Ms Rachel

My great daughter loved this programme. I not sure teaching them Americanisms at such an early age is such a good idea .
I think its an awful programme.

My grandson watches Miss Apple as she is British. My son didn't want him speaking with an American accent when he is British.

My two granddaughters, 2 & 4

They're two and four years old, presumably.

My two granddaughters, 2 & 4, enjoy watching Miss Rachel (American) and Miss Apple (English) as well as the singing and dancing videos on YouTube, it's fun to join in with instruments, they love it, and so do I! They occasionally watch CBeebies, but the whiney voices of Peppa Pig, Bluey and Bing really grate on me, and I get fed up hearing about subjects that little children shouldn't be dealing with, eg. emotions - feeling nervous, worried, anxious, angry, jealous, no wonder there's so much anxiety in the schools, we didn't know the meaning of the word at such a young age. Children's TV should be fun and carefree, cheerful and bright, that's how I remember it anyway. I'd much rather they watch people interacting with them than cartoons. Danny and his "the floor is lava" is fun, and keeps them fit on a cold, rainy day, they get their coloured foam mats out and jump from mat to mat. All that said, they get plenty of interaction from me, visits to the park, zoo, soft play, colouring, drawing, writing up the kitchen table, crafting, reading and dressing up. They also go to pre-school and primary school. I doubt the OP meant his niece watches TV all day, he didn't say so anyway, but parts of the day is fine, anything to enable you to get your jobs done, knowing the child is being amused and, if appropriate, safely strapped in a seat so as not to endanger itself. Let's not judge one another, being a mum/gran is busy, stressful and demanding, jobs around the house still have to be done (quickly!!), so if we can find something on the telly to amuse them while we get on, I don't see the harm in it.

Nanny27

mollygo i often wonder at the assumption that parents (or other caregivers) have so much less time than we did.
When they load the automatic washing machine I was fighting with a twin tub.
When they throw away a disposable nappy I was handwashing and hanging out to dry
When they ping a meal in the microwave I was preparing from scratch
And so on and so on

Likewise Nanny27 and then of course there was fitting in doing that around going to work.
But it’s not an assumption.
They tell us they have less time, then list the things they can’t do because they have less time.

I’ve never heard of Ms. Rachel,
but I’ll give it a try.
Our grandsons love Numberblocks and Alphablocks.

mollygo i often wonder at the assumption that parents (or other caregivers) have so much less time than we did.
When they load the automatic washing machine I was fighting with a twin tub.
When they throw away a disposable nappy I was handwashing and hanging out to dry
When they ping a meal in the microwave I was preparing from scratch
And so on and so on

Mine watched Rainbow.
But not at 5/6 months old.

We even went to a Rainbow live theatre production 😂
Great fun.

Casdon

Some of these replies are really annoying me. Have you watched Ms Rachel? Do you think most parents abandon their children to watch her for hours instead of interacting with them directly for the vast majority of time? Are you judging young mothers yet again as being wanting compared with your own ‘perfect’ parenting? On threads like this, Gransnet does my head in.

Sorry, but does a five month old need to watch Netflix?
Really?
Call me old-fashioned but no, they do not.
Does a five month old need entertaining in front of the TV?
No, they do not.

They're asleep, feeding, interacting with their parent while they're having a nappy changed, having "tummy time" with toys. Listening to a parent talking to them, singing etc.

Sorry if that does your head in, Casdon

I don’t know
if most parents abandon their children to watch her for hours instead of interacting with them directly for the vast majority of time.

I do know that I see even very young children attached to devices when they’re out in the park instead of playing. Or see them attached to devices in cafés so their parents can chat in peace, but I used to give mine colouring to do or books to look at, so maybe not much different.

However ,
I do know that an increasing number of children come to school unable to string a sentence together, with or without an American accent.
If parents are there interacting with the child and the program, there’s no more harm than my DC learning songs with Music Time or Watch or Rainbow.
When they were young, parents were criticised for propping children up in front of the television.
The main difference now is that the screens are smaller and portable.

Yes, I’ve watched it. It makes my teeth itch! All that good job and non-stop whiny yapping! There’s no room for the baby in it, it’s a one way street.

