« January 2011 | Main | March 2011 »
Hi all, I will be silent for a few days while I'm on mini-vacation with my girlfriends.
This will be the second trip that I will be away from now 14-month-old Jake. I missed him terribly on my first trip, which was a weeklong overseas trip, though Skype helped some.
We'll see how well I handle this separation. I will be back to blogging on Wednesday.
Here's Betsy of Fluffy Windover's Diary in this week's Toddler Thursday:
Mayim Bialik, whom you may remember as "Blossom" from the early 90's TV series, has recently become somewhat of a parenting guru. If you Google her name and "parenting" you will find all sorts of interviews and writings she has done about her somewhat unusual style (think extreme attachment parenting). I usually like to read what she writes; though some of her choices seem pretty wacky to me, she expresses herself well and is clearly a very caring parent. Since I don't subscribe to any one parenting style and I have an open mind, I'm always interested in reading about all the different schools of thought.
Now Bialik is a regular contributor to the pretty mainstream TODAY Moms blog, and her most recent post is definitely an attention-grabber (starting with the title: "Why I don't force my kids to say 'please'... or walk on schedule.") She talks about both of her sons' speech and motor skills delays, revealing, "by current conventional standards both of my sons qualified for speech, occupational and physical therapy and I gave them none."
Bialik is clearly very confident in her parenting instincts. She says she knew that both of her boys were just fine, and so she chose to trust her instincts instead of seeking assessment or therapy for them. What do you think: reckless over-confidence or insightful parenting?
Liz Atwood discusses the culture wars in this week's Tween Tuesday:
Lucky me. The Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition arrived in the mail last week. It’s a dream come true for adolescent boys. But while my sons took turns ogling this year’s swim fashions (that look remarkably like last year’s and the year before, as best I can tell), I’m reminded that today’s kids are growing up in a much more sexually charged environment than when I was growing up ---and since I grew up in the 1960s and 1970s, that’s saying something. Yes, I was a teen when Rod Stewart came out with Tonight’s the Night. But for all the provocative lyrics (some of which were in French), there was much left to the imagination. That was before MTV and Youtube videos.
Today the kids listen to the music on their iPods and then rush to Youtube to click on the videos. And that puts parents and teachers in a predicament when it comes to the annual variety show at my kid’s elementary school. Every year some of the young girls choose songs I would think way over their heads. Some dress the parts as well. If you ever saw the talent competition in the movie Little Miss Sunshine, you know what I’m talking about.
Recently I sat in on tryouts and watched as parents and teachers tried to dissuade a couple girls from dancing to the Black Eyed Peas “I Gotta Feeling.” On the face of it, that seems like a fine song. The group led off its Super Bowl performance with the tune. But click on the video and you’ll see lots of drinking, lewd behavior and people falling-down drunk or high.
I know this battle isn’t new. When Elvis was on the Ed Sullivan Show, the producers refused show him below the waist. Still, call me a prude, but when my son turns on his favorite rap station and the singer talks about taking a girl from the shower to the bed, that’s too much. We had a big battle in the car a few days ago because I kept turning off the radio.
I wonder if we parents are fighting a losing cultural battle in the culture wars?
Here's Betsy of Fluffy Windover's Diary shares some good news and seeks advice on how to prepare a toddler for a new sibling in this week's Toddler Thursday:
Just after Christmas my husband and I found out that we are expecting a baby late this summer. It's blowing my mind to think of Edwin as a big brother! But a big brother he will be. He doesn't really get what's going on yet, but we've been testing the waters with him. We asked him if he might like to have a baby brother or baby sister, and he said yes. But when I asked him what things he might like to do with him or her, he said, "Take her away. To the neighbor's house." But he has also said sweet things, like that he would share his teddy bear and show him/her his Thomas trains. Generally, he seems amenable to the idea.
Of course, at this point he probably thinks it's just a fun thing to talk about. He doesn't have a real grasp of time yet (try telling a toddler that they can do something "later" or "tomorrow" - ha!) So I know he may not ever really be prepared for what's coming. Still, though, we'd like to get him used to the idea before we show up with a baby and turn his life upside down. My husband and I are both the youngest in our families, so we never had to deal with this growing up. Edwin will be just a few weeks shy of three when the baby is born, so hopefully he won't remember too much about it. But thinking about him feeling upset or neglected or displaced just makes my heart break. I know it's unavoidable, but I want to make sure we do all we can to help him through the transition.
Any suggestions for preparing a doted-on toddler for a new baby?
