splash happy

From a thread at the Unconditional Parenting message board, where a poster asked about a situation in which a 3-year-old likes to splash water out of the bath all over floor/parents.

Brain storm:

Get in the bath with the two children (between them) so you protect smaller child from tsunamis and you are warm and wet instead of cold and wet.

Put washing up bowls along the edge of the bath on the floor to catch splashes.

Buy one of those really cheap carpet mat things which have a plastic base (they look pretty grim, but they soak up lots of water, it doesn't go through to the carpet, and they can easily be hung on the washing line outside to dry off)

Cut up an old towel into strips and attach the strips to the side of the bath with strong tape. Drips going down the outside of the bath get caught in a towel strip rather than going on the carpet.

Make lots of little bottles of potion (food colouring and water) for pouring.

Get a waterwheel for pouring games.

Bubbles may be more fun to pat and throw around than actual tidal wave splashing

If your kitchen has tiled/lino/wooden floor, the sink may be a good place for maxi-splash fun (and you can get just as clean in a sink as in a bath). As long as child isn't in danger of falling on the floor, parent can use it as an opportunity to mop the floor with constant water provision!

"Playful Parenting"

I read half of it.

Too many cheery anecdotes about Lawrence Cohen's own family and therapy patients, which all show what a Goofy Guy Larry is.

Important good things: play is an important means of communication for children; play can be a means of changing the energy of a situation, of backing off from an area of conflict for a time, or a tool with which to resolve it; play can be a way of reconnecting with the people we cohabit with.

Bad things: "follow the giggles" - because IMO giggling can indicate fear and nervousness
: he does not like TV and thinks that it stops children from being able to play imaginatively - because they are following someone else's script. I've seen 4 year olds tell/act out The Three Bears without tolerating hesitation, repetition or deviation and it didn't take a TV show to fix the narrative.

Attitudes to children

Overheard on a bus:

"Oh, children are manipulative little s*ds, aren't they?"

This comment would be socially impossible to make in a western country in a public place about any other group of people (blacks, hispanics, joooos, women, old people...)

It also reveals a complete lack of understanding of the aims of very small children.
"Gah I can't sleep alone in the dark here... I know, I'll really annoy my parents by screaming so loudly that they get as miserable as me... mwahahaha that'll show them not to force feed me tasteless goop three times a day"

"Gateway Books"

There is a thread on the TCS list at the moment about books people have found helpful in learning how to treat their children as small autonomous people rather than property, untamed savages, extensions of the self etc etc.

I want to put the books on here so I don't lose the list!

Lawrence Cohen 'Playful Parenting'

Jan Hunt 'The Natural Child'

anything by John Holt or Deborah Jackson

Alison Stallibrass, "The Self-Respecting Child" (for a reminder that some good ideas have been around
for a while...)

Unconditional Parenting by Alfie Kohn

Hold On To Your Kids

"Raising Your Child Not by Force but by Love," by Sidney D. Craig

Jan Fortune -Wood's 'Winning Parent Winning Child', 'With Consent', 'Without Boundaries'

co-sleeping in the MSM

I was just sent this link

The Sunday Times is read by thousands and thousands of people. And this article takes exactly the right approach for its audience - nothing crunchy or "natural" but measured use of the science. Babies who sleep apart from their parents are much more stressed. Sleeping apart from parents correlates with women having eating disorders later in life (not that that proves a causal link of course).

And there's a neat little sting in the tail - the stress felt by babies sleeping alone is similar to the stress they experience when left at nurseries...

health visitor rant

this article reminds us that UK Health Visitors have not had a clue about baby nutrition for the past 40 years, despite that being one of the main parts of their tax-funded advisory role.

Gah.

