Strollerderby : mothers

Mom Arrested for Having 555 Pound Son

Brett Singer — Tue, 26 May 2009 15:30:00 GMT

This story is not to be confused with the one Madeline brought us, about the 550 pound woman who gave birth recently.

14-year-old Alexander Deundray Draper of South Carolina had been on the run with his mother, Jerri Althea Gray. Gray had been told by a family court judge to turn her son over to the state because they determined that he "was of the weight where it was decided by medical authorities that he needed treatment that was not being provided for by his mother."

That weight is 555 pounds.

According to CNN, the mother did not appear in court as ordered, "and has concealed the child."

It's one thing to be a little on the chunky side. But when your child is this heavy, clearly some enabling is going on. Barring some bizarre medical condition I'm unaware of, it doesn't seem possible for someone to reach 555 pounds at any age, much less 14, without a diet of nothing but unhealthy food. Hopefully everyone involved in this case will get the help that they need.

Source: CNN

550-Pound Woman Gives Birth

Baby Asleep On Dad's Head

Hit Her Cat, She'll Hit Your Kid

Morning News - Mike Tyson's Daughter Injured

Dad Charges Daughter With Grand Theft Auto

OctoMom's Kid - Bite Mark And Black Eye

Hey Look! Mom Is On The Net!

Brett Singer — Sat, 16 May 2009 16:00:00 GMT

In various outlets (OK, mostly just VH1) people express their nostalgia for the 90's.

But music and movies aren't the only thing from the Whatever Decade (I just made that up) to get all misty-eyed about. There's also the commercials. Like this one.

It's not clear what is being advertised. But one thing's for sure -- these moms know all about technology!

You have to hang in there until the end of the video, when some random long-haired guy arrives. Just trust me on this one.

Source: Buzzfeed Via Everything Is Terrible (Or maybe it's the other way around. I get confused by all this WWW Dot Com Stuff.)

A Really Graphic Homebirth

We're Not Judging You, Pinky Swear

Did This Woman Commit Suicide Because She Couldn't Breastfeed?

10 Year Old Burned By Tanning Bed

Classic Mother Songs For Mother's Day

Brett Singer — Sun, 10 May 2009 17:00:00 GMT

There are lots of songs about moms, some with "mother" in the title. "Mother" by Pink Floyd, for example. But that song isn't really about mom.

However, "M-O-T-H-E-R", written by Theodore Morse and Howard Johnson in 1915, certainly is.

M is for the million things she gave me.
O means only that she’s growing old.
T is for the tears were shed to save me.
H is for her heart of purest gold.
E is for her eyes, with love light shining.
R means right, and right she’ll always be.

And what about the Charles Coleman classic from 1914, "Your Mother Is Your Best Friend After All"? ("When your days are dark and drear-y / Moth-er does not grow wea-ry...")

Unless you have a fondness for early 20th Century tunage, or happen to be very, very old, you probably aren't familiar with these musical portraits of momhood. Lucas Gonze, an accomplished musician and computer programmer, wants to change that by transcribing and recording these songs so that current and future generations can enjoy and play them.

Lucas posts both music that he discovers as well as his own renditions of public domain work on his site SoupGreens.com. A few months ago I noticed that he was working on a series of "mother songs", and Mother's Day seemed like the perfect time to share them with you. Here is an interview I did with Lucas via email, followed by links to the music, all of which can be downloaded, legally, for free.

Q: Why did you decide to do mother songs?
A: Mother songs are a lost genre sitting right under our noses. I had no idea they even existed, but there's a ton of them. And they're a cool idea because they go in the opposite direction of things like gangster rap and death metal. What could be less derivative than songs about how you should pay more attention to your mother? This genre is so over the top shameless about sentimentality that it's practically clawing at you, which is so out of style that it's original.
And I like the way that the primal emotional charge of motherhood draws you into a song. It's dynamic.
Also, I almost never do anything good for mother's day. So I'm hoping to not have to hear about how my brother, who is a total ass kisser, is a better son than me. Once in a while I'll send flowers via the internet but usually I just call my mom at the last minute, right at the end of the day when my guilt is bad enough that I have to do *something* or hear about it for the rest of the year.

Q: Why are you using old songs in the public domain?
A: I go back all the way to historical songs because copyright on compositions more recent than 1920 basically never expires, and doing a cover of a song under copyright means you owe seven cents every time somebody downloads it.

Q: Where do you find the tunes?
A: I learn them from early recordings or sheet music. In this case I transcribed a 1929 hillbilly recording and cross referenced it against a 1904 wax cylinder and an 1893 lyric sheet.

Q: Where do you find the sheet music or (gulp) wax cylinders?
A: It's a scavenger hunt all over the internet. In this case the cylinder was on archive.org, the lyric sheet was in a library folklore collection for researchers, and the 1929 recording was on a commercial CD.

Links:
Three mother songs on SoupGreens, via the Internet Archive:

Your mother wants you home, lad, by Robert Price (recorded on 78 RPM)
Snyder, does your mother know you're out? (1899, Performed by: George P. Watson, recorded on wax cylinder)
Blind Willie Johnson-Mother's Children Have A Hard Time (December 3, 1927, recorded on 78 RPM)

Another mom song can be found here: I’m Taking Care Of Mother (While Daddy’s Gone Away) by The Light Crust Dough Boys

Here is Lucas performing "A Widow’s Plea For Her Son" from 1893.

Lucas also links to a big page of mother songs at ParlorSongs.org.

This is just a small sample, of course. If you have any mother songs that you love, old or new, let us know in the comments.

And I almost forgot -- Happy Mother's Day!

Image: ParlorSongs.org

Hey Look! Mom Is On The Net!

Happy Mother's Day Cute Shots

Kitchenista: The Mother's Day Breakfast I Really Want

The Chubbiest Cheeks You Will Ever See

7 Mother's Day Gift Pitfalls

Nine Year Olds Performing Journey Song

10 Year Old Author Alec Greven Is Back

Mama's Got History

JeanneSager — Wed, 06 May 2009 16:01:00 GMT

If you haven't noticed Mother's Day is coming, get thee to a calendar.

In honor of all things mom, we're going old school at Babble. REALLY old school.