Americans view single motherhood as detrimental to society, according to a new survey.
What's interesting is that the poll found that Americans are accepting or at least tolerant of other type of nontraditional families, such as same-sex couples with kids, unmarried parents and childless women, reports The Washington Post.
The poll asked 2,700 people on their opinions on seven types of families: unmarried parents raising children; gay couples raising children; single mothers; partners living together outside of marriage; working mothers; interracial marriage; and women who never bear children. According to the Post:
Roughly a third said the trends have no impact on society or are positive. People who were positive about the changing family were overwhelmingly women, Hispanics and East Coast residents who rarely if ever attend religious services.Another third considered most of the changes harmful to society. The only trends they accepted were interracial marriage and fewer women having children. People who were unhappy with the trajectory tended to be older, white Republicans who are married and religiously observant. They also were more likely to be from the Midwest or South.
The third group tended to accept all the changes except for single motherhood. Virtually all said the growing prevalence of mothers who have no male partners around to help them raise children is bad for society. This group tended to be young, Democratic or independent, and more heavily minority.
What do you think?
Liz Atwood talks about deciphering truth vs. fiction on the Internet in this week's Tween Tuesday
If it’s on the Internet, it must be true, right? At least that’s what many children believe, according to a recent study at the University of Connecticut. The researchers asked a group of seventh graders to research the tree octopus and directed them to a website for information. According to the site, the rare creature lives in the rainforests on the West Coast. It has eight arms and a soft body, just like a regular octopus. But it doesn’t exist; the website was bogus. Nevertheless, the students who saw the site thought it was real.
The researchers say this study points out the need to better develop the kids’ critical thinking skills and teach them to question information — even that found on the Internet.
While schools bear some of the responsibility, certainly we as parents do as well. We need to be clear to our children that not everything they read is true and to teach them strategies for evaluating the information they find on the Internet.
Here are some tips:
1. What is the source of the information?
2. Is this information only on one site? Is the site reputable, such as a government or education site (hint: URL ends in edu or gov)
3. Does the information seem credible?
Happy V-day, readers!
In celebration of love, family and all the good stuff, here's a heartwarming story about a military couple.
Leaving their children in the care of Amber’s parents, the couple spent 15 months together in Iraq as part of the surge from 2007 to 2008; they were home until 2009, and then headed back until the end of last year. He pushed supplies out ahead of advancing platoons. She stayed on base and ensured that radios were encrypted. They bunked together when there was space available, and shared tents with others of their own sex when it wasn’t. Last Valentine’s Day Christopher procured a few bottles of sparkling grape juice from the canteen and asked a friend, who worked in the kitchen, to bake a cake.“Him being here has made this deployment easier because it’s like having your best friend with you all the time,” Amber said in an article about military marriage on the Army’s Web site www.army.mil in late fall. “To have that relationship with you physically and emotionally during a deployment is amazing.”
Less than “amazing” was the stress of keeping in touch with their children eight to ten time zones away. Amber and Christopher called home weekly, and sent letters at least that often, too. They kept their Facebook pages updated with photos, and made sure that a package arrived in time for each holiday. On the other end, Amber’s parents stuck to the house rules and daily schedules that the children already knew.
Thanks to the Motherlode blog for this reminder of what Valentine Day's is all about.
Here's Betsy of Fluffy Windover's Diary with this week's Toddler Thursday:
We have four pets at our house: two dogs and two cats. Our animals were with us long before Edwin arrived on the scene. After he was born, we were very concerned about keeping baby Edwin safe around his rambunctious “siblings”. As time went on, however, the concern shifted to keeping the poor animals safe from this rambunctious toddler. The way Edwin sees it, the animals are pesky nuisances that cramp his style. The dogs steal his cookies and chew up his Legos. The cats are merely furry obstacles that get in his way when he’s in a hurry. So we’ve spent a lot of time teaching him to be gentle with the dogs and cats, not to chase them, or kick them, or whack them with paper towel holders. It’s been a challenge, because he just doesn’t seem to like the animals at all. I find myself worrying that we have a burgeoning psychopath on our hands, and it all started with him kicking our poor cat because she chose to lounge atop one of his books.
