British kids are in trouble. At least that’s what Unicef thinks. According to the United Nation’s Children’s Agency, parents in the UK are caught in a "materialistic trap" in which they buy their kids things instead of spending time with them.
The state of the family is so bad there that, just three years ago, Unicef put the UK at the bottom of the barrel of 21 industrialized countries when it came to poverty, family relationships, and health. The question is why?
Although all the kids surveyed claimed that having time with their families was important, British parents, particularly those from low-income families, admitted to feeling “tremendous pressure” to buy material goods for their children.
For starters, Unicef suggested the UK follow Sweden’s example, by banning television advertising aimed at children younger than 12.
"Consumer culture in the UK contrasts starkly with Sweden and Spain, where family time is prioritized, children and families are under less pressure to own material goods and children have greater access to activities out of the home," said the report.
According to Anita Tiessen, deputy director of Unicef UK, at the heart of the problem is the long working hours of British families. Having lived in London for over a decade, I can than vouch for this theory. In Canada, my husband has, on average, an extra two more hours with his son every day.
Because of their guilt, perhaps, British parents tend to make up for their absence by buying their children “branded clothes, trainers, technology". Add to that already grim picture the austerity measures and recent rioting.
Unicef stressed that funding for play facilities and free leisure activities for children and families must be protected to help families “who are often already at breaking point”.
"Not only are these services critical in developing the social and emotional skills needed to maximize children and young people's potential, but they help prevent intergenerational cycles of deprivation. The government needs to stop just hearing young people and actually listen to them."
Do you think we are in danger of falling into the same trap over here?
We know that learning a second language comes as second nature to babies. But according to a new study in the Journal of Phonetics, that ability may begin to fade as early as a child’s first birthday.
“Bilingual babies learn that objects and events in the world have two names, and flexibly switch between these labels, giving the brain lots of good exercise,” says the study’s co-author, Patricia Kuhl, professor of speech and hearing sciences and co-director of the Institute for Learning & Brain Sciences at the University of Washington.
Babies raised in bilingual households have a longer period of flexibility when it comes to picking up different languages. Plus, the more language babies are exposed to affects their vocabulary as toddlers.
Between 8 and 10 months of age, monolingual babies are increasingly able to distinguish sounds of their native language, while their ability to process foreign language sounds simultaneously declines.
For example, English-speaking babies become better at differentiating between “r” and “l” sounds, while Japanese babies (who aren’t exposed to as many “r” and “l” sounds) become less able to detect them.
As part of the study, monolingual (English or Spanish) babies and bilingual (English and Spanish) babies wore caps fitted with electrodes to measure brain activity with an electroencephalogram (EEG), a device that records the flow of energy in the brain. Background speech played in one language, followed by an occasional contrasting sound in the other language.
At 6-9 months of age, babies detected the contrast in sounds. But at 10-12 months of age, the monolingual babies’ brains only responded to the English contrasting sound, whereas the bilingual babies still recognized the contrast.
Responses at 10-12 months related to later speaking skills and vocabulary in the bilingual children, with 15 month olds knowing more words in both English and Spanish than their monolingual counterparts.
Moral of the story: It’s never too early to start teaching your child another language. Adios!
Heaven knows Hollywood stars love a diet fad. Plenty of them are declared macrobiotics or vegans, including Jessica Simpson and even cheeseburger-loving former US president, Bill Clinton. But what about their kids? Is it safe for stars to impose their lifestyle choice on babies?
Alicia Silverstone has been raising her three-month-old baby, Bear Blu, on a strictly vegan diet. And they're not alone. Many parents are choosing to raise their children meat, fish, and dairy-free.
For 43-year-old Californian, Caity McCardell, there “was never really a question”. Both her son and daughter have been vegan since birth, 6 and 8 years ago respectively.
According to the Associated Press, around 1 per cent of Americans are vegan. Even though the diet is more mainstream than it once was, is it healthy to get through pregnancy and breastfeeding without consuming any animal products? I for one had the most carnivorous cravings, which led to many a trip to the local golden arches.
Even staunch-vegan Natalie Portman reportedly reverted back to a less-strict vegetarian diet during her pregnancy to gobble up baked goods containing eggs.
McCardell admits it wasn’t easy. During a particularly intense meat-and-cheese craving, she almost caved at a Taco Bell drive-through.
"I was in this crazy place of hunger, and I ordered some tacos with no cheese and no meat. I can remember wanting to tell her, 'If you leave cheese on it's really okay,'" she said.
McCardell maintains that despite her dietary abstinence, her kids turned out perfectly healthy. "My kids are above average at school and they're super tall," she said. "It's not like they're these twiggy, skinny, little people who don’t get all the nutrients they need."
But what about milk, the nectar for growing healthy bones? Isn’t veganism dangerous for kids?
In an extreme case, an Atlanta-based vegan couple was sentenced to life in prison in 2007 after their son died of malnourishment. They'd been feeding him soymilk and apple juice. Shortly after, an 11 month old died due to vitamin deficiencies because his breastfeeding vegan mom wasn’t yet giving her child solids.
Although veganism didn't cause those deaths directly, a nutritionally restrictive lifestyle can be potentially fatal if parents are not sufficiently educated. The key is a well-balanced diet. Vegans should ensure they are getting enough iron, calcium, vitamin D, zinc, and vitamin B-12, which is missing from breast milk.
Vegan parents should consult a nutritionist or registered dietician to make sure they're giving themselves and their families all the nutrients they need.
And what about when Bear-Blu and the other little vegans grow up? Vegan cookbook author, Kristen Suzanne, isn’t overly concerned about her 14-month-old daughter’s future culinary choices.
"I really hope to share my passion for the animals and the earth with her. When she's old enough to go out for dinner with friends, she can choose on her own. I'm not going to say 'You can't be my daughter because you chose chicken.'"
Printer-friendly version