Backstory: The American History Guys, a radio show produced at the University of Virginia, managed to squash three centuries of motherhood into an hour-long show.

It's worth a listen simply for Ann Hulbert explaining why mothers in the 1920s were instructed "not to smother their children with love." No whirring helicopters in those roaring twenties, apparently.

Then there's the tragic story of Anna Jarvis, mama of Mother's Day, a West Virginian feminist in the nineteenth century and her daughter, Anna Marie Jarvis. The latter Jarvis wasn't a mother, but she loved her mother - and she loved her mother's ideals. She worked tirelessly to make her mother's dream of Mother's Day a national holiday about social justice. By 1914, she'd gained the national holiday for mother's. But why was she unhappy with it, railing against it for the latter half of her life? You'll have to listen to the American History Guys' Mama Tried: A History of American Motherhood."

What about you moms, do you like Mother's Day?

Image: Backstory

Breastfeeding Benefits For Moms Greater Than Previously Believed

Kate Tuttle — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 18:01:00 GMT

Not that you needed another reason to choose breastfeeding -- or pat yourself on the back if you did/do, or feel horribly guilty and pissed off if you didn't/don't -- but this week came news reports of even more dramatic health benefits for moms who breastfeed. The new study, published in the May issue of Obstetrics and Gynecology, found that women who had breastfed were less likely to develop high blood pressure, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease than their non-nursing counterparts, and that the effect increases with increasing duration of breastfeeding.

The study looked at the data of 139,681 post-menopausal women whose health records have been followed as part of the Women's Health Initiative. Those who breastfed for more than a year over the course of their lives, the study found, were almost ten times less likely to suffer a heart attack or stroke than those who hadn't nursed at all, and they were 20 percent less likely to have diabetes, 12 percent less likely to have hypertension, 19 percent less likely to have high cholesterol. Even one month of breastfeeding was associated with lowered rates of diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol.

Studies like this are often criticized for offering correlation but not causation -- they are not constructed as a double-blind study with controls, and so it's hard to tease out just which health benefits come from breastfeeding and which tend to go along with being the type of mother for whom breastfeeding is a priority (breastfeeding rates are much higher for richer, better-educated women overall). As one doctor told the New York Times, those who breastfeed “may be healthier women who take better care of themselves." True -- but the fact that this survey breaks down rates among women who nursed a little and those who nursed a lot may tend to argue for an actual medical difference, a mechanism by which breastfeeding protects women who do it (and offers more and more protection the more one does it). It's a nice study to show to anyone whose mother-in-law keeps asking, "haven't you weaned that child yet?"

More by this author:

They Say: Bilingual Babies Learn Better

Why Are We So Shocked When Women Kill?

(Public) Breastfeeding Now Legal in Massachusetts

What Should A Man Do While A Woman Breastfeeds

Brett Singer — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 16:00:00 GMT

Scene: a toddler's birthday party. A father is chatting with a woman that he knows from the kids' pre-school. The woman is holding a baby.

The baby stirs. Opens her tiny mouth. Starts... what was the word again?

Oh! Right. Rooting. When they're hungry. That's it.

The woman starts to undo her shirt. Then her bra. She takes out her breast and the baby eagerly starts to eat.

OK dude. Now what?

I'm a fan of breastfeeding in general. I don't think anyone should be pressured into doing it but I believe that it's healthy for the baby, and if the mother is able to do it, that's great. I also believe that women should be able to breastfeed wherever they want. (Maybe not on a Broadway stage while the show is going on, or even in the audience of the theater while the show is going on. But the lower lobby? Sure.) So this isn't about that.

The question is, which is more offensive? Looking? Or looking away?

I don't have an answer, so I'm curious what our readers think. In general it seems rude to head for ze hills as soon as the little one starts her liquid lunch. On the other hand, if I'm standing and the woman is seated, it's difficult to talk to her without seeing her breast. Which in any other situation is considered quite rude. This isn't a sexual thing. I don't think breastfeeding is hot, or inappropriate, or anything of that sort. At the same time I don't know how a woman feels about being on display like that. Or even if they feel on display at all.

So. Help me out here! What's the right thing to do?

(Public) Breastfeeding Now Legal in Massachusetts!

Nursing Mom Calls for Breastpump Ban

Jamie Foxx Jokes Miley Cyrus Should Make A Sex Tape

Did Sarah Palin Know That Bristol Was Sleeping With Levi?

Girl Scouts Use Cookie Money For Soldier's Care Package

Why It's Not Too Late to Say What You Should Have Said . . .

JeanneSager — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:49:00 GMT

I was not the mom who sat down and wrote out her feelings during her pregnancy in a record book for her child to look back on twenty-one years down the line. Thank God - I was a miserable pregnant woman.

But almost four years on, reading a host of letters from mothers to daughters in the Times of London, I decided maybe it's time. Before the pre-teen hormones set in and my daughter and I are at odds with each other. Before she starts slamming doors and I start debating whether my gray hair is from age or stress.

The letters are not strictly mother to daughter; there's aunt to niece in there, along with memories of advice given by mothers long ago. But it's hard to read them without wanting to write something, anything, that will one day be read and bring the happy sort of tears to my daughter's eyes that these letters written by strangers brought to mine.

Because these are the true keepsakes - not the huge scrapbooks some parents spend hours every week perfecting (more power to you honey, but that's just not me). We all have a letter somewhere, written by someone special at some time - a note from a high school boyfriend in his chicken scratch handwriting, a carefully penned missive from one grandparent to another. They talk about the lost art of handwriting, and it's true - I hardly see e-mails printed out and kept in a closet somewhere. Letters though, they last.

And so, while I hope to be very much alive when my own daughter is twenty-one, I think it's time I write a letter . . . or maybe two or three. In my own chicken scratch. About the girl she is and the girl I know she'll be. The girl I love today and will love even more tomorrow.

Go read the letters at the Times . . . then go write your own.

Image:

Are Working Mothers (And Fathers) Discriminated Against?

