+1 for hamsters (and making pet dreams come true). Our low-tech family had two over six years -Sir Sniffles and Captain Carrots - and they were amazing for all the reasons your guest mentioned.
I love your work and the awareness you and are others are building around the hazards of smart phones, I really do... but I'm going to take a few minutes to comment on this podcast because even as a supporter of the philosophy, generally, I feel a disconnect with the messaging and wonder if it's minimizing the reality of many family's lives and the difficult decision-making that arises around tech. As a parent who has much of my daily parenting in the rearview (mom to an 18 and 21 year old), I found managing tech at home to be really hard, and we were constantly revising, but the choice to get phones early (age 11 and 10.5 in our case), is something I finally feel at peace with.
When parent writers and others advocate for and share their "delay tech" approach, I know they believe in it fully, but every time I hear a talk like this, I feel something is missing—those often very very good reasons for a family to make a different choice, even absent evidence-based studies on it. I say this as a mom who wanted no plastic or beeping toys, chose play-based preschool, had strict limits on tv/show time, sidelined career opps to be home hosting messy, muddy playdates, was unapologetically in favor of boredom and prioritized a massively outdoorsy family life.
While I agree with some aspects of the delay approach—phones are addictive and sucky and ofcourse I wanted my kids to be kids for as long as possible, I also find myself definitely in disagreement with it too—bc I also wanted my kids to be physically safe in our city, and I wanted some strong parental influence on their orientation to/management of tech.
You all mentioned Jenifer Garner's approach and while its a cute anecdote, her children are children of famous people, privileged to the max, and likely have staff handling all kinds of things. Also, it sounds amazing to have a yard and the ability to set up a gym in the garage, a trampoline and a slackline, but at least in the U.S. 80% of people live in urban areas, and it feels unrelatable. I know the idea is to empower, but if you can't see yourself in these stories, then I wonder if it just makes a parent feel defeated or inadequate. Delay may make sense for some, but not all, and it may actually eliminate an opportunity to give clear and implementable guidance in the run up to the teen years.
Here's some real life examples from my neighborhood that influenced our family decision making: 11 year old walking 1.2 miles to/from school alone or with friends, most days, sometimes in the dark, past known drug & crime activity, or through a quiet neighborhood where no one is home (aka no eyes on the street) to assist, should there be a problem. In this case, does anyone stick to a "no phone until 16" rule? We did not and neither did most of our peers. How about an 11-15.99 year old who needs to navigate public transit to get home or to activities (even to access fun stuff like meeting a friend at a park) and the routes and schedules and schedule changes/delays need to be accessed via a smartphone bc the old-school printed schedules are damaged, incorrect or missing; an argument could be made for just tolerating this and handling the unknowns of buses not arriving, but again...it's maybe dark, it's a young person, there's unstable people nearby (not imagined, but actual humans asking for money or food or help or whatever). What about a child who is living in different houses bc of divorce and really needs to have conversations with a parent, without going through the other parent? What happens when a 13-15.99 year old finds herself having made a poor choice at a party, and needs assistance getting home safely (no landlines/payphones, and "friends" are all drunk or high)? How does a high school freshman at a large public high school get involved and find community when literally ALL club information - scheduled meetings, locations, updates - is organized by students and shared via instagram? These are not theoretical and are real life examples of the realities and the kinds of needs for communication that compel parents to get their kid set up with a phone.
We chose to equip our kids with smart phones at age 11 and 10.5 and I feel alright about it. Do I wish we lived in a time and place in which we didn't need to do that? Sure, yes. (And our friends who had kids at private schools and were being carpooled by parents and nannies were all able to delay.) But we felt it was the right move with pre-teens navigating the city and needing to be in touch with us and each other.
