I guess I really don't see the point of trying to "give the child an edge" as an infant or a child.
I think, if a child ASKS for specific things like wanting to take ballet, or music lessons, or go to science camp (like my dd7 did), it's good to support that interest.
I have a pretty enriched environment at home, but never had the desire to teach reading early. I had one that went from not reading before kindy to reading 6th grade material in the span of 2 years. I have one daughter that self-taught to read at 4.5. She's reading easy chapter books (Magic Treehouse) and she's almost 6 now.
I don't see the point in sitting down teaching a baby to read when I think kids who are really interested and really ready will catch on and quickly advance.
Kids need time to be kids. There will be opportunities when they are older to be tailored for the job market, I kind of think it's a waste of my headspace to worry about what my almost 6 year old will do for a career when she's 20. I want to enjoy her being a child as long as she can.
There's a lot to be said about being able to just play in terms of creative thinking/creative problem solving (a skill in high demand in many careers).
Here's some food for thought
NPR articles:
Old Fashioned Play Builds Serious Skills Creative Play Makes for Kids in Control From a homeschooling archive
Much Too Early Okay, I have to modify the portion below. I don't know if this group is the same as Your Baby Can Read...but if not it is seems similar to the Doman techniques.
The author of Teach Your baby to read, G. Doman, has been under a LOT of criticism over the years, taking peoples money for his "proven" techniques.
Rush Little Baby His original studies were regarding brain damaged children, and his techniques have been criticized for the use with brain damaged children by the AAP
See Wikipedia Article
The Institutes for the Achievement of Human Potential Go ahead, spend money on ridiculous scams to give your baby an edge, but it's not proven to be beneficial over the long term.
