Baby Angels Blog

Great stuff, thought i’d share it.

My friend and fellow Dad blogger Jim Turner (aka Genuine) and I had an interesting discussion this evening over a rather extraordinarily long and delicious dinner away from the wee ones where we talked about whether children should be required to apologize if they break the rules or hurt someone. It sprang out of a relatively minor incident at Jim’s house, but we see something transpire every day with our three that might warrant an apology or two.

This isn’t as obvious as it may appear on first glance, and Linda and I have discussed this very matter more than once in the recent past too.

Obviously, you want to teach your children to be kind, polite and mind their manners, if nothing else than just to be able to survive having them in your house for so many, many years, so from that angle, yes, they need to be taught pleasant behavior like “don’t throw the broccoli at the dog during dinner!” (no further explanation needed, I bet)

But other than training them in some sort of Pavlovian way to monotonically say “yeah, whatever, I’m sorry” or similar, does it really matter if they say “sorry” or not?

Clearly insisting they “say it like you mean it!” is more of the same knee-jerk response to the situation and again, do you really care if someone’s hurt you and they say, but cleary don’t mean, an apology? Does it make your broken lamp get fixed? Your skinned elbow heal?

Having said that, it may surprise you that I believe children should apologize and Jim captured my reasoning well when he observed that it’s just politeness training. Linda, however, believes that it’s quite possible that some children are just too young and since you won’t get a genuine apology, you should just let it go if they don’t automatically say “woah, sorry!”

I’m kind of on a fence about this (but don’t tell my wife) because I have seem my children do something bad and immediately apologize with a heartfelt upset about the situation. Not always, but let’s be frank: do you always mean it when you apologize for things like accidentally bumping someone getting onto the subway?

So what do you do? Do you require 100% compliance with the “say you’re sorry” rule, do you let it go completely, or do you rather sporadically request an apology from the offending party with the perhaps naive belief that somehow they’ll learn to be nicer and more polite and pleasant in the future?

Fantastic - had to share this with every mother lacking a good night’s sleep:

Bananas. They’re practically a sleeping pill in a peel. In addition to a bit of soothing melatonin and serotonin, bananas contain magnesium, a muscle relaxant.

Chamomile tea. The reason chamomile is such a staple of bedtime tea blends is its mild sedating effect - it’s the perfect natural antidote for restless minds/bodies.

Warm milk. It’s not a myth. Milk has some tryptophan - an amino acid that has a sedative - like effect - and calcium, which helps the brain use tryptophan. Plus there’s the psychological throw-back to infancy, when a warm bottle meant “relax, everything’s fine.”

Honey. Drizzle a little in your warm milk or herb tea. Lots of sugar is stimulating, but a little glucose tells your brain to turn off orexin, a recently discovered neurotransmitter that’s linked to alertness.

Potatoes. A small baked spud won’t overwhelm your GI tract, and it clears away acids that can interfere with yawn-inducing tryptophan. To up the soothing effects, mash it with warm milk.

Oatmeal. Oats are a rich source of sleep - inviting melatonin, and a small bowl of warm cereal with a splash of maple syrup is cozy - plus if you’ve got the munchies, it’s filling too.

Almonds. A handful of these heart-healthy nuts can be snooze-inducing, as they contain both tryptophan and a nice dose of muscle-relaxing magnesium.

Flaxseeds. When life goes awry and feeling down is keeping you up, try sprinkling 2 tablespoons of these healthy little seeds on your bedtime oatmeal. They’re rich in omega-3 fatty acids, a natural mood lifter.

Whole-wheat bread. A slice of toast with your tea and honey will release insulin, which helps tryptophan get to your brain, where it’s converted to serotonin and quietly murmurs “time to sleep.”

Turkey. It’s the most famous source of tryptophan, credited with all those Thanksgiving naps. But that’s actually modern folklore. Tryptophan works when your stomach’s basically empty, not overstuffed, and when there are some carbs around, not tons of protein. But put a lean slice or two on some whole-wheat bread mid-evening, and you’ve got one of the best sleep inducers in your kitchen.

