Detriments to society due to FF
Teresa Chandler
complain when someone FFs has got me thinking. There are many reasons FF
has a detrimental effect on more than just the families who do it (without
weighing in on the issue of who has the right to say what). It's very
thought provoking. . Here are some of the things I thought of off the top
of my head:
Health issues--
higher insurance costs
spread of contagious diseases from sicklier babies
ill effects of environmental issues (see below) on society
Environmental issues--
landfill space taken up
waste caused by manufacture of formula, packaging, etc.
air pollution caused by distribution of said stuff
landfill space filled up by those #$%^^& coupons they keep sending me!
Money issues--
sick days for moms with sicker babies
higher costs for WIC (my SIL had a baby on WIC on hypoallergenic super
expensive formula, much more $$ than cans of tuna and carrots)
insurance costs
I don't believe we could quantify, for sure, a $$ amount, because many
factors play into all of these things, but there is a definite harm done to
society by the prevalence of FFing. For example, my husband was FF. He has
a lifelong problem of asthma now, and a thyroid problem. Both might have
been prevented by BFing, not that his mom could (she had a stroke before she
even got to hold him the first time... she's still very sad about it...)
Anyway, if FFing wasn't the force it is today, would the effect on air
pollution be appreciable enough to help his lungs? Maybe it would, maybe
not...
Any more to add to the list? Thoughts?
--
Teresa
Eric&Denise Anderson
"Teresa Chandler" <ra...@netzero.net> wrote in message
news:ae3gd0$3l4i4$1...@ID-130694.news.dfncis.de...
>
> higher costs for WIC (my SIL had a baby on WIC on hypoallergenic super
> expensive formula, much more $$ than cans of tuna and carrots)
> insurance costs
>
> --
> Teresa
I didn't get on WIC until I had a very high needs preemie who needed the
super high cost hypoallergenic formula.. Up until that time I had tried to
breastfeed her, but with her severe GERD and allergies, it wasn't
happening.. its not like you can just walk into a WIC office and say "Hey,
I'd like to try the most expensive formula in the country please.." It was
very very hard to justify. So I think this WIC issue is kinda a dumb
point..BUT I do believe that WIC is more expensive because they pay for
formula for people who don't NEED it.
>
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Brigitte
> landfill space taken up
> waste caused by manufacture of formula,
packaging, etc.
> air pollution caused by distribution of
said stuff
> landfill space filled up by those #$%^^&
coupons they keep sending me!
I hope that anyone who would use this
arguement would also be so environmentally
conscious as to use cloth diapers. They are
truly a much bigger problem in our landfills
than anything else.
Brigitte
"Teresa Chandler" <ra...@netzero.net> wrote
in message
news:ae3gd0$3l4i4$1...@ID-130694.news.dfncis.de.
..
Kandee Wright
No one ever wants to talk about it, but what of the emotional impact of not
breastfeeding on children? How does it affect them, thus affecting society at
large? We are bombarded in the news with children doing horrific crimes, maybe
it's an attachment issue that stems from not having been breastfed. Like
formula feeding some babies thrive fine, but others who are more sensitive may
not.
--
Kandace
Jackie 8/28/96 | Jacob 10/21/98 | Jessie 7/24/01
http://www.kandacewright.com/sweetestthings.html
aimsmith
> No one ever wants to talk about it, but what of the emotional impact of not
> breastfeeding on children? How does it affect them, thus affecting society at
> large? We are bombarded in the news with children doing horrific crimes, maybe
> it's an attachment issue that stems from not having been breastfed. Like
> formula feeding some babies thrive fine, but others who are more sensitive may
> not.
If we are going to talk about the emotional impact of adults' choices on
children, why not talk about the *most obvious* one, which has *far*
more negative impact on them than not breastfeeding:
mothers who choose to work outside of the home and not raise their own
children
Brigitte
"aimsmith" <aims...@nospam.here> wrote in
message news:3D06113B...@nospam.here...
> Kandee Wright wrote:
>
> > No one ever wants to talk about it, but
what of the emotional impact of not
> > breastfeeding on children? How does it
affect them, thus affecting society at
> > large? We are bombarded in the news with
children doing horrific crimes, maybe
> > it's an attachment issue that stems from
not having been breastfed. Like
> > formula feeding some babies thrive fine,
but others who are more sensitive may
> > not.
