do people not like holding their babies?
Anne Rogers
Monday so the waiting room was full of babies. It didn't occur to me til I
came home that I was the only one actually holding my baby, everyone else
came in with them in a buggy, or a car seat, I'd driven, so when I'd
parked I took him out of the seat, so much easier than unbuckling it and
it's much easier to carry a baby than a huge plastic bucket. In the
waiting room no one picked up their babies til they cried, mine never
cried, he sat on my lap, played with me smiled at the nurses, took
interest in his surroundings and generally got admired by everyone for
being sociable. I didn't think I was an attachment parent, but now I'm
probably thinking compared to average I am, he's sociable cos people
socialise with him!
-----------
Anne Rogers
CountryJay
Well, I do the same, bring my baby in his stroller. As long as he is
content I leave him be. Sometimes a mom needs a break and when he is a new
place he gets stimulation and enjoyment from watching others. I do speak
with him and talk to him while we go places, but it's nice to have baby
confined...Plus the sroller I put him in is big and I put all our stuff
under the buggy.
At home I don't get a break at all.......He is on my hip or at my feet, so
it is nice to have him near me in ublic without being on top of me......and
then there is big brother. Plus it's a way of keeping people from touching
him. People seem to be more friendly with babies when mommy is holding
them. A doctors office is just hidden with germs.
Anne Rogers
no one seemed to be holding their baby by choice, if he had been asleep in
his car seat when we had got there, I probably would have lugged it in.
-----------
Anne Rogers
badgirl
"Anne Rogers" <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.44.030908...@green.csi.cam.ac.uk...
Before munchkinhead was mobile I loved to hold him no matter where we
were UNLESS I was standing, then it was DH's job or Nicolas was in a
stroller or bucket (I have bad back problems) But as long as I was
able to sit I wanted to hold him.
Now that he is 16 months, walking all over the place and weighs a ton
I prefer to let him be down ;)
Jen
Dawn Lawson
Anne Rogers wrote:
> oops, I didn't mean for anyone to feel got at, it just surprised me that
> no one seemed to be holding their baby by choice, if he had been asleep in
> his car seat when we had got there, I probably would have lugged it in.
Anne, I'm with you. I find it very odd as well, to leave an awake baby
"confined". I also note that babies left in seats and strollers aren't
picked up until they are crying, and sometimes (often enuf to notice)
not even then. Having a quick browse thru a catalogue early on, I
realised that MOST of what you buy for babies is stuff to avoid holding
them (carriage, stroller, carseat that snaps into stroller (don't even
have to touch baby from leaving home to getting back!), cribs, playpens,
baby monitors, bouncy chairs, jolly jumpers, playmats for tiny infants,
baby videos, etc, etc....) I HAVE used a few of these (bouncy chair and
baby monitor, mostly) but not as "intensely" as most parents. I'm also
shocked when people are surprised that I have always prefered to hold DS
than to leave him in a chair or stroller.
That realisation that I probably have a more AP view of raising my child
hit me about the same way it's come to you. Comments like "martyr
mother" and "it's nice to have a break" don't really make sense to me.
I don't feel that way, and I hear as many moms who GET a break daily
whinging about the things I whinge about to think it makes no difference.
(And my DS is one of the most social engaging little creatures around,
to the point that I sometimes struggle to get noticed in a store as he's
got them all chatted up and is flirting like mad.)
Dawn
Lucy
news:Pine.SOL.4.44.030908...@green.csi.cam.ac.uk...
> Monday so the waiting room was full of babies. It didn't occur to me til I
> came home that I was the only one actually holding my baby, everyone else
> came in with them in a buggy, or a car seat
I've tried both ways. I've carried DD to the doctor's and I've put her in a
stroller. For some reason, I seem to lack the dexterity of other people and
have a really hard time holding a baby and fumbling around in my bag for my
credit card, filling out paperwork, etc. The stroller just gives me two
hands free to do stuff.
At our ped's office, they never have you wait in the waiting room for more
than about two minutes, so it's not worth taking her out of the stroller. I
hold her while we wait in the exam room though.
Daye
<Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> I didn't think I was an attachment parent, but now I'm
>probably thinking compared to average I am, he's sociable cos people
>socialise with him!
My DH and I find hauling a stroller in and out of the car to be a huge
PITA, esp. for a short visit like to the doctor's or just popping into
the shops. We carried her. It was less hassle.
If we were doing a long shopping trip, we would use the stroller. Or
if we went for a nature walk, sometimes we would use the stroller...
sometimes not. I know that we used to take the stroller into people's
houses that we were going to be having a good, long visit with, but it
was so DD had a place to nap.
Carrying DD was just easier so we did. She liked it. I liked it...
However, DD had to be near me at all times or she would cry. So I
used the stroller in the house a lot. I would put her in the
stroller, and I could clean or use the bathroom. I would push her
into the room I was in. She could see me, and I would talk to her as
I did things. As soon as she could crawl, we stopped using it.
--
Daye
Momma to Jayan
"Boy" EDD 11 Jan 2004
See Jayan: http://jayan.topcities.com/
CountryJay
content I leave him be. Sometimes a mom needs a break and when he is a new
place he gets stimulation and enjoyment from watching others. I do speak
with him and talk to him while we go places, but it's nice to have baby
confined...Plus the sroller I put him in is big and I put all our stuff
under the buggy.
At home I don't get a break at all.......He is on my hip or at my feet, so
it is nice to have him near me in ublic without being on top of me......and
then there is big brother. Plus it's a way of keeping people from touching
him. People seem to be more friendly with babies when mommy is holding
them. A doctors office is just hidden with germs.
Jay
Michelle Podnar
happy unless I held her (ALL THE TIME), and at first I was a little
exasperated by it (never expected to sleep with my baby, BF until 14 months
(still going strong though) etc...) but instead of fighting with her, I just
gave her what she needed. Once I did that, parenthood got a lot more fun,
and a lot smoother.....
--
Michelle P
Ava Marie July 14, 2002
"Anne Rogers" <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.44.030908...@green.csi.cam.ac.uk...
Marie
That is how it is everywhere we go, it's rare to see someone holding a
baby instead of having it in a carrier or stroller. Usually the baby
stays in the carrier/stroller even if it is crying, the parent just
rocks the carrier or pushes the stroller back and forth, crams a
pacifier in baby's mouth or sticks a bottle in there. Many times we
have been shopping and see a baby crying in the carrier inside the
cart, the parents just ignore it and get on with their lives. Yes yes
I know about the babies who cry and holding them won't help. I still
wouldn't let it go on for so long without picking them up.
Marie
Nikki
> I took ds for jabs today, our surgery has a baby clinic for an hour
> on a Monday so the waiting room was full of babies. It didn't occur
> to me til I came home that I was the only one actually holding my
> baby, everyone else came in with them in a buggy, or a car seat,
Most likely the 'don't fuss with a content baby' factor, which has some
merit :-)
I didn't use a bucket with Hunter and only did with Luke when he was about
2.5mos I found it made life *a lot* easier but it hurt my back to carry the
bucket. Anyway.....I see a lot of strollers and buckets in my area as well
but my experience differs in that I hardly ever see a baby left to cry in
them. Once the baby cries then they are taken out and comforted or fed or
what have you.
--
Nikki
Mama to Hunter (4) and Luke (2)
Nevermind
time they are not holding their babies, and you assume they don't
*like* to hold their babies? This is one of those problems that you
need to remind yourself there's "not enough information" to figure
out.
I have a feeling that this is your first baby, and that he is not very
mobile -- true? The child's age and personality type have a lot to do
with how parents decide to transport them around. My 2nd child wanted
to be held at all times and only rarely crawled further than a few
feet away from me even after she could do so; it was for her that I
bought a sling, and I sure used it! Had to get used to peeing with the
thing on, for God's sake. Can't say I mind having a baby who is quite
happy to sit in a cart or stroller or her carseat sometimes now -- a
baby who is so fast and so adventurous that the world really is a
dangerous place for her, and mom's arms a prison (unless she's tired,
of course).
I love holding babies, my own in particular. I hold my baby quite a
bit, sometimes by my choice ("just for fun"), sometimes by her choice
(I'd really like to do something else with my arms, like finish the
dishes or cut an onion or brush out my older DD's hair with 2 hands
rather than 1, but she needs to be held), and sometimes for
convenience (I'm running into a small store for one thing and have
cash).
However, there are many times when you will not find me holding my
baby. For example, I never carry her to the kids' busstop because the
bus is often late and she probably weighs about 20 lbs now, so she
gets heavy!! If the bus is very late, I take her out of the stroller
and hold her for periods, but she comes and goes and spends a portion
of the waiting time in her stroller. She doesn't seem to mind at all,
or to be suffering socially, as she is down at the level of the kids
when she's in her stroller, so she gets all kinds of attention. I
always put her in something to take her into the doc's too, because
she is a curious, fast crawler, and the doc's office floor would be a
hazard, IMO. I *could* sign forms and fumble for money while holding
her (during which time she would be invariably grabbing at the pen and
at the money and at the papers and also craning around to see what's
going on behind me, and reaching out suddenly and dangerously for the
hair of the little kid standing next to me), but why should I? To
advertise my love for her to complete strangers? I agree that the
carseats are unweildy, but at least they provide you with a safe place
to put a baby down in the event you need to, say, use a public toilet.
You might consider this sad, but as a third child, my current baby is
often just "along for the ride." I am simply not always in a position
to hold her when we're out and about; in fact, I rarely am. However,
what matters is that *she* is perfectly happy -- often ecstatic! -- to
be out and about with us even though she is not held most of the time.
When I have a free moment, I tend to take her out for a cuddle or a
sit-down on my lap to play pat-a-cake or whatever, so she doesn't mind
being in the stroller the rest of the time. She has a great life, if I
may say so. . . :)
Anne Rogers <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<Pine.SOL.4.44.030908...@green.csi.cam.ac.uk>...
Anonymommmy
what everyone else was doing so it didn't occur to me to use the
snugli, and at that time DD used to sleep a lot so it was nice not to
have to take her out of the carseat and wake her up (the stroller was
a frame with wheels onto which you snap the carseat).
Now we use the snugli, and just as with your ds, people socialize a
lot with DD because she's closer to their eye level and she's facing
them, and for that reason she really prefers the snugli. People
comment on what a happy baby she is and I think that's due in part to
her being in the snugli rather than the stroller or grocery cart.
What DH and I think is strange is "very old" children, like maybe 5
years old or older, in strollers. It seems as if maybe people don't
want to have to deal with the 5-year-old's free will so they confine
the child in the stroller for the parent's convenience. Does this
seem weird to anyone else? What do people who have (or have had) a
preschooler/school age child think about this?
(Of course, I don't want to judge those parents because I have never
been in their shoes; our DD is not yet walking. I realize that even
though it's not our current plan, maybe when DD gets to be a
preschooler we'll end up using a stroller too. One thing I have
learned is that sometimes parenting involves making compromises I
never thought I'd make.)
Anonymommmy
DD, Sept. '02
Anne Rogers <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<Pine.SOL.4.44.030908...@green.csi.cam.ac.uk>...
Dawn Lawson
Nevermind wrote:
> You see these people for, what, 15 mins of their day, during which
> time they are not holding their babies, and you assume they don't
> *like* to hold their babies? This is one of those problems that you
> need to remind yourself there's "not enough information" to figure
> out.
