Jolly Jumpers are BAD for infant development

[suse]

I can't point you to any articles online ... and partly because I always get in trouble for posting links)

Kuraiza, you are allowed to post links provided that they are to non-commercial sites, so links to articles are fine.

[KatieRabbit]

I have a colleague who said and I quote "I drank two pints of beer everyday when I was pregnant and my daughter is fine" and no one wanted to point out to her that her daughter is not fine! Anyway I digress.

Child: Care, Health and Development
Volume 27 Issue 3, Pages 295 - 306
Published Online: 12 Jan 2002

Infant motor development and equipment use in the home
A.L. Abbott and D. J. Bartlett
School of Physical Therapy, Elborn College, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Western Ontario, London, Ontario, Canada

"Statistically significant correlations were found for the relationships between total equipment use and infant motor development"
"These findings suggest that infants who have high equipment use tend to score lower on infant motor development or that infants who have low equipment use tend to score higher on infant motor development".

Jolly Jumpers do not help babies to walk better or have better balance. The American Academy of Pediatrics says "Infant walkers and jumpers and car safety seats
should not be used as positioning devices in
the home."
(http://brightfutures.aap.org/pdfs/Gu...l_Activity.pdf)

[LimeSlice]

So once again, the notion of everything in moderation comes into play.
They didn't say the compared to children who NEVER used the equipment, they said low use of equipment.
It also doesn't state the parameters of the testing, how many children were used and what their definitions of use were. It also doesn't say anything about a control group, to measure the 'normal' progress of children who don't use any of the said equipment.
From my personal experience, a JJ (not a walker) did have a significant positive impact on Charlotte's balance and walking, and many other kids I know benefited too.

"Infant walkers and jumpers and car safety seats
should not be used as positioning devices in
the home."

is a great little sound byte to prove a point, but you have used it completely out of its intended context. the FULL statement was actually about allowing a child to explore the environment, and not leave a child in a restrictive device for excessive periods of time in place of full unrestricted `movement like tummy time. and not a comment on their intended use, as prescribed by the mufacturers.

Infants need parents and other caregivers to
provide consistent, lively, and developmentally
appropriate physical activity. Without ade-
quate physical stimulation, infants adopt
more sedentary behaviors and tend to roll
over, crawl, and walk later than babies who
enjoy physical activity with a parent or
caregiver.

Giving infants freedom of movement
encourages them to explore their environ-
ment and learn about their surroundings.
Playpens, swings, and infant seats may be
appropriate at certain times, but parents
should be encouraged to let the infant move
around freely with close supervision. Infant
walkers and jumpers and car safety seats
should not be used as positioning devices in
the home. Consideration should be given to
families who live in environments where they
do not feel it is safe for their child to explore,
such as in shelters or substandard housing.
Discussions with parents who live in these
environments can help them identify appro-
priate activities so that their child can meet
the daily physical activity recommendations.

Again, statistics and studies are great sources of information, but they MUST be taken entirely in context. Their parameters must be clearly explained - otherwise they are easily adaptable to prove both the pro and con of the one argument.

[SunnyRain]

... but playpens, swings and infant seats are not the same as walkers, jumpers and car safety seats, they would have used the same words if they meant the same things. They are differentiating between them. The quote was not altered by being taken out of context.

I can't help but notice how defensive people are about this issue. What if you're wrong and your children end up with back problems? Is it worth the risk?

But what if the health professionals are wrong and there's no connection between JJs and developmental delays and back problems in adult life and you don't use a jolly jumper for your child ... nothing.

I also can't stand the argument that your mother did it so it's ok. Was it OK for generations of Chinese women to bind their daughter's feet because their mothers had done it to them? It's an extreme example but I use it to illustrate the point that your argument is simply invalid.

[Visitor8]

That example is totally irrelevant because it isn't anywhere NEAR the same thing.

Ashton has one, he uses it MAYBE 10 minutes a week MAYBE. Having said that he hasn't been in it for about a month. He has a car thing which I prop him in and he plays. Oh yeah he will be soooo back wards because I do that ... even though the rest of the day I am playing with him

The box says it shouldn't be used until 4 months. All the 4 month olds that I have met have been able to hold their own weight. I know my 4 month olds could, my 5 month old was pulling himself up on the table! I gave him a Jolly Jumper to play in when he turned 4 months, he is flat footed, he has a little play and most of the time I am in front of him being silly so I am not using it as a baby sitter. I am following all the guidelines for using on safely to ensure that he comes to no harm.

I am very offended that you are insinuating that I am purposefully hurting my child. I love my child and I will always do what is best for him. If I think that 10 minutes a week in a Tigger bouncer is ok then that is my choice. I could be doing much worse things then that!

[Lolli]

I think, like Lime says, moderation is the key.

Everything seems to be bad for kids if they use it/ have it all the time. Sultanas, shoes, bottles, dummies, juice, fruit... the list goes on. Surely if you are sensible and don't use the equipment as a full time babysitter there can't be that much harm to it...

[SunnyRain]

Ashton has one, he uses it MAYBE 10 minutes a week MAYBE. ...
The box says it shouldn't be used until 4 months. All the 4 month olds that I have met have been able to hold their own weight. I know my 4 month olds could, my 5 month old was pulling himself up on the table! ...
I am very offended that you are insinuating that I am purposefully hurting my child

My 5-month-old can't support his own weight at all. You are misinformed if you think EVERY 5-month old can do that.

[Junglemum]

i can't believe you are arguing about each others choices?!

Seriously, the information is there to do with what you wish, but it's not there so we can judge or criticize each other.

Each to their own.

[christy]

There is a fine line between disagreements and flaming, please take a moment before posting in frustration and realise that it is other mothers you are responding too. I am going to have to edit a few posts. It is either edit myself, or infract for flaming. Anymore flaming behaviour and posters will be banned from this thread.

[Bathsheba]

Only read the first page of posts but we never used JJ or any piece of equipment that put a child into a position that was unnatural for it's stage of development... plus we didn't have the money to buy such items with our first baby... was just something that didn't feel right so we never did it. ETA: ...and I never really thought to judge parents that did use such things... it was just something we chose not to do.

[leesha]

Wooooaahhhhh......

Each to their own I say!!

Take the information given and decide what to do for your own child!! No need to get nasty with one another!!

I for one think that kurazia did the right thing posting the information she has found but it won't stop me from using a JJ.....But that is my choice!!!

Do with the information what you please just don't make it personal and argue about it as there is no right or wrong answer in this case!!!

[Visitor8]

I didn't realise I got nasty. Was just having my opinion. Sorry if I offended anyone.

[Bathsheba]

I still haven't read the whole thread (not in the mood for arguments) but I agree with Leesha that it's good to read all articles that involve the safety and health of our children. I'd rather have some food for thought than proceed in ignorance. If I discover that I may have made a choice that could have been harmful I guess I hope for the best and move forward. All of us are trying to be the best parents we can be and THAT'S what matters.

Though personally I'm a huge advocate for living in line with nature's design when it comes to our bodies. Convenience and temporary pleasure can be tempting things. When I think of the most harmful things we do to our bodies it's often for these reasons of convenience and short term pleasure. I'm not saying your kids have to be wrapped in cotton wool and bored stiff... like many have said, moderation is the key, as is really thinking about the big picture of what the activity is doing to the body.

[Butterfly Dawn]

I think you raise some good points. It is personal choice what you choice to give your children to play in/with. I personally welcome more information posted as it helps me to decide what I will choose for my kids

[Madissun]

I think you raise some good points. It is personal choice what you choice to give your children to play in/with. I personally welcome more information posted as it helps me to decide what I will choose for my kids

I completely agree