An idea from the corner shop

The lady in our local corner shop told me today that when her children was little, she bought one of these types of things.

and filled it up with chocolate covered raisins, M&Ms, raisins, and nuts. Especially almonds, which she was waxing lyrical about how good for you they are. And then she justleft it at child height and whenever they wanted a snack they'd go and help themselves. It was particularly good for snacking in the early morning, when she didn't want to get up and make breakfast yet. The container keeps it all fresh, and the turning handle bit makes it fun, and mixing up the chocolate covered ones with plain ones makes the plain ones more delicious in combination

schools

Monastery and cathedral schools trained churchmen. The earliest monastery schools I know of are ca. 800 AD in the Carolingian empire. The main purpose was to teach Latin through memorising (singing by rote) first the Psalms and then Latin hymns. Once the novices had this basis they could take part in the liturgy. Later training was based on the seven liberal arts, all of which equipped students to be effective monks/clerics (eg arithmetic and astronomy were important for calculating the date of Easter). These schools provided a focused vocational training.

Secular schools developed in urban centres in the 15th century. European grammar schools (Lateinschule in Germany) came from the desire of urban merchants to prepare their sons for the professions (law, medicine etc) without necessarily tying them into a career in the church. To enter such professions, the boys were expected to know the sorts of things that the products of cathedral and monastic schools knew, concentrating on the acquisition of Latin. Such families were unlikely to be able to afford individual tutors. They set up charter schools to spread the cost of educating their children.

Schools were often set up by urban guilds as a perk for the sons of their members; some still survive in England (eg Merchant Taylors; Haberdashers; Christs Hospital -
still run by the Almoners' Guild...)

So even at this stage, schools had moved beyond providing a vocational training to providing an arbitrary passport (Latinity) to the desired profession. IMO, this peacock’s tail is still the primary function of schools – they rarely supply the information or offer the training that people want; instead, the qualifications are interpreted by employers or universities or whoever as indicating a certain level of staying power and determination to proceed to whatever goal it is that the person has in mind.

It is quite possible for a person to spend many years (not just finishing high school or a Bachelor’s degree, but a Masters as well) chasing the peacock’s tail which will supposedly finally allow one to start learning how to do what one actually wants to do.

The most valuable areas of training preserve their vocational aspects – music, dance, art, sports… – and mostly people pursue these areas outside schools through: private tuition with an expert; self-directed practice and study; joining a club/team/orchestra; engagement in the pursuit with others of similar ability, etc. IMO, the methods by which people find and train for their vocations are much better models for pursuing any interest at any age than the school model, which purports to provide a generic preparation for specialisation later.

circumcision and nappy rash

On the TCS list, someone likened infant circumcision to changing a diaper when child has a rash - it will hurt the child but parent knows it is the best thing to do and goes ahead regardless of inflicting the pain.

In the current case, the mother (father / caregiver / whatever) often has to make decisions for the eight-day-old boy because she can't communicate why some things are happening, he's not yet prepared to understand the range of options, and he can't communicate his opinions except in the most basic ways. Under those circumstances, making many decisions for him is necessary, not irrational. For example, he might not want her to change his diaper, perhaps because he has a rash and the wipes cause pain. Yet the mother, if she is rational, will change his diaper anyway because she knows that to do otherwise is far worse for the child. This is coercive, but rational. There's no alternative. (She will likely mitigate the pain however possible, of course, but she'll still change the diaper and the child will still hurt.)

No. Changing the diaper regardless is unneccessary coercion. Here are some possible solutions which would not hurt the tiny baby:

Get in bath with tiny baby. Instead of using baby wipes, the water will gently wash the baby clean. No pain.

Change diaper when child is asleep and won't notice.

Instead of using wipes, gently wipe the baby with a soothing anti-rash cream (yes, fingers in poop and all). After a few minutes, it may be possible to use wipes without hurting the baby. Wash hands thoroughly in between obviously ;-)

Instead of wipes, use a soft damp cloth?

Lose the diapers altogether and leave the bottom half nekkid until the rash goes. Might be a chance to experiment with elimination communication. And honestly, 8-day-old baby pee or poop on one's T-shirt is not a disaster. It can just join the half digested milk :lol:

To say "In most cases, I try not to coerce my child, but in circumstance X there is no alternative" signals a failure of creativity not a grim reminder that life is inevitably painful. Sure, we all have failures of creativity from time to time, but we mustn't pretend that they are anything other than failures, which we can learn from and do better next time.

circumcision

The infant circumcision rate in the UK is less than 1%. In this country circumcision is generally regarded as barbaric genital mutilation, undertaken only by a tiny proportion of the population, for religious reasons. I was astonished to learn today that the circumcision rate in the US is more like 60%.