>
I worked in a place where there were LOTS of babies and it was noticable
and shocking how MANY people would not take their babies out of the
carseat or stroller no matter what. To the point that we were known to
comment to those rare moms who DID take their babes out that it was nice
to see them respond to their infants.
20lbs isnt' that heavy, imo. I carry DS (19lb 11oz) in backpack or
sling for long long periods of time on walks, visits to events, etc. I
detest strollers from the point of view of the user AND the poor
unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
blockages.
Given the number of items available to make picking up one's child less
"necessary" and the frequency with whch I see MANY of them in one house,
I have to assume the average parent spends very little time holding
their infant. Many places (homes)I've been, the parent has shuttled the
baby from carseat to bouncer to swing to playmat to crib and back, only
holding them long enough to transfer them.
Although the question may be "loaded" it certainly seems a valid
question if you look about and notice how very very few people really DO
hold their infants/children for any appreciable length of time. and
really, those that reply that they use a stroller or seat say they do so
because they do NOT like holding their baby during a meal or to go for
walks, or whatever. (Not to say they don't like their baby)
Dawn
Anne Rogers
> time they are not holding their babies, and you assume they don't
> *like* to hold their babies? This is one of those problems that you
> need to remind yourself there's "not enough information" to figure
> out.
oh dear, I didn't mean to open a can of worms, or criticise these people,
of course I have no idea what these people are like the rest of the day,
it just struck me later that it was odd and I shared it, people did
eventually pick their babies up when they got unhappy, but it made me
think, did I prevent my son from being unhappy by letting him look around
and see the surroundings yet be safe in my arms, just a thought...
at home he does get put down, we have a bouncy chair and he goes in that
whilst I do chores etc. chatting to him whilst I do it, inventing games to
play whilst folding washing etc. I love taking him out places where I can
sit him on my knee and play/let him be sociable. But I do use a stroller,
when walking is required, I like to use a carrier/sling, but I have a bad
back and if I know I'm going to be buying anything the stroller makes an
excellent trolley.
KC
it better for me to roll the baby than carry her when I walk for
longer than around the house distances. I sometimes use a wheelchair
for me, and then I use a sling for my dd.
But, I do tend to pick her up out of the stroller once we are sitting
down.
I have held her so much, that it took me several days recently to
figure out that the thing she wanted when she kept crying was to be
laid down on her back to play with her feet and toys. Now, when she
cries after all her other needs are met, I set her down on her back
and she is happy.
KC
-------
Whittlestone Breast Expresser Distributor:
Special discount available for newsgroup participants.
Contact me at kcla...@yahoo.com for details.
Anne Rogers <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message news:<Pine.SOL.4.44.030908...@green.csi.cam.ac.uk>...
Sue
> What DH and I think is strange is "very old" children, like maybe 5
> years old or older, in strollers. It seems as if maybe people don't
> want to have to deal with the 5-year-old's free will so they confine
> the child in the stroller for the parent's convenience. Does this
> seem weird to anyone else? What do people who have (or have had) a
> preschooler/school age child think about this?
Uh, perhaps the child is tired of walking and they are in the stroller for a
break. Even though children are able to walk, they do get tired and very
quickly. Especially at the zoo or an amusement park. Having a place that
they can rest for a bit is probably what these older children are doing. We
usually use a wagon when we will be walking for long periods of time, but
for the most part I don't think it is weird to see a bigger child in a
stroller.
--
Sue
mom to three girls
Jacqui
> Although the question may be "loaded" it certainly seems a valid
> question if you look about and notice how very very few people
> really DO hold their infants/children for any appreciable length
> of time. and really, those that reply that they use a stroller or
> seat say they do so because they do NOT like holding their baby
> during a meal or to go for walks, or whatever. (Not to say they
> don't like their baby)
I don't like holding the baby during some meals. I am clumsy and the
prospect of dropping hot melted cheese on him, for instance, is
unpleasantly likely. Babies burn more easily than adults.
I'll happily hold him during a cold meal, or something I'm not likely
to spill, and for great chunks of the day otherwise (he's on my lap
right now) but I will not have him on my lap in a restaurant (ever had
a waiter drop a hot meal in your lap? I have) or during certain meals
at home. If he needs to be picked up, my meal can always be reheated,
but I'm not risking burning him just because putting him in the bouncy
chair might be seen as 'unattached'.
Jac
K.B.
stroller system. He is so heavy and I have to walk with my 3 yr old. It's
easier to get around like that. When we get to our destination, I give him a
toy and read for a few minutes. But I will pick him up when he doesn't want
to play by himself anymore. I have needs too. I would like to read every
once in a while. I never am without my children. They are always with me and
I'm always holding my baby. When I can grab 5 minutes for myself while he is
in his stroller I am happy too.
Kris
"Anne Rogers" <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.44.030908...@green.csi.cam.ac.uk...
Sue
> probably thinking compared to average I am, he's sociable cos people
> socialise with him!
What about all the other kids that are sociable too, but have spent time in
a carseat or stroller?
Bruce and Jeanne
> What DH and I think is strange is "very old" children, like maybe 5
> years old or older, in strollers. It seems as if maybe people don't
> want to have to deal with the 5-year-old's free will so they confine
> the child in the stroller for the parent's convenience. Does this
> seem weird to anyone else? What do people who have (or have had) a
> preschooler/school age child think about this?
>
Sure it may seem weird but I'd rather seem weird to a stranger than
carry my 45 lb (or more) child for an half hour or so and kill my back.
Jeanne
Anne Rogers
> > probably thinking compared to average I am, he's sociable cos people
> > socialise with him!
>
> What about all the other kids that are sociable too, but have spent time in
> a carseat or stroller?
there's a flaw in every theory
Nikki
> What DH and I think is strange is "very old" children, like maybe 5
> years old or older, in strollers. It seems as if maybe people don't
> want to have to deal with the 5-year-old's free will so they confine
> the child in the stroller for the parent's convenience. Does this
> seem weird to anyone else? What do people who have (or have had) a
> preschooler/school age child think about this?
IME children want to walk and be free of the stroller up through the age of
two. Then they suddenly get very tired and want to be carried everywhere
again ;-) Not easy so a stroller works nicely for the pokey or tired older
child, especially if the trip requires a lot of walking.
I don't know if I live in a weird place or if other people do but I just do
not see babies left to cry in car seats, I don't see kids in strollers when
they don't want to be, I've never had a negative comment when breastfeeding
in public. If a child is happy then I don't see a problem. Lots of babies
*prefer* sitting in a carseat or stroller versus being juggled around in
mothers arms.
My first was in my arms 24/7. Not even dad would do. I carried him
constantly at home and when we were out. He cried in the car seat during
the ride, he cried at home if I sat him down for 10 seconds. So when I had
number two I carried him (without a car seat) when we were out. He was such
a crab when we were out. I finally got a car seat because he fell asleep in
the car and I hated to wake him up each time we got out of the car and it
was hard to help Hunter and hold a floppy newborn that I couldn't set
anywhere. Low and behold, he was a much happier camper when he was left in
peice rather then be fussed with and get hot in my arms.
Sue
and the child can actually grow up to be a normal, healthy and very socal
person.
--
Sue
mom to three girls
Anne Rogers <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.44.030909...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk...
Nevermind
> Nevermind wrote:
> > You see these people for, what, 15 mins of their day, during which
> > time they are not holding their babies, and you assume they don't
> > *like* to hold their babies? This is one of those problems that you
> > need to remind yourself there's "not enough information" to figure
> > out.
>
> sling for long long periods of time on walks, visits to events, etc.
It isn't too heavy for a sling, which I also use, but it is heavy *for
me* when I am simply holding her. I don't find slings to be very
convenient for a lot of times. Now that my baby is older and is amused
by just being out, I only use it when a stroller would be a PITA or
when all I'm doing is walking, not for when I'm walking while needing
to do stuff, e.g., shopping.
> I
> detest strollers from the point of view of the user
Do you mean the parent or the child? If the former, why detest it for
them -- they wouldn't use it if they didn't want to. If the latter,
why? Some babies are not happy in strollers, but many clearly are. Do
you object to happy babies in strollers? Why?!
Let's not pretend that babies in slings are never cranky or that if
you're out doing stuff with your baby in a sling and she starts
crying, you are always able to make her happy immediately. I take ALL
my baby's cries seriously, but not all crying can be avoided. If I
made that my rule #1, the house and my older kids' lives would fall
apart. Remember that a baby crying is not like an adult crying. I only
cry when really really upet, whereas babies cry for the equivalent of
"I think I'll have a glass of water now." Not every cry is an
emergency, nor should it be treated like one. Please do not attempt to
twist this into me being hard-hearted about babies crying. I'm not. I
just try to keep it in perspective.
> AND the poor
> unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
> blockages.
Whatever. You sound like a CFer with that.
> Given the number of items available to make picking up one's child less
> "necessary" and the frequency with whch I see MANY of them in one house,
> I have to assume the average parent spends very little time holding
> their infant. Many places (homes)I've been, the parent has shuttled the
> baby from carseat to bouncer to swing to playmat to crib and back, only
> holding them long enough to transfer them.
Are these parents busy with something else when you're there? I tend
to assume militant APers are "persons of leisure" who can stand or sit
around holding babies all day long. I am most definitely not. I cook
our meals; I help 2 older kids with homework and guitar practice and
stuff in general; I attend soccer practices and other events not
baby-focused; I do this-and-that to keep the house running; and I
<gasp!> work, albeit at home. I do have a babysitter 6 hours a week
and do the rest of the bulk of my work at night when the kiddies are
abed, but I occasionally need to answer e-mail or look something up or
whatever while the baby is awake.
> Although the question may be "loaded" it certainly seems a valid
> question if you look about and notice how very very few people really DO
> hold their infants/children for any appreciable length of time.
Oh, please -- how could you possibly know that this is true?
> and
> really, those that reply that they use a stroller or seat say they do so
> because they do NOT like holding their baby during a meal or to go for
> walks, or whatever. (Not to say they don't like their baby)
Who on earth would hold a baby during a meal if she didn't have to
(that is, if the baby was happy in a chair)? My DH and I often have
to hold our baby during dinner, but it makes eating very hard. She's
constantly grabbing at the plates and the forks. If we feed her in our
arms, we get very dirty, making yet more laundry in a busy household.
The ultimate question is, if a baby is happy in a stroller, why
shouldn't she be there?
Irrational Number
>
> [...] Many places (homes)I've been, the parent has shuttled the
> baby from carseat to bouncer to swing to playmat to crib and back, only
> holding them long enough to transfer them.
We have all those things and more! And, they're
used a LOT when I have company. I put Pillbug in
his bouncy seat or swing so that I can pour drinks
for my guests or set out dinner.
> Although the question may be "loaded" it certainly seems a valid
> question if you look about and notice how very very few people really DO
> hold their infants/children for any appreciable length of time. and
> really, those that reply that they use a stroller or seat say they do so
> because they do NOT like holding their baby during a meal or to go for
> walks, or whatever. (Not to say they don't like their baby)
I don't hold my baby during my meals! Gosh,
my baby is my whole life, but I still want
to be able to cut my meat and drink and talk
to my husband. Pillbug is in his bouncer at
my feet and is included in the conversation,
but he's not in my arms! That doesn't mean
I don't like to hold him.
