Consumer Group Calls for Recall on iPad-Equipped Newborn 'Apptivity' Seat

[MacRumors]

A consumer group is campaigning for a recall on an infant bouncy chair that comes equipped with an iPad stand, reports AllThingsD. The Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood (CCFC) is calling on parents and supporters to sign a petition directed at Fisher-Price Vice President David Allmark asking parent company Mattel to stop selling the Fisher-Price Newborn-to-Toddler Apptivity Seat for iPad.

The Apptivity seat, which is priced at $80, has an adjustable three-position seat designed to fit both infants and toddlers.

If you insert and lock your iPad® into the mirror's case, the visual display provides another way to stimulate and engage baby while protecting your device from baby's sticky fingers and preventing unintentional navigating to other apps.

According to the CCFC, which backs the American Academy of Pediatrics recommendation discouraging screen time for kids under age two, the iPad blocks the baby's view of the world and encourages parents to leave infants alone with iPads.

There are so many awful screen products for babies these days, but the Fisher-Price Newborn-to-Toddler Apptivity(TM) Seat for iPad® device is the worst yet. It's a bouncy seat for an infant - with a place for an iPad directly above the baby's face, blocking his or her view of the rest of the world. And because screens can be mesmerizing and babies are strapped down and "safely" restrained, it encourages parents to leave infants all alone with an iPad. To make matters even worse, Fisher-Price is marketing the Apptivity Seat - and claiming it's educational - for newborns.

"It is wrong to create a product whose very existence suggests that it's fine to leave babies as young as newborns alone and with an iPad inches from their face," says CCFC, while urging consumers to support the petition demanding the product be removed from store shelves. Josh Golin, associate director for the group, says the toy is the "worst of the worst."

Currently, the CCFC's petition had garnered nearly 2,000 signatures. The group is hoping for a total of 3,000 signatures

Article Link: Consumer Group Calls for Recall on iPad-Equipped Newborn 'Apptivity' Seat

 

[WiiDSmoker]

Wow. Wall-e is truly becoming real.

 

[dannys1]

Nearly 2000 signatures? Thats pretty pathetic to be honest.

 

[ArtOfWarfare]

Wow. Wall-e is truly becoming real.

All we need now is to stick some wheels on that chair and let it grow as the baby grows.

Edit: And motorize the chairs, of course.

 

[freedevil]

It's not meant to left there 24/7. Over reacting much? Distract the baby for a hour or two. Even a screensaver like app would excite a baby.

 

[Z400Racer37]

... This thing is probably a bid extreme, but who cares what I think? or what the CCFC thinks for that matter? If people don't want it, then they won't buy it and then they'll stop making it. Simple.

 

[END3R]

I would agree with this recommendation to some extent. Yes, we don't need to plug-in our children, this will happen on its own as we all know. Parents will leave their children in front of a TV anyway so this is more of a call to parents to be more forthcoming in paying attention to your children. Not to say that this product screams that as all parents need that time to tend to other children, too, sometimes with two hands.

 

[IGregory]

Please, shouldn't this be parent decision? I'd be complaining more about the price.

 

[woogy12]

Really? What a waste of time. If its a bad product, then don't buy it. That will make the company not sell products like this.

We need an activist group to tell us this. Wow!! Stupid!

 

[WaxedJacket]

Be even more absent with your child's upbringing with the new Apptivity seat!

 

[Albright]

Perhaps it's pedantic, but halting the selling of something is quite different from a recall. The petition is only asking for the former, but the article title implies the latter.

 

[jclo]

Perhaps it's pedantic, but halting the selling of something is quite different from a recall. The petition is only asking for the former, but the article title implies the latter.

The text of the form letter to Allmark does ask for a recall:

"Dear Mr. Allmark,

I am writing to urge you to stop selling the Fisher-Price Newborn-to-Toddler Apptivity™ Seat for iPad® device. It’s troubling enough when companies promote screen time for babies – the American Academy of Pediatrics discourages any screen time for children under two. But this product is clearly designed to occupy infants alone and free parents up from interacting with them. Placing an iPad directly above baby’s face blocks his or her view of the rest of the world. And to make matters even worse, Fisher-Price is marketing the Apptivity Seat -- and claiming it’s educational -- for newborns.

Babies need laps, not apps. Fisher-Price should focus on developing products that actually facilitate learning and development instead of encouraging parents to strap down babies -- even those too young to sit up -- inches from a screen.

Please immediately recall the Fisher-Price Newborn-to-Toddler Apptivity™ Seat for iPad® device. "

 

[thatisme]

Let the market decide.

My first thought when seeing this earlier was that there would be a recall for the iPad coming dislodged from the arm and hitting the baby in the chair.

 

[iSRS]

Not sure I agree with their reasoning...

My first thought (mainly because it said recall) was that there was concern that the iPad could fall and hurt the kid. Oh well. I guess I was just not so attention seeking and pious in my views. I'll try harder next time.

Personally, I think we need to prepare our kids for the future. When they are "40"

 

[pscl]

this is insane.
babys now see angry birds for the first time, instead of real birds in the sky. this is ridiculous.

 

[macduke]

My wife is due with our first child in just a couple months and there's no way we would buy this thing. All a baby needs are some dangling, brightly colored objects to paw at. If I had to guess, it probably helps develop coordination. Staring at a screen from the time you pop out of the womb sets you up for a lifetime of sedentary behavior. I feel like too many parents babysit their kids nowadays with an iPad and/or a Netflix subscription.