For an extra treat, here’s the ultimate sleep-inducing snack…

Lullaby Muffins
Makes 12 low-fat muffins
Between the bananas, the whole wheat, and the honeyed touch of sweetness, these muffins are practically an edible lullaby.
· 2 cups whole-wheat pastry flour
· 1/2 teaspoon salt
· 1 tablespoon baking powder
· 2 large, very ripe bananas
· 1/3 cup applesauce
· 1/4 cup honey
· 1/2 cup milk or soymilk

Preheat oven to 350F. In a large bowl, combine the flour (make sure it’s whole-wheat pastry flour or you’ll produce golf balls, not muffins), salt, and baking powder. In a blender, puree the bananas; add the applesauce, honey, and milk. Blend well. Pour the banana mixture into the dry ingredients and stir until just moistened. Line muffin tins with paper muffin cups, pour in batter, and bake 30 minutes or until tops are lightly brown and slightly springy.
 

Nutrition Facts
Per serving: 119 calories; 1g fat; 2.5g protein; 27g carbohydrates; 10g sugars; 133mg sodium; 3g fiber; 35mg magnesium

Saw this, thought it was useful:

[I bumped into this amusing and interesting article on my friend Tom Frey’s Impact Lab weblog, and thought it was sufficiently useful that I’m republishing it here. If you’re having problems getting your wee ones to sleep, perhaps part of the problem is dinner and post-dinner snacks, anyway…]

What is the secret to getting a solid 7 to 8 hours of sleep? Head for the kitchen and enjoy one or two of these 10 foods. They relax tense muscles, quiet buzzing minds, and/or get calming, sleep-inducing hormones - serotonin and melatonin - flowing.

Bananas. They’re practically a sleeping pill in a peel. In addition to a bit of soothing melatonin and serotonin, bananas contain magnesium, a muscle relaxant.

Chamomile tea. The reason chamomile is such a staple of bedtime tea blends is its mild sedating effect - it’s the perfect natural antidote for restless minds/bodies.

Warm milk. It’s not a myth. Milk has some tryptophan - an amino acid that has a sedative - like effect - and calcium, which helps the brain use tryptophan. Plus there’s the psychological throw-back to infancy, when a warm bottle meant “relax, everything’s fine.”

Honey. Drizzle a little in your warm milk or herb tea. Lots of sugar is stimulating, but a little glucose tells your brain to turn off orexin, a recently discovered neurotransmitter that’s linked to alertness.

Potatoes. A small baked spud won’t overwhelm your GI tract, and it clears away acids that can interfere with yawn-inducing tryptophan. To up the soothing effects, mash it with warm milk.

Oatmeal. Oats are a rich source of sleep - inviting melatonin, and a small bowl of warm cereal with a splash of maple syrup is cozy - plus if you’ve got the munchies, it’s filling too.

Almonds. A handful of these heart-healthy nuts can be snooze-inducing, as they contain both tryptophan and a nice dose of muscle-relaxing magnesium.

Flaxseeds. When life goes awry and feeling down is keeping you up, try sprinkling 2 tablespoons of these healthy little seeds on your bedtime oatmeal. They’re rich in omega-3 fatty acids, a natural mood lifter.

Whole-wheat bread. A slice of toast with your tea and honey will release insulin, which helps tryptophan get to your brain, where it’s converted to serotonin and quietly murmurs “time to sleep.”

Turkey. It’s the most famous source of tryptophan, credited with all those Thanksgiving naps. But that’s actually modern folklore. Tryptophan works when your stomach’s basically empty, not overstuffed, and when there are some carbs around, not tons of protein. But put a lean slice or two on some whole-wheat bread mid-evening, and you’ve got one of the best sleep inducers in your kitchen.

A couple of things I’ve read today, All Hallow’s Eve, have really stuck with me and made me really wonder about the state of our society.

First, I was reading through a local guide to Halloween events and was struck by the fact that each of those listed had the word “safe” in its title. But why do we need to know that the event is safe in the first place? Because, of course, there’s much about Halloween celebrations that is no longer safe.