Kate Tuttle — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 16:30:00 GMT

We all know the myth of the Superwoman is just that, but where does that leave the normal mom who also needs (and often wants) to work for pay outside the house? In a tragic bind, according to a recent post to the New York Times Economix blog. Women who attempt to balance working with motherhood nearly always pay a significant penalty at the workplace, whether in lost promotions or stagnating pay. Women who don't have kids are often praised for their ability to give their all to work -- but face stigma and gossipy questions about their childless status. Men, you'll be glad to know, tend to be rewarded either way (though I'm guessing that they benefit at least in perceptual terms for having kids).

The blog's author admits it can be hard to guage whether negative effects spring from discriminatory attitudes toward working mothers alone, or whether job performance can indeed suffer across the board for women who have caretaker responsibilities on top of job duties. I'd imagine it's a little of both -- the perception that mothers can't commit fully to their jobs is endemic, though, and is used against even those mothers who can and do overperform at work. In a study cited in the Times piece, both men and women evaluating fake resumes tended to discount those of women with subtle hints that they were mothers (telltale maternity leave gaps, etc.).

So what's to be done, and can the playing field ever be truly even? Or is an anti-mommy (or anti-child) bias just built into our sexist society, never to be overcome? I know that better maternity -- and paternity -- leave would be one solution, if only to help mothers maintain a consistent paycheck and pay history. But even if men and women were treated more equally in this regard (and in dividing their home duties -- I know, this is a pipe dream, and also a presumption of heterosexual couple-dom that I regret but can't seem to shake when thinking about this topic), where would that leave those with children versus those without? Perhaps we need to widen the scope even further, to seek not just gender parity but also some awareness that family responsibilities don't always come in the cute little form of a child. Workers caring for aging parents, or ailing partners, also need protection and respect.

Once we start talking about workers being treated with respect by big corporations, I know I'm in the land of fantasy. Still, the reality is so difficult that at times it can be hard to face. My own salary history is so uneven, what with staying home to care for two children, that I'll probably never again make as much money as my husband (we were on par when we met). I'm not even trying to get back to full-time work yet, but I wonder what limitations I'll face, and how many of them come down to the parenting choices I have made. Do I regret staying home with my kids? Not for a second. But do I wish mothers and fathers had better options? That's a no-brainer.

More by this author:

Late-Term Abortion Provider on Trial in Kansas

Boomer Grandmothers: Out Of Control?

Move Over, Booties! Here Come Knitted Boobies

Think Your Baby's Car Seat Is Safe? Think Again

Best of FameCrawler: Week of March 27th

Whit Honea — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 20:00:00 GMT

Jon & Kate Plus 8 Finale - To Divorce or Not?

Is Michael Jackson Going to Adopt While in England?

Kidnap Suspect Amalia Tabata Pereira is Wife of MLB Player Jose Tabata (PHOTOS)

Natasha Richardson's Mom Wore White To Her Funeral - Why?

Anna Nicole Smith Death Case to be Reopened?

Jeffrey Dean Morgan Has a Secret Son!

TLC's Jon & Kate Plus 8 - Is It Over!?

Octomom Nadya Suleman Fires Nurses, Says They Were Spying

The Hottest Moms - Photos

Jenny McCarthy Slaves Over Her Looks

UPDATE - Josef Fritzl Sentenced To Life In Psychiatric Institution

Brett Singer — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 01:35:00 GMT

UPDATE: Josef Fritzl has been sentenced to life in a psychiatric institution. While onthe surface this seems like justice has been served, The Scotsman says that the ruling means he could be free in 15 years if a doctor says he's been cured of whatever they decide is wrong with him. Basically, Fritzl is eligible for parole in 15 years. It's not a big chance, but it could happen. Which would be bad. The Scotsman's Stephen McGinty does say that, "It is likely...that [Fritzl] will die in prison," since he is 73 years old.

Earlier posts follow.

*-*-*-*-*

Josef Fritzl's daughter Elisabeth testified against him on Tuesday, according to CNN. Thankfully, it was by videotape. Elisabeth and the children she had as a result of her father's abuse are living in an undisclosed location with new identities.

How do you go on after something like that? I'm amazed and oddly impressed that Elisabeth has the strength to go on living, much less testify against her father. Of course, I imagine she would like nothing more than to see him go to prison for the rest of his life.

The case has become a major media event in Austria, with crowds gathering in and out of the courtroom. Press has been barred from certain parts of the trial, including Elisabeth's testimony.

*-*-*-*-*

CNN is reporting that Josef Fritzl will plead guilty to rape and incest on Monday. He will not plead guilty to charges of "murder, enslavement and assault." Fritzl's lawyer says that his client "expects to spend the rest of his life in prison." Um, yeah, that sounds right. That said, the charges he's pleading guilty to carry relatively short prison terms -- five to fifteen years for rape, one year for incest. The biggest is the murder charge, which, as discussed below, some experts think will be tough to prove. I guess it's a good thing that Fritzl will definitely be found guilty of something, although if he goes to jail for only a couple of years, that would be tragic.

Original post follows.

*-*-*-*-*-*

Josef Fritzl, the man who kept his daughter locked in the basement for more than 20 years and impregnated her multiple times, is finally going on trial.

Disturbingly, he may spend only 15 years in jail. Or less.

According to London's Times Online, the "Austrian incest monster" is about to stand trial for "murder, incest, unlawful imprisonment and enslavement." Fritzl thinks that he could receive less than 10 years in prison.

He may be right. Some lawyers feel that the murder charge, which is based on the fact that he allowed one of the children he had with his own daughter to die, won't stick. That leaves rape as the biggest charge, which under Austrian law carries a 15 year sentence. Parole, good behavior -- he could be out in five years.

I know that everyone is entitled to a defense, but the one that Fritzl and his lawyer are offering is almost as disturbing as what he did. Fritzl is "claiming that his daughter was having sex when she was barely out of her teens. She smoked. She took drugs. She drank. He wanted to save her." His lawyer, Rudolf Mayer, says of his client: "He is not a monster. He loved his daughter in his own way." The father also says that he took good care of his "captives", citing the fact that the bird he bought them lived as evidence of good air quality in their underground prison. (This is at least consistent with the insane statements he made last year.)