Did we have to work extra hard to manage the phone interactions at home and in the world? Why yes. Incredibly, demandingly frustratingly, tear your hair out hard. But also, they learned to use their phones with our oversight, with training wheels created by parental controls and limits on screentime and consistent constant reminders about putting them away and being present, and for us this proved to be a useful runway before the teen years where they are much less open to parental insights/guidance. At 11-14, they tolerated discussing phone use, understood it was part of the deal, and we had good and meaningful conversations about how we wanted to see them show up in the world, with a phone - eye contact, situational awareness, keep reading books, etc., and we had these during the years when they were inclined to listen to us. We scrutinized our phone use, alongside them, even had a stretch where we compared daily/weekly screentime use and discussed why each of us might have had a higher or lower number. At first, phone-free at dinner seemed like no big deal, then it seemed annoying to them, but then as they watched it in practice at our home and notsomuch in others, they experienced for themselves the value and now they own it and alert friends and visitors about it.
As for the operating a car vs operating a phone analogy, it's logical, but also I'm super glad my kids weren't learning to drive and learning to use their phones at the same time. That would have been a COMPLETE nightmare for us. By 16, they understood quite deeply how distracting phones are and that they are not remotely compatible with safe driving. And as parents we didn't have to couple all the intensity of driving practice (and the opportunities for arguments and frustration that come with that) with rolling out a program around smartphone behavior and competency.( I do love the idea of a driver's ed-esque program for being safe smartphone users, for ALL ages. )
I'm sad that kids, mine included, need/needed a level of tech competency for basic safety and communication, but I do think it's reality, at least it is where I live. Philosophically I love the delay approach, but practically, as a mom to pre-teen girls who were navigating an urban area daily, it was not a fit. I wonder how many other families find themselves in a similar dilemma and maybe even ashamed or overwhelmed when faced with the growing amount of media reports on smartphones and negative health outcomes. Given the realities, I'm unsure about delaying as an empowering strategy that has broad applicability for families, and wonder if the cultural conversation needs to get much more real about how to be safe with phones at whatever age your family members begin using them.
Thx for reading. I do really love your work and it's helped me so much :). Also, if you really want to fend off the hamster...you can stall by insisting your kid research care considerations, lifespan, humane housing, etc. and make a budget for all the gear & food. That approach saved us from a ferret and a chinchilla.
+1 for hamsters (and making pet dreams come true). Our low-tech family had two over six years -Sir Sniffles and Captain Carrots - and they were amazing for all the reasons your guest mentioned.
I love your work and the awareness you and are others are building around the hazards of smart phones, I really do... but I'm going to take a few minutes to comment on this podcast because even as a supporter of the philosophy, generally, I feel a disconnect with the messaging and wonder if it's minimizing the reality of many family's lives and the difficult decision-making that arises around tech. As a parent who has much of my daily parenting in the rearview (mom to an 18 and 21 year old), I found managing tech at home to be really hard, and we were constantly revising, but the choice to get phones early (age 11 and 10.5 in our case), is something I finally feel at peace with.
When parent writers and others advocate for and share their "delay tech" approach, I know they believe in it fully, but every time I hear a talk like this, I feel something is missing—those often very very good reasons for a family to make a different choice, even absent evidence-based studies on it. I say this as a mom who wanted no plastic or beeping toys, chose play-based preschool, had strict limits on tv/show time, sidelined career opps to be home hosting messy, muddy playdates, was unapologetically in favor of boredom and prioritized a massively outdoorsy family life.
While I agree with some aspects of the delay approach—phones are addictive and sucky and ofcourse I wanted my kids to be kids for as long as possible, I also find myself definitely in disagreement with it too—bc I also wanted my kids to be physically safe in our city, and I wanted some strong parental influence on their orientation to/management of tech.
You all mentioned Jenifer Garner's approach and while its a cute anecdote, her children are children of famous people, privileged to the max, and likely have staff handling all kinds of things. Also, it sounds amazing to have a yard and the ability to set up a gym in the garage, a trampoline and a slackline, but at least in the U.S. 80% of people live in urban areas, and it feels unrelatable. I know the idea is to empower, but if you can't see yourself in these stories, then I wonder if it just makes a parent feel defeated or inadequate. Delay may make sense for some, but not all, and it may actually eliminate an opportunity to give clear and implementable guidance in the run up to the teen years.
