Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Question: Have you used the program for your child/children and did it work?


I have used it and it worked!

I have used it and it didn't really work

I have not used it

other, please explain

Only group members can vote in this poll.

Total Votes: 49

View Results

*Success Story*

My 3.5 year old Sd can read about 200 words, knows all her letters and can write.

My 21 month old Dd can read about 150 words and is learning the alphabet. 


To those of you saying it only teaches memorization, I wondered about this until one day I wrote a word my Dd had NEVER seen before, she looked at it and 2 seconds later said it out loud. 

You can all think whatever you want, but for MY children this program works. And they still prefer Your Baby Can Read to any of the crap on tv.

I also do not care that the company is out of business, I'm just glad that I bought the entire set before that happened


by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 4:05 AM
Replies (21-25):
by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 6:49 AM
1 mom liked this

No.  I refuse to use it.

It has been under much scrutiny and lawsuits due to it's false advertising and claims.  While it is perfectly fine to expose children to words, I do not believe teaching children random words is beneficial to later reading success.  However, many schools use "sight words" or "dolch words".  They are typically the 200 most frequently use words in the English language (you, I, can, see, my, the, to, etc,).  While YBCR results in random words being said, sight words result in real sentences being used "I see the [insert picture]." Which has real meaning and understanding, also something my students can read within two weeks of school.  I do not disagree with the way they teach the words, just the words used.  Sight Words tend to be a bit more abstract, which is why most children need to be taught them a bit later.

Phonics is also a component that is a must when children learn how to read.  Associating letters and sounds is a key component to reading (which YBCR misses).  I often recommend sites like and if you want to spend money, which all combine sight words and phonics and an age appropriate level.  Reading to your young child and allowing them to see you read has been shown to be the best and most effective way to teach children basic literacy skills.

*steps off soapbox*

Kindergarten teacher

by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 6:52 AM
There is a reason that scam was pulled from the market.

The children are not truly taught "how to read".

Reading to your child is much more beneficial in regards to long term reading skills.
Posted on the NEW CafeMom Mobile
by Sapphire Member on Feb. 25, 2013 at 7:21 AM
No, I haven't used it. My son's therapist said it was a rip off. No baby can "read", the cognitive processes required for reading aren't developed until later. What this system does is teach the baby a different image for an object. The baby associated the image of the word with the object, but it's not recognizing it as a word, nor putting sound to those letters. That's not reading.
What several therapists told me later, including my best friend whom I think is the best, is that it can actually be counterproductive, as you're forcing an ability a baby isn't ready to have, it may interfere with actually learning to read later on.
IMHO, it just takes advantage of the natural desire of some parents for their child to he "advanced". They kvell that their 1 year old can "read", film it, show it to friends and acquaintances with "less advanced" children and they feel good. But it's really just a trick.
by Anonymous 8 on Feb. 25, 2013 at 7:22 AM

Not a success story. All it teaches them to do is memorize. In order to read, they need to learn phonics and not just remember words.

by on Feb. 25, 2013 at 12:51 PM


Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)