There are various possible health benefits to circumcision, but the American Academy of Paediatrics said in 1999 that they are not sufficient to recommend routine infant circumcision. There are some STDs which are more difficult to catch with a circumcised penis (because there are some cells in the foreskin which easily absorb whatever is going around), but there are simple ways of avoiding STDs which do not involve genital mutilation. Several of the risk factors can easily be dealt with by basic hygiene.

On the reverse side, there are risks associated with circumcision itself, from bleeding to infection and much worse. Estimates of the percentage of baby boys affected by such things vary between less than 1% and 10%, depending on who is counting. Use of anaesthesia is by no means universal, although the procedure is certainly painful. Duh.

Circumcision is not easily reversible, and affects sex. It makes it much harder to keep penis and vagina lubricated during sex. It reduces sensation in the penis and can affect the erection. It takes longer for circumcised males to come to ejaculation (some might find this an advantage of circumcision).

There is no guarantee that one’s son will thank one for having circumcised him. The surveys of males circumcised as adults cited on Wikipedia indicate that the satisfaction rate is only about 60%. There was nothing to indicate how many men circumcised as infants were happy about it.

If your son decides as a teen/adult that he wants to be genitally mutilated, that’d be the time to do it, IMO, when he can decide for himself.

I find it hard to imagine a viable justification of infant circumcision unless there are religious factors involved, and that deserves another post, which will have to wait till I have time to write it.

hello

well, I assume noone is sitting patiently out there waiting for me to write.

I've changed my links so they reflect what I'm actually reading.

Thoughts about other things are still cooking...

random thoughts about shyness

If child is nervous around new people, try to meet them in places where there is lots of space to move away and still have fun. EG a park rather than going to someone's house for tea. That enables a child to play on the swings/slide/on the grass verge 50 yards away and begin interacting AT THEIR OWN PACE (Which might mean - not actually directly till the next play date)

Some children might like to be told ahead of time who they are going to meet - perhaps see a photo too.

Some adults are REALLY bad about invading the personal space of a child who is not comfortable with it. In that situation, defend the child - make a physical barrier between yourself and the adult so that they would have to invade your space to get at the child. I know parents who say explicitly "give him/her some space - (s)he takes a while to be comfortable with new people".

I also know parents who say "please just ignore my small child until (s)he gets used to your presence". Some children like to be around people without 5 pairs of eyes looking expectantly at them waiting for some kind of performance.

The other thing is that I think parents need to be willing to follow their child's cues about pace of almost any activity. It might take 20 visits just playing on the side of the swimming pool before another 5 where the child plays in their depth and then eventually wants to explore further - but sides of pools are wonderful places to play and so are the steps in and out. Rather than thinking "my child is timid" think "my child wants to get every ounce of learning and richness out of every aspect of this before the next bunch of sensory overload bangs in".

smart suits

The problem, of course, with smart suits is that one only buys them every 6-10 years. And one day one looks at them, and although the jacket is still in good condition, and it is just as beautiful a colour as it was 10 years ago, the trousers just won't do.

I don't think it is POSSIBLE to wear trousers where the hem tapers in to the ankle any more. Nobody does. And wearing clothes that would look completely dated rather destroys the point of wearing the smart suit. Harumph. Which is why I am delighted that a little concentrated googling turned up this site

Whether I am brave enough to do this or not is another question. Maybe I'll just take the trousers to the nice alteration shop in town...

day care woes

There was a recent question to the TCS list about a pre-verbal child who protests at the transition to day care, but then goes on to have a lovely time (according to the day care providers). I responded as my thoughts developed, in several messages. This is more structured.

1. Let’s assume that the child really does enjoy going to day care while the parent works. The parent needs to be pretty sure of this assumption before working on it.

It may be that all that is needed is a different approach to the transition. Allow an extra hour for mooching around the puddles in the day care car park, or for playing with the child at day care? 5 minutes of puddle hopping seems a long time when you are late, but nothing at all when you have an hour's leeway.