Here's some real life examples from my neighborhood that influenced our family decision making: 11 year old walking 1.2 miles to/from school alone or with friends, most days, sometimes in the dark, past known drug & crime activity, or through a quiet neighborhood where no one is home (aka no eyes on the street) to assist, should there be a problem. In this case, does anyone stick to a "no phone until 16" rule? We did not and neither did most of our peers. How about an 11-15.99 year old who needs to navigate public transit to get home or to activities (even to access fun stuff like meeting a friend at a park) and the routes and schedules and schedule changes/delays need to be accessed via a smartphone bc the old-school printed schedules are damaged, incorrect or missing; an argument could be made for just tolerating this and handling the unknowns of buses not arriving, but again...it's maybe dark, it's a young person, there's unstable people nearby (not imagined, but actual humans asking for money or food or help or whatever). What about a child who is living in different houses bc of divorce and really needs to have conversations with a parent, without going through the other parent? What happens when a 13-15.99 year old finds herself having made a poor choice at a party, and needs assistance getting home safely (no landlines/payphones, and "friends" are all drunk or high)? How does a high school freshman at a large public high school get involved and find community when literally ALL club information - scheduled meetings, locations, updates - is organized by students and shared via instagram? These are not theoretical and are real life examples of the realities and the kinds of needs for communication that compel parents to get their kid set up with a phone.
We chose to equip our kids with smart phones at age 11 and 10.5 and I feel alright about it. Do I wish we lived in a time and place in which we didn't need to do that? Sure, yes. (And our friends who had kids at private schools and were being carpooled by parents and nannies were all able to delay.) But we felt it was the right move with pre-teens navigating the city and needing to be in touch with us and each other.
Did we have to work extra hard to manage the phone interactions at home and in the world? Why yes. Incredibly, demandingly frustratingly, tear your hair out hard. But also, they learned to use their phones with our oversight, with training wheels created by parental controls and limits on screentime and consistent constant reminders about putting them away and being present, and for us this proved to be a useful runway before the teen years where they are much less open to parental insights/guidance. At 11-14, they tolerated discussing phone use, understood it was part of the deal, and we had good and meaningful conversations about how we wanted to see them show up in the world, with a phone - eye contact, situational awareness, keep reading books, etc., and we had these during the years when they were inclined to listen to us. We scrutinized our phone use, alongside them, even had a stretch where we compared daily/weekly screentime use and discussed why each of us might have had a higher or lower number. At first, phone-free at dinner seemed like no big deal, then it seemed annoying to them, but then as they watched it in practice at our home and notsomuch in others, they experienced for themselves the value and now they own it and alert friends and visitors about it.
As for the operating a car vs operating a phone analogy, it's logical, but also I'm super glad my kids weren't learning to drive and learning to use their phones at the same time. That would have been a COMPLETE nightmare for us. By 16, they understood quite deeply how distracting phones are and that they are not remotely compatible with safe driving. And as parents we didn't have to couple all the intensity of driving practice (and the opportunities for arguments and frustration that come with that) with rolling out a program around smartphone behavior and competency.( I do love the idea of a driver's ed-esque program for being safe smartphone users, for ALL ages. )
I'm sad that kids, mine included, need/needed a level of tech competency for basic safety and communication, but I do think it's reality, at least it is where I live. Philosophically I love the delay approach, but practically, as a mom to pre-teen girls who were navigating an urban area daily, it was not a fit. I wonder how many other families find themselves in a similar dilemma and maybe even ashamed or overwhelmed when faced with the growing amount of media reports on smartphones and negative health outcomes. Given the realities, I'm unsure about delaying as an empowering strategy that has broad applicability for families, and wonder if the cultural conversation needs to get much more real about how to be safe with phones at whatever age your family members begin using them.
Thx for reading. I do really love your work and it's helped me so much :). Also, if you really want to fend off the hamster...you can stall by insisting your kid research care considerations, lifespan, humane housing, etc. and make a budget for all the gear & food. That approach saved us from a ferret and a chinchilla.