, specifically the Internet and video games, and their impact on childhood brain development. Her task was to look at what was already being done in Britain to safeguard kids from online predators and material meant for adults, whether in games or on websites, and then make recommendations for improvements.

In terms of video games, the report does all this masterfully. It is a beacon of common sense in what can be a polarized debate.

On the violence front, for example, there is a school of thought, based on research conducted almost exclusively in the United States, that games desensitize players to violence and actively lead them astray. (Last week, one British tabloid offered hundreds of pounds to anyone who would publicly trace their criminal behaviour back to video games; there have been no takers yet.) At the opposite end of the spectrum are proponents of the “catharsis effect,” the idea that exposure to violent content can purge players of their violent compulsions.

Dr. Byron parsed the existing research into those theories, and found almost all of it wanting. Throughout the video-game sections and the rest of the report, she urges people to “take into account children’s individual strengths and vulnerabilities, because the factors that can discriminate a ‘beneficial’ from a ‘harmful’ experience online and in video games will often be individual factors in the child.”

The review calls for a comprehensive marketing and education program, paid for by industry and government, to better prepare parents and children for their increasingly digital lives.

Her findings also set out three main areas of concern related to games and young minds: 1) Games can take up too much time and get in the way of other activities; 2) online games carry with them the risk of exposure to potentially harmful outsiders, in the same way the Internet does; and 3) young people often gain access to games meant for an older audience.

Regarding that last issue, Dr. Byron recommended that parents be made more aware of parental controls that can filter content for individual players on game consoles and computers. The review also calls for the British video-game rating system to be overhauled so that film classifications, with which parents are familiar, appear on the front of game packaging. It will be a big switch for the British review board, but it would be even more onerous here: Canada has seven provincial agencies charged with classifying movies, and all video games are currently rated by the U.S.-based Entertainment Software Rating Board.

Of course, since the Conservatives seem to be guided by the philosophy that government is useless, I don’t expect meaningful action on Internet and gaming issues any time soon.

That shouldn’t stop parents and others, however, from cherry-picking from this impressive, balanced piece of work. The full report, an executive summary and a special section for kids can be found at http://www.dfes.gov.uk/byronreview.

Source: Globe and Mail, Canada
http://tinyurl.com/4fhz73