Alternatively, perhaps the child would prefer to be taken to day care by hir father, or maybe they'd rather say goodbye at home, and have another trusted adult take them to day care?

A good threshold game is playing peek-a-boo around the door one hopes the child will eventually want to go through. And making sure one goes on playing peek-a-boo with furniture props well into the room. Maybe one of the day care staff could be primed to go on with the peek-a-boo game? Then child's transition to day care could be very gradual.


2. Let’s assume that the child does not want to go to day care. Parents now need to brainstorm WILDLY.

Perhaps one parent could do their work at home or in the evenings, perhaps with a baby sitter in the house (a trusted teen? A devoted grandparent?). Perhaps a parent could take the child to work with them (either on an occasional basis, so they can see what is happening when they are at day care, or even on a regular basis). Perhaps two people could job share, each looking after their combined children in one of their houses while the other works.

Perhaps one of the parents would like to stop working for money and be at home with the child?

It would certainly be worth doing the maths of income minus day care = remainder and think of other ways which would make parent happy to earn that remainder, not involving child care.


3. If the current situation involves leaving the child crying in the day care provider's arms, the parent is teaching their child a big lesson: "when the chips are down, parent cannot be relied upon for assistance". Will that not come back and bite the parent later on? It has to damage the parent/child relationship, quite apart from not taking the child's NEED not to be left seriously.

4. I think it is also worth bearing in mind that children are designed to be pretty well glued to parents or similarly close carers until sometime in their second year, at least. The nursery scenario is a cheap way of enabling parents to work, but it is not optimum for many children ever, depending on personality.

IME, children thrive in small mixed-age groups rather than in same-age groups, which most nurseries don't offer. A 4 year old is much more interesting to a 2 year old than another 2 year old is.

Sure, we have to be creative to be parents as well as earning money; the difficulties associated with finding ways of paying the bills do not excuse following the herd and abandoning our children to something sub-optimal, however.

The product mentality

APInternational, the attachment parenting organisation, has the motto "Peaceful Parenting for a Peaceful World"

The underlying message is clearly that if you attachment parent your children - breastfeeding on demand, co-sleeping, baby wearing - your children will likely turn out to be gentle and peaceful people.

Unfortunately, the API logo writer had not read The Nurture Assumption by Judith Rich Harris. She argues - pretty compellingly, as far as I've got - that the major influence on how children turn out is not how their parents treat them, but what their peer group is like. There are genetic effects and indirect genetic effects, but the people children mdel themselves on, once they leave their mother's knee, are their peers.

If you want your child to be peaceful, live in a commune where the whole community is peaceful.

I think Attachment Parenting is a splendid way to treat very small people. But do it because it makes parents and children happier, not because you have some ultimate goal for your child's mature personality.

Thinking about tantrums

This is a recycled post from Rational Parenting, which is on hiatus.

A tantrum: when a person loses all ability to express their intentions directly through language or signs, instead using a variety of tantrum-characteristic behaviours, such as uncontrollable weeping, screaming, shaking, drumming of heels on floor (varies according to the person).

A tantrum is a horrible thing to experience. It makes one's eyes sore, gives one a headache, makes one tired, dehydrates one, and does not solve whatever the problem was in the first place.

Helping one's children avoid tantrums and minimise their effects seems to me to be the natural aim of any parent, not only because tantrums are horrible for the person having them, but also because they are horrible for the person on the receiving end - there is great temptation either to give in to all demands of the hysterical person or to remove them from sight and earshot until they have stopped. The one end of the scale is self-sacrifice, the other is neglect. I would recommend neither as a parenting strategy.

I think that having tantrums is an inevitable part of childhood. Some children have them because their parents seem to set out to ignore their intentions. Others have them because their parents - being fallible - sometimes miss the cues of their children until the children have reached a point where intelligible communication is no longer possible.


1. staving off tantrums

is eminently possible. It requires the tantrum-catcher to know the tantrum-thrower very well indeed, in order to pick up on their cues.