I think that leaving children in day care all
day long, to be raised by non-family members
is more damaging to a child than not
breast-feeding.
I expect I'll be flamed for this comment, but
when I read about people who are concerned
with breastfeeding their children and how
important it is, which I agree with
whole-heartedly, but how can one put so much
importance on breastfeeding, then overlook
the need for the child to be raised by its
parent. When you think about how many hours
a day most children today are left in
daycare, versus how many hours they were left
in daycare 40 years ago, one would have to be
in total and complete denial not to see
what's happened to the children of today.
Just my 2 cents worth....
Brigitte
Gay Rand
> If we are going to talk about the emotional impact of adults' choices on
> children, why not talk about the *most obvious* one, which has *far*
> more negative impact on them than not breastfeeding:
>
> mothers who choose to work outside of the home and not raise their own
> children
>
Some of us work outside of the home, not by choice, but because of
necessity.
If it weren't for my salary, my husband and I wouldn't be able to pay our
bills AND his alimony and child support. Maybe we should talk about the
adult (his ex-wife) who chooses to live off someone else out of spite.
-----
Gay Rand
mama to Nicholas James 5-14-02
aimsmith
referring to. Just wanted you to know there are others who share this
opinion.
Charlotte M.
news:sOoN8.22362$yd4.277...@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com...
Maybe we should talk about the
> adult (his ex-wife) who chooses to live off someone else out of spite.
You mean to tell me that your husband pays enough alimony that his ex-wife
is able to NOT work?
Charlotte
--
Maternity Photographer and Doula
Visit www.birth.bc.ca and connect with other parents from around BC.
aimsmith
> Some of us work outside of the home, not by choice, but because of
> necessity.
That's the absolute truth, I'm sure. It is for *many*. But that
doesn't change the fact that with every choice we make in life, there is
either a good or bad consequence.
Just like a mother who had a double mastectomy, let's say, since this
discussion was originally about breastfeeding, who must absolutely have
to formula feed. Not because she wants to at all, but out of necessity.
Her child will pay a negative consequence for that choice/decision.
Even though it is completely out of her hands.
Same goes for children in day care - for whatever reason.
Kavvy
Brigitte wrote in message ...
>I think that leaving children in day care all
>day long, to be raised by non-family members
>is more damaging to a child than not
>breast-feeding.
I agree with that and I use daycare.
When you think about how many hours
>a day most children today are left in
>daycare, versus how many hours they were left
>in daycare 40 years ago, one would have to be
>in total and complete denial not to see
>what's happened to the children of today.
I think that is a bit simplistic. I think daycare has a bigger impact then
breastfeeding, I think lack of a father in the home has a bigger impact then
daycare. I think where a person lives has the potential to have a bigger
impact then all the rest. I think *all* those things can and often are over
come. There are so many variables and no easy answers. I also don't have
that pessimistic of a view of the children today. Part of the reason for my
view may be because IRL my experiences have been a bit different then what
the statistics show.
Nikki
Mama to Hunter (3) and Luke (1)
Gay Rand
> "Gay Rand" <gay...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message
> news:sOoN8.22362$yd4.277...@newssvr10.news.prodigy.com...
>
> > Maybe we should talk about the
> > adult (his ex-wife) who chooses to live off someone else out of spite.
>
> You mean to tell me that your husband pays enough alimony that his ex-wife
> is able to NOT work?
>
Sadly, yes, between alimony (for ten years, not ending if she remarries) and
child support, she only has to work when it pleases her, as a substitute
secretary at one of the schools in town. I've seen her W2 (income statement
for tax purposes) ... if she makes $200 to $250 US a year, it's a feat.
My DH has an income that could support us handily were he not supporting
her. Bear in mind here, I have no issues with his child support obligation,
just the alimony piece, especially in light of the fact that it was her
decision to end the marriage. She has a college degree in computer science,
and could quite easily be earning $30-$40k US annually. Her position is
that she didn't expect to have to work, hasn't since the eldest child (now
13) was born, and shouldn't have to start now. Amazingly, a judge agreed
with her ... overlooking the fact that she had enough money to be taking
classes towards her Master's degree.
Sorry ... you got me started there. ;-)
aimsmith
> Let me guess. You don't work.
