Video Baby Monitors: A Step Too Far?

Wednesday 21st of November 2012 | Category: Pregnancy News | Written by: Siobhan Thomas

Always watching

The market for video baby monitors is growing. New parents are often spending in excess of £100 to enable them to watch their baby via wireless technology from another room in the house. Rupert Plumridge wrote a blog to help people rig up their own video monitor using some free software and a webcam at a significantly lower price than the commercial equivalent. His blog made the BBC news this week and has been attracting a lot of attention. But what's the big deal? Why do people think they need a video monitor?

Many grandparents look on with ill-concealed amusement at today's parents and their obsession with (some might even say 'reliance upon') baby related gadgets. 'We didn't have them in our day, and we coped alright'. They're right of course, even simple audio monitors weren't commonplace a couple of generations ago. But obviously that isn't to say more people wouldn't have had them had they had the choice.

What they're good for

A video monitor's main benefit has got to be the added reassurance that it gives parents. Anything that helps you to reduce the permanent worry that a newborn tends to cause is beneficial. People spend hours standing over new babies just checking that they definitely are breathing, presumably these monitors enable you to do the 'paranoid breathing check' from the comfort of the sofa. Many parents feel that the reassurance helps them to sleep better and to relax properly when you are in another room away from the baby. As the baby gets older, the watching your baby uses of the monitor change. You can use the camera when they are playing, enabling you to check from another room that they are safe and happy without running in and out every ten seconds. Many parents go on to find them really useful monitoring the 'escapee' toddler who won't stay in their big bed. For any kind of behaviour monitoring, the idea to the child that Mummy & Daddy can always see them when they are misbehaving surely can't be a bad thing. In my experience an 'I know what you're doing' warning works all the better when they can't tell how you knew (although in our case the method is less high-tech, they don't realise that the utility room window looks into the lounge). Another target market for the video monitor is those parents or carers who have hearing difficulties, for whom the visual aspect of these monitors is invaluable.

But do any of these benefits make a video monitor essential? With many of them now offering the capability for you to talk back to your baby through the monitor, isn't this all becoming just a little 'big brother' like?

Relying on Big Brother

The 'Big Brother' argument against these monitors actually doesn't hold much water for me. Sure, baby is being watched all the time, but by their own parent. We are talking about a helpless little being here, 100% dependent on their Mum & Dad, I can't see they'll ever resent the 'intrusion on their privacy'.

For me, I think the real problem with the video monitors is the ease with which they can become used for more than your original intentions. Standing over your baby in the dark to check that they are breathing is practically a rite of passage when caring for a newborn. But if your monitor shows you a close up image of their moving chest then presumably you'll visit their room less. Is it just me or is that not a bit of a shame? Is there not something very special about those moments spent watching your own baby resting peacefully in their cot at night? And what about actually touching them? It's habit for me to go in and to the children and check they don't feel sweaty or like they might have a temperature (especially right now as we have started the 'what virus next?' stage of the year by taking up all those on offer). It's no longer a paranoid check that I do (I admit it probably used to be), now it's just more of a semi-absentminded routine I run through every night, probably more than once a night. But would it be less of a habit if I could see them from the kitchen?

If you use the camera to watch your children when they're awake - particularly if they are playing out of their cot - then of course it gives you more freedom to nip around the house getting other jobs done quickly. But undoubtedly this leads to less interaction with them overall, and that's a trade-off worth thinking twice about. And what of the temptation to do more than just run off and give the dinner a stir? It would be easy to spend more and more time in other rooms, achieving the otherwise impossible tasks of, well, just finishing all your half-finished tasks. Using multiple cameras (many of which can be rotated remotely) you could watch them in several rooms from your smartphone or laptop wherever you are. On those days where you're pressed for time with too much to do, where will you draw the line?

I don't doubt that most people would purchase and set up these video monitors with the baby's best interests at heart - had I not been sold on a movement monitor at the time of having my first baby I might have bought one myself (although you can now buy monitors that do both). What's more, I think the arguments for having them are very strong. However, now that I have two young children I know how restrictive it can be, having to be on top of them making sure that they aren't trying to swallow a wooden cupcake or climb onto the changing table. I over-rely on the stair gate probably - I admit to using it, knowing that they are contained upstairs whilst I get something from downstairs, answer the door etc. If they seem to be behaving I do, on occasion, give in to the temptation to run out to the garage to put a wash on or whatever and in the back of my mind I know I am pushing my luck. But if I could have a live image of them fed to me at all times? I probably would push my luck further. Perhaps I'm just extraordinarily weak willed, but would it also not be just the tiniest bit tempting to have a peek when you're out and leave them with your partner, orthe babysitter?