For example, many pre-menstrual women display tantrum characteristics - a boiling up of frustration is eventually vented, either through aggression or through weeping. It can often be side-stepped by those who love the women. Some like to be cosseted, and tucked up on the sofa with a cup of tea; others need to be told to "buck up, old girl"; yet others merely need reminding that their hormones go funny at certain times of month. Choose the wrong response at your peril.

Helping one's children requires exactly the same attention to the cues of the child. Sometimes people have gone beyond being able to express how tired or hungry or thirsty they are; this is where trusted adults can gently help them to change their mental state through a snack or a drink or a quiet activity or whatever.



2. Helping to end a tantrum when it has begun

Some of the same techniques would apply as in the tantrum-avoidance stage: trying to identify the problem and a way to solve it; or providing comfort until the child has calmed down enough to solve their problem themselves. NB it strikes me that this is a big argument in favour of extended breastfeeding, which can provide food, drink AND comfort in one benign swoop to an unhappy child.

Sending someone away to weep it out alone is a cruel act. No-one should wish weeping-oneself-into-exhaustion on another person. Sending one's own child away, denying them the love and reassurance that will help them to start problem solving again quickly, is also counterproductive in the long run. If one's role as a parent is to be a trusted advisor to the small people one lives with, then excluding them from one's presence when their problems have got too large for them to handle rationally is the act of a fool. If Betty's parents do not help her to solve problems as a child, she is highly unlikely to communicate her problems to them and ask for help as she grows more independent. Welcome to teenage hell.

Acceding to demands that are in conflict with one's own intentions is also counterproductive (= self-sacrifice). I hope that helping one's child no longer be hungry or thirsty wouldn't clash with anyone's own intentions (and remember the urgency with which such physical needs need to be met when one is not in control of the provision of food and drink - there's nothing like a blood sugar low). But buying a toy that a child just saw and won't use for more than ten minutes?? It is much better to calm down the tantrum with love and respect, and then creatively find alternative solutions with the child (do we know anyone who owns this toy? Might it be for sale on Ebay or in a charity shop? Are there any better toys it would be worth buying instead? If we spend money on this toy, will it have implications for the rest of the family finances? Can we sell it on Ebay if it's rubbish? Can we play with it in the shop?).

One should never assume that someone is throwing a tantrum 'for no good reason'. Even when it's 'just hormones', the emotions are real enough, and problem solving (however small the problem seems to anyone outside the sufferer's head) goes on hold until the emotions have been assuaged.

Are we at the beck and call of our 'manipulative' children here? No more than we are at the beck and call of anyone we love who needs help to see beyond the perceived enormity of a problem to its solution.

How common is baby-wearing in the UK?

I have no means of being scientific about this, obviously, so here is my anecdotal response.

I have seen lots of people use a baby carrier of the Baby Bjorn/Tomy variety for the first couple of months. You can buy them on the High Street - it is a pretty mainstream thing to do. Obviously, the baby quickly becomes too heavy to be comfortable to carry in this way, but more and more babies at least have the security of being carried in their earliest weeks. I think it is partly because our town centres are mostly pedestrianised, and they are often also medieval. Cobbled streets and tiny-baby-in-pram is not a happy mixture for a Saturday shopping trip.

Most people then move straight on into prams and buggies, IME, except for when they are going on long walks, and then Karrimor-type backpacks are common, at least among the middle classes.

But there is a little move towards baby/toddler wearing, again, among the middle classes. One clear indication of this is the NCT catalogue - the National Childbirth Trust is the nation's big natural childbirth charity; they organise antenatal classes and have active networks of local branches with coffee mornings, tea parties, nearly new sales etc etc. And as you can see in the NCT catalogue, there are various baby carrying devices advertised. I think there are more than there were 2 or 3 years ago, but I might be misremembering.

1. The Wilkinet. What a splendid invention this thing is. It starts like a standard baby bjorn type baby carrier, but as the baby gets larger, they can face outwards or can be carried on an adult's back, rucksack style. I have seen successful (though fairly contorted) breastfeeding going on in it with older babies. And the weight really is distributed well. I have also seen fathers very happy and comfortable with a Wilkinet - it doesn't look too earth mother-y for a man with a manly outlook.