> Did you major in French literature in college?
Isn't it funny, and oh so predictable, when those who feel guilty resort
to personal attack and name-calling. You can just feel the guilt oozing
out of Jess, but she can't argue with the fact that a child does better
on the whole with a parent (correction: mother or father) who stays home
with them.
Brigitte
"Jess" <jess...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:s29cgugl5cvk5ea665u4308sgnfqskne51@4ax.c
om...
> >I think that leaving children in day care
all
> >day long, to be raised by non-family
members
> >is more damaging to a child than not
> >breast-feeding.
>
> Let me guess. You don't work.
>
>
http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2000/02/24
/pros/
>
> Did you major in French literature in
college?
>
> -- j.
>
>
Brigitte
more important than having one's child in
daycare all day?
"Jess" <jess...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:s29cgugl5cvk5ea665u4308sgnfqskne51@4ax.c
om...
> >I think that leaving children in day care
all
> >day long, to be raised by non-family
members
> >is more damaging to a child than not
> >breast-feeding.
>
Brigitte
"aimsmith" <aims...@nospam.here> wrote in
message news:3D062A3C...@nospam.here...
Teresa Chandler
"Eric&Denise Anderson" wrote
> I didn't get on WIC until I had a very high needs preemie who needed the
> super high cost hypoallergenic formula.. Up until that time I had tried to
> breastfeed her, but with her severe GERD and allergies, it wasn't
> happening.. its not like you can just walk into a WIC office and say "Hey,
> I'd like to try the most expensive formula in the country please.." It was
> very very hard to justify. So I think this WIC issue is kinda a dumb
> point..BUT I do believe that WIC is more expensive because they pay for
> formula for people who don't NEED it.
Well, it's not dumb in this example, and let me explain why. My SIL ffed
from day one, partly because "it's free on WIC!" My neice ended up on
Nutramagin (sp?) after bouts of colic and mild reflux. But the point is it
was more expensive for just the plain formula which she started on, but once
she was switched to Nutramagin, the cost to taxpayers skyrocketed. She
didn't NEED formula in the first place, and yes she did just walk in and
say, "I need (basic) formula." Then, it was just a doctor's note or two to
make it to the expensive stuff. And my neice did benefit from the expensive
stuff, but not as much as she would have from BM.
--
Teresa
Brigitte
discussion, but I need to go get tires. I
know...what fun!!
and btw Jess, I do work outside my home at
night, while my husband is home with the
children. And since I work 11pm to 7am, my
children are asleep the entire time I'm gone.
I am home during the day while I am
homeschooling them.
OK, gotta run and get those tires now.
Brigitte
Brigitte" <ba...@rocketmail.com> wrote in
message news:ae5a8a$j65$1...@iac5.navix.net...
AGreen1209
>more negative impact on them than not breastfeeding:
>
>mothers who choose to work outside of the home and not raise their own
>children
>
Well, I don't *choose* to woh. I have to do so.
There are ways to WOH without compromising children. We work alternate
schedules to avoid as much daycare as possible. My son is in a wonderful home
daycare situation (that we searched for, btw) in which he is watched by a
retired nurse who has also been a foster mom for over 20 years, and who
homeschools her teens. My son is around children of all ages and all abilities
while there, and my sitter also believes in bf and cosleeping and thinks it is
impossible to spoil an infant.
So, while I will admit that there are some women who put their careers ahead of
their children, and just dump them off in daycare to get rid of them, it isn't
always the case.
Just my $.02
Amanda
mom to Elijah - 10/9/99
Expecting Baby #2 6/22/02
Joshua Levy
> I hope that anyone who would use this
> arguement would also be so environmentally
> conscious as to use cloth diapers. They are
> truly a much bigger problem in our landfills
> than anything else.
Only if you clean them youselves. Now the pollution
is different: disposables generate more solid waste
while cloth w/service generates more air and water polution.
Remember the chemicals used by cloth cleaning services are
really toxic, plus their trucks polute. But in terms of one
being worse than the other, it's pretty much a draw.
Unless your town happens to have specific problems with one
type of polution over another, this is not a big issue.