Yesterday, however, I learned that Edwin has some compassion for them after all. One of our cats, Lefty, ran under the car as we were pulling into the driveway. She is not the brightest bulb in the box, and I guess she just didn’t move out of the way. I heard a yelp and saw her dart off to the neighbors yard, limping. We brought her inside, and she collapsed just inside the door, panting. I was a frantic with worry, but I didn’t want to upset Edwin. So I just pet her for a while and told Edwin that she might have gotten hurt. He said, “Aww, Lefty” and started petting her gently. Then he went and got his little toy guitar and said, “Mommy, I’m playin’ a song for her.” It was so sweet, and a big relief to see that he is not entirely without feeling for our pets.
After a long (and expensive) night at the pet ER, Lefty is home resting with some pain killers. Nothing is broken, so we’re hopeful that she will be OK. As for Edwin, this morning he was yelling at our dog to “go away, that’s my waffle!” Perhaps his compassion for animals only extends to those in distress. But I guess that’s better than nothing.
Disney is coming to a maternity ward near you.
The New York Times reports that the company is marketing Disney Baby at hospitals in the U.S.
In this new venture, the company gains access to the maternity hospitals through a company called Our365, a business that sells bedside baby pictures. Our365 pays hospitals for exclusive access, and companies like Disney pay Our365 to promote their own products. Our365 also has Fisher-Price and Procter & Gamble as clients. It is unclear whether mothers know of Our365’s financial ties to these companies.I delivered at Howard County hospital, and I bought pictures through Our365 and since then, I've been getting emails promoting various products.
It's a smart move for Disney, but I'm not sure how I feel about this practice. The story notes that some hospitals have banned the practice, citing privacy concerns for one.
The marketing can leave a strong mark. The gift bag that I received included free samples of baby formula Enfamil, so when J. transitioned to formula, Enfamil was our family's go-to brand.
In recent years, Disney has had to fight criticism of its Baby Einstein videos and toys for babies and toddlers over its advertising claims that those products can make kids smarter.What do you think of Disney's most recent push into the newborn market?
Liz Atwood wonders when girls should start wearing makeup in this week's Tween Tuesday:
When should girls start wearing makeup? This age-old question came up again recently with
But when retailing giant Wal-mart offers something new, people take notice. Its geoGirl line will offer 69 items, including blush, mascara, lipstick and face shimmer. An accompanying website will provide how-to videos.
Is all this too much for girls as young as 8?
The New York Times Magazine has taken a critical look at assumptions and conflicting data and research on symptons of shaken-baby syndrome -- and the questions they have raised in court as caretakers and others have been convicted of child abuse and more serious crimes.
As the diagnosis of shaken-baby syndrome took hold in medicine, and prosecutors began to bring charges based on it, doctors testified that shaking could generate the same terrible force as throwing a child from a second-story window. It turned out they were wrong. In 1987, a neurosurgeon named Ann-Christine Duhaime published a paper that included the autopsy results of 13 babies with symptoms associated with shaken-baby syndrome. In all of them she found evidence of trauma that was actually caused by impact. She teamed up with biomechanical engineers to create infant-sized dummies equipped with sensors to measure acceleration.“We shook them as hard as we could, and we thought something was wrong, because the accelerations we measured were unexpectedly low,” Duhaime says. Instead, the force level shot up when the testers released the dummies after shaking them, even if they hit a soft surface like a bed or a couch.Later experiments confirmed this finding and have made some doctors and biomechanical engineers skeptical that shaking alone can cause severe brain damage or death. At the same time, the experiments have not ruled this out, Duhaime says. Among other things, the dummies are not live children, and while their heads and necks can exhibit the effects of acceleration, impact on brain tissue is still hard to model.
Many doctors who treat child abuse say that decades of clinical observation, as well as confessions, show that it’s possible for shaking alone to cause the triad of subdural and retinal bleeding and brain swelling. A 2009 position paper from the American Academy of Pediatrics, written by Cindy Christian, recommends that doctors use the more general term “abusive head trauma” but also calls shaking an “important mechanism” of such trauma. Many doctors who testify for the defense agree that shaking could in theory cause the triad of symptoms but only if there is an injury to the neck or spinal cord, “where the breathing center is,” as one doctor puts it. It’s the absence of signs of this kind of an injury that makes some shaken-baby cases particularly fraught.
It's a sad story all around. The author interviews caretakers accused and convicted of shaking babies, some of whom had died, as well as families who are dealing with the aftermath. Just like the conflicting medical data, there's no easy solution, answer or conclusion when you read this story.
when the baby is crying at night?
The answer: Moms are more than twice as likely to get up at night than dads, according to a study in the journal Social Forces.
When I was breastfeeding, I mainly took on the night shift. But now, my husband is much quicker in getting up at night.
