Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

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

I used to think this too, until I became a dad and started reading up on brain development. It is pretty well established that children under two shouldn't be exposed to screens (TVs, iPads, etc.) because screen time inhibits proper brain development. Infants need real-world objects to look at and interact with so they can properly develop depth perspective and motor control.

From http://www.healthychildren.org/english/family-life/media/pages/why-to-avoid-tv-before-age-2.aspx:
Good evidence suggests that screen viewing before age 2 has lasting negative effects on children’s language development, reading skills, and shortterm memory. It also contributes to problems with sleep and attention.
Click to expand...

So this enters into the gray area between letting the market decide versus taking action to stop a known harmful product from entering the market.

----------
Mad-B-One said:
This overprotective nonsense I sometimes hear is so ridiculous. It is not about the screen time, it is about unsupervised screen time, the point where the TV becomes a babysitter.
Click to expand...

It actually is about the screen time, and there's a mountain of research to back that up. But you are right, TV as a babysitter is also a bad thing.
 
Facetime makes this great

Wow, just make a facetime call and you've got instant babysitter! It's probably better than the nyqui-based daycare centers, but not by much.
 
What a bunch of Luddite, knee-jerk fools.
I searched those links to see if they had a shred of objective research.....
Wanted to see if even a single professional backed their claims. Apparently, none do. They are the equivalent of right-wing Christians howling about how evolution shouldn't be taught in public schools.
 
with the right software, this thing could be better for the kid than most parents. bring on our robotic child raising robots!
 
jclo said:
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. "
Click to expand...

Ah, I see. The last line mentions a recall, but the first just says "stop selling" - so the letter itself is internally inconsistent…
 
woogy12 said:
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!
Click to expand...

Because people don't think critically on their own. Activist groups are educational, not just obstructionist. People don't consider the consequences of their consumerism. Just because you think you're not going to mindlessly purchase and use something like this to ignore your child doesn't mean a lot of other people won't do it. People are habitual and look for convenience over personal involvement. Bad habits for parenting, but very common.
 
freedevil said:
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.
Click to expand...

Errr, no. Don't you remember the big controversy over the baby Einstein DVDs. It might appear that baby is enjoying the ipad, but at their stage of brain development they are physically incapable of looking away even if they wanted to! Watching a fast moving animated picture is like hooking your baby up to an alien hypnotic ray. Definitely not the way to go.....
 
kudukudu said:
Errr, no. Don't you remember the big controversy over the baby Einstein DVDs. It might appear that baby is enjoying the ipad, but at their stage of brain development they are physically incapable of looking away even if they wanted to! Watching a fast moving animated picture is like hooking your baby up to an alien hypnotic ray. Definitely not the way to go.....
Click to expand...

Everyone needs to watch that babies documentary. How babies are raised around the world. Nothing will happen and he won't be seeing the tooth fairy either.
 
smirk said:
I used to think this too, until I became a dad and started reading up on brain development. It is pretty well established that children under two shouldn't be exposed to screens (TVs, iPads, etc.) because screen time inhibits proper brain development. Infants need real-world objects to look at and interact with so they can properly develop depth perspective and motor control.

From http://www.healthychildren.org/english/family-life/media/pages/why-to-avoid-tv-before-age-2.aspx:
Click to expand...

It's not "pretty well established". Tablets haven't been around long enough to make any of the conclusions in this ridiculously sensationalistic study.

My 23 month old took over my iPad. It's his favorite thing. He plays games, watches shows, paints pictures, and asks Siri to show him photos of different animals.

He's smarter than I was at that age, and it's pretty obvious to me that the interactivity and versatility of the iPad has a lot to do with it.

Oh, he still loves regular toys and playing outside, too.

I guess I'm a bad parent!
 
macduke said:
My wife is due with our first child in just a couple months and there's no way we would buy this thing
Click to expand...

Report back to us after your baby is about 9 months old. Let us know then if you are still against a product that might keep your baby occupied for a few moments so you can do something else.
 
PhoneI said:
Report back to us after your baby is about 9 months old. Let us know then if you are still against a product that might keep your baby occupied for a few moments so you can do something else.
Click to expand...

Report back to us after your baby is about 9 years old. Let us know if you are still for a product that put them into the LD class at your local elementary school.

