As a study abroad leader, I’ve visited several schools in Oaxaca, Mexico in the past 6 years. I’ve been fascinated by the campaign for a #OaxacaSinChatarra: literally, Oaxaca Without Junk. Unlike my children’s public school in the U.S., where food high in sugar, fat, and additives is distributed like…well, candy, the Oaxacan schools I visited in 2023 and 2025 have recent policies that prevent junk food from even entering the school. That’s right: not only do they not serve junk food to the children, but children, teachers, and volunteers are asked not to bring it onto school property. Leaders like Felípe Sánchez frame this policy as a way to honor children’s right to healthy and nutritious food*. The word chatarra, like the word junk, refers to both scrap metal and unhealthy foods.
Last week, the fantastic podcast Maintenance Phase released an episode on Ultra-Processed Foods. The hosts argued that this term is poorly defined, pointing to inconsistent ways of categorizing things as ultra-processed, just processed, and not processed across the scientific literature on the topic. For example, honey has been categorized in different papers as The Most Ultra-Processed, The Least, and everywhere in between. Scientists often categorize “commercially-sold” bread as ultra-processed, while homemade bread is not; where does that leave small-batch bread sold at the farmer’s market?
Yesterday, Care and Feeding (Slate’s awesome parenting podcast, on which I have been a guest) released an episode called “What counts as screen time?” Do audiobooks count? What about podcasts? Listening to the Care and Feeding hosts, I was reminded about the difficulty of defining “ultra-processed” foods. Is “screen time” often used as a euphemism for “junk time”? Both are morally loaded, with purists (like those with orthorexia) avoiding them at all costs and many others trying to find balance by identifying and striving for some safe-enough dose at each developmental stage.
…parents (often mothers) must constantly defend their children from too much, with “too much” being ill-defined and billions of dollars spent to convince our children to consume more.
But just as “processed” and “junk” are sometimes contradictory when applied to food, there’s a similar problem with “screen time”, which sometimes doesn’t distinguish what’s on the screen or how someone is engaging with it. By itself, the advice to “limit kids’ screen time” would include both a video call with grandparents AND an hour of doomscrolling as things to be minimized. In both cases, parents (often mothers) must constantly defend their children from too much, with “too much” being ill-defined and billions of dollars spent to convince our children to consume more.
Even many who decry the evils of screen time acknowledge that it can support education and creativity. But does it have to? Where’s the space for pleasure? Relaxation? Joy? Connection? And yes, screens as parents’ helpers? How can we enjoy ourselves—and teach our kids to enjoy themselves—while reducing harm?
I’m lucky: my developmental psychology training has helped me understand the mechanisms of the harms of screen time and then make informed decisions about my family’s use of screens.** But you shouldn’t need a PhD to navigate the obstacle courses that Big Tech, Big Media, and Big Food have created. We need structural changes to make joyful, healthy behaviors the path of least resistance.
Notes
*More about children’s rights in Mexico is coming soon in Episode 3 of the Nurturing Minds podcast.
**Let us know if you’re interested in a post or an episode about how Vance and I navigate “screen time” for ourselves and our loved ones.
Note: I drafted this in 30 minutes because I only had an hour and a half of childcare today. And it’s over in 8 minutes! And my kids are 8 minutes away!