What about you?
Here's Betsy of Fluffy Windover's Diary with this week's Toddler Thursday:
I brought Edwin to my office for a little while on Monday. He was a huge hit with my coworkers (as is any child or baby who comes in and breaks the monotony of a boring day at the office). Everyone was very generous offering him little desk tchotchkes and he was, for the most part, gracious. At one point, however, he spied a particularly colorful display of beautiful, tiny origami boxes on my co-workers desk that her husband had folded for her. His eyes widened and he started pointing and saying, "I want dat! Peas have dat? Dats mine! Mommy! I want one of dose!" It was all I could do to stop him from pilfering the entire display. Thankfully I averted a potentially embarrassing situation with a quick distraction. But it reminded me of something funny I came across once. Perhaps you've seen it floating around; it's a list of toddler property laws (I'm not sure of the author). It goes something like this:
1. If I like it, it's mine.
2. If it's in my hand, it's mine.
3. If I can take it from you, it's mine.
4. If I had it a little while ago, it's mine.
5. If it's mine, it must never appear to be yours in any way.
6. If I'm doing or building something, all the pieces are mine.
7. If it looks just like mine, it is mine.
8. If I saw it first, it's mine.
9. If you are playing with something and you put it down, it automatically becomes mine.
10. If it's broken, it's yours!
I have no doubt that there will be several other boys with J.'s name when he's in school. His name has been one of the most popular baby names in recent years.
The Greater Baltimore Medical Center in Towson released its list of most popular names based on 4,447 babies that were born at the hospital last year.
Olivia was the most popular name for girls. Noah (which I love) was the No. 1 name for boys.
I'm beginning to see a return to more traditional names at least among my friends and people I know. Of course, there are parents who want unique and unusual names for their children, Aakarsh and Zyheim, according to GBMC.
Here's the rest of the list:
Boys:
2. Mason
3. Jacob & Ryan
4. Ethan & Logan
5. Andrew & William
6. Aiden, Benjamin & Dylan
7. Daniel, Michael & Tyler
8. David & Liam
9. Alexander, Jackson, Matthew & Samuel
10. James
Girls:
2. Emma
3. Madison
4. Sophia
5. Abigail, Ava, & Chloe
6. Emily
7. Ella
8. Elizabeth & Sydney
9. Alexandra
10. Brooke & Natalie
I would love to hear some stories on how you picked names.
Here's more discussion from Liz Atwood about "Tiger mothers" in this week's Tween Tuesday:
Tiger mothers are all the rage. “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother,” Amy Chua’s parenting memoir, has shot to No. 2 on The New York Times best-sellers list. Chua’s account of raising her daughters with strict rules and high expectations landed her on the cover of Time magazine and guest spots on TV news shows. Last week, I noticed on the bulletin board at my neighborhood Giant an advertisement for a local Tiger mothers club.
Chua’s book also has ignited debate about which parenting style is most effective. And while experts weigh in on the matter, I suspect most of us in the trenches are engaged in another round of questioning and self-doubt.
I tell my friends who don’t have kids that parenting is the hardest job anyone could ever have. Although babies do not come with instruction manuals, there is no shortage of advice. Even before their children are born, women are besieged with advice on everything from breastfeeding and diapering to college savings plans. Grandparents are eager to step in and tell you when you’re not doing something right. Friends give their thoughts. Child-rearing experts appear in magazines and in blogs spouting varying and often contradictory advice. We’re told punishment can destroy a child’s self esteem or that being too lenient will set the child up for failure later in life.
I’ll admit that when it comes to parenting, I’m more of a kitten than a tiger. Nearly every time I interact with my boys, I hear dozens of contradictory voices in my head. What would my mother do? What would my friends do? And now, what would Amy Chua do?
This week, when I again was complaining to my 14-year-old that he spends too much time watching TV, I brought up the subject of Amy Chua’s strict parenting philosophy. I asked if he had wondered why so many of the students he had seen win band competitions, science fairs and even black history contests were of Asian descent. “I’m not Asian,” he said, to which I replied, “It’s not genetics. It’s desire and discipline.” And though I didn’t say so, I thought, it’s also parenting.
My son answered, “You want things for me that I don’t want.”
And I guess that’s what it comes down to. Regardless of our parenting styles, we want our children to succeed. But they need to first accept our version of success, or no parenting approach, no matter how tough or lenient, will work in the long run.
So that brings up the question, how do we get them to buy into our version of success?
