Your Baby Can Read? Wow! You are AWESOME!

Lucy is so gifted that she prefers reading upside down

I love television, so I'm certainly not against my children watching a few shows (Sesame Street and something we call "Nina Night Night" on Sprout). Because of this, I have seen a thousand times a commercial for this program called "Your Baby Can Read." I'll admit that I am often swayed by advertising, but this infomercial has the same effect on me as the trailer for the TLC show, "Toddlers and Tiaras":  It pisses me off. Royally.

Here's some background on "Your Baby Can Read". http://www.yourbabycanread.com/
http://trevorcairney.blogspot.com/2008/07/your-baby-can-learn-to-read.html

Wow! Your baby can READ! Cool! You must have smart genes! You are undoubtedly an intelligent person and a GREAT parent!

Can your baby actually read? No. Your Baby Can Memorize! Good job, though. Memorizing is a noteworthy skill. The memorization versus actual reading issue is not what angers me as much as the pompousness of the program. It's the Baby-As-Mommy-and/or-Daddy's-Little-Trophy thing that disturbs me.



Besides, kids read at their own paces. Baby/toddlerhood is full of beginning reading opportunities that are fun for kids, without flashcard drills and mandatory videos. I'm sure some of the materials for YBCR are interesting to kids, and if my kids chose to look at those flashcards or watch one of those videos, of course I would go along with it. But in order for Your Baby [to] Read, you have to make those things a part of every day activities, giving your baby or toddler a homework schedule and mandatory tv or computer time, however many minutes a day. That's ridiculous. We do read books every day, but my kids initiate this reading time and it's fun. Being rebellious by nature, I can't imagine my kids willingly sitting still for mommy-led, mommy-enforced "reading" time for a certain amount of minutes every day. Isn't learning supposed to be child-directed and child-centered at this age? And all about play? The biggest objection I have to this program is that it is not really about the kids at all. The only reason parents would force their kids into daily "reading" according to this program is for bragging rights. Parents buy this because they want to be able to say to their friends and their kids' teachers, "Little Isabel started reading at 12 months." But no, Isabel did not. Isabel memorized some words because you sat her in front of those words every day. And you did that to make yourself look like a stellar parent of a gifted child. And that, to me, is almost as bad as putting your kid in a pageant dress and painting her orange.



Anyway, kids don't learn to become engaged readers from flashcards and videos. It's more subtle, less glam. They bring books to us that they want us to read with them. They gradually start pointing to print in their environment and start to say letters and words, sing songs, and play with language. My favorite part is when they get a little older and they inventing their own letters and words. It's really cool to see what they come up with. And the "pretend" reading is fun too-- when they make up their own words to a book, yet their little fingers are following the print like they've seen you do. The point is that our kids are learning without even knowing they are learning and they are having fun with it. We are not drilling them and teaching them in the process that learning is something they should do in order to make their parents talk in high-pitched voices and clap their hands. We teach them that learning is fun and that we respect them as learners and value their genuine interests.

Are we afraid our children will turn out to be ordinary like us?

 Cousins "reading" in the bath tub at Grammy's house



Are the parents of the "Toddlers in Tiaras" living out their own fantasies of being slim and glamorous through their frighteningly over-polished kids? I think so. Sorry, little Mykenzi does not look adorable in her eight-hundred-bucks-on-ebay tacky couture gown. She actually looks like a miniature Joan Crawford doll. I won't even get into the sexualization of little girls-- which is enough to send me over the edge. I guess two-year-old girls in bikinis with fake teeth, spray tans, and chinchillas tacked onto their heads are considered beautiful to some people out there. And who am I to judge?  

I judge because training kids to be "Best In Show" is disingenuous to me. But I could be wrong. I know some of the pageant kids really want to do it. And what if my son or daughter wants to be in pageants? I will deal with that if it happens. I guess it's the difference between forcing our kids to do something and guiding them in a sport or activity that they enjoy and want to do. And all of those babies who can "read" are strapped in high chairs or car seats at the time, and, if given the option to do something else, I'm not sure they'd rather stay strapped into those chairs reading flashcards. I'm sure it's complicated-- it's not bad that we want to teach our kids to learn and be smart and to follow-through and not be quitters, but we don't want to be too pushy and end up teaching them to hate books, to hate ballet, to hate the clarinet, to hate t-ball, and to hate us.

While some parents burst with pride as their babies read flash cards, and others clap their hands as their daughters shake their hips to Shania Twain songs on stage, I'm perfectly proud of my filthy, illiterate toddlers as they scream jibberish and dump buckets of sand on each other's heads. It's just another ordinary, happy day.