It's lazy parents like you who are ruining society. Or perhaps you're not lazy—just lacking in any creative thought whatsoever? There are many things other than being strapped into an iPad chair that can occupy a child's time. My wife gives therapy to autistic children and trains their parents for her job. While the two conditions aren't related, she deals with plenty of lazy parents like you who put themselves above their child because it's hard. If you went into parenting thinking it was going to be a cakewalk then you have no business being a parent. Perhaps you should give them up to someone else who would do a better job. I'd recommend a pack of ravenous wolves or maybe a sasquatch. You are insufferable.
 
Thathang3 said:
So in that case they can make a chair that electrifies the baby each 60 seconds and advertise it as 'the electric baby chair'?
People don't want that as well, but should we sell it?
Click to expand...

Well that's obviously silly. And what company would produce such a monstrous device anyways? Companies have a reputation to worry about in a free market, and if there were a company that produced such a device, the media would be all over them for it, especially today, and their name wold be ruined.

1. Find me a company that makes such a device

2. When you don't find one point me to the regulation or otherwise source of government force that is preventing them from making it.

3. There are laws in place to protect the individual rights of human beings, and it is a legitimate function of the government to make sure devices like that are not used to harm individuals in the way you described such a device would function.

There is no reason for the government to force this company to recall a device that holds an iPad just because some people don't like it. Just as they have the freedom to not buy that product if they don't like it, other individuals should have the right to buy that product if they do like it. The government has no say in this.
 
WestonHarvey1 said:
It's not "pretty well established". Tablets haven't been around long enough to make any of the conclusions in this ridiculously sensationalistic study.

My 23 month old took over my iPad. It's his favorite thing. He plays games, watches shows, paints pictures, and asks Siri to show him photos of different animals.

He's smarter than I was at that age, and it's pretty obvious to me that the interactivity and versatility of the iPad has a lot to do with it.
Click to expand...

I will confess that I haven't read the studies myself so I can't comment on if they are sensationalized or not. However, TVs have been around long enough to have drawn conclusions, and I believe most pediatricians recommend no screen time (including iPads) until two years old.

Kids are very good at detecting cause and effect. I push the ball, it rolls along the floor. Just because they've learned how to unlock an iPad and play an app doesn't mean they're increasing their intelligence and that some other developmental harm isn't being done.

Probably, everything in moderation is a good rule to live by.
 
Last edited:
macduke said:
Report back to us after your baby is about 9 years old. Let us know if you are still for a product that put them into the LD class at your local elementary school.

It's lazy parents like you who are ruining society. Or perhaps you're not lazy—just lacking in any creative thought whatsoever? There are many things other than being strapped into an iPad chair that can occupy a child's time. My wife gives therapy to autistic children and trains their parents for her job. While the two conditions aren't related, she deals with plenty of lazy parents like you who put themselves above their child because it's hard. If you went into parenting thinking it was going to be a cakewalk then you have no business being a parent. Perhaps you should give them up to someone else who would do a better job. I'd recommend a pack of ravenous wolves or maybe a sasquatch. You are insufferable.
Click to expand...

As requested, I am reporting back. My son turned 9 yesterday. He has his own iPad Mini and is an excellent student.
 
PhoneI said:
As requested, I am reporting back. My son turned 9 yesterday. He has his own iPad Mini and is an excellent student.
Click to expand...

Smartass. Did you strap your kid into a seat as an infant/toddler with their only window to the world around them obstructed by an iPad? No? I'm glad the iPad was invented after your child was too big for this if you think this is a good idea. I challenge you to ask any doctor—anywhere—if this is a good idea. Nothing wrong with a 9 year old using an iPad, with normal limits of course so that they receive sufficient physical activity and alternative mental stimuli. I plan to do the same with my child. I suggest you re-read my posts.
 
macduke said:
Smartass. Did you strap your kid into a seat as an infant/toddler with their only window to the world around them obstructed by an iPad? No? I'm glad the iPad was invented after your child was too big for this if you think this is a good idea. I challenge you to ask any doctor—anywhere—if this is a good idea. Nothing wrong with a 9 year old using an iPad, with normal limits of course so that they receive sufficient physical activity and alternative mental stimuli. I plan to do the same with my child. I suggest you re-read my posts.
Click to expand...


