Filed under: Lifestyle, Grandparents

When I became a grandmother at the age of 35, I knew without a doubt I did not want to be called 'Grandma'. Grandma's are sweet ladies with soft laps and false teeth. More importantly, Grandma's are old. I am none of those things and therefore chose Nana as a youthful alternative. But even Nana sounds old to me now and I am wishing I had given the whole matter a little more thought.

Which is why I read with interest this article about what baby boomer grandparents are calling themselves these days. Grandma or Grandpa is not cool enough for a generation who thinks middle age doesn't begin until 48 and old age starts somewhere around 75.

There is a stereotype connected to the traditional grandparent names and many want nothing to do with them. This aversion stems from the fact that grandparents today are different than previous generations. Only 12 percent of boomer grandparents have retired and they are generally healthier and wealthier than their own parents at that age. It's only fitting that their names reflect these differences.

Blended families are also playing a part in the changing of the names. Second marriages can result in all kinds of unique situations and who really wants to be called Daddy and Grandpa at the same time?

If you can't come up with a creative alternative on your own, there are several websites out there to help you. Namenerds and Grandboomers both have lists of unique names for grandparents. You could be Bampie or Tata. Or, like Goldie Hawn, your grandchildren could call you Glamma. I wish I had thought of that.

Read | Read | Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Moms, Image of the Day

Today is the last day of "Mother and son" month here at Parent Dish and this photo is from meganlally. It was absolutely wonderful to look at your photos with your sons. Come back tomorrow for a new month with a new theme!

If you'd like your own picture featured here, simply upload photos into our group Flickr Pool - We'll select an image every day to highlight. Remember: I'm on the lookout for shots with interesting backgrounds, cool angles, or original composition. Be sure to read the intro on the main Flickr page for more information and limit your uploading to 5 photos per day.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Tantrums, Newborn, Infant / First year, Emotions

There have been a couple times during my daughter's 2 1/2-year existence that I've thought: "if there were a baby crying contest, my kid would most definitely win." Little did I know, such a contest actually exists.

That's right -- the little terrors in the above photo aren't posing with their daddies for some sumo wrestling photo shoot. They're competing to see which one can cry the loudest.

In the end, 84 babies -- all born in 2006 -- took part in the contest, which happened this past weekend in Tokyo. In theory, it's held as a sort of prayer for the infant's health and growth, but really, I think they just did it 'cause it'd be funny.

That being said -- while the photo is hysterical -- anyone who's been driven to pulling their hair out by a screaming child knows that this is more cringe-worthy than comical.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Lifestyle, Media, Television, Movies

Bob Sassone, at our sister blog TV Squad, linked to a really wry and funny LA Times article by Joel Stein that was about a very serious subject. Harvard Associate Dean Jay Winsten (do you think he feels it is as ironic as I do that his name sounds like the beginning of a tobacco company?) has called for Hollywood to stop depicting smoking in movies that kids have access to. He claims that cigarette-smoking related deaths are CAUSED by kids viewing smoking in the movies and television and lighting up themselves.

Stein asked Winsten whether movies should start depicting people in movies as only eating vegetables and lean proteins as well. Winsten responded with a phrase that always makes my Mommy blood run cold: "We're talking about protecting kids!" I hate that. You can make everything and anything sound like a good decision if you throw that spice on top of it. It's like using hot sauce in every dish you make: Eventually you just kill off all your taste buds. That particular rhetorical argument has just lost all of its power to truly make an impact. It's an empty phrase, just a red herring people use to get what they want. Because how can you argue with protecting children!

Please.

It's my job to protect my children, thank you very much. And guess what? They have seen people smoking in real life too-- that is, until I swatted the cigarettes out of those shameless heathens' mouths and made citizens' arrests because they showed my children a reality that I am opposed to.

Cigarette smoking is a very serious health threat. I am a medical editor. I read about it and write about it ALL. THE. TIME. Teen and youth smoking is also very serious. But honestly? Most of the studies point to peer influences and advertising as what get kids to start smoking, not Hollywood.