Even before that, my 5yo and I were walking together down on the Pearl Street Mall, a major pedestrian and tourist center in town, and were startled by two men dressed in costume. Not any old costumes, but quite elaborate and grotesque nightmare outfits, one as a horrific Orc or similar, carrying two bloody and dismembered heads on chains, the other as, well, I don’t know, but it was phantasmagorical and quite frightening. G-, unsurprisingly, was fascinated by the pair and insisted we follow them for quite some time. Luckily a few minutes after we first saw them, one had to pull off his full-head mask and we got to see it was just a regular guy in a fancy outfit.

But even with that sneak view of the man underneath the outfit, G- was totally obsessed with them and kept asking me questions as the day went on, and doubly so at bedtime.

Perhaps it’s because we haven’t desensitized our kids through frequent exposure to modern media, but why should we have to? I hate feeling like a prude or old fogey or something, but I feel like we constantly have to worry about the culture around us.And I haven’t even mentioned the depressingly frequent use of obscenities in almost all settings…

Oh, and the third data point: Hundreds arrested during Halloween bash at a college party in Madison, Wisconsin. This follows a similar experience here in Boulder last year when locals set cars on fire, got into fights and even ended up in hospital.

What the heck is wrong with these people, one and all? What happened to having fun, to being silly but playful regarding Halloween and partying as a way to meet folk and maybe “get lucky”?

It’s days like this that make me quite sympathetic to folk who want to abolish Halloween entirely. And yet, I know that my kids love dress up and enjoy Halloween.

So how can we throw out the proverbial bathwater, but keep the baby?

Bah, humbug.

It’s coming up to Christmas / Hannukah and as a two-religion family, we celebrate both holidays, with different grandparents. We figure why not celebrate holidays as often as possible?

Anyway, holidays with presents mean that presents for our children start to show up on our doorstep weeks beforehand, sometimes in bright logo boxes, other times in dull brown cardboard, but huge.

Last night…

I was exhausted all yesterday, so last night I actually went to bed with the kids at 7.30pm (can’t remember the last time I did that!) and A- and G- were in their room, going to sleep, while the baby was in the big bedroom with me, lights off, slowing down to go to sleep.

A few minutes later, quiet as a wraith, G- comes into the room and whispers “Daddy, someone just knocked on the door.”

I answer ‘it’s okay, the door’s locked, go back to sleep.” (and he did! Amazing, such an easy bedtime last night)

This morning I wanted to have some closure and explain to them that it was just the UPS guy knocking on the door to let us know we’d received a package, but the package was a gift from Grandpa in a box that’s at least 2′ x 2′ x 3′ in size. I have no idea what it is, but it’s big!

So I lied to my kids. I told them that it was the UPS guy who knocked on the door last night after we went to bed, and that it was “just some boring book for Daddy”. They both talked about how weird it was to have someone knock on the door after dinner, but then the conversation wandered off the topic and was done.

Would you have lied to your kids in this situation? Or would you have said “it’s a present for you from Grandpa, but you can’t open it until Christmas, honey” even if you knew that they’d go bonkers wanting to see the box, shake it, pry a corner open to peek?

Due to the majority of people stating that their pediatricians have given incorrect recommendations, and the number of people who still do not understand the importance of keeping an infant rear facing as long as possible, I know now that my work is cut out for me more than ever. Contrary to what any one of you may believe, this is how it should work; if you want to give your child the greatest chance at living through an accident, you should keep this in mind:

An infant carrier is best from birth to 20 or 22 pounds (whichever the highest weight limit on the seat is, or until they outgrow the height maximum…all of this info is on a label on the side of your seat..READ IT.) Once the child outgrows this seat, they should ride in a convertible seat rear facing until they are ****AT LEAST**** ONE YEAR OLD (NO EXCEPTIONS). Then this is where you make the decision on whether or not you want to do the safest thing for your child or the convenient thing. A child is safest staying rear facing as long as possible, there are many seats out there that rear face to 30 and even 35 pounds now. We would all be safer if we could face backwards, this is true and proven. Yes, parents say it all the time “It’s a pain to keep them backward”, “My child doesn’t like it”, ” I can’t see my baby”. However, to me these are just excuses. At 30 or 35 pounds when that rear facing weight limit runs out or the height limit runs out, as long as they are over one year, then you should turn the convertible seat to face forward being very careful that you read where the harness straps should be positioned (in the very top slots for most convertible seats) and keep your child in this convertible seat until it’s forward facing limit is reached, usually 40 pounds.