-- Anita --
Mommy to Pillbug, almost 3 months
--
SUCCESS FOUR FLIGHTS THURSDAY MORNING ALL AGAINST
TWENTY ONE MILE WIND STARTED FROM LEVEL WITH ENGINE
POWER ALONE AVERAGE SPEED THROUGH AIR THIRTY ONE
MILES LONGEST 57 SECONDS INFORM PRESS HOME CHRISTMAS.
teapot
> I took ds for jabs today, our surgery has a baby clinic for an hour on a
> Monday so the waiting room was full of babies. It didn't occur to me til I
> came home that I was the only one actually holding my baby, everyone else
> came in with them in a buggy, or a car seat, I'd driven, so when I'd
> parked I took him out of the seat, so much easier than unbuckling it and
> it's much easier to carry a baby than a huge plastic bucket. In the
> waiting room no one picked up their babies til they cried, mine never
> cried, he sat on my lap, played with me smiled at the nurses, took
> interest in his surroundings and generally got admired by everyone for
> probably thinking compared to average I am, he's sociable cos people
> socialise with him!
>
so I leave him in there if he is happy. most of the time ( including
right this minute) he wont be put down so any chance of a break i get
i grab it.
its taken us some time to realise that he actually likes to be left
alone sometimes though, and will yell until that happens. i wish hed
make his mind up :-)
teapot and 3 month moo
Nevermind
> figure out that the thing she wanted when she kept crying was to be
> laid down on her back to play with her feet and toys. Now, when she
> cries after all her other needs are met, I set her down on her back
> and she is happy.
"She is happy." Isn't that what's it's all about? I can't say how
strongly I disagree with this doctrinaire AP stuff. The point was
supposed to be a happy baby -- no, scratch that: a happy *family*. It
wasn't supposed to be about "baby-wearing" per se.
Nevermind
> I always said that DD was a velcro baby. When she was born, she was not
> happy unless I held her (ALL THE TIME), and at first I was a little
> exasperated by it (never expected to sleep with my baby, BF until 14 months
> (still going strong though) etc...) but instead of fighting with her, I just
> gave her what she needed. Once I did that, parenthood got a lot more fun,
> and a lot smoother.....
I had one like that too, and I also adjusted -- the whole family
learned to adjust to it, and it was a drastic change of life for us.
However, not all babies are like that. My current one is not, and
that's OK by me!! :)
Dawn Lawson
Nevermind wrote:
> Dawn Lawson <dlaw...@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:<3F5D59BD...@shaw.ca>...
>>I
>>detest strollers from the point of view of the user
>
>
> Do you mean the parent or the child? If the former, why detest it for
> them -- they wouldn't use it if they didn't want to.
I as a user detest strollers, and also detest them used rudely by
others, which seems to be almost the norm. Interesting comments made by
a group of mums I know that they used to think it rude to shove a
stroller around blocking the way for others,etc, but now they just think
that's fine. I say if it was rude before, it's rude now.
>
> Let's not pretend that babies in slings are never cranky or that if
> you're out doing stuff with your baby in a sling and she starts
> crying, you are always able to make her happy immediately.
Actually, he rarely cries if we're out and he's in the sling, and is
easily soothed.
I take ALL
> my baby's cries seriously, but not all crying can be avoided.
I'm not saying that. Mind you, I do have a very happy little soul here.
To what that can be attributed, I'm not saying.
Remember that a baby crying is not like an adult crying. I only
> cry when really really upet, whereas babies cry for the equivalent of
> "I think I'll have a glass of water now."
Which they cannot do anything about themselves.
>
>
>>AND the poor
>>unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
>>blockages.
>
>
> Whatever. You sound like a CFer with that.
Stop one day and notice how obstructive and massive they are.
Seriously. CF or not, blocking pathways for others is rude.
> Are these parents busy with something else when you're there?
Nope.
I tend
> to assume militant APers are "persons of leisure" who can stand or sit
> around holding babies all day long. I am most definitely not.
Silly.
I have two gardens, am a single mum, keep a tidy house, cook meals, do
the shopping, maintain my yard, have begun school, and rarely spend a
day in the house. We go to heavy horse pulls, the zoo, botanical
gardens, the lake, you name it.
>
>>Although the question may be "loaded" it certainly seems a valid
>>question if you look about and notice how very very few people really DO
>>hold their infants/children for any appreciable length of time.
>
>
> Oh, please -- how could you possibly know that this is true?
obsevation?! People's reaction to ME wanting to hold DS. etc
>
>
>>and
>>really, those that reply that they use a stroller or seat say they do so
>>because they do NOT like holding their baby during a meal or to go for
>>walks, or whatever. (Not to say they don't like their baby)
>
>
> Who on earth would hold a baby during a meal if she didn't have to
> (that is, if the baby was happy in a chair)?
Why do we live in a society that needs to ASK what to do with a baby
that ISN'T in a chair when out??
Michelle Podnar
that 2 children, but I am not sure I have enough attention to give to DD and
to a new baby, not to mention more.... Don't get me wrong, DD is a
wonderful child, and I love the person she is becoming, but she is a handful
(attention wise, and she is a daredevil!!).
--
Michelle P
Ava Marie July 14, 2002
"Nevermind" <ohgos...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8718f4ed.03090...@posting.google.com...
JennP
"Sue" <sburk...@wideopenwest.com> wrote in message
news:rdydnfs67ZB...@wideopenwest.com...
> Then that just goes to show you that there are many ways to parent a child
> and the child can actually grow up to be a normal, healthy and very socal
> person.
> --
> Sue
> mom to three girls
Soooo in agreement here, Sue.
--
JennP.
mom to Matthew 10/11/00
remove "no........spam" to reply
DGoree
> AND the poor
> unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
> blockages.
to which ohgos...@yahoo.com (Nevermind) wrote,
<<Whatever. You sound like a CFer with that. >>
I agree 100% with Dawn about the obstructiveness of strollers. There have been
times when I could hardly get into our pediatrician's waiting room because
several parents were already parked inside with their enormous mobile-home
strollers. I have never understood why people either couldn't carry their
child the relatively short distance between parking garage and office building,
or at least keep an umbrella stroller in the car to use for the doctor's
office.
You know, just because we obviously disagree with the CF'ers on some
fundamental questions doesn't mean they don't make a valid point now and then.
As far as the rest of the debate about holding/not holding children, all I can
say is that I *personally know* people who seem determined to avoid holding
their children whenever possible, and strollers, swings, bouncy seats, etc. are
all a part of their strategy. Doesn't make those things evil nor does it make
people who use them in moderation uncaring parents. Maybe nobody on this
newsgroup is guilty of such behavior (very likely) but it does exist. I have
seen babies crying endlessly in their bucket seats or strollers while their
parents ignored them. Once I saw what appeared to be a two-month-old drinking
what appeared to be a bottle of kool-aid, propped of course, while strapped
into a bucket seat. A young cousin of mine once left her baby in the swing for
*four hours* while she read a book.
If you really want to see bad parenting in action, just go to Wal-Mart on a
school night at around 10:30 PM.
Mary Ellen
William (8)
Matthew (6)
Margaret (2)
Nina
> I took ds for jabs today, our surgery has a baby clinic for an hour on a
> Monday so the waiting room was full of babies. It didn't occur to me til I
> came home that I was the only one actually holding my baby, everyone else
> came in with them in a buggy, or a car seat, I'd driven, so when I'd
> parked I took him out of the seat, so much easier than unbuckling it and
> it's much easier to carry a baby than a huge plastic bucket. In the
> waiting room no one picked up their babies til they cried, mine never
> cried, he sat on my lap, played with me smiled at the nurses, took
> interest in his surroundings and generally got admired by everyone for
> being sociable. I didn't think I was an attachment parent, but now I'm
> probably thinking compared to average I am, he's sociable cos people
> socialise with him!
>
> Anne Rogers
>
>
On a related note, just the other day the NYT had an editorial on the
increasing use of strollers for toddlers (seems like this would apply to
other carries, too)
I've pasted int he full text becuase I'm not sure how long the link wil
be good for.
-Nina
http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/06/opinion/06CRAI.html?ex=1064137149&ei=1&en=7c40f44c7d2ad06f
No Free Ride for Toddlers
September 6, 2003
By WILLIAM CRAIN
In "Dr. Spock's Baby and Child Care," Drs. Benjamin Spock
and Steven J. Parker wrote that "when a baby has learned to
walk, it's time to let him out of his carriage or
stroller." Numerous child-development experts, from Dr.
Maria Montessori to Dr. T. Berry Brazelton, agree that the
toddler age - 1 to 3 years - is a time when parents should
encourage their children's urge to move around on their own
and explore.
Today's parents, however, seem bent on keeping their
children strapped in strollers long after they have taken
their first steps. Every day I see stroller after stroller
with children as old as 4 being pushed along, even in
parks. Part shopping cart, part storage bin, these
strollers are quite a sight: some models can be converted
into car seats or pushed while a parent jogs, and many
feature cushy seats, one-hand folding mechanisms, cup
holders and snack trays.
Stroller sales in the United States have been rising over
the last few years, despite the troubled economy and
generally flat birth rates. Why? Unfortunately there is
almost no formal research on the phenomenon, so I recently
conducted a small exploratory study of my own, asking
pediatricians to administer a brief questionnaire to 114
parents in the Upper West Side of Manhattan, suburban
Westchester, the Bronx, Washington, suburban Los Angeles
and St. Louis.
Overall, 95 percent of the parents reported using strollers
for babies under age 1; 94 percent said they used strollers
for 1- or 2-year-olds; 75 percent said they used them for
3-year-olds; and 39 percent said they used strollers for
4-year-olds.
Convenience and safety were the common explanations. One
parent of a 3-year-old said: "I use the stroller when I'm
running errands. I don't have time for him to walk around."
Several parents of 3- and 4-year-olds said they used the
strollers to cover long distances. Some parents with more
than one child said it was easier to use a double stroller
than to supervise one child walking while wheeling the
other.
As a father (and grandfather), I understand the appeal of
strollers as a safety precaution, particularly in big
cities. But keeping children in strollers too long can
suppress their growing sense of freedom and curiosity,
fostering a dispirited sense of compliance that may plague
them for years. (Moreover, strollers themselves can be
dangerous; emergency rooms in the United States report
nearly 13,000 stroller-related injuries a year.)
Toddlerhood is a time when the urges toward independent
movement and exploration emerge with tremendous force.
Toddlers want to be constantly on the move, seeing what
they can find. They want to march along the sidewalk or
across the grass. If they spot something interesting, like
a leaf, insect or puddle of water, they want to stop and
examine it and venture off again. During their excursions,
toddlers often stumble and fall, but they bounce back up
and keep moving. There's too much to investigate to worry
about minor pains. The toddler is a courageous explorer.
As their agility increases at ages 3 and 4, children love
to run, jump, hop and dance. Going down the sidewalk is a
great adventure, and they sometimes sing as they go. Free
movement outdoors stimulates their growing imaginations.
Parents should try to encourage these important moments in
their child's development as much as possible - and they
can, by maintaining an unobtrusive presence. When, for
example, a toddler marches along the sidewalk or the grass,
parents can follow the child's pace, stopping with the
child to examine things. The parent can stay close enough
to intervene if some danger should arise but remain
sufficiently in the background to allow the child to
explore the world on her own.
