View previous topic | View next topic

Stroller Stress and other sins.

Page 1 of 5
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Arcane
448583.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:04 am Reply with quote

What terrible crime are parents committing now? Abuse? Neglect? Deprivation?

No....it's this:

From the Brisbane Courier Mail.

"Babies transported in forward-facing strollers could end up "emotionally impoverished" due to the lack of face-to-face contact with the parent pushing them, a British study has suggested.

Having infants facing their parents gives them positive re-assurance and reduces mental stress, said researchers at Dundee University in Scotland.

"Neuroscience has helped us to learn how important social interaction during the early years is for children's brain development" said Suzanne Zeedyk of the university's School of Psychology. "Our data suggests that for many babies today, life in a buggy is emotionally impoverished and possibly stressful. Stressed babies grow into anxious adults."

The study found 25 per cent of parents using face-to-face strollers spoke to their babies more than twice as many than with away-facing strollers, the most common type.

The heart rate of babies who could see the person pushing them was also lower, and the infants were twice as likely to fall asleep, the study found.

The study involved nearly 3000 parent-infant pairs, including a test where babies were pushed half the time facing their parent, and half the time facing away."

I found This article very good, with links to various articles, the press release from Dundee University and some of the rather more slightly hysterical headlines from various newspapers.


Last edited by Arcane on Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:11 am; edited 1 time in total

 
zomgmouse
448584.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:11 am Reply with quote

Will I be the only person to say that this is complete and utter sloblock?
Oh sure, it may be that these studies were performed but WHY? I really can't get over the fact that people ACTUALLY RESEARCH this.
"emotionally impoverished" my foot. I don't actually think this makes even the tiniest difference on how a person will turn out. On the contrary, the parent will be so distracted that they will walk onto the road and be hit by a bus.
This doesn't sound any different to the "eat spinach with strawberries and you are 27% more likely to be pregnant with triplets" rubbish.

 
Arcane
448586.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:14 am Reply with quote

Well I said something along those lines zomg, basically it was "What a load of PANTS".

My own daughter had a forward/backward facing stroller - she's one of the most chatty and social young persons you'll ever be likely to meet.

I told my friend about this article and she roared with laughter. "Erm, did they ever think that a) the reason why their heart rates were higher was because they were actually being stimulated, and that b) they fell asleep because they were bored with looking at their bloody mother still and again?"

Honestly. The crappy guilt trips they lay on parents....

 
zomgmouse
448588.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:17 am Reply with quote

Well, I'm just glad that someone other than me (and with parenting experience, mind you!) finds this sort of stuff bonkers.

 
dr.bob
448595.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 5:54 am Reply with quote

reddygirl wrote:
I told my friend about this article and she roared with laughter. "Erm, did they ever think that a) the reason why their heart rates were higher was because they were actually being stimulated, and that b) they fell asleep because they were bored with looking at their bloody mother still and again?"


Heh, nice one! I thought it might be something to do with the fact that backwards facing buggies tend to be of the more expensive kind, with better cushioning and a more comfortable ride, whilst cheap and nasty buggies which look very uncomfortable tend to be of the forward facing variety.

I like the idea of kids falling asleep 'cos they're bored of staring at their mother, though :)

 
crissdee
448623.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 6:38 am Reply with quote

On a similar topic;

When my brother and sister in law were expecting the little bundle of joy that proved to be my niece, I decided to make a cot for the putative child. They were entirely chuffed with the idea but requested that I make it without rockers as this had been established to be harmful to the child's later development. So, after about ten thousand years and several hundred generations of rocking children to sleep, this is suddenly wrong?

 
nostradamus
448629.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 7:04 am Reply with quote

I really don't think this study means anything unless the children/parents being studied only spoke to their children whilst in the pram, I think conversely that a child facing forward has more experience of the world and surely it's the parents job to give the child as much experience as possible.

 
Arcane
448652.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:05 am Reply with quote

dr.bob wrote:
reddygirl wrote:
I told my friend about this article and she roared with laughter. "Erm, did they ever think that a) the reason why their heart rates were higher was because they were actually being stimulated, and that b) they fell asleep because they were bored with looking at their bloody mother still and again?"


Heh, nice one! I thought it might be something to do with the fact that backwards facing buggies tend to be of the more expensive kind, with better cushioning and a more comfortable ride, whilst cheap and nasty buggies which look very uncomfortable tend to be of the forward facing variety.

I like the idea of kids falling asleep 'cos they're bored of staring at their mother, though :)


My daughters pram was one of the fancy types that faced backwards and forwards; backwards for when they're little, forwards for when they're older (you just flipped the handle over).

One thing my friend did think of was that why on earth would you want a toddler in a pram facing towards you, and the little beasties be kicking you all the time - as they do tend to kick their feet a lot?!

Oh.... this sort of stuff is laughable and a lot of PANTS. PANTS. PANTS. Every minute as a parent you're being told something causes your child permanent damage, harm or psychological problems. Parenting is hard enough without having every decision you make peppered with guilt trips like this! And now COTS?! Oh crikey. It just makes you want to run to the hills, find a cave and live like a hermit.

 
samivel
448655.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 8:15 am Reply with quote

No, you don't want to do that, it's been proven in studies that living like a hermit damages your brain.

:)

 
nostradamus
448683.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 9:25 am Reply with quote

Well I dont know what i've done to my children I have 3 prams one for tiny infant that transforms to a toddler type and one light weight one that faces forwards and a double buggy for both of the little chaps facing forward so they'll be all messed up not knowing whether we love them or hate them facing to us love facing away hate poor blighters are going to have schizophrenia when they are older, next THEY'll be telling us it's bad to throw them against the wall to see if they stick.

 
Jenny
448688.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 9:47 am Reply with quote

I do wish they would print in very large letters next to stories of this type that CORRELATION IS NOT THE SAME AS CAUSATION.

 
nostradamus
448693.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 9:53 am Reply with quote

Hear hear

 
Arcane
448698.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 10:09 am Reply with quote

Jenny wrote:
I do wish they would print in very large letters next to stories of this type that CORRELATION IS NOT THE SAME AS CAUSATION.


But that would make common sense Jenny... and what paper would be brave enough to do that?!

As soon as I read it, I said "WHAT?!", spluttered with indignation and snorted with disbelief. If you read the link that I included in the original post, it has some quite non hysterical (um shock) worded information.

 
Sebastian flyte
448809.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 12:44 pm Reply with quote

Odd though as tiny babies do tend to be in pushchairs facing Mummy while older babies the ones who sit tend to face out to the world, makes sense to me. The pushchairs I have seen anyway tend to be this way. I think again but would be wrong I expect that rockers are for cribs maybe a rocking stand and bassinet? with tiny babies in and then when they are older and more robust and 'move about on their own able' they have a cot to basically imprison them so they don't get out and hurt themselves.
I thought that was it anyway as a rocking cot (with gliders? I have never seen one actually) could prove a method of escape or at least play and cot time is for sleeping.

The article is poo though :)

 
Ion Zone
448941.  Mon Dec 01, 2008 4:44 pm Reply with quote

So we're calling prams 'strollers' now?

Quote:
PANTS. PANTS. PANTS.


It is not rubbish, it has been known for years that eye contact and faces help social development in the same way that language is helped by being spoken to. Of the babies who are carried in slings, those who face their parents tend to grow up being more emotionally sensitive, but less social than babys who face forwards.

Little things like this can have a huge impact, babies and toddlers are learning about their world constantly.

 

Page 1 of 5
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours


Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group