Check out this article for an overview:
http://family.go.com/raisingkids/baby/care/feature/wisc117diaper/wisc117diaper.html
Here is a quote from the Siera Club's web site:
Franklin Associates in Prairie, Kansas, found that the manufacture,
packaging, and disposal of single-use diapers uses one-quarter as
much water and one-half as much energy as the manufacture and
maintenance of cloth.
The only way to make an impact on diaper pollution is to clean them
yourself, using environmentally friendly soaps, and line drying.
Joshua Levy
Charlotte M.
Sorry... I realise this is hugely OT. I am so utterly intrigued by this.
My ex pays a total of $170.83/month, assuming he pays it, which he doesn't
always. Each month that he pays this, he curses my name as a free-loading
money-grubber. I don't know what he thinks I do with the money, but I'm
pretty sure he believes I am padding my cozy lifestyle out of it.
I realise that the amount you are talking about and the amount I am talking
about are not the same amounts. I couldn't buy groceries for the month with
that money, never mind rent or other expenses. Nonetheless, I am very
curious to hear about how much your spouse is paying... and more to the
point... how you feel about all this.
I am certain, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that my ex and his future wife
will loathe and despise the amount of money I take from them, so what you
are writing here is hugely interesting to me. Anything you are willing to
share, I would love to know!!!
Charlotte
AGreen1209
>out of Jess, but she can't argue with the fact that a child does better
>on the whole with a parent (correction: mother or father) who stays home
>with them.
I can object to it. Case in point: my mother never worked. We never had a
daycare provider. All four of us have trouble in social situations. My nieces
and nephews are not in daycare, same thing.
My son is in daycare 2-3 days per week. He is outgoing, friendly, and can play
with children of all ages, and he is not even three years old. My daycare
provider is like a grandmother to him - she buys him birthday and Christmas
presents!
Please don't overgeneralize, and then turn around and smugly say anyone who
attacks your general, stereotypical statements is just feeling "guilty". I for
one don't feel guilty, because I think my son is better off for having been in
the daycare situation he is in.
aimsmith
> Uhh, my kid IS home with their parent.
I am very glad of that fact for Alicia & Julianne's sake. They will be
better off because of it - and in spite of you.
> Of course, you're a financial leech and trying to justify it
> did you ask your husband if
> he wanted to quit work after the baby was born
I consider it a privilege to be able to raise my children, myself, and
have chosen this career for myself. Your salon.com article was a joke!
I truly feel sorry for you and your view of the world. Good thing
you'll have your degree when Jason divorces you - since that is the path
you're planning for.
AGreen1209
>They will be
>better off because of it - and in spite of you.
>Good thing
>you'll have your degree when Jason divorces you - since that is the path
>you're planning for.
>
I think we've caught a troll.
Kavvy
AGreen1209 wrote in message
>Please don't overgeneralize, and then turn around and smugly say anyone who
>attacks your general, stereotypical statements is just feeling "guilty". I
for
>one don't feel guilty, because I think my son is better off for having been
in
>the daycare situation he is in.
>
It is very easy to over generalize isn't it? It is dangerous territory and
can be an 'out' for people to blame things on. (I am not saying that about
you btw, just an in general statement). I think it is impossible to take a
kid that turned into a 'bad' adult or is a 'bad' kid and say it is because
of x. It most probably is because of x y and z - and probably more.
Likewise I think it is just as dangerous to say a child turned out 'good'
because of a SAHP. I've seen to many contradictions. That parent was doing
other things right too.
I think by generalizing that daycare is evil, you (again I know it isn't
*you* :-) overlook a lot of the positives that children get from being in
that situation. The negatives can be heightened by parents that don't make
an effort to minimize them. That is when there is trouble. I put forth
extra effort to be home for my children when I'm not working, I plan to put
forth extra effort to be involved when they start school and other
activities, etc. etc. I plan to do those things to minimize the negatives
that I feel they are getting from some pretty hefty amounts of daycare. I
do have misgivings about that but I don't feel 'guilty' because I have
weighed all the (particular to my family) pros and cons, and I'm doing what
I think is best overall.
Just another anecdote to add. I have a shy son. We were at a ball game the
other day and two other little boys asked him if he wanted to play and he
literally ran in the other direction and watched them play from the dug out
:-) He *is* in daycare and plays just fine there, he is just shy. I can't
'blame' that on anything, it is his personality. Inherited from both of his
parents. It isn't even bad, just who he is.
aimsmith
> Please don't overgeneralize, and then turn around and smugly say anyone who
> attacks your general, stereotypical statements is just feeling "guilty". I for
> one don't feel guilty, because I think my son is better off for having been in
> the daycare situation he is in.