Sometimes, of course, parents must take active control, as
when they must cope with two children at once or take a
child's hand to cross a street. But on many occasions it's
sufficient to maintain a quiet, watchful presence, giving
the child a chance to move about and make discoveries. This
approach, of course, requires patience - but the rewards
will be well worth the effort.
William Crain, a professor of psychology at City College,
is author of "Reclaiming Childhood: Letting Children Be
Children in Our Achievement-Oriented Society."
Anne Rogers
> times when I could hardly get into our pediatrician's waiting room because
> several parents were already parked inside with their enormous mobile-home
> strollers. I have never understood why people either couldn't carry their
> child the relatively short distance between parking garage and office building,
> or at least keep an umbrella stroller in the car to use for the doctor's
> office.
I totally agree, it was partly why I started the thread, I felt totally
crowded in the waiting room with all the various bits of equipment. Had I
walked to the surgery that day, I would have used a stroller, it's 2 miles
and I've got a dodgy back, I would have folded it and left it in the
corner of reception, which is a much bigger room.
I think not carrying a child is a psycological thing in some ways, our son
was very small, initially his car seat drowned him so we only could use it
for short essential trips in the car, it was also the only way for our
buggy at that age, he was too small for our carrier (we didn't have a
sling then), we wanted to take him out to introduce him to some friends
who lived just round the corner, we really weren't sure whether we should
just carry him in our arms, in the end we did, but we did get some funny
looks.
Anne Rogers
> be good for.
I don't think things are quite so bad here, I got a similar impression
from reading a book set in New York recently (it was about a nanny of a 4
year old, the stroller went everywhere). I can definitely see that a
stroller would be useful sometimes for a slightly older child, perhaps on
a long day out or something, in fact on a recent group trip there were 5
children, my son whom was in his stroller whilst he slept when we got
there, then in a sling, facing out til he needed to sleep, then in, then
nursing whilst we carried on walking round, there were 2 other families,
one with a 2 year old and a newborn, the other with 3 and half year old
twins, the transport was one tandem buggy and 2 cheap very basic
strollers, there was rarely more than 1 child in these 4 seats, the
newborn was mainly carried, the 2 year old thought the best thing was to
push one of the strollers, the twins were quite tired and each spent some
time in the other stroller, the front of the tandem buggy, or on their
dad's shoulders, the back of the tandem buggy served as a very useful
dumping ground for all our picnic paraphenalia. The strollers were useful,
but not confining, each child did plenty of exploring as we wandered
around.
badgirl
"Anne Rogers" <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.44.030909...@orange.csi.cam.ac.uk...
When we went to Sea World over the summer we took the stroller into
the park with us both days we had tickets for. Bub spent maybe 1/4 of
his time in it. The rest of the time he was being carried by me or DH,
mostly DH because I can't carry his heavy butt for too long because of
my back.
Anyway, we felt he had a better vantage point in one of our arms, hard
for shorty pants to see much if he has to look through a bunch of
grown ups behinds lol ;) He was far more interested in looking at the
exhibits than playing with whatever we brought along for him to play
with while in the stroller. It did serve a great purpose when we went
into the park on the 4th to watch the fireworks....I sat in it with
Nicolas in my lap ;)
Jen
Daye
wrote:
>20lbs isnt' that heavy, imo. I carry DS (19lb 11oz) in backpack or
>sling for long long periods of time on walks, visits to events, etc. I
>detest strollers from the point of view of the user AND the poor
>unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
>blockages.
By this stage, DD was walking everywhere. She just held my hand, and
if she got tired, I would hold her. However, she preferred to walked.
--
Daye
Momma to Jayan
"Boy" EDD 11 Jan 2004
See Jayan: http://jayan.topcities.com/
Daye
>If you really want to see bad parenting in action, just go to Wal-Mart on a
>school night at around 10:30 PM.
Is it because the bad parents are out at 10:30 at night? Or is it
because the child is out at 10:30 at night, the parents must be bad?
This actually happened, and I didn't appreciate the judgemental woman.
DD was about 6 months old or so. I decided that I wanted some fake
nails. So I bought some and put them on. My nails hurt me a bit, but
I thought it was the fake nails pulling on my real ones.
DH, DD and I went to bed at a decent hour. At about 2am, I woke up
with my right index finger in massive amount of pain, and it was hot
to the touch. I realized that I must be allergic to the adhensive. I
*had* to get those nails off my hands.
We had no nail polish remover with acetone in it in the house. I
tried to remove the nail without it. During that, DD woke up. I
realized that I was going to have to go out and get some remover. DD
wanted to go with me. I told DH that DD and I were going to a 24 hour
grocery store and why.
We went, and I got the remover. DD was on my hip the whole time, and
she loved being out. She was also well behaved. When I went to the
checkout counter, the check out chick said to my DD (NOT to me),
"Well, shouldn't you be in bed?" Then she looked at me like I was the
worst mother in the world. I said very curtly, "She just woke up, and
she will be going back to bed once we get home."
Got home. Took off the nails. Fed and changed DD. We both went back
to sleep. It still pissed me off because the check out chick made an
assumption because my DD was awake and out at 2am.
Daye
wrote:
>What DH and I think is strange is "very old" children, like maybe 5
>years old or older, in strollers.
I don't get that either. DD is over 2 and she can walk. She is
usually well behaved, but she has her moments. We generally don't use
a stroller anymore. I feel sorry for those older children in
strollers.
Daye
<bridge...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Anonymommmy wrote:
>
>> What DH and I think is strange is "very old" children, like maybe 5
>> years old or older, in strollers.
>
>Sure it may seem weird but I'd rather seem weird to a stranger than
>carry my 45 lb (or more) child for an half hour or so and kill my back.
But your 5 year old can walk. Why not just make your child walk?
DGoree
<<Is it because the bad parents are out at 10:30 at night? Or is it
because the child is out at 10:30 at night, the parents must be bad?
>>
School age children have no business being out at 10:30 PM on a school night,
and parents ought not to be swearing at their children. I've seen both. And
lots of those school agers were out with *both* parents. Why couldn't one have
stayed home with children in bed?
Daye
>School age children have no business being out at 10:30 PM on a school night,
>and parents ought not to be swearing at their children. I've seen both. And
>lots of those school agers were out with *both* parents. Why couldn't one have
>stayed home with children in bed?
Okay, you didn't specifiy that these were school age children. I
agree. School age kids should be in bed, and parents shouldn't be
swearing at kids.
However, I do know some parents of non-school age kids that keep a
different schedule. Being out at 10:30pm would be no big deal because
parent and child would have had 8+ hours of sleep at other times.
JennP
"Daye" <da...@australia.edu> wrote in message
news:6ejslvs0hshnc7att...@4ax.com...
>
> We went, and I got the remover. DD was on my hip the whole time, and
> she loved being out. She was also well behaved. When I went to the
> checkout counter, the check out chick said to my DD (NOT to me),
> "Well, shouldn't you be in bed?" Then she looked at me like I was the
> worst mother in the world. I said very curtly, "She just woke up, and
> she will be going back to bed once we get home."
This is a good example of how we all need to remember that we don't know the
whole story. I'm sorry you had that allergic reaction, but thank you for
sharing. I think we could all use the reminder.
Sue
> usually well behaved, but she has her moments. We generally don't use
> a stroller anymore. I feel sorry for those older children in
> strollers.
Why would you feel sorry for an older child that got tired and needed a
break? Do you think that since they can walk, they will never get tired? I
feel sorry for your children then if you expect them to walk on an all day
outing without some place for them to have a break.
Chotii
> On 09 Sep 2003 22:38:56 GMT, dgo...@aol.com (DGoree) wrote:
>
> >School age children have no business being out at 10:30 PM on a school
night,
> >and parents ought not to be swearing at their children. I've seen both.
And
> >lots of those school agers were out with *both* parents. Why couldn't
one have
> >stayed home with children in bed?
>
> Okay, you didn't specifiy that these were school age children. I
> agree. School age kids should be in bed, and parents shouldn't be
> swearing at kids.
>
> However, I do know some parents of non-school age kids that keep a
> different schedule. Being out at 10:30pm would be no big deal because
> parent and child would have had 8+ hours of sleep at other times.
Heck yeah. We keep a different schedule. Much of the time, our kids go to
sleep as late as midnight (gasp!)....but then they wake up at 10am, which
suits me *just* fine. If we had to get up at 6am, of course the kids would
go to bed earlier. But we don't. The kids are natural night owls, and
there's no reason for us to fight them every single night "just because
that's when kids should be in bed".
--angela
Phoebe & Allyson
> It still pissed me off because the check out chick made an
> assumption because my DD was awake and out at 2am.
That story reminded me of my 4am trip to the Walmart for
Benadryl when I woke up covered in hives. If Caterpillar
had woken up as I was going out, I'd have likely taken her, too.
Phoebe :)
Nevermind
> > Let's not pretend that babies in slings are never cranky or that if
> > you're out doing stuff with your baby in a sling and she starts
> > crying, you are always able to make her happy immediately.
>
> Actually, he rarely cries if we're out and he's in the sling, and is
> easily soothed.
My DD also very rarely cries when we're out, regardless of whether
she's in a sling or the stroller. She loves being out and about, as is
true of most older babies. Some are happier in slings; others are just
as happy in strollers.
>
> I take ALL
> > my baby's cries seriously, but not all crying can be avoided.
>
> I'm not saying that. Mind you, I do have a very happy little soul here.
> To what that can be attributed, I'm not saying.
Well, a number of posters on this thread have clearly attempted to
make a connection between their babies not being put into strollers
and their babies being happy. However, my baby is quite happy too, and
she is quite often in a stroller.
> Remember that a baby crying is not like an adult crying. I only
> > cry when really really upet, whereas babies cry for the equivalent of
> > "I think I'll have a glass of water now."
>
> Which they cannot do anything about themselves.
...needless to say. What I'm getting at with the above statement,
though, is that these "I saw a baby CRYING today -- yes CRYING. And
she was in a STROLLER" type statements are sort of silly if we keep in
mind that a baby crying is really not such a strange thing, since
about the only way they can express most desires is to cry. That a
baby cries does not mean she is being neglected. it means she wants
something and her caregiver hasn't gotten it for her -- yet.
> >>AND the poor
> >>unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
> >>blockages.
> >
> > Whatever. You sound like a CFer with that.
>
> Stop one day and notice how obstructive and massive they are.
As are cars, to a bike messenger. As are groups of people on city
street corners, to a jogger. Lots of stuff gets in our way. We only
complain about those we consider illegitimate. I don't consider
strollers illegitmate. I consider them an acceptable way for people to
transport their children around, and as children have as much right to
be in the world as the rest of the people, then strollers and the
occasional reasonable, unavoidable, and brief blockages they cause
simply are part of the landscape that people in general need to deal
with.
> I tend
> > to assume militant APers are "persons of leisure" who can stand or sit
> > around holding babies all day long. I am most definitely not.
>
>
> Silly.
> I have two gardens, am a single mum, keep a tidy house, cook meals, do
> the shopping, maintain my yard, have begun school, and rarely spend a
> day in the house. We go to heavy horse pulls, the zoo, botanical
> gardens, the lake, you name it.
