Am I being paranoid?

My wife and I (we both work 9 to 5 jobs) are lucky to have someone
that is able to care for our child during the day, a very good friend
that we have known for years. She's about to hit 50, never had a child
of her own, and taking care of a 6 month old is tough for one person.

So here are my questions:

She lets our 6 month old watch a puppet show on Sesame Street for 5
minutes tops, we're ok with that. That's all the TV he gets. When I'm
home watching NFL games on Sunday, sometimes he'll look at the TV but
he never seems interested. Is this going to hurt him? She's not
keeping him in front of the TV all day long.

She gave him a lick of a lollipop one time when she had to go to the
bank. Maybe it was a couple licks, maybe just one. We said no more,
and she understood, but is that a big deal?

I have my own "issues" - when I feel out of control i get real
irritable/edgy and I tend to freak out about things.

Is a little tv here and there and a lick of a lollipop here or there
going to hurt our 6 month old?

she takes great care of him - he's always happy to see her, he smiles
all the time , he does have "meltdowns" with her more than with us, so
we think he misses us or something because he just fussies a lot more.

but she is great with him, lets him play, crawl, she reads to him, she
doesn't leave him a lone for a minute, but it does get tiring on her
and her back, so sometimes he has to be left on the floor a little
longer than he wants only because she's constantly picking him up and
down (we coddle him a lot).

i just feel out of control and want the best for him and wonder if i
worry too much about these small things (tv, lollipop) and i need to
relax more and know he's in good hands?

On Nov 28, 1:14 pm, Psalm Nuclei wrote:
she takes great care of him - he's always happy to see her, he smiles
all the time , he does have "meltdowns" with her more than with us, so
we think he misses us or something because he just fussies a lot more.

but she is great with him, lets him play, crawl, she reads to him, she
doesn't leave him a lone for a minute, but it does get tiring on her
and her back, so sometimes he has to be left on the floor a little
longer than he wants only because she's constantly picking him up and
down (we coddle him a lot).

i just feel out of control and want the best for him and wonder if i
worry too much about these small things (tv, lollipop) and i need to
relax more and know he's in good hands?

I think worrying is part of job description as a parent. I can tell
you not to worry but I don't know if you'll stop

I believe that kids should learn how to entertain themselves. If the
child always looks to someone else to play with, it's going to be hard
on both the kid and the caretaker. So leaving him alone with toys by
himself (under supervision) is actually recommended. Same goes for
sleeping. Kids should be able to fall asleep by themselves. Otherwise
every time they wake up in the middle of the night, they'll need
someone to put them back to sleep... but that's another thread.

I don't like my kids to watch lot of TV but few minutes of TV at that
age won't do any harm. At that age, they are more interested in the
patterns and lights and moving images on TV.

In article ,
Psalm Nuclei says...

she takes great care of him - he's always happy to see her, he smiles
all the time , he does have "meltdowns" with her more than with us, so
we think he misses us or something because he just fussies a lot more.

but she is great with him, lets him play, crawl, she reads to him, she
doesn't leave him a lone for a minute, but it does get tiring on her
and her back, so sometimes he has to be left on the floor a little
longer than he wants only because she's constantly picking him up and
down (we coddle him a lot).

i just feel out of control and want the best for him and wonder if i
worry too much about these small things (tv, lollipop) and i need to
relax more and know he's in good hands?

My OB-Gyn had the best advice I've heard:

"Babies are made to live in caves."

So - turn down the heat, light a fire, and throw some bones in the corner ;-)

No really, babies grow up healthy and happy in all kinds of cultures and all
kinds of situations. The 50 year old lady sounds fine to me; it's more of a
matter if she is communicating well with you.

Banty

On Nov 28, 2:10 pm, Psalm Nuclei wrote:
My wife and I (we both work 9 to 5 jobs) are lucky to have someone
that is able to care for our child during the day, a very good friend
that we have known for years. She's about to hit 50, never had a child
of her own, and taking care of a 6 month old is tough for one person.

So here are my questions:

She lets our 6 month old watch a puppet show on Sesame Street for 5
minutes tops, we're ok with that. That's all the TV he gets. When I'm
home watching NFL games on Sunday, sometimes he'll look at the TV but
he never seems interested. Is this going to hurt him? She's not
keeping him in front of the TV all day long.

I don't think there is much evidence that watching television reduces
a child's intelligence. For infants, if listening to people talk is a
good thing, as many sources say, maybe hearing the "talk" on TV has
benefits. Raw scores on IQ tests have risen almost continually over
the years (the "Flynn effect"), and are higher now than before TV was
invented. Some people have speculated that watching complex television
shows can make people smarter http://www.marginalrevolution.com/ma..._the_flyn.html
..

The problem with TV IMO is not that it is intrinsically bad but that
it take can take time away from more worthwhile pursuits. Watching TV
won't make Junior dumb, but it won't teach him algebra, either. But 5
minutes or even 1 hour a day of TV would not have a substantial
"crowding out" affect.

If you look at international comparisons of students on tests,
American children do pretty well in the early grades but fall behind
by high school. This suggests to me that the parenting practices of
most middle class Americans are not impairing kids intellectually.
Maybe you are being paranoid .

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:05:46 -0800 (PST), Beliavsky wrote:

If you look at international comparisons of students on tests,
American children do pretty well in the early grades but fall behind
by high school. This suggests to me that the parenting practices of
most middle class Americans are not impairing kids intellectually.
Maybe you are being paranoid .

