Why I refuse to feel guilty about my Twitter addiction

Thanks for posting this Keris and I *think* I may have been one of your first followers - that was before writing an article for paper which ended up titled something like: "Is twitter the biggest waste of time ever?"
You've got to love those headline writers...

PS love the jumper.

Well said, Keris. I really don't think it was a balanced article. The DM is the worst offender at parent bashing and throwing their hands up in horror. And they'll be so inconsistent - first tutting over "neglect" like this, then going on about pushy parents. Can't have it both ways!

This is why I don't read the Daily Mail.

Thanks, Linda and Kate :)

Kate, it's certainly a lot more balanced than the headline suggests, but I'm really undecided about how balanced it is overall. Obviously, read in the context of the Mail's attitude toward mothers (and women in general), it's infuriating. If I'd read it in another paper, I'm not sure how I'd feel.

Rosie - you're so right. I try really hard not to, but every so often I follow a link and then go on a frenzy of clicking and reading and getting myself worked up. I'm a glutton for punishment.

I thought it was a balanced piece written with good humour but the headline was a stinker - at least "middle class" wasn't shoe horned in or a link to cancer...for these pages it's going to be about mums isn't it? As your link to Rosie's piece shows, parents being online "too much" is a valid discussion point, but neglect? That's harsh!

I agree with you Keris - that having some time to yourself to spend online or on twitter is vital. We don't need to be hovering over our children the whole time and a little bit of 'healthy neglect' doesn't do them any harm - like your son getting his own sandwich. Of course it goes without saying I loathe The Daily Mail but I thought this piece was more balanced than usual.

I do worry about it sometimes. Recently we were out for lunch and my son wanted to go on his DS rather than talk to me whilst we waited for the food to come and I was upset. Upset he wasn't talking to me and would prefer to be on there. But he retorted that I'm often checking my phone in front of him (especially since I installed tweetdeck on it - fatal). Whenever I see parents in the playground glued to their phones (I've done it myself) when their child is coming down the slide saying 'Look at me Look at me' then I worry if we are doing them any lasting damage. In extreme cases, tweeting every minute of your day - surely there must be some "neglect" going on?

Alison, I do agree that it's not on in certain situations, but funnily enough the main culprit I've seen is one of the dads at school. He drops his son off and collects him without ever once looking up from his phone. But I guess that's okay because he's a busy working man rather than a feckless woman... ;)

I think letting the children play on their own encourages them to use their imaginations. We have a limit on computer use for them - they can only use them at the weekends once homework is done or they'd sit in front of them every spare hour - but since this was brought in they are happy to go up to their rooms and I hear them inventing characters and games, it's so good for their creative instincts. Not quite sure about 'Master and Servant' - it's always DD (8) being the boss and DS1 (6) being the servant, but that sums their personalities up really.

As for the Twitter addiction - my mobile is the most basic little brick I could find. I deliberately don't want unlimited internet or emails on it as I know I would constantly check it. I don't want to feed the addiction when I'm away from the house; I am bad enough at home!

Great piece Keris. Once again it's all about balance and moderation, isn't it?
Interestingly I've noticed that a lot of dads at the school gate have their phones attached to their ears/finger ends in a 'I'm really important and needed somewhere else' kind of way.

I havent bothered to read the article because the headline got my back up straight away and I wasnt in the mood to find out weather the article was just as bad. I also refuse to read anything in the Daily Fail anymore as it generally talks a load of r*****h. I completely agree with what you say about a little bit of "neglect" is a good thing! Like you I'd without a second thought do everything for my son without even thinking about it. But when I'm busying working in my room he often comes up with the most innovative of ideas on his own, without mummys input! As an only child who has always liked to be stimulated I love to see the fact he is developing his own mind, something he wont do if I'm in the room and able to help entertain!

Harry has limited computer time too, Rebecca. And I have a basic mobile - I only check Twitter when I'm out and about without the kids.

Thanks, Ellen. Perhaps some school dads worry people will think that if they're picking their kids up, they haven't got jobs?

Thanks, Hayley. It's so easy to just do everything for them without thinking, isn't it. And of course they'll let us!

Great article Keris and I agree too. Do we have to be our children's servants just because the Daily Mail says we should? The implication of the headline that Twitter mums neglect their children got my back up too. Yet more mum bashing from the Daily Mail - which is why I don't read it.

Ah... the power of the headline!
I see it like this.
Since becoming an active blogger/tweeter I have stopped watching TV and lounging around doing nothing. Sad as it may sound to a certain Daily Mail writer (who is also to be found running through my twitter stream on a daily basis. Pot... kettle?) Twitter has become my down time.
Yesterday was clearly a low news day we have nothing to be ashamed of and no reason to defend ourselves.

I agree Keris. I don't think it even occurred to my parents that they should be playing with me/providing stimulating activities while they were getting on with other things. They just got on with their cooking, gardening, cleaning, decorating (or whatever it happened to be) and didn't give it a thought. The phrase 'go and find something to do or I'll find something for you' was a popular one in our house. And at the last glance, I don't think me and brother have turned out emotionally scarred as a result! I do feel guilty sometimes about chatting on Twitter or Facebook or whatever, but when I really think about it I think it's only because current thinking about parenting seems to centre around 'over-parenting'....

Ahhh Keris, I am so relieved that your "just a minute" seem to get extended into something a little longer. I am not alone then!

As mothers we are all allowed to have a life. Likewise so do our children; they would rather have a pre-occupied mother at times than one who drops everything and lives her life only for and through them. What a terrible burden to bestow.

Thanks, Janet.

Lindsay, Harry has been known to wail, "But a minute is HOURS!" *guilty face*

I think the headline and the fact the original article was in the Daily Mail detracts from its message that Twitter *is* addictive and many parents spend too long on there (myself sometimes included).

I don't understand why people are upset by it. As mothers, I know we come in for some unfair stick but that doesn't mean there isn't some truth in what is being said.

I also don't get why agreeing with the view that some parents spend too long tweeting each day (and yes, some do) automatically means that you want mothers to spend their every waking moment playing or interacting with their children. It's not saying that at all.

When doing other jobs (even if it is mundane chores like housework) you can include your child. Twitter doesn't. By getting them to help with housework you're teaching them some essential life skills. Having a hot meal, clean clothes and a tidy home benefits everyone.

My children quite often see me reclined on the sofa, head stuck in a book. I don't see the harm in this, they recognise that I have needs and it's great for them to see an adult reading.

I just don't feel the same about them seeing me tapping away to complete strangers for ages. I don't want their overriding memory of me to be stuck in front of a computer screen. Plus, it means I don't have a leg to stand on when I want to enforce screen time!

I agree to a point, Debbie, but I do think it's just another article (and, yes, as I said above, my reaction would probably be different if it hadn't been in the Mail) that wants mothers to feel guilty (again, why aren't dads mentioned?) about doing things for themselves. Yes, some take it to extremes, but some women are obsessive about housework too.

And you can actually include children in tweeting - Harry has his own (locked) Twitter account and the brilliant @classroomtweets uses it as an educational tool very successfully.

I also don't agree you wouldn't have a leg to stand on when it comes to enforcing screen time. I'm allowed to do a lot of things my children aren't!

I'm going to jump in here too - I think the phrase 'complete strangers' that you use Debbie while Keris talks about 'chatting to friends' puts a different perspective on things - back in 2007 or whenever it was, there was a different feel to Twitter, for me, people I 'know' online are often people I have met, have worked with or are friends with. I seem to know a lot of people - I do feel a need to be in touch with some of them in this way, and most of all I need to be on for work - something I won't feel guilty about as well, my children have to eat. x