In Stein's article, he responds to the Harvard report's admonishment that smoking in movies is "unnecessary and cliched" by saying that everything in movies is unnecessary and cliched. Stein also says, and I think this is the critical point of this issue: "But even if Leonardo DiCaprio's chain smoking in "Blood Diamond" causes kids to try cigarettes, that's the price of liberty. Art is empty propaganda if it just shows the world as we want it to be."

Exactly.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Breastfeeding, Parent vs Parent

I am an unrepentant bottle feeder. I wasn't always; for years I was a guilt-ridden bottle feeder. I fully intended to breastfeed, for at least the first year, longer if possible. But then my first baby was premature and spent ten days in the NICU, and even though I pumped religiously while he was in hospital, there wasn't enough milk for all the feedings, and when I tried to nurse him at the hospital, he refused to latch on. But I felt guilty, so I kept pumping, for nearly five months, every three hours, day and night. I was miserable. At one point, I turned to a friend for support, and she said, "You HAVE to keep going. It could make a difference of THREE IQ points!" I was astonished--I felt like I was loosing IQ points of my own because I hadn't slept in so long, but she was so very earnest. I felt like a bad mother, at the same time that I was quite literally knocking myself out to do the right thing for my child.

When Charlie came along, two years later, full term and healthy, I thought Okay! THIS time will be different. THIS time I will get it right! THIS time I will be a Good Mommy! Charlie also struggled to latch on properly, and I struggled, again, with production issues. Charlie was always hungry; he would nurse for nearly an hour, sleep for twenty minutes, and be ready to nurse again. But there was nothing there for him, and I would cry and so would he. The lactation consultant suggested that I pump between feedings, and once again I was astonished. How, I asked her, did she suggest I do that, when the baby was only resting for maybe an hour between daytime feedings? And what about my two year old, who was basically running wild all day while I tried to nurse the baby? Was it okay, I asked her, that I was starting to resent everyone around me--the baby for wanting to nurse all the time, my toddler for wanting some attention, my husband for getting me into this in the first place?And then I started listening to myself and I thought, this just isn't going to work. And I weaned Charlie. I don't remember exactly how old he was--a few weeks, maybe?--but I remember feeling like a new person when I stopped nursing. I remember feeling relaxed and happy and rested. I remember being able to look at my son--at both of my sons--and think how much I loved them. I remember handing the baby to my husband at feeding time and curing up in bed with my toddler for a story and some snuggles.

It was the best possible choice for my family.

What I wish, though, was that other people had understood that, and had not felt the need to challenge my decision. Once, when Henry was a tiny baby, and I was still expressing milk for him, I took him to the bookstore, to meet a friend for coffee. While we were there, I gave him a bottle, full of breast milk. A woman a the next table looked down her nose at me and said, "You know, FORMULA is not healthy. BREAST MILK is the best choice." I was too horrified to even respond.

My sons are both healthy and smart; they don't seem to have been harmed by their year of formula. Looking back, I know that I made the right choice, that breastfeeding was not for me. I wasn't able to be a good mother to my sons when I was nursing. I am still a little bit envious of women like Jennifer who are able to work nursing so seamlessly into their lives, but I don't feel guilty about what I chose. Just like Jennifer--just like all of us, really--I did what was best for my family. What I do wish, though, in looking back was that I could have found more support from other moms, that more women like Jennifer could have looked me in the eye and said, "You're doing what works." That would have made the biggest difference of all.

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Moms, Alex, Working out of home, Working moms, Breastfeeding, Pumping, Willow, Nathan, Sophia, Parent vs Parent

I don't know why how we choose to feed our infants has become such a sensitive, divisive, political issue. It's one of Those Things, though, that draws lines between parents. Maybe it has to do mostly with our own insecurities: many of us are trying so hard to do everything exactly right, that we tend to put down all other ways of going about it. Maybe the people who are the loudest about criticizing other parenting styles are feeling unsure about their own. Because really, as a therapist I went to once said to me when I was lamenting about what someone else was doing: What's it to ya, bud?

I breastfed all my kids. I started in October of 1996 when Alex was born, and I nursed during four other pregnancies. It was like the old side out, rotate volleyball move: Alex kept nursing during my pregnancy with Nathan, and I tandem nursed Alex and Nathan through a pregnancy that didn't make it (it was a blighted ovum, before you go and blame the miscarriage on nursing) and through my pregnancy with Sophia. I weaned Alex before Soph was born, and then was back to nursing two kids. I weaned Nathan during my pregnancy with Willow, and then tandem nursed the girls. After Sophia was weaned, I continued nursing Willow until the summer of 2006. I breastfed for nearly ten years without any breaks.