As a quick reminder, Fritzl kept his daughter Elisabeth in the basement, along with some of the children they had together. Three of them were allowed to live upstairs -- the "upstairs children". The cellar was equipped with soundproof walls. Elisabeth was forced to write a letter saying that she had run away and joined a cult. This was a well thought out crime. Fritzl says that he is "not normal," but that's as close as he's come to an apology.

Making matters worse, prosecutors may cut a deal that will allow Fritzl to choose the prison where he serves his short sentence. One that lets him sing in a choir and take cooking lessons. When he gets out, he wants to go back home and live with his wife.

According to the Times, many feel that this situation could have been avoided if social workers had done their jobs. That may be the case, but the idea that this monster could get off with a light jail sentence in a country club prison is horrible. Not as horrible as what he did. But it's pretty close.

Source: timesonline.co.uk

Image: BBC

Boy Finds Spider Monkey in Backyard - Video

Woman Trades Two Kids For Bird

Teen Dad's Father Wearing Halloween Mask In Public

Should These Parents Be Charged With Murder?

92-Year-Old Delivers Baby

Parents Say Hospital Took Son's Organs Without Consent

The Best and Worst of 2008

Mom Found Guilty of Trespassing After Jumping on Speeding School Bus

Kate Tuttle — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:31:00 GMT

A Raeford, North Carolina, mother says she feels relieved after receiving a guilty verdict in connection with her actions in January, when she boarded a school bus she says was speeding through a residential neighborhood. Mindy Brumfiel says the bus appeared to be traveling more than 40 miles an hour in a 15 mile per hour zone, and so when it stopped, she got on. After the bus driver asked her to get off, she said she wouldn't until she got her own daughter off -- then proceded to call the driver and idiot and tell him he was speeding. The driver, a substitute bus driver and school custodian, had apparently taken a wrong turn and come back into the neighborhood he'd just left, drawing the attention of mothers who had just seen their children board.

Brumfiel says she had no idea it was trespassing to get on the bus -- she assumed they were public property -- but says she feels no particular remorse. “I can be guilty. That’s fine. The whole reason I’m here is because I was on the bus. I’m guilty for being a mom.”

Apparently the trespassing provision exists because some parents do get onto school buses with bad intentions -- the article mentions a mother having boarded a bus with a gun, and another parent getting on to attack a student. Still, Brumfiel's actions don't seem out of line to me. What would you do, if you saw a speeding school bus with your child on it?

More By This Author:

California Daycare Closed; Worker Was Mocking Kids' Genitals

Bad Science: How The Autism Vaccine Scare Snowballed

Preteen Accused of Shooting Dad's Pregnant Girlfriend

Smackdown: Boob Nazis - Is Breastfeeding that Big A Deal? NO!

Cole Gamble — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 15:00:00 GMT

By now you’re probably thinking, “Why are two DUDES arguing the merits of breastfeeding? Where do they get off?!” Well, here’s where I get off (that sounds weird): I offered to tackle this subject with any of the ladies at Strollerderby and they were all too scared. The ladies were too scared to argue about breastfeeding. That’s why, for better or worse, you’ve got Brett and me. What would we know about it? We have children and wives who birthed them, don’t we? We were first hand throughout the breastfeeding process and we did the research right along with our partners. So, I’m gonna say we’re qualified.

My biggest beef with some of the breastfeeding advocates is guilt. I’m not a big fan of guilt as a motivator and I’m even less of a fan of fear tactics. You know, like that pro-breastfeeding commercial that had a heavily pregnant woman thrown from a mechanical bull—equating that with not breastfeeding. I’ve also got no love for bullying, as in the La Leche League member who met my wife at a party and upon learning breastfeeding didn’t work for my wife, ended the conversation, turned on a dime and proceeded to belittle my wife throughout the rest of the party. (This woman is still breastfeeding her 5-year-old. Let that sink in)

But my appeal here won’t be emotional. That’s too easy. I’m gonna give you the facts. The cold hard facts that boob pushers and breast bullies obfuscate or completely deny.

1) Mastitis. An inflammation of the mammary gland occurring in lactating mothers. Nipple can get infected and turn into an abscess that must be surgically removed. Although this can occur in non-breastfeeding women, it’s more likely in breast feeders.

2) The Psychological Benefits are False. The conventional wisdom was breastfeeding led to a more focused, less hyperactive child adept at forming peer relations. However, an exhaustive study recently proved these assumptions wrong. Experts and laymen presumed that the constant physical closeness involved with breastfeeding would do all kinds of psychological wonders. Nope.

3) B-Milk in the Bottle is Just as Good. Some women can’t get their kids to latch. Some women simply don’t like the feeling of breast feeding. No problem, just pump a bit of that magic elixir and give it to junior via bottle. Not only is there no shame in it, but now that we know the physical act of breast feeding comes with no special benefits, the bottle is more acceptable than ever.

4) Where’s the D? This news is hot off the presses: there is insufficient vitamin D in breast milk. A lack of vitamin D can lead to rickets. So, if you breast feed, your kid will become a pirate.

5) You Should Never Do Anything Just Because of Peer Pressure. Like I said above, breast feeding is a choice. If you want to get a little breast milk to your kid but can’t or don’t want the suckling, that’s your business. And if you don’t want to do it at all, you are not abusing your child.

The Other Side and More BF articles:

Smackdown: Breastfeeding -- Why Not?

Smackdown: Damned if You Do, Doomed if you Don't

5 Things That Make You a Breastfeeding Nazi . . . And 5 Things That Don’t

More by this Author:

Should You Take A Risk on Orgasmic Birth? (Orgasmic Birth Video included)

Anti-Abortion Group Up In Arms Over Krispy Kreme Abortion Donuts

"I Ate Little Black Girls for Two Years"

Bizarro News: Flaming Squirrel Sets Elementary School on Fire

4 Ways Birth and Breastfeeding Will Ruin Sex

Smackdown: Breastfeeding -- Why Not?

Brett Singer — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:15:00 GMT

Cole challenged me to a Smackdown on breastfeeding, and of course I said yes. I never back down from a challenge, at least not one as harmless as a blog face off. (In other words, don't challenge me to get in the ring with Mike Tyson. That, I will decline.)