All the stuff in the last sentence are fun things to do that you can
do while holding a baby. Those are, in fact, leisure activities. How
do you cook meals while holding a baby? How do you garden while
holding a baby? How do you go to school and do research while holding
a baby?
> >>Although the question may be "loaded" it certainly seems a valid
> >>question if you look about and notice how very very few people really DO
> >>hold their infants/children for any appreciable length of time.
> >
> >
> > Oh, please -- how could you possibly know that this is true?
>
> obsevation?!
But you aren't around a sizable enough number of them for long enough
to know and to able to then make pronouncements about society as a
whole. Like the OP -- she based her complaint on, what, 15 minutes in
a doc's office and extrapolated from there.
> People's reaction to ME wanting to hold DS. etc
What, they complain about you holding him? Why would they care?
Busybodies of the world, unite!
> >>and
> >>really, those that reply that they use a stroller or seat say they do so
> >>because they do NOT like holding their baby during a meal or to go for
> >>walks, or whatever. (Not to say they don't like their baby)
> >
> >
> > Who on earth would hold a baby during a meal if she didn't have to
> > (that is, if the baby was happy in a chair)?
>
> Why do we live in a society that needs to ASK what to do with a baby
> that ISN'T in a chair when out??
Huh? If I understand this question correctly (which it isn't easy to
do), then you have *willfully* misread my statement, which gives good
clues as to why you get so upset about seeing babies in strollers and
such. I wasn't asking, in general, who on earth would hold a baby if
the baby didn't appear to need to be held. I was asking who would do
so *while trying to eat her meal*! That is not an easy thing to do
with an active, curious, healthy baby of a certain age, so insisting
on doing it is forced.
Nevermind
> was very small, initially his car seat drowned him so we only could use it
> for short essential trips in the car, it was also the only way for our
> buggy at that age, he was too small for our carrier (we didn't have a
> sling then), we wanted to take him out to introduce him to some friends
> who lived just round the corner, we really weren't sure whether we should
> just carry him in our arms, in the end we did, but we did get some funny
> looks.
Are you sure you're not being a bit paranoid with this? Who would look
funny at a person holding a very small baby? My middle child needed to
be held all the time, and I'm sure I never got any "looks" while doing
so. Maybe I live in some kind of alternate universe, or maybe this is
proof that people see what they expect to see, but I don't agree that
babies are never held out in public. And I *rarely* see babies crying
without their parents either (1) quickly picking them up or otherwise
making them happy or (2) making every reasonable attempt to finish
what they must do so they can pick them up.
In general, I guess I just find that in my little corner of the world,
most parents appear to adore and dote upon their babies. This is NOT
to say, though, that these babies never cry or never have to go
without direct parental attention for certain periods of time.
Nevermind
> That actually weighs heavily on when we have a second. I always wanted more
> that 2 children, but I am not sure I have enough attention to give to DD and
> to a new baby, not to mention more.... Don't get me wrong, DD is a
> wonderful child, and I love the person she is becoming, but she is a handful
> (attention wise, and she is a daredevil!!).
Well, my own "velcro baby" came out of her shell at about 3, and by 4,
people were acting surprised when I mentioned that she was shy. I do
suspect that giving her all the closeness she needed early on, as hard
as it sometimes was for me, helped her feel safe enough to separate as
she got older. If you can give it a couple of years, you may find that
you have a pretty "average" kid (need-for-closeness-wise) and so
you'll be ready to start over again. And, of course, what are the
chances of having 2 such babies in a row?
Kathy Cole
> I don't get that either. DD is over 2 and she can walk. She is
> usually well behaved, but she has her moments. We generally don't use
> a stroller anymore. I feel sorry for those older children in
> strollers.
Consider the possibility that the child can't walk. Kyle can't, at
three, and may not be able to do so by the time he's five. Since it's
smaller than his wheelchair, we use his stroller for excursions, so it's
not obvious to observers that he's got a disability.
In addition, on a lengthier walking excursion, keeping some means for
resting with you is good planning.
Basically, beware the knee jerking assumptions.
Dawn Lawson
Nevermind wrote:
> Anne Rogers <Anne....@nospam.cl.cam.ac.uk> wrote
>
>>I think not carrying a child is a psycological thing in some ways, our son
>>was very small, initially his car seat drowned him so we only could use it
>>for short essential trips in the car, it was also the only way for our
>>buggy at that age, he was too small for our carrier (we didn't have a
>>sling then), we wanted to take him out to introduce him to some friends
>>who lived just round the corner, we really weren't sure whether we should
>>just carry him in our arms, in the end we did, but we did get some funny
>>looks.
>
>
> Are you sure you're not being a bit paranoid with this? Who would look
> funny at a person holding a very small baby?
You'd think no one, but you'd be very very surprised.
THAT's what I am getting at. It does't take a lot of observation hours
to note that carrying a babe in arms really is a surprising thing to a
whole lot of people, including those with children of their own.
Dawn
Dawn Lawson
Why not feel sorry for those who's lives are so overbooked that they
cannot manage to find a place to sit WITH their children while they have
a break??
It goes both ways, it seems.
(oh, and from another message: my garden is for sustenance, not leisure,
jfyi, and yes, I garden with DS on my back when necessary (sling))
Nikki
> Well, my own "velcro baby" came out of her shell at about 3, and by 4,
> people were acting surprised when I mentioned that she was shy. I do
> suspect that giving her all the closeness she needed early on, as hard
> as it sometimes was for me, helped her feel safe enough to separate as
> she got older. If you can give it a couple of years, you may find that
> you have a pretty "average" kid (need-for-closeness-wise)
This was certainly my experience with Hunter. He continues to be 'shy' in
large groups but get him in a small group or alone and he is a motor mouth.
He isn'at afraid to address strangers or stick up for himself either. This
happened in a span of about 6 months is all. Quite amazing :-)
--
Nikki
Mama to Hunter (4) and Luke (2)
Nikki
> Sue wrote:
>> Daye <da...@australia.edu> wrote in message
>>
>>> I don't get that either. DD is over 2 and she can walk. She is
>>> usually well behaved, but she has her moments. We generally don't
>>> use a stroller anymore. I feel sorry for those older children in
>>> strollers.
>>
>>
>> Why would you feel sorry for an older child that got tired and
>> needed a break? Do you think that since they can walk, they will
>> never get tired? I feel sorry for your children then if you expect
>> them to walk on an all day outing without some place for them to
>> have a break.
>>
>
> Why not feel sorry for those who's lives are so overbooked that they
> cannot manage to find a place to sit WITH their children while they
> have a break??
This just seems ridiculous. I've used a stroller about a dozen times in my
*entire life*. They have all been for when Hunter was older. If I wanted
to take a trip to the zoo and give him time to walk and all the breaks he
would need I'd have to take a sleeping bag because it would take us 2.5 days
to make it through the place. I'd also need ear muffs to block out the
non-stop complaining when he got tired. It takes us 20 minutes to get from
the kitchen table to the car door.
I don't really give a rip what other people thing or say but I haven't had a
sideways glance. I also haven't seen any children unhappily restrained in
or left to cry in one. Move to South Dakota. The land of the happy
children :-)
I'm not complaining by the way. It seems I have it better then the other
families that are on a dead run to keep up with their kids.
Dawn Lawson
Nikki wrote:
> Dawn Lawson wrote:
>
>>Sue wrote:
>>
>>>Daye <da...@australia.edu> wrote in message
>>>
>>>
>>>>I don't get that either. DD is over 2 and she can walk. She is
>>>>usually well behaved, but she has her moments. We generally don't
>>>>use a stroller anymore. I feel sorry for those older children in
>>>>strollers.
>>>
>>>
>>>Why would you feel sorry for an older child that got tired and
>>>needed a break? Do you think that since they can walk, they will
>>>never get tired? I feel sorry for your children then if you expect
>>>them to walk on an all day outing without some place for them to
>>>have a break.
>>>
>>
>>Why not feel sorry for those who's lives are so overbooked that they
>>cannot manage to find a place to sit WITH their children while they
>>have a break??
>
>
> This just seems ridiculous.
Yup. Agreed.
Move to South Dakota. The land of the happy
> children :-)
Been there. Tho not many kids at Sturgis Rally (and a low proportion of
them were happy) :-)
Nikki
> Nikki wrote:
> Move to South Dakota. The land of the happy
>> children :-)
>
> Been there. Tho not many kids at Sturgis Rally (and a low proportion
> of them were happy) :-)
Now see, don't you want to move here! I can't recall seeing any children at
the rally but I've only ventured there once :-) Unfortantely that was west
river and all the cool people live east river, Lol.
KC
5 drill. Right now my kids are both under school age and stay up
until between 10:30 and midnight every day and then we all sleep in,
so there may be some children who have business being out at 10:30
after all.
KC
-------
Whittlestone Breast Expresser Distributor:
Special discount available for newsgroup participants.
Contact me at kcla...@yahoo.com for details.
dgo...@aol.com (DGoree) wrote in message news:<20030909183856...@mb-m10.aol.com>...
Dawn Lawson
Nevermind wrote:
> Dawn Lawson <dlaw...@shaw.ca> wrote
>
>>>>AND the poor
>>>>unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
>>>>blockages.
>>>
>>>Whatever. You sound like a CFer with that.
>>
>>Stop one day and notice how obstructive and massive they are.
>
>
> As are cars, to a bike messenger.
Ah, but cars stay in their lanes, or at least move fairly predictably,
and there are laws to govern their movements.
> Lots of stuff gets in our way.
Not so much.
We only
> complain about those we consider illegitimate.
speak for yourself. I think that obstructive and rude use of even the
most legitimate object can nullify any goodwill I feel towards it.
I don't consider
> strollers illegitmate. I consider them an acceptable way for people to
> transport their children around, and as children have as much right to
> be in the world as the rest of the people, then strollers and the
> occasional reasonable, unavoidable, and brief blockages they cause
> simply are part of the landscape that people in general need to deal
> with.
>
occasional reasonable unavoidable and brief blockages are NOT the ones
that rile me. Its parking strollers so that no other person or thing
can pass along the way, or get to the stalls at market, or whatever.
And then being pissy when asked politely to adjust the position of the
stroller so that the pathways are useable. Would that even THOSE
situations be occasional, and the whole thing could be less of an issue
for me, probably.
(That's without even getting into the ridiculous SIZE of the
stroller/carseat combos most people seem to be using. (My dad refers to
them as Lunar Landing Modules). What's the logic of finding an 8 lb
baby too heavy, but a 15-20lb baby/chair combo to be somehow preferable?
People have commented to me MANY times that I didn't have DS in a
carseat when I was carrying him. It's a novelty.)
OUt with a group of three other moms, I was shocked to hear them saying
that they now acted in ways that had been unthinkably rude when they had
no children, though they were certainly none of them ever CFers. and
they were definately showing that rudeness, taking up most of the eating
area with their strollers, parking them in such a way as to completely
block off sidewalks or doors, and taking them where they were
specifically forbidden, due to space limitations. they typified the
stroller use I detest.
As for children having a right to be in the world, I am CERTAINLY IN NO
WAY saying they don't. Good grief. But I don't think that becoming a
parent entitles anyone to acts of rudeness simply because they have
chosen to use a stroller to transport their children. And though I
can't place the reference atm, I keep thinking of the idea of using LESS
instead of MORE, leaving a smaller footprint, etc.