Some of these replies are really annoying me. Have you watched Ms Rachel? Do you think most parents abandon their children to watch her for hours instead of interacting with them directly for the vast majority of time? Are you judging young mothers yet again as being wanting compared with your own ‘perfect’ parenting? On threads like this, Gransnet does my head in.

They’re doing a job that parents and grandparents used to do but possibly now no longer have time or even inclination.

American words/accent? I guess they’ll pick some up but the option is DIY.
Does Ms Rachel do potty training videos too?

Ms Rachel?? How dreadful.Poor children!

Rachel is just as popular in the UK as cbbies, both my toddler grandsons loved her.
The amount of American stuff on our tvs now are as normal to kids as UK programs.

She is, and she is very good at what she does too. It’s not rubbish cartoon type TV at all.

Ms Rachel apparently is a really nice person in real life, giving millions to children's charities.

A TV isn’t a personal screen Allira, it’s on so that everybody who is in the room can see it. I think that’s how most young children would be viewing, with the parent in the room commenting on it, at least that’s my experience, I don’t think a young baby would get anything from it, unless it was sensory. My GD at about nine months sat on her mum or dad’s lap and had just five minutes of Dancing Fruit occasionally, and she loved that, she jogged about when it was on.

Yes, Missiseff, that has been the rule with my GC. The parents decreed no screen time at all for the first year or two, then limited time with parental supervision.
This has become more relaxed with the oldest two , now twelve and eight, but it's still controlled.
So, the little one ( aged two) is stuck with Grandma's singing: poor girl.

Casdon

butterandjam

Allira

Missiseff

You're not supposed to introduce screen time to babies under a year old. Apparantly. According to the WHO

I'm amazed that anyone would introduce tiny babies to a screen. There are so many problems with teenagers becoming addicted to their screens now I'd have thought leaving it as long as possible would be better.

What happened to Mummy (or Daddy) playing clapping games, singing to their children, the entertainment when they were in their prams or cots being a mobile above their heads, moving gently round?

How things change.

One of these days, somebody is going to make a connection between the arrival of personal screens for children and the astonishing rise in childhood anxiety, ADHD, neurodiversity etc

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10353947/

Personal screens? Surely young children watch on the TV, not a personal screen? It’s all about parental control and time spent. Yes, if a child is plonked in front of a screen all day it will do them harm, but do any of you know anybody who does that? Most parents are much more clued up than we were, and limit what their children watch and for how long.

Well, it rather sounded as if the baby spends a lot of time in front of a screen.
My niece has a 5-6 month old baby and this is his entertainment on Netlix during the day.

They're all screens, whether TV, tablets, phones etc.

4allweknow

Goodness, how were such young children entertained or "educated" before day time tv. I'm surprised so many of us managed to speak never mind read and write.

Most of us under 75 or so watched Watch with Mother I imagine. It started in the early 1950s.

My grandchild is only allowed to watch tv for a very short time while I have a much needed tea break after keeping a 3yr old entertained. Can't wait for Blippi to be out of favour as I find it so annoying - same with the program called Makery.

Goodness, how were such young children entertained or "educated" before day time tv. I'm surprised so many of us managed to speak never mind read and write.

Many years ago DD loved Balamory, one of her first words was 'Hallo' in a scotyish accent like Miss Hooley 😅😅

butterandjam

Allira

Missiseff

You're not supposed to introduce screen time to babies under a year old. Apparantly. According to the WHO

I'm amazed that anyone would introduce tiny babies to a screen. There are so many problems with teenagers becoming addicted to their screens now I'd have thought leaving it as long as possible would be better.

What happened to Mummy (or Daddy) playing clapping games, singing to their children, the entertainment when they were in their prams or cots being a mobile above their heads, moving gently round?

How things change.

One of these days, somebody is going to make a connection between the arrival of personal screens for children and the astonishing rise in childhood anxiety, ADHD, neurodiversity etc

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10353947/

Personal screens? Surely young children watch on the TV, not a personal screen? It’s all about parental control and time spent. Yes, if a child is plonked in front of a screen all day it will do them harm, but do any of you know anybody who does that? Most parents are much more clued up than we were, and limit what their children watch and for how long.