Ok, I just asked my cousin. He is a pediatrician. He told me that his guess was as good as mine. Probably no worse than letting your kid watch tv. But, I guess you know better.
 
PhoneI said:
Ok, I just asked my cousin. He is a pediatrician. He told me that his guess was as good as mine. Probably no worse than letting your kid watch tv. But, I guess you know better.
Click to expand...

Why are you making this so personal? It's not me who knows better. I didn't conduct any scientific research, but unlike you I've actually educated myself. The friggin article that we've been commenting on says the American Academy of Pediatrics discourages screen time for kids under age two. You see, infant eyes can only see up to 12" or less at first because that is all that is needed to find the breast and see their mother's face. It severely inhibits the development of vision to keep staring at something only 12" from your face all day long that is two-dimensional. It discourages developing depth perception and three-dimensional motion tracking of objects.

I recommend you read what the American Optometric Association has to say about what parents can do to encourage healthy vision development before you decide to breed again and strap your helpless child into a friggin iPad chair. Link:

http://www.aoa.org/patients-and-public/good-vision-throughout-life/childrens-vision/infant-vision-birth-to-24-months-of-age#3
 
Z400Racer37 said:
... 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.
Click to expand...

And they forget that they just drew more attention to this product, and likely increased sales... Hell, if I had a kid that age, I'd get one and leave it on the camera setting and front facing camera. What could go wrong with that... We are already raising a nation of narcissists... :p

----------
macduke said:
Why are you making this so personal? It's not me who knows better. I didn't conduct any scientific research, but unlike you I've actually educated myself. The friggin article that we've been commenting on says the American Academy of Pediatrics discourages screen time for kids under age two. You see, infant eyes can only see up to 12" or less at first because that is all that is needed to find the breast and see their mother's face. It severely inhibits the development of vision to keep staring at something only 12" from your face all day long that is two-dimensional. It discourages developing depth perception and three-dimensional motion tracking of objects.

I recommend you read what the American Optometric Association has to say about what parents can do to encourage healthy vision development before you decide to breed again and strap your helpless child into a friggin iPad chair. Link:

http://www.aoa.org/patients-and-public/good-vision-throughout-life/childrens-vision/infant-vision-birth-to-24-months-of-age#3
Click to expand...

Good idea but I remember reading an article that said that humans are gradually getting worse eyesight over time. More kids are needing glasses. I don't know if that's real or not, but with our reliance on things like computers and cellphones and the idea that we already changed the evolutionary selection schema by inventing glasses and contact lenses, it stands to reason...

In cave men days, the ones with bad eyesight got eaten... Now they breed...
 
PhoneI said:
Report back to us after your baby is about 9 months old. Let us know then if you are still against a product that might keep your baby occupied for a few moments so you can do something else.
Click to expand...

Reporting back, as requested. Can confirm that I am still, in fact, not an ***hole parent. As a matter of fact my daughter has a blast playing with the creative toys that we bought her, such as blocks, a drum with maracas, a baby doll, a veterinarian play set, and some toy cars among others. Although we often do play with her, these simple toys are more than enough to keep her occupied (and developing) for several minutes while I finish up dinner. My wife has taught her some sign language (my wife is fluent in ASL having grown up with deaf parents) so we usually have a general idea of what she wants. After giving birth my wife actually quit her job and started a full-time daycare. We primarily buy toys for the daycare that inspire creativity, problem solving, imagination, etc. My wife now watches five kids in total including our daughter and has never had to turn on the TV or give them an iPad—despite the fact that we now have two iPads in our household. Occasionally she will stream some children's music to our bluetooth soundbar and they will dance or play games. You see, we don't have to resort to lazy tactics that many other parents use because we actually care about our children and even the daycare children. It's called putting in the effort. Being a parent is a lot of hard work. I've put in my time through the restless nights, the fevers, the seemingly endless crying. You know what usually calms her down? Reading her a book about animals while snuggling. Then she is relaxed and goes back to playing—or sleep if it's bedtime. Babysitting kids with an iPad is just lazy and shameful. I would hate myself if I did that. I couldn't look at myself in the mirror every day. Kids need to be playing, exploring, learning, and growing.
 
It sounds like you're doing everything right, and your child is growing up with all the right stimuli that she needs for healthy development. Good job -- I wish more parents approached parenting like you and your wife do.

Best of luck in the coming years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back