For instance, why not use an umbrella stroller instead of a LLM? For
most uses, it would be entirely adequate.
Anyhow, this is WAY off topic now, so I'm done.
Dawn
Anne Rogers
> to know and to able to then make pronouncements about society as a
> whole. Like the OP -- she based her complaint on, what, 15 minutes in
> a doc's office and extrapolated from there.
it was a comment, not a complaint, it struck me as odd later, and I
shared, now I'm wishing I hadn't!
the original post said nothing about what these people might be like
outside the surgery
Anne Rogers
> > was very small, initially his car seat drowned him so we only could use it
> > for short essential trips in the car, it was also the only way for our
> > buggy at that age, he was too small for our carrier (we didn't have a
> > sling then), we wanted to take him out to introduce him to some friends
> > who lived just round the corner, we really weren't sure whether we should
> > just carry him in our arms, in the end we did, but we did get some funny
> > looks.
>
> Are you sure you're not being a bit paranoid with this? Who would look
> funny at a person holding a very small baby? My middle child needed to
> be held all the time, and I'm sure I never got any "looks" while doing
> so. Maybe I live in some kind of alternate universe, or maybe this is
> proof that people see what they expect to see, but I don't agree that
> babies are never held out in public. And I *rarely* see babies crying
> without their parents either (1) quickly picking them up or otherwise
> making them happy or (2) making every reasonable attempt to finish
> what they must do so they can pick them up.
probably, but we did have a 3 day old baby, aren't all new parents
paranoid and walking on egg shells? people did look at us strangely, as if
we were about to drop him or something
>
> In general, I guess I just find that in my little corner of the world,
> most parents appear to adore and dote upon their babies. This is NOT
> to say, though, that these babies never cry or never have to go
> without direct parental attention for certain periods of time.
>
-----------
Anne Rogers
KC
I am guessing you are young and in great shape and have only one kid
by this post. 20 pounds is alot for some of us, and sorry you have to
walk around our monstrous blockages. It must be even worse for you
when you have to walk around people in wheelchairs.
KC
Dawn Lawson <dlaw...@shaw.ca> wrote in message news:<3F5D59BD...@shaw.ca>...
> Nevermind wrote:
> > You see these people for, what, 15 mins of their day, during which
> > time they are not holding their babies, and you assume they don't
> > *like* to hold their babies? This is one of those problems that you
> > need to remind yourself there's "not enough information" to figure
> > out.
> >
>
> I worked in a place where there were LOTS of babies and it was noticable
> and shocking how MANY people would not take their babies out of the
> carseat or stroller no matter what. To the point that we were known to
> comment to those rare moms who DID take their babes out that it was nice
> to see them respond to their infants.
>
> 20lbs isnt' that heavy, imo. I carry DS (19lb 11oz) in backpack or
> sling for long long periods of time on walks, visits to events, etc. I
> detest strollers from the point of view of the user AND the poor
> unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
> blockages.
>
> Given the number of items available to make picking up one's child less
> "necessary" and the frequency with whch I see MANY of them in one house,
> I have to assume the average parent spends very little time holding
> their infant. Many places (homes)I've been, the parent has shuttled the
> baby from carseat to bouncer to swing to playmat to crib and back, only
> holding them long enough to transfer them.
>
> Although the question may be "loaded" it certainly seems a valid
> question if you look about and notice how very very few people really DO
> hold their infants/children for any appreciable length of time. and
> really, those that reply that they use a stroller or seat say they do so
> because they do NOT like holding their baby during a meal or to go for
> walks, or whatever. (Not to say they don't like their baby)
>
> Dawn
Denise
"Kathy Cole" <ka...@scconsult.com> wrote in message
news:on5tlvslmnjjhuo72...@4ax.com...
I agree. I have a double stroller for my one year old and <gasp> 3 1/2 year
old. She has mental development issues and orthopedic issues. She can walk
fine for short distances, but she gets very uncomfortable after a while. So
for a day of shopping at the mall, or extended walking, she gets to ride in
her stroller, and she enjoys it.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
Sue
older two children and other children we were with at an amusement park over
the summer was not willing to sit and wait while the little ones had a
break. The older children wanted to ride rides. So we compromised. We had a
wagon the little ones can take a break when needed without intruppting the
older children's fun. If you are just with family and have lots of time,
certainly one can take breaks when needed, but if we are with other people,
I would rather not interrupt everyone.
--
Sue
mom to three girls
Dawn Lawson <dlaw...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:3F5EA0BB...@shaw.ca...
Sue
> to note that carrying a babe in arms really is a surprising thing to a
> whole lot of people, including those with children of their own.
> Dawn
Not in my corner of the world either. All babies are held here. But,
sometimes they are in strollers, but they are not crying and if they do,
moms immediately get them out. I don't usually give a wit what moms and
babies are doing, I am too busy trying to keep up with my kids.
Marion Baumgarten
My daughter was almost three when her brother was born. We hardly used
the stroller once she was walking well- but once her brother was born,
she wanted to ride too! That's where a double stroller came in handy.
When the kids got older, I used a wagon quite a bit.
DGoree
<<Some kids are home-schooled and therefore don't need to follow the 9 -
5 drill. Right now my kids are both under school age and stay up
until between 10:30 and midnight every day and then we all sleep in,
so there may be some children who have business being out at 10:30
after all.>>
True. But when I see school-age children wearing their school uniforms (same
school that my sons went to through last year) at the neighborhood Wal-Mart,
and I *know* that their school day begins at 7:30 AM the next morning, I think
the obvious conclusion is that these kids belong in bed.
Nevermind
You write as if I would not have had opportunity to observe this
myself, which isn't the case. With my 2nd child, I almost *always*
carried her, or I'd have been one of those moms with the crying baby
in the stroller. (In fact, since my first had been like my current
baby, who is happy in the stroller, when we first started going out
with my 2nd, I tried the stroller and ended up carrying her *and*
pushing the stroller, which was dumb. Thus I all but abandoned the
stroller for a while.) This constant carrying went on for about 2
years, and even up until she was about 3, she tended to be in a sling
a lot because of the kinds of activities we were doing then (I had 2
little ones and wasn't working much, so we did fun things everywhere).
And I don't recall ever getting "looks" on account of it.
Now, if we're talking about carrying a 3 week old around, of course
one will get looks. Babies that young get a lot of attention. I am not
one to talk to strangers, but if I see a baby that young out and
about, in a sling, a stroller, or in arms, I usually stop and look and
wonder. . . Even having had 3, there's something amazing about a
newborn.
I also remember a few confused "what is that?" type looks when using
the sling. Slings are still fairly uncommon around here, though that's
changing. Especially 5 years ago, when my 2nd was an infant, most
people used snuglis and baby bjorns.
Jacqui
> (That's without even getting into the ridiculous SIZE of the
> stroller/carseat combos most people seem to be using. (My dad
> refers to them as Lunar Landing Modules). What's the logic of
> finding an 8 lb baby too heavy, but a 15-20lb baby/chair combo to
> be somehow preferable?
Ever had a seriously bad back? Or Symphysis Pubis Dysfunction? Or an
infected caesarean wound?* Some days I can't lift or carry T (10lbs and
counting) in any comfortable position, but I can steer the pushchair
with no effort because it's ergonomically 'right' for me. I can put
shopping in it, which I wouldn't be able to carry even without the
baby. I can even use a crutch and push it too, something that's
actually impossible with the baby in the other arm or a sling.
Jac
*Yes, I'm suffering all three. But any one alone would be bad enough.
Bruce and Jeanne
> On Tue, 09 Sep 2003 04:27:34 GMT, Dawn Lawson <dlaw...@shaw.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >20lbs isnt' that heavy, imo. I carry DS (19lb 11oz) in backpack or
> >sling for long long periods of time on walks, visits to events, etc. I
> >detest strollers from the point of view of the user AND the poor
> >unfortunate person trying to navigate AROUND one of those monstrous
> >blockages.
>
> By this stage, DD was walking everywhere. She just held my hand, and
> if she got tired, I would hold her. However, she preferred to walked.
>
>
That's great for you but not all kids come in nice sizes. My son hit 20
lbs by 3 months, so even the backpack carrier is out for now. I use BB
pretty often but my back now hurts so a stroller is a necessity for me.
I love holding my son, but some days it's just not possible for me for
long periods of time.
Jeanne
Daye
wrote:
>Why would you feel sorry for an older child that got tired and needed a
>break? Do you think that since they can walk, they will never get tired? I
>feel sorry for your children then if you expect them to walk on an all day
>outing without some place for them to have a break.
Did I say that I never give her break? Defensive, much????
You don't have to pick them up and carry them for them to have a
break. A stroller is simply a holding pen for parents who can't seem
to take the time to really tend to an older child's needs. I don't
plan my days or my outings to be so busy that I can't sit down with my
tired child to let her rest. If she is so tired that she needs a
sleep, we go home.
If we are out and she gets tired and needs a rest, we find somewhere
to sit and we take a break. We talk about what we have done and what
we need to do. If she is hungry, we sit somewhere and eat. There is
usually somewhere to sit. If not, we go home. We have also been
known to sit on the ground so she can have a rest.
She doesn't like her stroller and she doesn't need to be caged up in
one. She can interact with her world, and she knows if she gets
tired, Momma will sit down with her and let her have a rest.
It isn't that hard to do.
--
Daye
Momma to Jayan
"Boy" EDD 11 Jan 2004
See Jayan: http://jayan.topcities.com/
Daye
wrote:
>Consider the possibility that the child can't walk. Kyle can't, at
>three, and may not be able to do so by the time he's five. Since it's
>smaller than his wheelchair, we use his stroller for excursions, so it's
>not obvious to observers that he's got a disability.
Then Kyle has a reason. I get that. Some children may need a
stroller. However, I doubt that the biggest majority of children over
2 in a stroller need to be in there.
I hope that Kyle does walk by 5.
Circe
> Some children may need a
> stroller. However, I doubt that the biggest majority of children over
> 2 in a stroller need to be in there.
>
this that I've missed, but why should a child *need* to be in a stroller to
be in one? My 4yo *likes* riding in the stroller on certain occasions (say,
an outing to the Zoo, which requires considerably more walking than she is
likely to be up to doing entirely on her own). Even my 6yo occasionally
wants to ride in the stroller because he's gotten tired (although he's so
big that it's not practical for any length of time)
Not to mention that it is considerably easier to keep track of three kids
when two of then are in a stroller(s) than when all three (or even two of
three) are running loose. Sadly, I find that they tend to go in opposite
directions <g>!
--
Be well, Barbara
(Julian [6], Aurora [4], and Vernon's [18mo] mom)
See us at http://photos.yahoo.com/guavaln
This week's special at the English Language Butcher Shop:
"No parking passed this sign" -- hotel parking lot sign
All opinions expressed in this post are well-reasoned and insightful.
Needless to say, they are not those of my Internet Service Provider, its
other subscribers or lackeys. Anyone who says otherwise is itchin' for a
fight. -- with apologies to Michael Feldman
Circe
> She doesn't like her stroller and she doesn't need to be caged up in
> one. She can interact with her world, and she knows if she gets
> tired, Momma will sit down with her and let her have a rest.
>
> It isn't that hard to do.
>
your daughter and resist/dislike riding in a stroller. You see it as a cage
because your daughter sees it as one. And indeed, for her, it may well be.