Breastfeeding is a controversial subject, but it wasn't always. Back in the day (as in, black and white televisions, Uncle Milty, etc.) many women took a pill to dry up their milk ducts. They didn't feel guilty about it, and those children grew up to live happy lives despite being denied breast milk.

There was also a point in our history when women didn't have the right to vote. In other words, times change. We've learned a lot about human health, and there is definitely evidence that breast milk CAN be good for your kids. Is it conclusive? No. So what? If you are able to breastfeed, isn't it worth the potential benefits?

Now for some specifics:

1. The Guilt Factor: No disagreement here. It's wrong to bully a woman, especially a new mother. However, let us not ignore…

2. The Laziness Factor: There are a number of reasons why some women don't breastfeed their kids. I've heard at least one new mom who said that breastfeeding her child made her feel "gross"; she had no problems with her child latching on, she just didn't like having a baby suckling at her "teet." It made her, "feel like a mammal." When someone says that, I want to ask them a simple question: If you are able to do something that has potential health benefits for your child, why wouldn't you? If you can't breastfeed, you can't breastfeed. But if you tried once and just bailed, that seems like a cop-out. Some of the La Leche people may be a little nuts, but many lactation counselors are very good at what they do. If you have trouble with latching or other breastfeeding issues, it's worth trying a counselor just for the potential health benefits.

3. Expressed Milk in a Bottle: Cole, I love ya, but sometimes I wonder if you've been sipping from a different type of bottle. (A glass one. Filled with bourbon.) Who says that expressed breast milk is a bad thing? As I understand it, the debate is usually between breast milk and formula. And I have yet to see a study that says formula is undeniably better for the child. At best, some say that breast milk may not have the benefits that some claim. Which brings us to the next point:

4. "No Proof That Breast Feeding is Healthier": Is there proof that it's harmful? There is certainly evidence that breast milk is good for babies. Again, why not give it to your children if you can? There was a time when doctors said that smoking was healthy. Look at how that turned out.

5. Formulas Aren't Perfect Either: I haven’t done extensive research but I know that whenever there is a product that is mass-produced, there is the potential for problems. Remember the Chinese milk recall? Ever heard of a breast milk recall? I didn't think so.

There's a difference between "can't" and "won't." No one should be bullied into breastfeeding (sorry, La Leche). But if you won't even try because you just don't want to, or you feel like you want to "rebel" against the "breastfeeding nazis", maybe you should rethink your position. Cole is right -- you shouldn't do anything JUST because of peer pressure. But if everyone isn't jumping off the Brooklyn Bridge, that doesn't mean you should. (Think about it for a minute, I'm pretty sure it makes sense.)

Read Cole's take on the matter here.

Read Madeline's take on the matter here. (And I didn't say that ALL women who don't breastfeed are lazy. I mean, c'mon.)

What do you think? I'm right and he's wrong, yes? (Even if you think I'm wrong, let us know in the comments.)

Ann Coulter Says Single Moms Are Bad For Society

Smackdown: Damned if You Do, Doomed if You Don't (Breastfeed, That is)

They Say -- Kids Who Skip Breakfast and Hate Mom Have Sex Sooner

New Pro Vaccine Book Author Getting Death Threats

Kid Named Hitler Taken From His Parents By Family Services

Woman Arrested For Breast Feeding At A Bar

They Say: Women Have Special Instinct for "Cute Babies"

Kate Tuttle — Wed, 21 Jan 2009 21:32:00 GMT

Researchers in England have reported that women are more sensitive than men to signifiers of cutness in babies that include chubby cheeks, button noses, and big eyes. Apparently women scored more highly than men at selecting a computer-generated composite image that blended the features linked most highly with cuteness over another image, also computer-generated, showing a sad little hypotethical baby lacking said features. Men (and menopausal women, it should be added) apparently saw little difference between the two. The drop-off in women's sensitivity to cuteness when they enter menopause leads the researchers to hypothesize that the cause for any gender difference in cute-fancying is hormonal, rather than societal, in nature.

I have to wonder, though: if this heightened sensitivity to cuteness is being somehow linked to a so-called maternal instinct, wouldn't that indicate a kind of skewed instinct? I mean, what about mothers whose babies aren't so cute? Do they exhibit less attraction, less bonding, less devotion? What kind of maternal instinct would that be? On the contrary, in our house it's I, the woman, who seems to believe that nearly every baby is just incredibly cute, while my husband, the man, makes fine distinctions between babies who are and babies who, regrettably, kind of aren't. I like to think this means I'm more maternal than he is, more willing to take a baby as it comes and love it up, rather than hold it at arm's length if its cheeks are quite up to the chubbiness quotient my hormones have prompted me to desire. In other words, isn't "maternal instinct" (if it exists at all) related to the ability to love even a very sad-looking little baby, the Charlie Brown Christmas tree of babies, just as if it were straight from central casting?

At the very end of the BBC article reporting the study, a small sad hint at the ugly side of all this:

Further research will explore whether cuteness sensitivity is a factor in post-natal depression.

Would that mean that post-partum depression arises out of having a not-quite-cute-enough infant, or from having an under-developed ability to perceive the cuteness of the baby in one's arms? I await their findings with a skeptical eye.

More by this author:

Biracial Twins -- Is One "Black" and One "White"?

Death by Peanut: Epidemic or Urban Myth?

Is This Baby Obese? Aussie Mom Says No

Baby Nearly Starves to Death, Diluted Formula to Blame

What's Wrong with "Women and Children First?"

JeanneSager — Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:02:00 GMT

The crash of Flight 1549 came just when the nation needed it - a crisis averted, a hero in our midst, nearly two hundred people saved. Next to the inaguration, it's the brightest spot what's been an otherwise bleak American horizon of late.

But we're a country that thrives on some sort of scandal - so it's no surprise the heroism of Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger has quickly turned to criticism of the age-old (at least one hundred and fifty-some year-old) standard of evacuating people in case of tragedy: "women and children first."

To be fair, I'm biased. I am, after all, a woman. I'm also a mother. So women and children rank pretty high on my list. By all accounts, I should be rushing to the defense of the mandate Jezebel aptly dubbed "strangely quaint" and "old fashioned."