I wonder who they test when they do these tests. I wonder if American kids
do well early on because all the kids get tested early on. I wonder if we
do worse later because we test everyone, including special ed kids, while
kids in some other countries can't even attend high school unless their
parents have money or they have passed rigorous tests. Do they test the
kids in other countries like they do in the USA? Does it include kids
tracked into trade schools and non-academic persuits? Maybe kids in some
of those countries have a very high drop-out rate in high school and you're
only testing the cream of the crop.

toypup wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:05:46 -0800 (PST), Beliavsky wrote:

If you look at international comparisons of students on tests,
American children do pretty well in the early grades but fall behind
by high school. This suggests to me that the parenting practices of
most middle class Americans are not impairing kids intellectually.
Maybe you are being paranoid .

I wonder who they test when they do these tests. I wonder if American kids
do well early on because all the kids get tested early on. I wonder if we
do worse later because we test everyone, including special ed kids, while
kids in some other countries can't even attend high school unless their
parents have money or they have passed rigorous tests. Do they test the
kids in other countries like they do in the USA? Does it include kids
tracked into trade schools and non-academic persuits? Maybe kids in some
of those countries have a very high drop-out rate in high school and you're
only testing the cream of the crop.

There are boatloads of these studies, and they are
done with many different methodologies. Some of the studies are
apples to apples, and some aren't. There are differences, even
with the apples-to-apples tests, but that isn't particularly
surprising since different countries have different priorities,
different curricula, and different expectations.

Best wishes,
Ericka

On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:20:26 -0500, Ericka Kammerer wrote:

toypup wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:05:46 -0800 (PST), Beliavsky wrote:

If you look at international comparisons of students on tests,
American children do pretty well in the early grades but fall behind
by high school. This suggests to me that the parenting practices of
most middle class Americans are not impairing kids intellectually.
Maybe you are being paranoid .

I wonder who they test when they do these tests. I wonder if American kids
do well early on because all the kids get tested early on. I wonder if we
do worse later because we test everyone, including special ed kids, while
kids in some other countries can't even attend high school unless their
parents have money or they have passed rigorous tests. Do they test the
kids in other countries like they do in the USA? Does it include kids
tracked into trade schools and non-academic persuits? Maybe kids in some
of those countries have a very high drop-out rate in high school and you're
only testing the cream of the crop.

There are boatloads of these studies, and they are
done with many different methodologies. Some of the studies are
apples to apples, and some aren't. There are differences, even
with the apples-to-apples tests, but that isn't particularly
surprising since different countries have different priorities,
different curricula, and different expectations.

So, is the USA really that far off in the apples-to-appples tests? And I
do agree the priorities are different in the USA. Getting a well-rounded
education isn't a concern in some countries.

My parents thought education trumped everything. We had no chores, because
education was so important. I understand that is the case in many
cultures. I know of many kids raised like that. When people get upset
over certain cultures doing better, I have them consider what is being
sacrificed. It is not without cost.

toypup wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 16:20:26 -0500, Ericka Kammerer wrote:

toypup wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:05:46 -0800 (PST), Beliavsky wrote:

If you look at international comparisons of students on tests,
American children do pretty well in the early grades but fall behind
by high school. This suggests to me that the parenting practices of
most middle class Americans are not impairing kids intellectually.
Maybe you are being paranoid .
I wonder who they test when they do these tests. I wonder if American kids
do well early on because all the kids get tested early on. I wonder if we
do worse later because we test everyone, including special ed kids, while
kids in some other countries can't even attend high school unless their
parents have money or they have passed rigorous tests. Do they test the
kids in other countries like they do in the USA? Does it include kids
tracked into trade schools and non-academic persuits? Maybe kids in some
of those countries have a very high drop-out rate in high school and you're
only testing the cream of the crop.
There are boatloads of these studies, and they are
done with many different methodologies. Some of the studies are
apples to apples, and some aren't. There are differences, even
with the apples-to-apples tests, but that isn't particularly
surprising since different countries have different priorities,
different curricula, and different expectations.

So, is the USA really that far off in the apples-to-appples tests?

Depends on the apples being compared ;-) There are
scenarios in which US students fare better and scenarios in
which they fare worse. Which are more important depends on
which skills you think are most important overall.

And I
do agree the priorities are different in the USA. Getting a well-rounded
education isn't a concern in some countries.

My parents thought education trumped everything. We had no chores, because
education was so important. I understand that is the case in many
cultures. I know of many kids raised like that. When people get upset
over certain cultures doing better, I have them consider what is being
sacrificed. It is not without cost.

Absolutely.

Best wishes,
Ericka

On Nov 28, 3:56 pm, toypup wrote:
On Wed, 28 Nov 2007 12:05:46 -0800 (PST), Beliavsky wrote:
If you look at international comparisons of students on tests,
American children do pretty well in the early grades but fall behind
by high school. This suggests to me that the parenting practices of
most middle class Americans are not impairing kids intellectually.
Maybe you are being paranoid .

I wonder who they test when they do these tests. I wonder if American kids
do well early on because all the kids get tested early on. I wonder if we
do worse later because we test everyone, including special ed kids, while
kids in some other countries can't even attend high school unless their
parents have money or they have passed rigorous tests. Do they test the
kids in other countries like they do in the USA? Does it include kids
tracked into trade schools and non-academic persuits? Maybe kids in some
of those countries have a very high drop-out rate in high school and you're
only testing the cream of the crop.

The main cross-country comparison I know of is Trends in International
Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) http://nces.ed.gov/timss/ .
Some of the reports there may answer your questions. Because of a
printing error in test booklets, the U.S. will not be included in a
reading test that 56 other countries are participating in

For Want of a Proofreader, or at Least a Good One, a Reading Exam Is
Lost
By SAM DILLON
New York Times, November 20, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/education/20test.html