This is totally an aside, but I couldn't help but make the comparison in
how the arguments sound so similar to those who argue the "bf/ff thing."
Usually it is the formula feeder everyone is attacking, knowing full
well they have no leg to stand on, since everyone knows bf is far
superior. But everyone continues to make general, stereotypical
statements not knowing their individual situation.
Now we have the stay home vs. day care argument and some of the same
people who attack the ff-er mercilously are asking for those to not
judge them and consider their individual situation...
Hmmm...
(not saying you do this, Amanda, just couldn't help but see the similarity)
Kavvy
Brigitte wrote in message ...
I do work outside my home at
>night, while my husband is home with the
>children. And since I work 11pm to 7am, my
>children are asleep the entire time I'm gone.
>I am home during the day while I am
>homeschooling them.
I've considered doing an overnight shift once my husband is employed and I
can afford to take a (significant) pay cut. I've done that job before but
I'm wondering, when do you sleep? That is what is concerning me. How do
you make that work?
Thanks,
aimsmith
> I think we've caught a troll.
I am most definitely not a troll. I have read m.k.p. and m.k.b. for
years now. I have 2 children. I have also read many of the ludricrous
posts Jess makes and know how completely mixed up she is.
Kandee Wright
> >out of Jess, but she can't argue with the fact that a child does better
> >on the whole with a parent (correction: mother or father) who stays home
> >with them.
>
> Uhh, my kid IS home with their parent.
>
> Of course, you're a financial leech and trying to justify it, so your
Financial leech? Glad to know what you think of SAHMs. As someone who I
think of as my friend, that sucks that you see me as a fucking leech. Good
to know though that my choice is not respected by you.
I've never insulted your choice to continue to work or lack of choice and
need to work. You may not have liked what Aimsmith wrote (I didn't either)
but I wouldn't have cut down an entire population of women who I consider
selfless in many respects. It's not as if staying home is without
sacrifice. I'm luckier than most because I still work a little bit, but
still.
>
> guilt is oozing out of your need to accuse me of being a bad mother.
> And your automatic assumption of mother -- did you ask your husband if
> he wanted to quit work after the baby was born, or did you hand in
> your resignation the day you got a positive HPT?
In our case, Keith and I did talk about who would stay home. We wanted out
child breastfed and to be taken care of at home. We weighed the benefits and
cons for both of us. It made the most sense to us for me too.
Part of me can't believe this came out of your mouth, but part of me isn't
surprised.
DGoree
<<I have oten wondered this. I ff 2 babies and bf #3. There is a huge
difference in the way they all behave. Tantrums ect. 2 are very angry
and up an down on the emotional scale all day but my bf baby is much
different. He has his moments but they are nothing like the other 2 were>>
Well, I breastfed all three of mine--#3 is still breastfeeding; I nursed the
boys until about age three and a half. (Yes, I nursed through pregnancy and
tandem nursed.) All three babies were nursed on demand, co-slept, frequently
held or carried, etc.
Son #1 is intense, moody, thin-skinned, perfectionistic and easily frustrated.
Son #2 is noticeably less intense and moody, far less easily frustrated, but
also less able to entertain himself than son #1.
Daughter is a far calmer baby than either of her brothers were, and much better
at keeping herself entertained than *either* of her brothers were at the same
age. The difference in temperament is so pronounced that the pediatrician
commented at her 2-week visit that she seemed calmer than her brothers.
I don't think it's breastfeeding, I think an awful lot of temperament is just
inborn.
Mary Ellen
William 2/14/95
Matthew 4/13/97
Margaret 9/1/01
aimsmith
> I've never insulted your choice to continue to work or lack of choice and
> need to work. You may not have liked what Aimsmith wrote (I didn't either)
I am really curious which part you disagreed with, since you also stay
home.
> Part of me can't believe this came out of your mouth, but part of me isn't
> surprised.
Wasn't surprised even a tiny bit.
DGoree
<<my dh agrees with you. He refuses to let me put our kids in daycare,
especially for the first 5 years since they are the most impressionable.