Then you should purchase a high back booster seat and put your child in that using a lap/shoulder belt only and keep him in that until you exceed the weight limit or your child is able to sit properly in an adult seatbelt. This usually does not happen until around 80 pounds or 8 years of age. I know a 60 pound 9 year old who is still in a booster, so it varie from child to child. When your child can sit with his butt against the seat crack, not slouching, knees bent over the edge of the seat, feet on the floor with the lap belt low on the hips and the shoulder belt not across the neck, then he is ok to use a lap/shoulder belt. Do not use shield boosters (the kind where the shield comes over your child’s lap), children can be ejected from them in a rollover crash. The only time it is acceptable to use this seat is if you have lap belts only in all rear seating positions and your child is between 30 and 40 pounds (because the shield cannot be used beyond this weight limit, it must be removed after 40 pounds). When at all possible, have your rear seat retrofitted with shoulder belts.

You now know if you are reading this what is safest. What you do with your child is up to you, but remember that you’re the parent and if the child cries when he’s backward, oh well, he’ll get over it. I would rather have a crying child in my car than a limp body that I am doing CPR on because his neck snapped so severely in a frontal crash that his spinal cord is now severed. I am a paramedic, I have been there, and believe me you do not want to be there. You can ask any of the parents of the children who have died as a result of being misinformed by their pediatrician, or who were uneducated about the use of car seats, or who simply did not want to restrain their children (because their kid wouldn’t sit in a car seat).

There is no excuse that will bring their child back, and they know that and want you to know that. Look on the AAP (www.aap.org) website or the NHTSA (www.nhtsa.dot.gov) website. There is proof that one year old is the general age when most children’s spinal columns are developed enough to withstand a frontal crash. For the parents who say “every kid is different”: that may be true, but wouldn’t you want to err on the side of keeping them backwards too long vs. not long enough and risk endangering your child’s life? I have put children in body bags and watched families being torn apart before my very eyes. Please restrain your children properly in the BACK seat. Children under 12 should never ride in the front seat, unless there are no other options (all seats are taken). If a child must ride in the front and there is an airbag, please deactivate the airbag or make sure the seat is as far back as possible with your child restrained properly and do not allow them to lean forward toward the dash.

NEVER under any circumcstances put a rear-facing infant in front with an airbag, even for a short ride. Airbags can deploy in a parking lot fender bender if the sensors are hit. Don’t think it can’t happen to you. That’s what everyone thinks until they are faced with a tragic situation.

Please be sure every person in your vehicle is buckled on EVERY SINGLE RIDE. It does no good to your children if they are safely restrained, and you are ejected and killed because you were unrestrained.

Drive safe, kids in the BACK, and always set the example…buckle up!

Saw this on Daily Mail website, thought it was interesting for others to read here.

Charts used to check whether babies are the right weight are being revised amid concern that they lead to overfeeding.

Up to now the growth charts used by health visitors have been based on the weight gain of babies given formula milk - which is faster than those being breastfed.

But child health doctors fear that the 20-year-old guidance has been used to pressure some mothers into overfeeding because, according to the charts, their breastfed babies are ‘failing to thrive’.

Some mothers have been told to supplement breast milk with the bottle - or even to stop breastfeeding altogether, it is claimed.

There are fears that overfeeding in infancy brings health problems in later life.

Infants given high-protein bottled milk tend to be larger than those who are breastfeeding, but they may find it harder to shake off the weight in adulthood.

Revising the charts downwards could help slow the obesity epidemic by reflecting the slower weight gain of breastfeeding babies.

The new charts covering children up to the age of two have been drawn up by the World Health Organisation, after a study of 8,000 breastfed babies from six cities around the world, and will be tried out in pilot studies in England before being more widely adopted.

It is estimated the new charts, which are backed by the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health, would redefine a quarter of all babies as heavier than the norm.

