Photo by: Michel Filion

Guilt Trip into the Woods: Do Kids Really Need Nature?

Photo by: Michel Filion

Last summer, my husband and I wrestled with where to take our seven-year-old son for vacation: Someplace wild and natural? Or a few days in New York City? Part of me longed to spend a week at the beach; we could turn off the computers, we could spend all day outside, we could commune with nature like poets or saints, or at least wiggle free of the media snake for a few hours. It would be good for our son, Nick, I told myself dutifully, even if I knew he’d rather listen to my iPod.

The Big Apple won out. We arrived in New York on a warm July day and headed straight to Times Square after dinner. Staring up at the ten-story movie ads, scrolling numbers, and cartoon characters, Nick danced as if the sidewalk were on fire. He gazed in wonder, like all the other tourists, many sitting in lawn chairs on one closed section of Broadway. He begged to go back to Times Square every night, and we did. My husband and I loved it, too, and more surprisingly, we loved our son’s response.

Maybe I was wrong to choose the asphalt jungle over the forest primeval. I’d always assumed that nature was better for my child than anything else. Oceans: beautiful, good. Giant M&M’s leaping on flat-panel displays: ugly, evil. But after witnessing Nick’s delight in Times Square, I began to feel not so much wrong as barraged by a dire message at every turn: Your child is being damaged by a lack of contact with nature. If you don’t fix it now, he will turn fat and fearful; he’ll be rudderless, adrift in a sea of enervating boredom.

My son is not a glassy-eyed blob tethered to a screen. He’s an enthusiastic dynamo, and his love of manga and anime and digital cameras and computer games and PowerPoint to create his own stories has made me question if nature has become his generation’s version of castor oil. Is it really true that Nick and all other children are in a state of natural crisis? Or is this just another round of Oldsters versus Youngsters, with boomer oldsters re-claiming a familiar refrain? These kids today are going to hell in a hand basket.

Front and center in the movement to call kids back to nature is a book by journalist Richard Louv, Last Child in the Woods. Published in 2005, it was followed by an expanded paperback edition in 2008. That same year Louv received the Audubon Medal for, in the words of the National Audubon Society’s website, “sounding the alarm about the health and societal costs of children’s isolation from the natural world.” Louv is now the chairman of the Children & Nature Network, an organization that he co-founded in 2006 and which was sparked by his book. The nonprofit based in Santa Fe, with its “news service and portal” website, is devoted to promoting nature programs around the country and kicky slogans like “No Child Left Inside.”

Louv’s manifesto is deceptively calm in its early sections, almost sad, as if he knows he needs to reel in skeptics like me. In it, he argues that children are rapidly losing the free-roaming experience of outdoor play. Kids now know a lot about global warming, but few can name what birds they see in their own backyards. They’d rather stay inside, watching nature on TV, and for Louv, that’s a disaster.

His crusade is far from a lonely one. Since the publication of Last Child in the Woods, a mini-boomlet of nature activity books has appeared, including I Love Dirt!, Nature’s Playground, and The Green Hour: A Daily Dose of Nature for Happier, Healthier, Smarter Kids. The Children & Nature Network promotes everything from the Children in Nature Action Plan created by the National Park Service to learning gardens in Buffalo schools. (According to the website, “C&NN has identified over sixty regions that have either launched or are assembling grassroots campaigns to connect children with nature.”) Each book and campaign and after-school program urges parents to expose their kids to the great outdoors; each tap-taps away, creating yet another anxious drumbeat, hectoring us about what we’re doing wrong.

No parent believes kids should sit in front of a computer 24/7. But I can’t help but feel irked by the hyperbole in statements like, “To take nature and natural play away from children may be tantamount to withholding oxygen.” And I object strongly to the assumptions behind Louv’s message. As a feminist and white adoptive mom of an Asian son, I’m disturbed by the belief that what’s “natural” is always best for kids. This feels like ’60s nostalgia—the kind that wishes women’s liberation and the Internet hadn’t ever come along to mess things up.

In addition, the back-to-nature movement demonizes its perceived enemy—the siren song of high-tech leisure options—to an unrealistic degree. A number of studies funded since 2006 by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation have found that children’s involvement with digital media is not just passive and addictive. Whether they’re creating photo collages and videos, hip-hop mixes, blogging their own stories, or modifying the rules of video games, kids can become empowered creators online. They’re not only sexting and aping celebrities.

The more I examine the work of Louv and his brethren, the less I’m persuaded that when boomers share stories of magical childhood times in a tree, “their cultural, political, and religious walls come tumbling down” as he claims. I just don’t believe that wonder can be reduced to one essential experience any more than motherhood can. And perhaps most disturbing for environmentalist moms and dads, I’m discovering that the nature movement—green and forward-thinking as it appears at first blush—looks an awful lot like a conservative message cloaked with some liberal fig leaves.

Last Child in the Woods isn’t telling a new story, but at the beat-me-whip-me level it’s an undeniably compelling one. Louv covers plenty of well-documented bad news, including the rise in childhood obesity, ADHD diagnoses, and electronic addiction.

Like most of my parent peers, I feel guilty—a lot. Every morning, when there’s barely enough caffeine in my system to cope, NPR seems to pummel me with stories about why our multi-tasking, Internet-chained pace isn’t good for kids… Continue reading on Brain Child’s site

Martha Nichols is a freelance writer in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Her work has appeared in Harvard Business Review, Utne Reader, Adoptive Families, Youth Today, and other publications. She is an instructor in the journalism program at the Harvard University Extension School, and a contributing editor and blog manager at Women’s Review of Books. She also blogs at Athena’s Head and Adopt-a-tude.