A lot of what Jezebel's Sadie said made sense - there has to be some organizational basis for getting people moved from here to there, and few would argue with a child's right to be cut the line in light of a tragedy. Children first, at least, is almost irrefutable. They still have a chance at a life. They still have time left to make a difference.

But Sadie makes one very salient point - kids need caregivers when they're rescued. And last I checked, caregivers come in all forms - daddies too. So what happens when we stick to "women and children first?" If a child is traveling with their Dad in tow, is the screaming tot ripped from his arms and thrust into those of a stranger, wriggling and crying? Add a toddler torquing his body in frustration to an already stressful situation, and you've just lost precious moments.The organizaton you're striving for can be dealt that fatal blow with the moments lost calming them down.

Yes, I would want to get off a sinking plane as quickly as possible - and with my daughter in my arms. But as important as I would hope someone thinks I am in my daughter's life, so too is my husband, my father, my brother . . . I am not a he-man hating feminist (yes, some of them still exist). If one of them were there with my child, I would hope that an able-bodied adult would be willing to let child and "male relative caregiver" take the place of "mother/woman."

Perhaps the more appropriate choice is children - with appropriate caregiver - first, to be followed by whomever the pilot and his crew thinks can be gotten to next in the most organized fashion?

Image: AP

Fire Starts While Toddler has Mom Locked in the Basement

Zimbabwe Releases Jailed Toddler

Mom Says Hospital Fouled Childbirth - Twice

Survey Time: How Will Becoming a Mother Change You?

Miriam Axel-Lute — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:30:00 GMT

If you're chomping at the bit to fill out The Birth Survey, but are still pregnant, you don't have to wait to scratch your itch to contribute to the greater body of knowledge about parenting, motherhood, and people's weird, weird brains.

Just hop over to The Motherhood Project and fill out the first of a pair of surveys that aim to uncover things about the "process of becoming a mother and how it may inform a woman’s identity, relationships, spirituality, and mental health." They'll want to you to come back after the birth and fill it out again, to see how it's changed. (And that'll be a good reminder to go fill out The Birth Survey too. Just saying.)

The Columbia U doctoral students doing the research say the online survey should take about 30 to 60 minutes. If you're in the first trimester, they ask that you wait until the second or third (but you can sign up for a reminder).

Photo by psd.

More by this author:

Woman Arrested For Breast Feeding At A Bar

Brett Singer — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:00:00 GMT

Allanah Earley went to a Durham, Connecticut bar to have a couple of drinks. Nothing wrong with that, right? But the 36-year-old brought her baby. Hey, lots of us think that's fine as well. Then she started breast-feeding the baby, who is seven weeks old.

Two new acronyms have popped up as a result – DWB (Drinking With Baby, from NBC Connecticut) and BWI (Breastfeeding While Intoxicated, from ParentDish). BWI works better, I think. The official charge is "risk of injury to a minor", which sounds pretty, um, minor. At the moment, Earley is free on $10,000 bail.

Imperfect Parent asks, "Wonder where the breastfeeding advocates stand on this issue." Well, it's generally thought that drinking alcohol while breast-feeding is a bad idea. Especially if you literally drink alcohol WHILE YOU ARE BREAST-FEEDING. Like, have a couple of drinks, feed the kid, have another shot, and so on. That's what Allanah Earley is accused of: The Middletown Press says that when police interviewed Earley, she was visibly drunk, and admitted to officers that she'd had seven drinks. I'm guessing even the strictest La Leche Leaguer would suggest formula in that situation.

Poor kid. Even without the breast-feeding, mom's got some problems.

One report says that bar patrons called the police when Earley left the bar and "wandered out into the cold" with the baby, eventually finding her way to a friend's house, where she kept on drinking and breast-feeding. (Ah, reminds me of my college days… sorry, not funny.) In other words, the "concerned customers" didn't make the call while Earley was at the bar.

Would you do something if you saw a mom drinking and breast-feeding her baby at a bar? It's trickier than it sounds, I think – one the one hand, she has a right to do what she wants as long as it's legal. But as she becomes more and more intoxicated, the baby could be in danger, right? I'm not sure what I would do. How would you handle it?

Source: wfsb.com, others

Should Homeschooling Parents Be Certified?

They Say: Smoking While Pregnant Makes Kids Aggressive

Cops End Search for Baby Thrown in Hospital Trash

Airing the Parental Dirty Laundry

Man Says Drinking Breastmilk Cured His Cancer

Donated Breastmilk Comes to NY, Slowly

Breastfeeding Moms Fight Facebook Ban

Airing the Parental Dirty Laundry

Brett Singer — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:00:00 GMT

If you blog, you presumably want readers. And one way to do that is with a snappy headline. One could borrow from supermarket tabloids and go with something sensational and completely fake -- "Sarah Palin Gives Birth To Three Headed Alien" – that would do it. But if you blog about family matters, the truth can work just as well.

For example: this post on Yahoo! Shine.

My son is home!!! And I am really mad at his father.

The title got me to click and see what the heck was going on.

The first sentence was a grabber:

I recently wrote a blog about how I hate it when my son goes to his father's for Christmas.

Then it got better:

So many of you left very nice comments about my tough time while he is gone. There were a few that said I was being petty. Let me Go deeper into this........

I started to feel like a voyeur. This was pretty personal stuff. But it's not like I'm looking in the author's window. I'm reading something she posted on the Internet.

I'm not sure what the initial post was about, but this one tells the tale of a father who brought his son home after Christmas with an injured thumb. The mother was mad because the kid should have gone to the emergency room, and thinks that pop was too cheap to pay the seventy-five dollar co-pay. The injury is described in "ER"-level detail: "When I picked him up, it was black and purple and he could not bend it. We went immediately to the ER. After 2 shots of pain killer, they drilled 2 holes in the nail to relieve the pressure." Presumably the couple is divorced and the boy was spending the holidays with his father, although the post doesn't say that explicitly.

So here's my question. Is this fair to the kid, the father, and everyone else involved? Most of us who blog, whether for pay or play, reveal certain details. But it's one thing to talk about a goofy thing your three year old told you. It's another thing to reveal personal details like the ones on this particular Shine post.