When my daughter gets older she can use Macs (if they still exist, yikes) and iPads but there will be limits. I had my NES when I was little, and today I have my Xbox One and iPad—but my mom was smart enough to make me go outside and play with my friends. Our neighborhood wasn't exactly poor—maybe lower middle class at best. So with a lack of shiny new toys we got pretty creative with coming up with imaginative games to play. Later on in middle school the internet was developing, and I was able to use it to learn lots of stuff about how to do graphic design and program apps and websites, which led to my future career in app and web design. So I can see the benefits of both. I think a good balance of spare time (outside of homework and chores) will be about ⅓ on devices and ⅔ outside playing, or inside if it's cold playing with legos or reading. Though I bet a lot of the reading will be done on devices, so that might have to be adjusted.

I hope iOS continues to add new and refine existing parental controls, especially filters for Safari. Or use TouchID to set daily time limits—especially for certain app categories such as games. Their fingerprint won't work, say, after 2 hours of use until the next day. That could be overridden by the parent, of course. But could keep them from sneaking in extra device time here and there.

I'd love to hear from other (responsible) parents on how they manage the time spent on devices vs. other types of play. I feel like a lot of it will be trial and error, and it probably depends on the kid.

 

[IGregory]

My first thought (mainly because it said recall) was that there was concern that the iPad could fall and hurt the kid. Oh well. I guess I was just not so attention seeking and pious in my views. I'll try harder next time.

Personally, I think we need to prepare our kids for the future. When they are "40"

[url=http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41rIIJPNgoL._SX300_.jpg]Image[/URL]

Now, if only they made this in my size.

 

[JackieInCo]

I don't see anything wrong with this. It's up to parents to decide how they want to raise the baby.

 

[ChrisA]

This screen thing would make your baby dumber by the hour. They need to see and explore the real 3D world. It literally does make then dumber, hour by hour. I fthe screen is more attractive than the world it is harmful.

TV is the same way with older kids it makes them passive rather then active problem solvers. We like being passive as it requires less work. This is why TV is so addictive. But mental effort is like physical effort it makes you stronger.

So let the baby do baby things like touch things and drop them and taste them and make noise and listen to sounds in the environment.

If you want the baby to be smarter carry him/her around with you all the time as you do normal activities. It actually works the baby is exposed to more. later as they become pre-schoolers take them 1,000 different places. no need for "educational stuff" they need a variety of experience.

----------

I don't see anything wrong with this. It's up to parents to decide how they want to raise the baby.

But many parents are ignorant of what's best. I would not ban these things but I'd get the word out that there is counter productive and like I wrote almost suck IQ number of to kid's brains. All passive entertainment has that effect but it is worse the younger you are.

 

[designgeek]

It's not meant to left there 24/7. Over reacting much? Distract the baby for a hour or two. Even a screensaver like app would excite a baby.

The problem is that parents are likely to leave the children alone for long periods of time which is not ok. Another problem is that children have not been shown to respond to screens under the age of two so in all actuality it's quite pointless. That said, it's probably better to just not buy it, no need for an actual recall.

Here's a study about this.

http://crx.sagepub.com/content/31/3/288.short

 

[rhett7660]

Wow. Wall-e is truly becoming real.

That is funny you said that, this was the first thing that I thought of when I read and saw this! Poor kid is going to be blind by the time he/she is 10!

 

[ChrisA]

Let the market decide.

Good idea as long as you also approve sell heroin and machine guns. If it is harmful then people will see it and not buy it right? The "let the market" decide ONLY works if buyers are informed and educated.

This toy is not quite so harmful as a machine gun. Not as bad as tobacco. But it would likely cause some hard to a baby's development.

Maybe we compromise and ask them tom place a warning label on the box.

At the VERY LEAST they should be required to remove any claim that this is "educational". Not unless they have good data to back up the claim.

 

[MigueldelRio]

Consumer groups are there to protect you from your own stupidity

Let the market decide.

My first thought when seeing this earlier was that there would be a recall for the iPad coming dislodged from the arm and hitting the baby in the chair.

I cannot believe how idiotic some of these comments are. "Let the market decide". Do you always let the market decide if a product is safe, no matter what the experts say? So if someone tries to sell a power drill that experts say will spin out of place shooting the bit through your eye, and a consumer group raises the alarm, you should shut them up and let the market decide. Right? Why not let the market decide about kiddie porn, for that matter? No, I am not going out on a limb. Just take this sentence to an extreme and you will realize how blatantly stupid it is.

The fact that society is blindly going into a world mediated by a screen is not to be taken lightly. I mean, we can joke about it as much as we like, but at some point someone must get serious about it. And the Wall•e scenario looks pretty terrible to me, even if we are talking about adults. But children? I will not explain the psychological reasons for not letting children use screens at such a young age (if you're so techie jfgi), but let us just agree that people need people to know they're people. You follow?

Hopefully, those above that so magnanimously concede their wits to the "market" (ie corporations willing to make big bucks at the expense of your children's psychological development) don't have children and have no f idea about their needs - hence their genius remarks... Hopefully. For everything else - consumer groups. They protect the braindead from their own stupidity.

 

[theBB]

Perhaps it's pedantic, but halting the selling of something is quite different from a recall. The petition is only asking for the former, but the article title implies the latter.

Yes, during a recall, the people who have purchased the item are asked to return them to the retailers or manufacturers in addition to the company halting sales. It may take a few more minutes of editing, but it is till better to avoid using (mildly) technical terms incorrectly. Judging by the length of the headline, author did not seem to be under that much pressure to minimize the number of words, so it cannot be that difficult to describe the campaign accurately.

 

[MigueldelRio]

I don't see anything wrong with this. It's up to parents to decide how they want to raise the baby.

Sure. It's up to parents to give them a stupid, harmful education of they so wish. But consumer groups are there to prevent that from happening if they can. Apparently they weren't successful in some cases, and I am not replying to your comment in particular for any reason at all.