Brain, Child magazine: The Magazine for Thinking Mothers was founded in 1999 by Jennifer Niesslein and Stephanie Wilkinson, two friends who had babies under a year old. The pair, both with backgrounds in journalism, were itching for writing about motherhood that spoke to them.

Editor’s Note: What do you think, Do kids need nature? Add your thoughts in the Comments below, and you could be a lucky winner of a 1 year subscription to Brain, Child Magazine!

Like This Article

Like Mamapedia

Learn From Moms Like You

Get answers, tips, deals, and amazing advice from other Moms.

84 Comments

I am disturbed by your statement: 'I’m disturbed by the belief that what’s “natural” is always best for kids'. I believe in those words not to the point of extremism, but in a term applied more liberally. I don't doubt your child would be amazed by the city and all the flashing lights. I don't live in the city and frankly am not a big fan. I do however would like to show you the other side of your reasoning. My daughter is 3 years old now...

See entire comment

wow,really that's what you poeple are worried about.now thats what disturbs me.let the kids be kids and give them a healthy dose of both.Let them know that they are the future and to build this world up with a strong mind(city life)and a kind heart(the out doors)too much of any thing is bad for anyone.Keep an even playing field,guide them,and love them and let them live life to the fullest.

I find these assumptions about the author hilarious -- and even though that really isn't the point of the article -- just for the record. She is an avid bird watcher, and has done so all over the U.S. She is the one I call when a Baltimore Oriole nests in my trees or a wild turkey wanders through my yard. She is also an expert in identifying birds by their song...

See entire comment

This article comes off as a big boo hoo. You feel guilt for not choosing a more natural place to raise your child? People like Louv made you feel guilty? So you experience inner turmoil over having made location decisions you possibly regret, but don't really want to face or deal with. Take your child to a park more often. Take him camping, hiking, swimming, beach combing. Problem solved. Concerning the asphalt jungle, video games, computers? All things in moderation...

See entire comment

After reading this convoluted mess, I was left scratching my head and wondering at the state of journalism more than anything else. "Feeling guilty" for taking a child to the city instead of the country, are you serious? In my humble opinion that is a load for horse pucky! Parents should expose their children to as much variety as possible. Each of these venues hold valuable experiences and should be explored to whatever extent the family is able...

See entire comment

I think that kids need to learn about nature not just for it's beauty, but for survival. People have no survival skills anymore, and it's high time that they started gettin' learned again.

As someone who works with large groups of kids everyday and have a child of my own, I can assure you that they all benefit from time in nature and outdoors in general. I by no means feel technology is the enemy, however communication skills, interpersonal relationships and problem solving and compromise skills are not learned through media but through real time, real place interactions. The amount of time many children spend outside is appaling...

See entire comment

This article left me unsettled. It just feels like the author has a chip on her shoulder regarding all the input from the world on how to raise our kids. A previous commentor states that the author is an avid bird watcher etc. so it would seem that she would be introducing her son to a variety of mediums. The article just feels kind of argumentative. "Convoluted Mess" really does sum up the whole article...

See entire comment

Balance in life is always good. That being said, this article comes off as one persons poorly laid out excuse for not taking her child outside. She did nothing to forward her argument here but probably helped the argument of those she disagreed with.

As mothers we need to evaluate and balance. A heathy dose of nature and modern technology. We are in a different era than our own parents. So we need to do what is best for our children by evaluating then adn questioning them. We can teach them about sun rises, birds, by ourselfs taking a few seconds while driving them to daycare and commenting. We play the cloud game a lot, and the colors in the sky when the sun rises or falls. We are challenged to be creative...

See entire comment

I think balance is the key. Children should learn from the entire world, both with nature and technology.
Children love the natural worldyet don't have enough of it. Just bring them there,they will do the rest. What child doesn't like to explore and discover?
It saddens me that children are too scheduled and don't have any *down time* to just *play* and *decide* what to do at that moment...

See entire comment

It’s important to give kids a balance. Sure, expose them to city things – buildings, museums, “Giant M&M’s leaping on flat-panel displays”, but don’t forget about the natural element either. I have 2 children – ages 5 and 2.5 – and I make sure that we go on picnics, to the park and explore nature. Also, there’s a strong correlation that people who have a connection to something will respect it and nurture it and it's important to keep our kids connected to the planet...

See entire comment

I was born and raised in NYC as is my son and hubs. So we've seen it all flashing lights, amazing architecture etc. We try to "escape" as much as possible and go to upstate NY farms for apple picking, starwberry picking anything to breathe fresh air. But it's all balanced as we love the city too and my 7 year old son is all over the techno as well as nature. Even when we all have a day off and can head anywhere in NYC we inevitably end up in Central Park...

See entire comment

Having raised two very well adjusted, very successful, very well educated young adults (24 and 26 years old) I can say that doing both the city and the nature thing worked for us. Our girls have both earned their masters' degrees. They are both environmentalists. They have also had great experiences getting to know communities of varying sizes and varying degrees of sophistication...

See entire comment

Many well replied comments were left for the writerr!I would like to add my piece of relevance...

See entire comment

Leave a Comment

Required
Required (will not be published)
Required (to prove you're human)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on topic and not abusive
For Updates and Special Promotions
Follow Us
Want to become a contributor?
Want to become a contributor?

If you'd like to contribute to the Wisdom of Moms on Mamapedia, please sign up here to learn more: Sign Up

Recent Voices Posts

See all