It could be a generational thing. I'm selective about what I share with the world, and I think most folks are. Other people don't mind putting it all out there. (That's why Facebook is so successful.) In this case, I imagine that posting these personal details is therapeutic for the author. It is also interesting to other people; the post has over 100 comments. But if I'm the father, I'd be irritated.

Of course, if I'm the father and I really didn't take my son to the emergency room because I didn't want to spend seventy-five dollars, I'm also a major league jerk. Part of the problem, of course, is that we don't know what the father did or didn't do. It's possible that he weighed in with a comment; I haven't read them all. Still, judgments will be made – by me, the commenters on Shine, and commenters here. That's the nature of blogs. Once it's out there, it's out there. But is there a line that we shouldn't cross when kids and/or our significant others are involved? Can there be such a thing as too much sharing online?

Source: Yahoo Shine

Image (which is completely unrelated to this topic): sas.org.uk

Is Miley Cyrus' First Photo Shoot Creepy?

Baby Bikini and Pregnant Man Top 2008 Weird News List

Babble Talk: Did Mommy Get New Boobies?

A Quiverfull Of Kids

Working Parents Smackdown Part 2 – Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs

Working Parents Smackdown Part 1 - SAHD vs SAHM

Who Buys The Baby Products In Your House?

Brett Singer — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 16:15:00 GMT

We now present: The Diaper Follies.

Scene: An apartment in Manhattan. There is a stench. It is coming from the baby. The baby's father, a stay at home dad, puts the baby on the changing table and removes his diaper. It is indeed filled with a noxious substance not unlike nuclear waste. After cleaning the baby's tushy, Father notices that there are no clean diapers. He picks up a telephone and calls Mother, who is at work.

Father (very cheerful, abnormally so): Hi Honey.

Mother (working, wary of Father's cheerful mood): Hello dear. What's up?

Father (still cheery but as transparent as a brand-new window): We're out of diapers.

(Pause.)

Mother (calm): You should go buy some.

(Pause.)

Father (still cheerful, hiding his nervousness): Great idea! Thanks hon! See you later!

And… scene.

*-*-*

Obviously that's not exactly what happened. I would never leave a baby on the changing table while I made a phone call, for example. But I did email my wife (I didn't call, that would be weird) and inform her that we were out of diapers. We just, I don't know. We didn't have any. And I didn't know where she got them from.

Does that make me a dummy? I was probably tired and it was my first time. The point is, despite the fact that my wife is the primary wage earner and I am the primary childcare person, she's still in charge of stuff like diaper purchases.

While I never called my wife at work to tell her we were out of diapers or other baby products, that still isn't really my department. Another example: I am at the drugstore to buy diapers. Upon arriving, I realize that I have no idea what size diaper my children wear. Rather than buy the wrong size (which has happened before and may happen again – would those kids just start using the freakin' bathroom? Sheesh) I call home and say, "Honey? What size diapers should I buy?" I am mocked for not knowing, but that's better than the beating I receive for buying the wrong size. (Note: my wife has never actually beaten me for buying the wrong diapers. Mocked me, yes. Forced me to wear the diaper on my head…OK, that's not true either. But mocking. Oh, the mocking.)

Anyway, I was wondering – who's in charge of baby product buying at your house?

Image: Amazon

Baby Bikini and Pregnant Man Top 2008 Weird News List

Announce Your New Addition With Panties: Male Perspective

A Quiverfull Of Kids

Working Parents Smackdown Part 2 – Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs

Working Parents Smackdown Part 1 - SAHD vs SAHM

Working Parents Smackdown Part 2 – Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs

Brett Singer — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 17:00:00 GMT

Part 2 of Working Parents Smackdown (read Part 1 here). This time we focus on the workplace:

When men work late, they're just doing their jobs. Women are neglecting their children.

Women are often made to feel guilty about working late, sometimes by their spouses. Men probably are too but it seems like its easier to avoid.

Women who work risk "emasculating" their husbands. "Femininasculating" isn't even a word.

The "Mommy Wars" are definitely a thing. There are no "daddy wars."

If a woman works "outside the home" and has children, people ask "how does she do it?" If a man works, no one ever says "outside the home", and nobody wonders how they do whatever "it" is.

No matter what, mom is the first point of contact for any school issues. That's not to say I have a problem with that but that's what I see happen. This includes general PTA-type matters, actual issues such as coming to pick the kid up due to illness, and of course Mom's Night Out. (Note: I am NOT angling for an invite to Mom's Night Out. I vastly prefer Dad's Night In, especially when there is a football game on.)

These aren't necessarily sexism or something-ism. It's more of an assumption of gender roles. Which is technically sexism. But it doesn't feel quite as insidious as, say, discrimination in the workplace. Of course, these assumptions can easily translate into more dangerous actions in a job setting, such as when a woman is passed over for a promotion because her boss assumes that she will eventually leave her job to have children. So maybe it is the same. I don't know.

I do know that the last time my friends teased me for being a stay at home dad (who, for the record, works) I was able to silence them by saying, "Have fun at the office on Monday, guys." Haven't heard any teasing since then.

Last word: I find it infuriating when anyone gives a woman a hard time for being a primary caregiver. (Although I use the term frequently, "staying home with the kids" is kind of a silly term once the rugrats are old enough to go to school or even daycare.)

Last word number two: Feelings of emasculation are in the brain of the man. That doesn't mean that the feelings are invalid, nor does it mean that there aren't women who can be cruel and try to make their menfolk feel small. But often the issue is in the guy's head. (It was with me; that's a topic for another time.)

Last word number three: I hereby vow to look up the meaning of the word "last".

Image: edmbookstore.com

Matt Lauer Talks To Sarah Palin In The Kitchen

Teacher Has Affair With Student, Parents Say Keep The Door Open

Grown Kids Try Forcing Dad To Divorce Second Wife In Court

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Working Parents Smackdown Part 1 - SAHD vs SAHM

Brett Singer — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:00:00 GMT

Definitions:
SAHD = Stay at home dad
SAHM = Stay at home mom

I've been thinking about some of the differences between these two types of parents. (See also Part 2, Dads With Jobs vs Moms With Jobs.)

Now:

At a party, SAHDs are asked, "What do you do?" SAHMs are not.