2. The better baby sling. I've got a friend with this one (and actually, both parents use it completely interchangeably - an effect of the tartan pattern rather than being a bit floral, maybe?!). It always looked a bit stiffer to me than my faithful Huggababy, but it's a perfectly good ring sling and LOOK there it is out in the mainstream.

3. The Hippychick hipseat. There is one good thing about this. It acknowledges that a) carrying a child unaided on your hip leads to problems and b) every mother carries her child on her hip. But really, how many people are going to wander around the house with this contraption strapped to them for every time a child might want a carry? A ring sling gives you the same load spreading, but is much easier either to whip on instantaneously or leave on all day, wookie-like.

4. The Bush Baby cocoon and baby carrier - the sorts of things I mentioned above. I haven't tried this brand.

I rarely see mothers with slings - local ones I tend to get to know! - but people often say supportive things, and I wave the logo of my sling at anyone who says anything friendly.

There is a growing market on Ebay.co.uk of second-hand slings and also WAHM ring slings. Every time I go to visit, there are more slings on offer and less chance of a bargain!

In praise of reins

“Leads are for dogs not people”

Actually, I disagree. The sight of a child straining at the leash while their mother gossips 4 feet above them is an awful one. But there are times and places in which a set of toddler reins is a splendid piece of equipment.

There is a stage when a child begins to learn about traffic. They are fascinated by cars (*point*), lorries (*point*), buses (*point*), vans (*point*), motorcycles (*point*) and aeroplanes (oh no, sorry, that’s something else). They learn from their parents’ verbal and non-verbal cues that roads are things to be treated with caution, and that the pavement is the safe place to be.

There is also a stage when a child learns to walk – wobbly at first, and delighting in their growing balance and confidence.

Some people’s children encounter these stages in the convenient order. Others learn to walk before they understand roads. For these children, wearing reins by the roadside gives them the freedom to walk along and the parent the ability to stop them falling into the path of an oncoming juggernaut. Reins can be slack at all times except when disaster actually looms.

Cliff tops and river banks are similarly good rein places. A child can investigate without actually falling 150 feet.

Baby Food – An Easier Alternative

This is a partially fictionalised account for our local parenting magazine. Feedback please - I want to improve it! You'll spot the breastfeeding and autonomy subtexts...

I’ve never bought a jar of baby food. And I’m not one of those efficient mothers who (apparently effortlessly) boils up vats of vegetables, puréeing and freezing them in ice-cube trays so that there are always home-made meals ready for the baby.

Instead, I’ve just been following the guidelines of the World Health Organisation. They advocate exclusive breastfeeding up to 6 months and then a mixture of breastfeeding with suitable food until at least the age of two. Babies don’t develop the digestive enzymes to cope with anything other than milk before around 6 months, so there’s little point in hurrying the process. I think the important thing is to let your child dictate the pace.

How much food?

If you continue to breastfeed on demand after 6 months, you never need to worry about whether your child is eating enough. By 18 months, my children probably got more than 50% of their nutrition from solid food, but to be honest I wasn’t counting. The ratio of milk and food shifted very gradually. I always offered my child small helpings and plenty of them, and avoided trying to force just-one-more-mouthful in to finish the helping. Only the child can decide when they are full.

What if they don’t like it?

Do you eat food you don’t like? Does forcing it down make you like it any better? Well, why try to force a small child to eat something, then?

Some food I offered was rejected with contempt first time, and then was soon after enjoyed. One or two things were left of the side of the plate lots of times, so I made sure I offered alternatives and eased off on the unpalatable item. After a few months, these foods could often be easily reintroduced and hugely enjoyed.

Letting the child decide what to eat and how much of it means that those battles of wills over eating are much less likely to develop in the future. Relax now, and save real stress later!

What sort of food?

Remember, food is fun! If you are house proud, I recommend putting one of those waterproof tablecloths over the area where the child will be eating, and then… let them have at it! We soon gave up on bibs as completely inadequate (if you’re going to have to wash the cardigan anyway, why wash a bib too?).

If you give the child a spoon from the start, they will soon get the hang of it, especially if you are showing the way with another spoon. I found myself being solemnly (and pretty dextrously) fed yoghurt by 1-year olds as often as I fed them.