Finding alternatives to using a stroller makes sense if your child finds
riding in a stroller distasteful.
That said, *none* of my kids has ever evinced a dislike of stroller riding.
And particularly at relatively crowded places (Zoo, fairs, amusement parks,
etc.), it is considerably easier to avoid losing a strollered child
(particularly when you're trying to keep track of more than one) than it is
to try to do without the stroller. Also, it isn't always practical when
you've got three kids to sit down and take a break when one of them is
tired. If kid #1 is in immediate need of a toilet, for example, while kid #2
is too exhausted to move, a stroller comes in *real* handy!
Daye
>Ah, but you see, you're starting from the premise that all children are like
>your daughter and resist/dislike riding in a stroller. You see it as a cage
>because your daughter sees it as one.
No, I see it as a cage because I have always seen it as a cage. My DD
just happens to agree with me. My nephew didn't mind the stroller (I
was his nanny). However, when he hit 3, he was never in one. He
didn't need to be there. HIs parents agreed with me.
I am not saying that for a child under 1 year old, the stroller is an
evil place. I would even say that for a child under 2, I can see a
stroller as a useful thing. However, with a 3-5 year old, I can't see
why you would use a stroller for a child that big.
I know that people have given me reasons for why they use a stroller
for that age group. I *personally* don't see them as good reasons. I
will not be using a stroller with my DD at that age. I have found
other ways to deal with my older child, and 95% of them do not involve
a stroller.
If the stroller works for you, then okay. It isn't my child.
Circe
> However, with a 3-5 year old, I can't see
> why you would use a stroller for a child that big.
>
bring a stroller for the 4yo to be a mistake.
Marion Baumgarten
>
> She doesn't like her stroller and she doesn't need to be caged up in
> one. She can interact with her world, and she knows if she gets
> tired, Momma will sit down with her and let her have a rest.
>
> It isn't that hard to do.
>
> --
> Daye
> Momma to Jayan
> "Boy" EDD 11 Jan 2004
> See Jayan: http://jayan.topcities.com/
And you have how many children?
Circe
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:01:17 -0700, "Circe" <gua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Ah, but you see, you're starting from the premise that all children are
like
> >your daughter and resist/dislike riding in a stroller. You see it as a
cage
> >because your daughter sees it as one.
>
> No, I see it as a cage because I have always seen it as a cage. My DD
> just happens to agree with me. My nephew didn't mind the stroller (I
> was his nanny). However, when he hit 3, he was never in one. He
> didn't need to be there. HIs parents agreed with me.
>
doesn't mean the child is confined to it for the duration. My kids go in and
out of their strollers quite a lot during outings. It is very rare for us to
*make* a child, even the 18mo, ride in the stroller if he/she doesn't want
to. And sometimes, we have to force the 6yo to get out of it <g>!
Kathy Cole
> Then Kyle has a reason. I get that. Some children may need a
> stroller. However, I doubt that the biggest majority of children
> over 2 in a stroller need to be in there.
I don't see an issue with either need or want with respect to stroller
usage, assuming the kid's happy, the parents are happy, and the stroller
is suited to the terrain/location of use.
> I hope that Kyle does walk by 5.
Me too.
Kathy Cole
> You don't have to pick them up and carry them for them to have a
> break. A stroller is simply a holding pen for parents who can't seem
> to take the time to really tend to an older child's needs. I don't
> plan my days or my outings to be so busy that I can't sit down with my
> tired child to let her rest. If she is so tired that she needs a
> sleep, we go home.
That's an awfully judgmental opinion for someone with only one kid.
Emily Roysdon
I also hate to see bucket babies or unhappy children confined against
their will to a stroller or carseat while a parent is oblivious or gives
them a token "you're okay" while she continues her adult stuff. I
remember getting lectured at the doctor's office when Rebekah was an
infant and Noah was a toddler, because I dared bring them in without a
stroller. It never occured to me to use one, what with the tiny
doorways and crowded aisles, and I certainly wouldn't have brought the
heavy baby seat in with me. People do have a tendency to keep their
infants at arm's length in our culture, but that doesn't have anything
to do with occasional use of strollers with older children, imho.
Daye wrote:
> You don't have to pick them up and carry them for them to have a
> break. A stroller is simply a holding pen for parents who can't seem
> to take the time to really tend to an older child's needs.
If the child is unhappy to be there, I agree. There are times when my
children (ages 3 and 5) ask to be in the stroller, and we use it. I
didn't use it more than once or twice before either child was one year
old, because it wasn't where they needed to be. There are times now
when we'll be walking a long distance before we get to where the fun
begins, and the kids like to ride so they can enjoy the outing without
being hot and tired before they even get there. It also allows me to
carry in lunches, sunscreen, wipes, etc. so that I'm not lugging in 2 or
more heavy bags. Life really does change once you have more than one
child; sometimes, something has to give, and it can't always be mom.
I'm as AP as they come, and even I couldn't sling two kids weighing
nearly 90 lbs combined, nor could I force them to walk for long
distances in the hot sun.
> I don't
> plan my days or my outings to be so busy that I can't sit down with my
> tired child to let her rest. If she is so tired that she needs a
> sleep, we go home.
Me too, but sometimes we have a day at the zoo. Or we go to the
Farmer's Market where people walk in zig zag lines and have cigarettes
at kid height (irrational? phobia of mine from childhood, being burned
by someone's cigarette), and it's safer for the kids, and easier for me,
if they ride. They don't complain, but they would complain if I forced
them to hold my hand every second at the Farmer's Market (and how would
I do that with fruits and veggies to buy?)
<snip>
> She doesn't like her stroller and she doesn't need to be caged up in
> one. She can interact with her world, and she knows if she gets
> tired, Momma will sit down with her and let her have a rest.
>
> It isn't that hard to do.
It's harder when you have two kids. Letting the kids ride sometimes
allows everyone's needs to be met.
Emily
Marie
Baumgarten) wrote:
>And you have how many children?
Number of children matter because...?
I have three, and I agree with her.
Saying things lke that mean nothing, you know.
Marie
Marion Baumgarten
You have three children and you never have had a time when their needs
conflict?
Marion Baumgarten
Mary Ann Tuli
Daye wrote:
> On 8 Sep 2003 21:11:36 -0700, anony...@yahoo.com (Anonymommmy)
> wrote:
>
>
>>What DH and I think is strange is "very old" children, like maybe 5
>>years old or older, in strollers.
>
>
> I don't get that either. DD is over 2 and she can walk. She is
> usually well behaved, but she has her moments. We generally don't use
> a stroller anymore. I feel sorry for those older children in
> strollers.
>
> --
> Daye
> Momma to Jayan
On the contrary. Both me and my son were extremely happy when he had a
nap in his stroller while I went clothes shopping now and again. Happy
Mum, happy boy.
Mary Ann
Sue
> Number of children matter because...?
The more children you have, the harder it is to make sure everyone is happy
and taken care of. If you have more than one child and are out for the day,
then someone is going to get tired, some will just want to go on and some
will need to go to the bathroom and on and on. It makes an all day trip
extremely easy when you have a wagon or stroller to let them take breaks.
Have you never taken the girls to the zoo? Have you not taken the girls to
an amusement park? Do you take the girls anywhere at all? Let me know how
you managed? Because I must have done something wrong or I didn't get my
supermom powers because I found it hard when I had four children (my nephew
also) under the age of five to have a place for all of them. I could have
stayed home all the time where I wouldn't need a stroller, but that
certainly was boring.
> I have three, and I agree with her.
Then I would have to say that you haven't been in any kind of situation
where you need to contain a child or have one get tired. Your children can
walk long distances without getting tired? Do you not go on all day outings?
> Saying things lke that mean nothing, you know.
Sure it does. Having more than one child opens you up to different
scenarios. It makes you less judgmental because chances are, the very thing
you scorned when you thought life was grand with one child, turns chaotic
after the second or third child. The dynamics change when you have more than
one child. You have other people to take in account for. Older children must
be taken care of just like the little ones. Everyone's needs must be met the
best way you can. Say your at an amusement park with little ones and older
children and other adults. The older children are not going to want to sit
and take a break every ten minutes because the little ones get tired. You
don't stop, you put child in the stroller or wagon and go on. Why is that
such a problem? If the child is happy to ride in a stroller and doesn't
fuss, what is the problem with that?
Tine Andersen
news:o3-dnVlX5cL...@wideopenwest.com...
In my opinion it can't be worse to transport a kid in a car than in a
stroller. In both cases you do it to save time when you need to.
In Denmark the discussions goes as well - the same people who dislike
strollers happily transport their kids in a chair on their bike - a very
common form of transportation in this small country with bike lanes and no
hills.
Tine, Denmark
Marie
Baumgarten) wrote:
>You have three children and you never have had a time when their needs
>conflict?
Of course needs conflict, especially when one is a baby. I was
agreeing with the line of thought of just stopping for a rest when one
of the children get tired. When we go out, whether it's for one hour
or all day, if someone is tired we stop, sit and have a drink. It's a
welcome rest for all of us and we get to talk about what we've done
and plan to do next.
Marie
Circe
So if one kid is tired while you're walking through the parking lot at the
end of a long day, you just sit down and have a rest? If one kid needs to
find the restroom but the other is exhausted, you just sit down and take a
rest while someone pees their pants? And what in the world do you do when an
unstrollered 3yo needs a nap?
Honestly, I know people who never used strollers (my sister is one of them),
but I just can't fathom how they deal with these situations. That's not to
say I think there's anything *wrong* with not using a stroller--I just can't
quite envision how you manage all-day outings without one, even if the
youngest child is 3-5yo who's perfectly capable of walking some of the time.
Marie
>So if one kid is tired while you're walking through the parking lot at the
>end of a long day, you just sit down and have a rest?
No lol We keep going to the car? I really do not see the problem in
that. The kids know they can rest in the car. Do you honestly think a
stoller is needed just to walk through a parking lot?
> If one kid needs to
>find the restroom but the other is exhausted, you just sit down and take a
>rest while someone pees their pants?
We find the restroom and then rest/use the restroom for a few minutes.
What in that situation would require the use of a stroller?
> And what in the world do you do when an
>unstrollered 3yo needs a nap?
My kids would never nap if we were on an outing! They are too
interested in what's going on around them. The 6 year old has always
slept in the car, but always woke up if taken out of the carseat. If
it was such a problem to have a missed nap then we'd plan around the
nap, and plan to be at home. This has never been a problem.
>Honestly, I know people who never used strollers (my sister is one of them),
>but I just can't fathom how they deal with these situations. That's not to
>say I think there's anything *wrong* with not using a stroller--I just can't
>quite envision how you manage all-day outings without one, even if the
>youngest child is 3-5yo who's perfectly capable of walking some of the time.
None of these problems you mentioned require a stroller, ime. I
personally don't see why anyone would think they do.
Marie
Tine Andersen
news:e7l1mvocmv2426hfa...@4ax.com...
> No lol We keep going to the car? I really do not see the problem in
> that. The kids know they can rest in the car. Do you honestly think a
> stoller is needed just to walk through a parking lot?
Oh there came the light for me - the car. When you don't own one the
stroller IS nice.
Tine, Denmark (where cars are very expensive and highly taxed)
Sara
I think we public-transportation-users have a very different
perspective on these things. I was miffed when I read the first post,
but then I realized what was going on.