BUt, I think as kids get older it is less of an issue. ometimes there
isn't an option its either daycare or no home.....and no home equals
foster care wich I would think could be worse than daycare.....
>>
FWIW, several of my friends whose children are grown or almost so feel strongly
that their presence was more needed with the older children. An awful lot of
things can happen between school and dinner, and an awful lot goes on in school
that needs a parental ear.
Disclaimer so you can write off anything else I have to say on the subject: I
woh as does my husband. He is a teacher and I am a professional musician,
which is a fulltime job but is not office hours. Our children have attended
part-time daycare (15 - 25 hours/week, with three to four weeks off for
Thanksgiving, Christmas, and spring break) for nine months a year; during the
summer they are with my husband when I have rehearsal. On the one afternoon or
so a week when I cannot pick up my oldest son from school, he goes home with a
friend's mother for a couple of hours. Our children are happy, healthy, and
thriving; the boys were nursed to age three and a half and my daughter is of
course still nursing. My husband's mother never worked outside the home; he
wishes she had as she might have been less angry and resentful.
Personally I think that a breastfeeding newsgroup is a great place to discuss
breastfeeding issues, including ideas for pumping and managing nursing while
WOH. The issue of whether or not to WOH at all is a separate issue and is
off-topic here. I left this newsgroup about four years ago when my second son
was a toddler because it had degenerated into WOHM- SAHM flame wars, which was
not helpful to anyone. I would hate to see that happen again.
Mary S.
> Only if you clean them youselves. Now the pollution
> is different: disposables generate more solid waste
> while cloth w/service generates more air and water polution.
The one big study that concluded that cloth/disposables were equally
detrimental to the enviornment studied the enviornmental impact of each
diaper from first use to disposal. Not production of the diapers. The
air and water pollution generated by the creation of one disposable
diaper (one change) is equal to the air and water pollution generated by
the creation and use of one cloth diaper over its entire lifetime by a
diaper service (many many changes). Add to that the solid waste problem
on the part of disposables and they aren't even close. Add to that the
fact that many women here do wash their own.
I'm talking about regular disposables. The chemical-free enviornmental
disposable diapers like Tushies still use the same amount of water per
diaper in creation as a cloth diaper uses over its lifetime (because of
the wood pulping and paper production), but are more biodegradable, so
the waste is lessened. And that still doesn't make them equal.
Mary S.
--
Mary S.
mom to the Charlotte-sprout, 3 months
Mary S.
> I can object to it. Case in point: my mother never worked. We never had a
> daycare provider. All four of us have trouble in social situations. My nieces
> and nephews are not in daycare, same thing.
>
> My son is in daycare 2-3 days per week. He is outgoing, friendly, and can play
> with children of all ages, and he is not even three years old.
Isn't this an exact parallel to the BF/FF arguments? Grandmothers who
insist that their kids were formula fed and were never sick a day in
their lives, while their neighbor breastfed and those children were
always coming down with ear infections... the old "but we were all FF
and we turned out fine" argument?
There is objective research that shows that breastfed children are
healthier than formula-fed children. Is there research about children
who are raised by a full-time parent vs. children who are put into
full-time daycare? For the sake of this argument, we should compare
working part-time to combifeeding, which is much harder to get data on.
There ought to be studies out there on SAH kids and daycare kids and
what the effects are.
Michelle S. Spina
>
> Kandee Wright wrote:
>
> > I've never insulted your choice to continue to work or lack of choice and
> > need to work. You may not have liked what Aimsmith wrote (I didn't either)
>
> I am really curious which part you disagreed with, since you also stay
> home.
Because not everyone who stays home with their children share the same
sanctimonious views about it that you apparently do.
m.
James 12/17/99
munchkin #2 EDD 10/23/02
Gay Rand
"Charlotte M." <SPAMHEREbir...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:YpqN8.129080$Ka.89...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Michelle S. Spina
Well, first of all, Jess' husband DOES stay home with her kids, so there
goes that try. And second, why can't she argue with that "fact?" I don't
think I've ever seen any conclusive data about this issue, but I'm open
if you have something to share. It's hardly a fact, as far as I am
aware.
aimsmith
>>I am really curious which part you disagreed with, since you also stay
>>home.