Finger foods are as good for playing with as eating: slices of apple, carrot sticks, a thin slice of cheese, a soldier of toast (With LOTS of butter on) and so on. Little things a child can pick up and pop in (like peas or those little pasta twirls and shells) are often appreciated.

Different textures, colours and flavours are much more interesting for a child than beige-coloured purée, and being introduced to them early means that children are more likely to accept all kinds of different foods later. Offer lots of variety – and offer what you eat yourself, so that joining in with the family foods is just normal.

Food doesn’t appear by magic. At 6 months, I started including my children in food preparation. They enjoyed playing with the vegetables as I prepared them, and ate lots of raw brussels sprouts, parsnips and even garlic – ah well, I expect they were following some deeply healthy Californian raw foods diet! With help, children little over a year old can start chopping vegetables; even younger ones can stir successfully.

What about choking?

A certain number of things will go down the wrong way to start with. Either the child will cough the things out again or you can quickly scoop them out of the mouth with a finger. I was careful to avoid really hard things like nuts. By waiting until past 6 months, the child will quickly get the hang of chewing (even with no teeth) and swallowing, and the chance of choking just gets smaller and smaller.


So introducing your child to food needn’t be traumatic, hard work or expensive. By keeping the breastfeeding going, you can relax about letting your child play with food and gradually eat more of it when they are ready.

Jabbermommy's promotion at work post

from here

Your Big Day, v1.0

You just got a big promotion at work. Your job now allows you much more autonomy, as well as providing you with many more outlets for expression. Your head is swimming with new thoughts, ideas and feelings. You're not one to plan for the future very much, but you do love to reminisce about your day, and you feel elated. The celebration dinner was okay, the chicken and pasta was delicious, but the broccoli has left you feeling a little gassy.

You take a relaxing bath, slip on some soft pajamas, and read a short story that you love to read every night. You feel a little drowsy, and your eyes droop, even though you still feel excited about your big promotion.

Your loved one, someone you love in ways you don't even understand yet you can feel the love for them so deeply, tucks the covers around you, kisses you goodnight, and then leaves the room.

You are now supposed to sleep for nine to ten hours. Solid. Without waking. Alone. In your excitement about your big day, you'd forgotten all about that requirement of the household. In fact, you forget that requirement the moment you wake up in the morning, because you love being awake so much, you love experiencing everything life has to offer. Nonetheless, you try to settle down, even though thoughts of your big promotion are still racing through your head. You drift in and out of a light sleep, dreaming of all the big things that have happened today.

You startle awake each time your stomach aches. That broccoli is still bothering you, and you call to your partner to bring some medicine, but they ignore you. You wake occasionally, jumping up onto your knees, ready to crawl, because your legs are restless, twitching and itchy. You twist and turn trying to get comfortable. The covers are too light, so you call to your loved one for another blanket, and they ignore you. You're thirsty and your throat feels a bit sore from all the calling to your loved one, but again they ignore you. You begin to feel scared, wondering why your loved one, the one you feel so much love for, the one you are completely dependent upon, is not coming in to help you. You start crying, calling out to your loved one, "Please, come to me! I need help! Please, just come here and give me a hug, I need some reassurance that things are okay!"

Silence. The clock ticks. You cry out one more time, desperately. Silence. You sink back down onto the mattress, pulling your blanket around you, trying to soothe yourself. You realize you're hungry, that your stomach has already emptied its contents, and that you need a small snack. You again call for your loved one, shrilly this time, stridently. Your head aches, your eyes ache, your throat aches. They continue to ignore you.

You give up calling for your loved one, and drift into an uneasy, exhausted sleep, your stomach aching, your eyes itchy and swollen, your mind confused and troubled.

Who are you?

You are a baby that stood up on your own for the first time today.

Your loved one is your mother. Unbeknownst to you, she's read in a few articles online that you're supposed to sleep through the night, uninterrupted. Her friends, her mother and her spouse keep telling her that it's good for you. Her heart aches every time you cry, her arms literally hurt wanting to reach for you, but she checks herself. She halts on the way to your door, and turns around, to settle back into her own bed and her own uneasy sleep. Even though she no longer hears your crying on the baby monitor, she doesn't understand why she doesn't feel right.

