Any other TV-free moms of onlies?

[NYCVeg]

I'm curious if there are any other moms of only children who are TV-free. Dd is a pretty independent player (she's not quite 2, so we're always in the room with her, but she can entertain herself for 20 minutes to an hour, occasional even longer), but I wonder what will happen when she gets older. Dh and I are voracious readers--and were when we were kids as well--so we hope to pass that along to dd. And we're very conscious about providing her with lots of social opportunities. But I wonder what TV-free is like with an older child who doesn't have the "built-in" playmates (i.e., siblings).

[earthgirl]

Me! DD is 16 mos and she will be an only. We are TV free, but we may get a TV in a few years for movie viewing only. The jury is still out on this one. Anyway, I grew up as an only and I watched way too much TV. I never even thought about how being an only and not having a TV will present any unusual situations. I just assume my DD will find more interesting ways to entertain herself.

[NYCVeg]

Originally Posted by earthgirl

Me! DD is 16 mos and she will be an only. We are TV free, but we may get a TV in a few years for movie viewing only. The jury is still out on this one. Anyway, I grew up as an only and I watched way too much TV. I never even thought about how being an only and not having a TV will present any unusual situations. I just assume my DD will find more interesting ways to entertain herself.

Have you read The Plug-In Drug? The author makes a big point of how only children watch more TV because they get "bored" more often. I don't know if it's true or not--I can't remember if there was supporting research--but it obviously stuck with me! I don't really see why compulsive reading can't just replace compulsive TV watching, though.

[mamabutterfly]

(nak) Well, now have a newborn, but dd was an only for 6 years before this surprise & I thought she wouls remain so. IME she has always been amazing at entertaining herself, so imaginative (all that story reading!). And she loves creating her own worlds.
I've noticed siblings can also sometimes mean built in squabbles, lol! I feel more tempted to put on movies when she's fighting with a playdate!

might just be personality, but I think my dd is more easily self entertained (now also 'writes' her own books) than friends' kids who have siblings.

[earthgirl]

Originally Posted by NYCVeg

Have you read The Plug-In Drug? The author makes a big point of how only children watch more TV because they get "bored" more often. I don't know if it's true or not--I can't remember if there was supporting research--but it obviously stuck with me! I don't really see why compulsive reading can't just replace compulsive TV watching, though.

I have read that book. It's been a few years, though. It's funny b/c after I posted this I was thinking about how I was a huge bookworm as a kid, too. I loved reading. And I think I also did pretend play a lot longer than a lot of my peers. I don't know if this was b/c I was an only, but imagine how creative I could have been w/out the TV's dreadful influence!

[boatbaby]

DS is 3.5 and an only (planning to stay an only) and we are TV free. I sometimes worry about him needing a playmate (ie sibling) but I don't think having a sibling around for "entertainment" is a "must" anymore than having a tv around for entertainment or education or relaxation is.

I don't think TV thing impacts the only child thing. I've never felt more compelled to put in a movie b/c of lack of a playmate. In fact, my friends who also have 3-4 year olds coupled with a baby probably do MUCH MORE screen time because they need to distract the older one while the baby is being nursed down or napping or what have you. They do "quiet time" with a movie or TV show.

[Hannahsmummy]

Originally Posted by boatbaby

I don't think TV thing impacts the only child thing. I've never felt more compelled to put in a movie b/c of lack of a playmate. In fact, my friends who also have 3-4 year olds coupled with a baby probably do MUCH MORE screen time because they need to distract the older one while the baby is being nursed down or napping or what have you. They do "quiet time" with a movie or TV show.

I agree with this. I would have thought that the lure of the TV would be so much stronger when trying to care for two kids.

My daughter is an almost 5 year old only and she's TV free. She's always been really good at entertaining herself she is an amazing artist so we always have art and craft supplies available for her to help herself to. Since Tv has never been a part of her life, it's not really an option that would cross anyone's mind.

[homefrontgirl]

Excellent topic!

Our DS (20 months old on Sunday) will probably be our only one. I've never thought about the impact of this and being tv-free. I agree with PP that with more than one it's probably more of an issue. DS is so easy to tote around that we DO stuff all the time. Since we've never used tv, it just the way things are.

[RockStarMom]

My daughter is 2.5. The only thing I feel like I'm missing out on is having a break. My daughter is incredibly creative and imaginative, but she doesn't play by herself at all really. She went through a phase where she did, but...not anymore. So I need to always be there and go along with all her little things she makes up. I feel like not having the TV is part of what has made her so creative though, which is great.

[onlyzombiecat]

My dd is 8 years old and an only.
She has not been TV free her whole life. She is very creative and imaginative though.
We cut out TV (but kept selected dvd's) and dd entertains herself fine for long periods of time most days without watching anything. She rarely tells me she is bored. We homeschool. We have actively sought toys and activities that 1 or 2 people can enjoy to have in our home.

I don't think it will be more of an issue for your only as they get older. As my dd has gotten older she has become even better at amusing herself.

[miasmommy]

Waving hello!


I just found this new forum. My DD is an only & she just turned 4. She is tv free but I must admit that she is on occasion allowed to watch the Boston Red Sox & the Patriots with us. Big Boston sports freaks here, no flames please.


I haven't read the Plug In Drug but I will admit that I wanted to maintain her as TV free a s long as possible because I knew she would be an only & I didn't want her to become a "TV junkie". I also want her to reach for books before reaching for the remote.


Interesting thread!

[Bufomander]

another mother of an only here. dd is four and will almost certainly remain an only... we've not had a tv since before she was born. i agree that it will only get easier as she gets older, at least as far as the self-entertainment piece goes...

[loraxc]

DD is not an only anymore, but she is 4 and her brother is 7 weeks. I am actually much more worried about giving to TV now that she has a sib, because of the nap issue for the baby. I did not find it hard to keep her TV-free as an only. She just doesn't even think of it as an option.

[goldfinch]

A little off-topic here, but re: newborn naptime... I seem to recall (admittedly hazily at best) that when newborns are tired, they are pretty good at napping regardless of where they are or what the noise level is in the general area. Am I wrong? We are unexpectedly expecting #3 in August and will have twin almost-4's at the same time. They're TV-free right now and I'm hoping not to 'give in' to the TV when the new one arrives.