There will be a lower range of ‘healthy’ weights for all babies, with slightly fewer deemed to be underweight at any age.

For example, under existing charts a healthy one-year-old weighs between 22.5lb and 28.5lb.

But the new chart says the ideal range is from 21lb and 26lb.

Peter Aggett, professor of child health at the University of Central Lancashire, said manufacturers are planning to reduce slightly the calorie content of formula milk to more closely reflect breast milk.

He said: “New mothers often say they feel heavy pressure from health visitors using the old charts to feed up babies they claim are failingto thrive.

“The new charts will be a more accurate guide to what should happen if the babies are being breastfed.

“Formula-fed children tend to gain weight fastest and those who are overweight may end up having health problems in later life such as obesity, high blood pressure, diabetes and heart disease.

“The new charts should prevent babies getting overweight because we’ll be able to warn mothers if their children are overfeeding.”

The Department of Health recommends exclusive breastfeeding up to six months but only 25 per cent of mothers in Britain breastfeed their babies at least some of the time for the first six months.

Many of these also give their babies some formula.

Public Health Minister Dawn Primarolo said: “We are committed to promoting breastfeeding and these new standards will help alleviate mothers’ concerns regarding the difference in growth patterns often observed between breastfed and formula-fed babies.

“Our next step is to consider the practical aspects of implementing them effectively.”

A spokesman for the Infant and Dietetic Foods Association said: “Our main concern is the supply of nutritionally safe infant formula for mothers who cannot or choose not to breast feed.”

He added: “We await the outcome of the pilot study on the implementation of the charts in the UK.”

Saw this article and thought it was useful for others to read:

I’m so unsurprised by the latest report over on the BBC News entitled Children need even more exercise, in which they suggest that modern children watch too much TV, play too many video games, and generally get far less exercise than they should.

Their bold suggestion, well, the bold suggestion of researchers in the prestigious journal Lancet, is that children should get at least 90 minutes of exercise each day.

So how about your kids? Are they getting the recommended amount of physical activity? Remember, if they’re running around, or if you’re even just walking to the store (or school, though this time of year you probably aren’t going to school too frequently) that’s exercise.

The reason this is so important? Because the rates of obesity in children have tripled in the last 20 years and even in the UK, which isn’t anywhere near as into junk food and videogames as the United States, one in ten six-year-olds is obese.

The researchers calculate that if the current trends continue that half of all children in England will be obese by 2020. Scary!

Interesting comments in the article itself:

“There were a number of schemes working to increase physical activity among young people, including issuing schoolchildren with pedometers - devices that measure how many steps someone takes.”

My 6yo son is very interested in getting a pedometer, as it happens, but so far we haven’t gotten him one. Maybe I should rethink that.

My favorite line: “The government also wants all school pupils to receive two hours of PE and sport a day by 2010.”

Compare that with the amount of physical activity your own child gets in public or private school each day. Weekly I hear about schools cutting physical education and related programs, not adding time to them. It’s one of the reasons that boys have such a hard time in school nowadays, in my opinion.

But that’s another story…

For now, just think about how much time your child spends doing physical activity on a daily basis. Is it even close to 90 minutes?

I saw this article and though it was useful reading:

Everybody knows that you should have your children vaccinated; it protects them from horrible diseases, keeps the diseases from being spread to others, and besides, immunizations are completely safe and harmless. Or, are they?

Consider this:

• Japan has done away with the MMR immunization, instead having children receive individual (”monovalent”) forms of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccines, because of known complications related to the MMR which include brain swelling and, some believe, autism.
• The DPT vaccine has the lowest rate of efficacy, and the highest rate of serious adverse reactions. The efficacy rate is only about 70%.After having been constantly reassured that these vaccines are safe for our babies and children, a new acellular version of the DPT (specifically the P [Pertussis] portion) was introduced because it is safer, and less problematic (causing fewer adverse reactions) than the older, whole cell version. But why replace it with a safer version if the old version was, as we were told, perfectly safe? [In reality children have *died* from the DPT!]
• Medical and goverment officials have steadfastly insisted that the immunizations administered in the United States are safe, and do not damage children. So why has the government established a Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)? Why have 1300 families been awarded $920,000,000 under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program? And Former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner David Kessler stated in 1993 that only about one percent of serious vaccine reactions are even reported! Of the adverse reactions reported to VAERS every year, fully 15% describe serious events, such as seizures, high fever life-threatening illnesses, or deaths!