If a woman chooses to be a SAHM, she is:
- a lazy throwback
- not fulfilling her potential

If a man chooses to be a SAHD, he is:
- making a sacrifice
- taking a break from work

Men who stay home are doing something great for their wife and children. Women are just, you know, doing what they're supposed to do.

SAHMs are "homemakers." SAHDs are "musicians."

Men who stay home with their kids are special and unique. Women are ordinary and perhaps even bad for their gender.

To sum up: women, whatever you do, you are wrong. If you work, you suck. If you stay home, you suck. Guys: whatever you do, you're OK! Rock on! Write that novel! Play that funky music, SAHD!

I'm exaggerating somewhat, but I'll put it out to the crowd. Am I exaggerating? If so, how much?

Image: theonlymanofthehouse.com

Matt Lauer Talks To Sarah Palin In The Kitchen

Teacher Has Affair With Student, Parents Say Keep The Door Open

Grown Kids Try Forcing Dad To Divorce Second Wife In Court

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Do You Have an Easy Bake Oven in Your Vagina? (by Miriam - one of the greatest blog post titles ever)

British Moms Ditch Lullabies for Pop Songs

Kate Tuttle — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 15:30:00 GMT

According to a new (non-scientific!) survey, more British mothers are singing pop songs to their babies than traditional lullabies. Two thirds of the moms who responded said the modern tunes worked better than older ones for soothing their kids to sleep. One in ten said they could never remember the words to the old songs.

The BBC reported the top ten songs moms mentioned as effective baby-soothers in their homes, including the ubiquitous "I Kissed a Girl," by Katy Perry and "You're Beautiful," by James Blunt, as well as older hits (Oasis' "Wonderwall" and Christina Aguilera's "Beautiful") and flat-out headscratchers (Guns 'n' Roses' "Sweet Child O Mine").

We go in for the traditional lullabies in our house, though mostly of the American variety ("Oh Susannah," "Home on the Range"), mixed in with a lot of Sesame Street and Dan Zanes, but we've been known to modify a Ramones song or two when the purpose is not sleep-inducing but diaper-change-cooperation. What songs work in your house? And what classics have you re-worded to fit your own infant or toddler's name, looks, or personality?

More by this author:

Baby Nearly Starves to Death, Diluted Formula to Blame
Grandmother’s Right? Or Totally Obnoxious?
Health Scam: Crisis Pregnancy Centers
Mama’s Got a Brand New Bag

Things You Should Never Say To A Nursing Mother

Brett Singer — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 15:30:00 GMT

For most of these, we'll assume that you are speaking to your significant other, unless otherwise indicated.

- “Can I get a squirt of that?” The answer is no. If you're desperately curious about the taste of breast milk, try some that the mother of your children has expressed into a bottle.
- Two words that should never go together: “Tittie milk.” Not funny. Trust me.
- “How far can you squirt that stuff? Can you hit this cup on the shelf? How about if I move it closer? Honey? What are you doing with that hammer? OW!”
- “You and the baby are being really loud. Can you do that someplace else? I'm watching TV.”

And here are a few things not to say to a woman you don't know if you see nursing in a public place:

- “Ew! Gross!”
- “Niiice.”
- "Hey baby. Get it? Hey... baby...?" (It's not funny. I know you think its funny. But it's not.)
- A blank stare.
- A lascivious stare.
- Any sort of stare at all.

Anything to add? Remember – it takes a village.

image: Flickr

Unusual toddler gifts

Mom blackmails daughters ex with nude photos

Woman leaves toddler in car while she goes to a bar

Santa Claus says: Smoke More

Is a happy ending massage cheating?

Woman changes her name to Cutout Dissection.com

Have you ever told your kids to shut up?

Barack Obama Becomes Popular Baby Name in Kenya

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:35:00 GMT

The election of the first African-American president in the U.S. will have a lasting impact in Kenya for years to come—not only because this historical moment has been ingrained in the people’s memories, but because “Barack Obama” will be a popular name amongst the next generation of schoolchildren.

Several mothers at a hospital in Kenya proudly told Reuters that they were christening their newborns “Barack Obama,” and that they hoped their little Baracks would grow up to possess the same qualities of success, intelligence, and perseverance that they see in America’s 44^th president.

"I would like that by the time he is in his 40s he becomes the president of this country," one mother said, indicating that not only is the American Dream live and well in the U.S., but it is being exported to other countries as well.

The Obama naming trend may also catch on in the U.S. A Florida couple named their child, who was born shortly after the election, “Obama Hall.” Obama was the first name of the president-elect’s Kenyan great-grandfather, so using it as a first name is actually makes sense.

The name Barack means blessed.

Photo: Reuters

Dr. Greene's Vitamins one way to get extra D

Brett Singer — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:15:00 GMT

One easy way to get the now-doctor-recommended dosage of 400 IUs of Vitamin D per day is to take one of the new Twinlab DrGreene nutritional supplements. I've been giving them to my kids and despite the fact that the tablets are larger than the Flinstones/Spider-Man/High School Musical variety (that last one I made up – I hope), they take them without protest. Dr. Greene, an author and pediatrician, included the higher dosage of D before the new guidelines came out, for what it's worth.

Also in the supplements are Omega-3s, which are really good for you but are not found in many of the foods kids (or adults) eat. NOT in the supplements are preservatives, high fructose corn syrup or unnatural colors and flavors. Dr. Greene is the doc's real name, and also his philosophy. (I admit I was a little suspicious that he changed his name for trendy reasons, but I've been assured that isn't the case.) Even the packaging is made with recycled content. Hey, every little bit helps, right?

If you want to go whole hog, the Twinlab DrGreene line starts Dr. Greene Prenatal and goes through Dr. Greene Children’s Chewable Multivitamin/Multimineral. I met the doctor at an event a few weeks ago (I'm writing up an interview I did with him) and he seemed like a tremendously nice man. He also acknowledged that it would be great if kids got these nutrients from eating food, but since they don't, these supplements are a way to do it. Bottom line: the kids take the vitamins willingly, they appear to have less crap (HFCS, etc.) in them than other kids' vitamins, and the amount of nutrients in them seems to be better than most. Works for me.

image: Amazon.com