>
>
> Because not everyone who stays home with their children share the same
> sanctimonious views about it that you apparently do.
Again - and those would be...
Michelle S. Spina
>
> AGreen1209 wrote:
>
> > I can object to it. Case in point: my mother never worked. We never had a
> > daycare provider. All four of us have trouble in social situations. My nieces
> > and nephews are not in daycare, same thing.
> >
> > My son is in daycare 2-3 days per week. He is outgoing, friendly, and can play
> > with children of all ages, and he is not even three years old.
>
> Isn't this an exact parallel to the BF/FF arguments? Grandmothers who
> insist that their kids were formula fed and were never sick a day in
> their lives, while their neighbor breastfed and those children were
> always coming down with ear infections... the old "but we were all FF
> and we turned out fine" argument?
Yup. Lousy argument!
>
> There is objective research that shows that breastfed children are
> healthier than formula-fed children. Is there research about children
> who are raised by a full-time parent vs. children who are put into
> full-time daycare? For the sake of this argument, we should compare
> working part-time to combifeeding, which is much harder to get data on.
> There ought to be studies out there on SAH kids and daycare kids and
> what the effects are.
There are studies that show conclusions in both directions (i.e., that
high quality day-care is actually *better* for kids, and that stay at
home parenting is better), which, as far as I'm concerned, means that
there actually isn't any difference (sorry aimsmith!). This is all
predicated on *quality* child care, of course. Obviously, lousy child
care (whether it's parent or not) is bad for kids.
aimsmith
> think I've ever seen any conclusive data about this issue, but I'm open
> if you have something to share. It's hardly a fact, as far as I am
> aware.
How about the study that came out recently (w/in the last year) that
said children who spent significant time in day care were more agressive
in kindergarten? (don't remember the specifics - it was all over the news).
Ok, tell me *all* the reasons this study was flawed, yada, yada, yada...
aimsmith
> There are studies that show conclusions in both directions (i.e., that
> high quality day-care is actually *better* for kids, and that stay at
> home parenting is better), which, as far as I'm concerned, means that
> there actually isn't any difference (sorry aimsmith!).
How sad that you actually admit you can be replaced by a day care
worker. That someone else is a better "mother-figure" to your
child(ren) than you can be.
Michelle S. Spina
Huh? Do you know my particular situation?
Anyway, *I* didn't say it - studies did. You can believe whatever you'd
like to believe, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.
m.
Michelle S. Spina
Yup, vaguely remember it - I think it was this past fall. Did you
actually *read* the entire study, by the way? I'm guessing you didn't,
from your post. You apparently just heard the news snips. The snippet
that was all over the news was actually taken VERY out of context, and
even then, the difference between the children was incredibly small. The
study, on the whole, had as one of it's conclusions that high quality
day care was actually *good* for children. But that's apparently boring
news, since that aspect of the study wasn't flashed in the headlines.
If that's all you got, then I'm standing by my original statement,
that's for sure!
m.
aimsmith
> Huh? Do you know my particular situation?
>
> Anyway, *I* didn't say it - studies did.
You're right. I don't know your situation. I will retract that.
Let me rephrase: it's sad that someone *could* believes the studies
that say they can be replaced as a mother/father (that's for Jess). I'm
sure if their children - and infants, specifically - could talk, they
would say they'd rather have their own parents take care of them.
Aimee
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"little black pot" <iamthe...@man.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.176fd7dd1...@News.CIS.DFN.DE...
> In article <5fa44575.02061...@posting.google.com>,
> joshu...@yahoo.com says...
> :"Brigitte" <ba...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:<ae3uuv$ifv$1...@iac5.navix.net>...
> :> I hope that anyone who would use this
> :> arguement would also be so environmentally
> :> conscious as to use cloth diapers. They are
> :> truly a much bigger problem in our landfills
> :> than anything else.
> :
> :Only if you clean them youselves. Now the pollution
> :is different: disposables generate more solid waste
> :while cloth w/service generates more air and water polution.
> :Remember the chemicals used by cloth cleaning services are
> :really toxic, plus their trucks polute. But in terms of one
> :being worse than the other, it's pretty much a draw.
> :Unless your town happens to have specific problems with one
> :type of polution over another, this is not a big issue.