--
Sara, USA (where cars stink and gas is far too cheap)
Circe
> On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:08:17 -0700, "Circe" <gua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >So if one kid is tired while you're walking through the parking lot at
the
> >end of a long day, you just sit down and have a rest?
>
> No lol We keep going to the car? I really do not see the problem in
> that. The kids know they can rest in the car. Do you honestly think a
> stoller is needed just to walk through a parking lot?
>
outing than yours, but it's usually all I can do to coax the 6yo to keep
walking to the car, and he certainly knows he can rest once he reaches the
car. That doesn't mean he stops complaining about how tired he is at every
step, though <g>! The 4yo, on the other hand, will simply sit down and stop
walking if she's too tired to go on. So, if we didn't have a stroller, we'd
either have to carry her (and depending on how far one has to go, that could
be quite a task) or sit there in the parking lot with her. Neither seems too
appealing to me, so on the whole, I'd rather have the stroller.
Now, of course, I'm not saying that a stroller is *necessary* to walk
through a parking lot. I certainly do without at the grocery store and
similar places. What *I'm* thinking of, though, is the long walk to the car,
parked in Timbuktu, at the end of a full day at a place like the Zoo,
Legoland, the Fair, etc. Under those circumstances, I just find it *way*
easier to have a stroller to get the younger kids to the car than to force
them to walk. I have seen enough parents literally dragging an exhausted,
screaming/crying toddler through a parking lot to think that failure to plan
ahead for this eventuality isn't exactly a kindness to the child. IOW, *not*
taking a stroller to allow a young child to rest can be just as "cruel" as
restraining a young child in one against his/her will.
> > If one kid needs to
> >find the restroom but the other is exhausted, you just sit down and take
a
> >rest while someone pees their pants?
>
> We find the restroom and then rest/use the restroom for a few minutes.
> What in that situation would require the use of a stroller?
>
<Sigh> You seemed to be claiming that when one of the children is tired,
you'd just sit down and rest until that child is ready to continue. The
argument seems to be that it is kinder to the child to simply stop and rest
than to have a stroller available for the child to rest in while everyone
else goes about their business. I'm saying I don't see that it *is* kinder
because it's not always *possible* to sit down and rest until the tired
child is ready to continue. One child needing a toilet while the other is
resting or needs a rest is a perfectly good example of a time when a
stroller might well come in quite handy.
> > And what in the world do you do when an
> >unstrollered 3yo needs a nap?
>
> My kids would never nap if we were on an outing! They are too
> interested in what's going on around them.
Well, I wouldn't dream of taking a 3yo on a day-long outing without the
*option* of taking a nap. Typically, what happens is that the child is
obviously getting tired and needs a nap, so gets into the stroller and falls
asleep while we're walking around. It doesn't *always* happen, mind you, but
it certainly happens often enough for me to plan for it. If the child didn't
have the stroller to get into for a nap, we'd probably have a major meltdown
due to a child lacking sleep. Again, to me, it does not seem kinder or more
loving to leave the stroller at home and effectively require the child to do
without a nap that he/she needs.
> >Honestly, I know people who never used strollers (my sister is one of
them),
> >but I just can't fathom how they deal with these situations. That's not
to
> >say I think there's anything *wrong* with not using a stroller--I just
can't
> >quite envision how you manage all-day outings without one, even if the
> >youngest child is 3-5yo who's perfectly capable of walking some of the
time.
>
> None of these problems you mentioned require a stroller, ime. I
> personally don't see why anyone would think they do.
Well, I've just explained why *I* have found that a stroller is sometimes
the kinder, gentler option for everyone concerned. My kids have never been
*confined* to a stroller and, in point of fact, bringing them along can be a
pain since it means an adult must always push the stroller(s), even if they
are not occupied during the entire outing. I still find that life seems
better for my little ones when I have a stroller for each of them than when
I don't. YMMV and obviously does, but I do find the notion that stroller use
= less attentive, less loving parenting a bit difficult to swallow.
Marion Baumgarten
> "Marie" <jmd...@wctel.net> wrote in message
> news:e7l1mvocmv2426hfa...@4ax.com...
> > On Thu, 11 Sep 2003 12:08:17 -0700, "Circe" <gua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >So if one kid is tired while you're walking through the parking lot at
> the
> > >end of a long day, you just sit down and have a rest?
> >
> > No lol We keep going to the car? I really do not see the problem in
> > that. The kids know they can rest in the car. Do you honestly think a
> > stoller is needed just to walk through a parking lot?
I used to walk my daughter to and from kindergarden (not every day) - a
mile each way. Now, she had turned six a month after class started and
had no problem walking. If I walked to pick her up, that's a two mile
walk total. Add a 3 year old and the need to get there when class gets
out. Some sort of device with wheels seems like a good idea. I could get
a dog to pull a sledge I suppose.
Nevermind
> On Wed, 10 Sep 2003 14:01:17 -0700, "Circe" <gua...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >Ah, but you see, you're starting from the premise that all children are like
> >your daughter and resist/dislike riding in a stroller. You see it as a cage
> >because your daughter sees it as one.
>
> No, I see it as a cage because I have always seen it as a cage.
I think it's wise to question one's opinions occasionally, to confirm
that they're based on reason and don't contradict real-world evidence.
Just a suggestion.
Anyway, don't you think it's far more important what the people using
the thing (that is, the children) think? As long as the child in the
stroller is happy to be there, why do you mind? It's funny that this
subthread consists mostly of stroller-users explaining why they use
strollers; I think that's backward. You should be explaining what you
have against them in cases when both the child and the caregiver are
happy with its use.
> My DD
> just happens to agree with me. My nephew didn't mind the stroller (I
> was his nanny). However, when he hit 3, he was never in one. He
> didn't need to be there. HIs parents agreed with me.
"Reason not the need". Noone needs to go to the zoo in the first
place. Hey, if someone offered to wheel me around an amusement park or
zoo, I'd be thrilled, as long as I was able to get out when I wanted.
> I am not saying that for a child under 1 year old, the stroller is an
> evil place. I would even say that for a child under 2, I can see a
> stroller as a useful thing. However, with a 3-5 year old, I can't see
> why you would use a stroller for a child that big.
OK, but what do you have *against* using it? That's the real question.
Because if you don't have a really good reason to be against it, then
why are you spreading ill will around the world by being judgmental
about their use? Ever hear of "live and let live"?
Dawn Lawson
Nevermind wrote:
>
> OK, but what do you have *against* using it? That's the real question.
> Because if you don't have a really good reason to be against it, then
> why are you spreading ill will around the world by being judgmental
> about their use? Ever hear of "live and let live"?
My main problem with stroller use, other than I find them bulky and
unnecessary in my life, is that people seem to feel the strollers should
be given the "right to exist" that belongs to teh child. Courtesy
doesn't end when you procreate. I don't mind stepping around a small
child, and I'm not incenced by stroller use alone, but I find it
obnoxious to hvae to manoever around a stroller parked across an access
route by an adult perfectly capable of a little consideration to the
rest of the world. Apparently this is an offensive opinion. *shrug*
Michelle J. Haines
mari...@mindspring.com says...
>
> I used to walk my daughter to and from kindergarden (not every day) - a
> mile each way.
Did you do it uphill both ways in the hip deep snow all year round,
too?
> Now, she had turned six a month after class started and
> had no problem walking. If I walked to pick her up, that's a two mile
> walk total. Add a 3 year old and the need to get there when class gets
> out. Some sort of device with wheels seems like a good idea. I could get
> a dog to pull a sledge I suppose.
There is no way I could carry even my THREE MONTH OLD for a two mile
walk without being in agony at the end.
Michelle
Flutist
--
In my heart. By my side.
Never apart. AP with Pride!
Katrina Marie (10/19/96)
Xander Ryan (09/22/98 - 02/23/99)
Gareth Xander (07/17/00) Zachary Mitchell
Theona Alexis (06/03/03) (01/12/94, fostered 09/05/01 - 07/23/03)
Tine Andersen
news:que_sara_sara-96E...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> Tine Andersen wrote:
>
> > "Marie" <jmd...@wctel.net> skrev i en meddelelse
> > news:e7l1mvocmv2426hfa...@4ax.com...
> > stroller IS nice.
> >
> > Tine, Denmark (where cars are very expensive and highly taxed)
>
> I think we public-transportation-users have a very different
> perspective on these things. I was miffed when I read the first post,
> but then I realized what was going on.
>
The car is just a very big stroller with a motor. And when it's driving you
are really confined - with carseats and belts and what have you.
My kids loved their strollers or big baby carrier/pram. They were their
extra home. If we had the pram/stroller they always had a homely place they
knew - same function as the car can have. The pram even had toys, pillows,
blankets etc.
And for shopping when you don't own a car - indispensable!! You can have
groceries in the basket at the bottom, Corn Flakes behind the back of the
sitting child, bags hanging from the hooks on the handle, and groceries in
your own backpack. I don't recall how we shopped before we had the pram.
Tine, Denmark
Sue
> My main problem with stroller use, other than I find them bulky and
> unnecessary in my life, is that people seem to feel the strollers should
> be given the "right to exist" that belongs to teh child. Courtesy
> doesn't end when you procreate. I don't mind stepping around a small
> child, and I'm not incenced by stroller use alone, but I find it
> obnoxious to hvae to manoever around a stroller parked across an access
> route by an adult perfectly capable of a little consideration to the
> rest of the world. Apparently this is an offensive opinion. *shrug*
Ah it seems you've had a bad experience with an inconsiderate person using
their stroller and you've painted the whole world with the same brush. NOT
ALL stroller users are inconsiderate. NOT ALL stroller users block sidewalks
when they are using them.
I feel that a stroller has just as much right to be on a sidewalk as much as
a bicycle, jogger, scooter, rollarblades or a walking person does. These
things have gotten in my way at one time or another. Do I hate all joggers
or someone on a bicycle, um no. I do realize that some people are
incondsiderate and most people I run into happen to be very nice and
accommodating. It's not that your opinion is offensive, because I could care
less how you feel about stroller usage. I just feel that your opinion is
held because you live in a black and white world and you won't allow
yourself to be open-minded enough to know that there are some really good
reasons why people use strollers.
Kathy Cole
> but I find it
> obnoxious to hvae to manoever around a stroller parked across an access
> route by an adult perfectly capable of a little consideration to the
> rest of the world. Apparently this is an offensive opinion. *shrug*
It's not offensive to find it annoying that someone doesn't have the
sense to be considerate using their strollers. I see that as a separate
issue from whether strollers are a useful tool.
Dawn Lawson
Sue wrote:
> Dawn Lawson <dlaw...@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>
>>My main problem with stroller use, other than I find them bulky and
>>unnecessary in my life, is that people seem to feel the strollers should
>>be given the "right to exist" that belongs to teh child. Courtesy
>>doesn't end when you procreate. I don't mind stepping around a small
>>child, and I'm not incenced by stroller use alone, but I find it
>>obnoxious to hvae to manoever around a stroller parked across an access
>>route by an adult perfectly capable of a little consideration to the
>>rest of the world. Apparently this is an offensive opinion. *shrug*
>
>
> Ah it seems you've had a bad experience with an inconsiderate person using
> their stroller and you've painted the whole world with the same brush.
Not one. Many many many.