Why would she do that? you may be thinking.

Honestly, I didn't plan it that way: that was just how things unfolded. When I was in high school, a friend told me that her mom had nursed her until she was four years old. Ewwwww, I thought, how hippy is that? And, there I was, a little over ten years later, weaning my four-year-old son. (He is fine, by the way. Well adjusted, very social, happy and "normal.") I don't think that every mother should do things just like I did. I think if you nurse your baby you are making a wonderful choice, and I'd be happy to give you advice, support, a sympathetic ear -- but I don't think it's the only way to nourish an infant.

Now, if the me who was still a fairly new mom heard this older version of me saying that, she'd have been aghast. I was pretty sure for a long while that nursing was right and not nursing was, well, bad. My cousin's wife who bottlefed so she could "go out to the movies and stuff," brought out the judgemental worst in me. I wasn't able to see that perhaps her baby would have a happier and more secure childhood if her mom was doing what made her the most comfortable. Are babies who are breastfed by mothers who resent or are very uncomfortable with it really better off than those who are formula fed? Who can say?

When I was working away from home when Alex was an infant, I spent more mornings than not half dressed and sobbing because I wasn't able to pump enough milk before I went to work. Then I'd spend my lunch hour stressed out and pumping what I could, before racing over to the babysitter's to deliver more milk for the afternoon. I think everyone would've had less stress if I'd just given the baby some similac every now and then. And, I probably would have had more success pumping if I could relax a little knowing enfamil had my back.

Speaking squarely from my own experience, I can say this: if you can nurse your baby and if it feels right to you, you should really give it a try. It isn't easy at first (unless you are very lucky), and it can be painful, from the cracked nipples to the biting to the thrush that feels like a severe sunburn. It can muck up your sex life, depending on how comfortable you and your partner are with it. And, when your child gets to the age where she wants to look around, going to the movies (or other places) can get tricky if you aren't interested in flashing the general public, at least occasionally. But, for me the benefits far outweighed the price of admission. I didn't have to buy or prepare formula, sterilize bottles, or figure out which brand or type of formula to use. I got to get close, skin to skin cuddling time with all my kids, and whenever they were hungry I got to put my feet up and rest while they nursed. I was confident that my babies were getting nutrition that was perfect for them, and I really benefited from that feeling of knowing that my body was what was helping them grow. A nursing break will usually stop toddler tantrums and is perfect for skinned knees, bumped heads, and hurt feelings.

I will always be glad that I chose to nurse my children, but I'm way past over looking down my nose at moms who use bottles. (Except for the ones who fill them with soda -- that is just plain wrong!)

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Media, High school, Teenager, Internet

Being a kid is either really boring -- leaving an enormous amount of time for young minds to wander -- or we're leaving one of the greatest resources for innovative thinking almost completely untapped. It seems everywhere I look these days, it's teenagers coming up with all the best ideas.

Take this kid, for example. Granted, his skill isn't going to change humanity, but it's one of the most interesting -- not to mention funniest -- talents I've seen in awhile. That, added to the fact that he had the wherewithall to create a slick-looking video and post it to the Internet, makes him a genius. Or an artist. Or both.

The question is: is he faking?

[via Neatorama]

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Lifestyle, Teachers, Public school, Going to school, Literacy

After six years without a raise (and, in fact, a net decrease in pay), being called greedy by administrators and a school board, and an ongoing lack of respect from the public and in the media, my wife is considering the unthinkable -- quitting teaching. You have to understand that this is a woman who has known she was going to be a teacher since first grade and who started teaching, first dance then in a regular classroom, at the age of ten.

Over the last six years, her net pay has gone down by almost a thousand dollars a month. That might be tolerable if the school board hadn't labeled the teachers greedy for wanting a raise and wanting to hold onto their medical care. It might be tolerable if the media didn't blame teachers for the incompetence of administration, the lack of parent support and involvement with their children, and, it sometimes seems, all of society's problems.