When you wake up in the morning, you are overjoyed to see the love of your life again! So overjoyed, in fact, that last night is already forgotten, by your conscious mind. She is so relieved that you're not angry with her, she smiles happily, knowing she did the right thing.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Infants have different sleep cycles than adults, for sound reasons that should be studied* by every parent. The growth of their body and their brain depend on their unique sleep cycles being respected. To expect an infant to conform to adult sleep patterns, or worse, to expect an infant sleep more hours and more soundly than an adult, is not only unrealistic, but is damaging in the long-term on both physiological and psychological levels.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your Big Day, v2.0

You just got a big promotion at work. Your job now allows you much more autonomy, as well as providing you with many more outlets for expression. Your head is swimming with new thoughts, ideas and feelings. You're not one to plan for the future very much, but you do love to reminisce about your day, and you feel elated. The celebration dinner was okay, the chicken and pasta was delicious, but the broccoli has left you feeling a little gassy.

You take a relaxing bath, slip on some soft pajamas, and read a short story that you love to read every night. You feel a little drowsy, and your eyes droop, even though you still feel excited about your big promotion.

Your loved one, someone you love in ways you don't even understand yet you can feel the love for them so deeply, tucks the covers around you, kisses you goodnight, and then settles in beside you to watch over you as you fall asleep.

You feel their breathing and their heartbeat against your body. Your own heartbeat and breathing slows to match theirs. Their warmth radiates through you, suffusing you with a sense of rightness and comfort. You slip into a light sleep, eyes twitching in REM. Your loved one knows you are only in a light sleep, and waits for the signs of deep sleep. When your body is completely limp and your eyelids have stopped twitching, your loved one quietly eases away from you, to return to you in a little bit, for their own sleep. You wake slightly to feel the warm body slide away from you, but you've felt it many times before and you know it'll return shortly, so you slide back into a deep sleep.

You startle awake each time your stomach aches. That broccoli is still bothering you, and your covers are too light. Your loved one is sleeping beside you, they wake lightly and tuck the covers around you again. You snuggle up to their warmth, but you whimper because your gassy stomach is still bothering you. Your loved one rubs your lower tummy gently in a clockwise motion, encouraging the gas to make its way through your body. They pat your back rhythmically, encouraging a little burp, as well. You're not as bothered by the gas now. Your needs were met. You feel secure, safe and comfortable, and you settle back to sleep.

You wake occasionally, jumping up onto your knees, ready to crawl, because your legs are restless, twitching and itchy. Your loved one's hands settle you back into your place, where you snuggle again, mind whirling with thoughts of your big promotion, legs twitching. You hear a quiet chuckle, and feel gentle hands massaging your tense legs until they're loose again. You clutch their fingers as you fall asleep.

You wake slightly and realize you're hungry, that your stomach has already emptied its contents, and that you need a small snack. You cry out for milk, your loved one provides it, and you suckle until your thirst and hunger is slaked.

You drift into an an easy, deep sleep, your tummy filled, your needs met, and your mind untroubled.

Who are you?

You are a baby that stood up on your own for the first time today.

Your loved one is your mother. She's been sleeping beside you since the day you were born, and she knows every twitch of your body, every one of your breathing patterns, and how often you're hungry and thirsty during the night. She knows you had a big day, and she is prepared for a night of disrupted sleep. She knows that you'll need to process your big development in your own way, and that she can just be there to guide you through the night without forcing anything. She trusts her own instincts. After she's had some time to herself, to refresh her mind and spirit, she settles into bed next to you, taking note of your furrowed brow, your twitching legs, and the sound of little gas bubbles in your tummy, and knows you'll need soothing during the night.

When you wake up in the morning, you are overjoyed to see the love of your life again! You reach up to pat her face as you get your fill of milk, your tummy comfortable and full. You jump up into a crawl immediately after eating, and find her body makes an excellent playground. She smiles happily, knowing she did the right thing.

Namaste,
Jabbermommy