One thing that many people don’t realize is that you can insist on the monovalent (one disease only) form of vaccines, where available! For example, measles, rubella, and mumps vaccines are available separately from Merck & Co. The measles-only vaccine is called Attenuvax, the rubella-only is Meruvax, and the mumps-only is Mumpsvax. With all the concern over the MMR, some parents are assessing which diseases they are most concerned about, and vaccinating for that disease only. For example, mumps, while no fun, is not generally a fatal or life-altering disease if contracted as a child, so some parents are choosing to hold off on the mumps vaccine until the child is older (but before the age when contracting mumps can be problematic), when the child’s immune and general system are better able to handle yet another vaccine.

Many parents are now also insisting on thimerosal-free, individual vaccines, due to the serious and legitimate concern about the thimerosal/mercury poisoning, and its possible link to autism and other problems. (Thimerosal is a preservative, used to preserve the vaccine in a large, multi-use vial of vaccine.)

If your pediatrician won’t allow you to make informed immunization decisions, or will not order monovalent vaccines for you, or thimerosal-free versions where available - well, your pediatrician can always be replaced - your child can’t.

---

More Information About Immunizations:

• Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)
• The Law Creating the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program
• National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program Vaccine Injury Table (a list of recognized acknowledged injuries from vaccines for which the government may compensate parents!)
• Vaccination Nation: Children On The Frontline
• The Law of Vaccination - Toward Radical Reform

More Information About The Thimerosal Issue:

• Joint Statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the United States Public Health Service re: Thimerosal
• Thimerosal in Vaccines: An Interrim Report to Clinicians [American Academy of Pediatrics]
• Limiting Infant Exposure to Thimerosal in Vaccines and Other Sources of Mercury by Neal A. Halsey, MD, Institute for Vaccine Safety, Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore, Md., as printed in the Journal of the American Medical Association
• Letter by Dr. William T. Redwood, and Mrs. Lyn Redwood, RN, MSN, CRNP to Dr. Neal A. Halsey, Division of Disease Control, regarding recommendation to remove Thimeresol from vaccines, and their own autistic child.

Is There a Connection Between the MMR and Autism?

• Joint House Panel Asks for Study of Possible Link Between MMR and Autism
• Testimony of Bernard Rimland, Ph.D., Before House Committee on Government Reform April 6, 2000
• Testimony of Vijendra K. Singh, Ph.D., Before House Committee on Government Reform April 6, 2000
• Testimony of Dr. Andrew J. Wakefield, Before House Committee on Government Reform April 6, 2000 (PDF)
• Autism and Mercury - A paper prepared by Sallie Bernard, Albert Enayati, B.S., Ch.E., M.S.M.E., Heidi Roger, Teresa Binstock, Lyn Redwood, R.N., M.S.N., C.R.N.P., Woody McGinnis, M.D.
• The Redwood’s Excellent “Austim and Mercury” website

NOTE: The author of this page is not a doctor, or a medical professional. This editorial contains her personal opinion only, and should not be construed as medical or legal advice.

British parents have been overfeeding their babies and fuelling childhood obesity for a generation because of inaccurate growth charts based on bottle-feeding, experts have warned.

Breast-feeding is thought to encourage a slower, healthier growth pattern than bottle-feeding, and the World Health Organisation revised its growth charts to reflect the former method 18 months ago.

However, British health visitors and GPs still use the old-style charts and the Government is only now going to try out the new system, provoking anger from some child health professionals.

Do you think mothers should be instructed to breast-feed their babies? Or is this a strictly personal decision that they should take on their own ? Should the WHO growth charts be introduced immediately or is the Government right to carry out its own trial?

What do you think are the pros and cons of the breast and the bottle? Is breast-feeding always best for mother and baby? If so, when should mothers abandon the breast and switch to the bottle full time?  Daily Telegraph