We hear, over and over again, about teachers who have affairs with their students or who use inappropriate discipline, but do we ever hear about the many, many teachers who work late into the night, setting up their classroom and preparing lessons? Do we hear about the teachers who spend thousands of dollars -- we average more than $2k per year, our highest year was over $6k -- of their own money of school supplies for other people's kids? Do people ever think of the teachers who made a difference in their lives? Rarely.

There is an inevitable result to all this. Good teachers leave the profession all too regularly. My Rachel is nowhere near the point of really leaving the world of education, but she did seriously consider taking a year off next year and she has talked about moving out of the classroom for a while.

This brings me to the point of this story, an article on SFGate about what is needed to retain good teachers. It takes more than just money. According to a new study, "A Possible Dream: Retaining California Teachers So All Students Can Learn" from the California State University system, there are six changes that need to be made to keep teachers from quitting. These focus on the working conditions for teachers as well as providing the support they need.

Why bother, you ask? For starters, about 18,000 teachers quit in California each year. That's a lot of teachers that need to be replaced, meaning hiring costs, training, and so on. Meanwhile, the state already has a serious teacher shortage. Personally, I think we owe to ourselves to make sure that our children and their peers receive the best possible education from the best possible educators. I also think it is in our own best interest to make sure that the people in whose hands we place our children's future are adequately compensated, supported, and appreciated.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Toys, Teachers, Elementary school, Middle school, High school, College, Public school, Private school

Gone are the good 'ol days when students would tap out coded messages with their pencils, pass notes, or scribble answers on their arms -- all in an effort to work the system, and cheat on tests. The modern student has been using technology -- first it was cell phone text-messaging (cell phones have since been banned in most schools), and, more recently, kids have been cheating with their iPods.

Apparently these crafty academic ne'er do wells have been hiding their digital music players under their clothing, and using earbud headphones to surreptitiously listen to pre-recorded information pertinent to their test questions.

For the most part, as one student notes in the article, cheaters are going to cheat, and because kids take more quickly to new technology than their teachers, they'll get away with.

However, I'm always disappointed to hear about schools banning anything outright, without first taking the opportunity to discuss with students why the objects were banned. Obviously, in this case, it was to stop cheating -- but does anyone ever stop to talk with these kids about why cheating is wrong in the first place? There's a reason it's against the rules, and a reason that academic integrity is important. This is a life lesson that isn't learned simply by slapping offenders on the wrist and taking away their tools.

Next year, when they're using something else to cheat, what will they have learned in the process?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here

Filed under: Lifestyle, Moms, Teenager, Celebrity style

On Saturday night my husband and I found ourselves unexpectedly child-free. One minute we are digging holes in the backyard for the sprinkler system, the next minute Ellie is headed out for a sleepover and we are racing to the showers in anticipation of an adults-only evening.

We went downtown, where things looked a little dressier than usual. It was prom night and the formal wear was out in full force. The boys looked handsome in their tuxedos, but let's face it, you've seen one awkward boy in a tux, you've seen them all. The girls, however, were another story.

As my husband and I wandered the streets, we spotted prom girls everywhere. I openly stared, quietly critiquing their choices. Some girls had chosen wisely and looked positively elegant. Others, not so much. Somebody should have had a word with that heavy redheaded girl before she went out dressed in a puffy orange monstrosity.

As I watched the girls go by, it became clear that there are two schools of thought regarding prom dressing. You either go Princess or Paris. The majority went Princess, with floor-length gowns, sweeping updos, tasteful makeup and understated jewelry. The Paris girls prefer something a bit racier. The operating theory behind Paris dressing seems to be that shorter is always better. It you can combine really short with a loud color, you've nailed it. Heavy makeup and lots of attitude complete the look.

My husband and I regularly make fun of Paris Hilton. I mean, she is trying to be funny, right? I know she is considered to be a bad influence on young women, but I had just never seen it with my own eyes. As we sat on a bench enjoying the show, I wondered about the parents of the Paris girls. Was mom on board with the slut look? Who looks at their teen-aged daughter dressed in a hot-pink mini dress with a shredded hem and three inch heels and thinks she looks lovely? Or appropriate?

Permalink | Email this | Linking Blogs | Comments

Read the Full Story Here