Nature deficit disorder--real or not?

Back in 2005 Richard Louv came up with a hypothesis regarding the reason children in this generation have behavioral issues. He wrote a book about his studies and explained that children are having these issues because parents are being to protective, these children are spending less and less time outdoors, and there is too much time being spent on electronic media.

Richard Louv spent ten years traveling around the USA reporting and speaking to parents and children, in both rural and urban areas, about their experiences in nature. He argues that sensationalist media coverage and paranoid parents have literally "scared children straight out of the woods and fields", while promoting a litigious culture of fear that favors "safe" regimented sports over imaginative play.

There is more information on the link below. Personally, I feel this is not necessarily a diagnosis to a problem or even a disorder. I do agree that more nature in everyone's lives helps us feel more calm and relaxed, and too much electronic media can be harmful and leave us feeling more stressed and uneasy.

Right now it is not supported in the medical field. Do you think this should be classed as a disorder?

Wikipedia

a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

I don't think it should be classified as a disorder,but I do think it is real as far as being detrimental to kids development.
I used to stay on my Uncle's farm that was 88 acres during the summers,I can tell you ,it is different in the country with the woods and the animals and having responsibilities etc. It is a slower pace that gives you time to think about who you are and what your place is in this world. You see the food chain in action,life and death,breeding,nursing and fighting for survival and breeding rights. You learn about pecking orders,dominance,the different sexes roles in their lives,providing the proper environment for things to live and grow as you want them too etc. All important things to know about life and how you fit in it.

I grew up in the countryside and my childhood was great. We were allowed out late, we used to walk from village to village playing in fields, ditches, climbing trees etc etc.

Now as a parent, in the same area I grew up in, I feel less inclined to allow my daughter to do the same things. However, I know this fear is false, therefore I force myself to let her explore most boundaries she wishes.

So why do I have the fear? Partly it's a parent's prerogative to not let their cuddly little offspring come to harm. This prerogative is made much more intense by daily news reports of peados and weirdos. Then made more intense again by other parents who believe the news and gossip about it... and thus the fear grows.

I feel the key to parenting is to let the child explore and feel fear themselves, this is what develops personality and strength!

a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

My son is only two years old, I let him play alone in the backyard and let him think that I am not watching, but yet I do watch as much as I can. There is no harm that can become to him within a fenced in yard (though he has opened the gate a few times and then walked to the front of my house to ring the doorbell laughing). Epecially when my dog is out with him (always is), whom barks and goes nuts at the random person walking down the street over 200ft away from our backyard, I know I will be alerted by her if anyone or any danger comes near. But if I lived in a dangerous and highly populated neighborhood with high gang activity and such, never would I do this. So I guess it has a lot to do with where you live and what kind of parent you are. I want my son to explore and to enjoy outdoors, but he is way too young to be trusted to handle himself, which is a good reason to own a dog. As he gets 3-4 years older, I would feel safe with him walking around the neighborhood with my dog or any dog that has grown to accpet my son as their kin.

But it is true, anyone with a gun could put an end to both of their lives at any given moment, get swiped up, hit by a car, etc. And it is my fear for his safety that makes me uncomfortable about him being alone, but at the same time life is so unpredictable that you cannot protect your child from everything. But knowing your child is protected gives yourself the well being that there is no harm that can become to him. But just as you think he is safe, he drowns with his head in the toilet, electrocutes himself, breaks his neck falling down the stairs, has a life threatening illness, etc, that happen so quickly and unforseen by a parent that it is so easy to be over protective.

a reply to: ArnoldNonymous

The only problem with the "disorder" is that there is an incentive for people to stay indoors - I mean, heck, why go outside when you can own someone on Call of Duty? Combine that with parents that are worried every passing stranger means their child harm (not to mention every scrape can lead to loosing a limb), and the fact that many places now aren't as safe as they used to be, and there's ample reason for a kid to sit inside on a perfectly nice day.

I grew up in a rural town, and my parent's made it easy for me: If you stay indoors, there was a good chance you would be nominated to do chores (computer, internet, and TV time were considered privileges, not rights). Mine had no problem letting me stay out in the woods from dawn to dusk, and on weekends or breaks, I was allowed to stay out even later (especially when taking the dog for walks). Then again, I had that natural drive to stay outdoors, and even now, I mope because I can't get outside with my regular 9-5.

If I were a parent in today's age, I'd be leery about letting my kids do the same thing; but I also know that if I can survive, and the kids were officially mine, then I also know they will most likely be like me, and also survive. I might not give them the same freedom I had, but it would still be enough to suffice.

-fossilera