Effects of “Bad” Dolls on Children Development

Effects of “Bad” Dolls on Children Development Introduction Permitting children play with the so called “bad” toys like Barbie is not beneficial, but actually harmful to their personal development. In her essay, “Gals and Dolls: The moral value of “Bad” Toys”, Mami Jackson discusses the Barbie dolls which seem to do well in the markets, but she is also keen to point out the controversies surrounding the dolls. In fact, Jackson mentions that to the parenting generation, these dolls instill fear over the development pattern of the children who possess them. The only positive attribute she associates with dolls is that of serving the child’s sense of play (par. 9). However, this cannot be substituted by the overall effect these dolls are likely to impact on the development of the children who use them, most of them between the age of four and ten years. The effects could spread far with time; for instance, Jackson points out that Barbie dolls are sold in 67 countries all over the world.

Buy this excellently written paper or order a fresh one from acemyhomework.com

EFFECTS OF “BAD” TOYS ON CHILDREN DEVELOPMENT

2

Allowing children to play with “bad” dolls is, therefore, harmful as it exposes children to negative effects which include emotional disorders, poor physical health, and degrading social values.

By stating that Barbie dolls are envied by therapists for creating, “a private, privileged space where any kind of feeling is permitted”, Jackson admits the fact that these dolls trigger emotional emptiness where associated disorders can manifest themselves. This is a dangerous scenario especially where the child is exposed to the dolls for too long. Emotional disorders such as loss of self esteem may interfere with the child’s growth and development, both physically and mentally. Bad habits like addiction may result from not addressing such disorders in their early stages, as in the case of a small girl with multiple dolls of the same type (par. 6). It is, therefore, important to protect children from emotional disorders through abstinence from the “bad” dolls or control the degree of children’s exposure to these dolls.

The physical well being of children who play with the “bad” dolls is also at risk.

Unhealthy behaviors such as eating disorders have for long been associated with dolls like Barbie. Stress arising from emotional disorders is also another threat to the health of the children who play with these “bad” dolls. A wide range of diseases are known to be caused by stressrelated cases, especially where stressors are recurrent. Children who overstay with these dolls increase the risk of developing emotional disorders. Playing with dolls hardly improves the physical well being of a child as there is little or no physical exercise involved. Preventing children from playing with these dolls is, therefore, an asset to their physical health.

The social life of children playing with these dolls has very little, if anything, to gain from these plays. In fact, social values are not upheld, but rather degraded through a child’s involvement with “bad” dolls. The article refers to Barbie dolls as “uneducational” and goes

EFFECTS OF “BAD” TOYS ON CHILDREN DEVELOPMENT

3

further to state that the dolls lack in redeeming social values, and that this is the parents’ worst fears. The kind of plays that children do with these dolls are always those of mean babysitters and, according to Jackson, they have no “parent-pleasing values” (par. 9). Some like Ken are said to play a game of suicidal dives. Some of these games are not healthy to the development of children who are actually in the stage where there is much learning. The social life of any individual is known to suffer a big blow whenever their self esteem is threatened, yet dolls like Barbie have for long been accused of lowering the self esteem of children who play with them.

They are also known to be gender oriented, and this could be an obstacle in the making as far as interaction of both genders is involved. Social values could, therefore, be instilled in children who play with such dolls by reducing their exposure to the dolls.

Conclusion The basic scenario, therefore, is that the so called “bad” dolls do more harm than good in a child’s growth and development process. Already, “bad” dolls are widespread in many parts of the world and it is possible that they will continue in the market. This market is mainly comprised of children who may not be informed of the effects of such dolls. It is, therefore, important that parents be in control of their children and take a supervisory role even in the kind of games their children play. Otherwise, the parents should, from an informed perspective, ensure that these negative effects are addressed keenly if at all the child has to use the toys. This should be through monitoring the child closely and ensuring that the child is not exposed to the “bad” dolls for too long. It is also important to introduce alternative ways of playing and encourage games that are relevant to children’s growth and development process.

EFFECTS OF “BAD” TOYS ON CHILDREN DEVELOPMENT References Jackson, M. Gals and dolls: The moral value of “bad” toys.

4