>
>
> in case you missed it those of us who do use cloth are more
> enviromentally concious...MOST of us DO wash them at home and don't use
> a diaper service. MOST of us use CLOTH wipes too (also becasue
> disposable wipes contribute to rashes) I can see your point being valid
> but not in all cases.
>
>
>
> --
>
> Christine
>
> he who laughs last, thinks slowest
>
> Q: Why does a man have a hole in his penis?
> A: To get some air to his brain.
>
> bellybug due Dec 20, 2002
>
aimsmith
> Yup, vaguely remember it - I think it was this past fall. Did you
> actually *read* the entire study, by the way?
I am going to find the study and analyze it for myself, thanks. Don't
really want to take your word for it. I'll get back to you.
> If that's all you got, then I'm standing by my original statement
How about this: how does it make one *feel* to leave their child with
someone else all day? If it's an infant, what if they miss the first
rolling over, laugh, crawl, walk, whatever? Personally, I would feel
horrible. I'm sure a lot of people "get over" those feelings and
rationalize the fact that some study *today* says "day care is better
for kids" and put all of their faith in that, but what happens tomorrow,
or in 2 years or whatever when the contrary is proven?
Aimee
have a lot of relationship problems, not to mention the disagreeances we
have because I believe sooo much in bf, and she didn't. She has guilt trips
because she thinks "I" think, she wasn't a good mother to me etc.....
I don't know, I don't know if we'll ever really know, but hey, we were made
with breasts for a reason, and about 3-5 days after a baby is born, milk
will begin to fill those breasts. I cannot even imagine mothers who get
grossed out by that, and do not put their baby to their breast, instead they
bind their breasts, and pray for the disgusting, sticky milk to dry up and
go away. I'm sorry, it just makes no sense at all to me, and I can't help
but be angry at those people.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Kandee Wright" <kan...@kvts.com> wrote in message
news:3D05D96D...@kvts.com...
> Teresa Chandler wrote:
>
> > The exchange between Kandee and Jolene about whether we have the *right*
to
> > complain when someone FFs has got me thinking. There are many reasons
FF
> > has a detrimental effect on more than just the families who do it
(without
> > weighing in on the issue of who has the right to say what). It's very
> > thought provoking. . Here are some of the things I thought of off the
top
> > of my head:
> >
> > Health issues--
> > higher insurance costs
> > spread of contagious diseases from sicklier babies
> > ill effects of environmental issues (see below) on society
> >
> > Environmental issues--
> > landfill space taken up
> > waste caused by manufacture of formula, packaging, etc.
> > air pollution caused by distribution of said stuff
> > landfill space filled up by those #$%^^& coupons they keep sending me!
> >
> > Money issues--
> > sick days for moms with sicker babies
> > higher costs for WIC (my SIL had a baby on WIC on hypoallergenic super
> > expensive formula, much more $$ than cans of tuna and carrots)
> > insurance costs
> >
> > I don't believe we could quantify, for sure, a $$ amount, because many
> > factors play into all of these things, but there is a definite harm done
to
> > society by the prevalence of FFing. For example, my husband was FF. He
has
> > a lifelong problem of asthma now, and a thyroid problem. Both might
have
> > been prevented by BFing, not that his mom could (she had a stroke before
she
> > even got to hold him the first time... she's still very sad about
it...)
> > Anyway, if FFing wasn't the force it is today, would the effect on air
> > pollution be appreciable enough to help his lungs? Maybe it would,
maybe
> > not...
> >
> > Any more to add to the list? Thoughts?
> > --
> > Teresa
>
> No one ever wants to talk about it, but what of the emotional impact of
not
> breastfeeding on children? How does it affect them, thus affecting
society at
> large? We are bombarded in the news with children doing horrific crimes,
maybe
> it's an attachment issue that stems from not having been breastfed. Like
> formula feeding some babies thrive fine, but others who are more sensitive
may
> not.
Andrea Phillips
http://www.parenting.com/parenting/article/article_general/0,8266,3720,00.html
Factors like the education of the mother, income level of the family,
and maternal well-being were far more significant.
And honestly, is a noncompliant, demanding, talkative child such a
terrible thing? Seems like a sign of a developing personality and
ability to think for him or herself, to me. :)
--Andrhia
Mommy to Sasha 5.20.02
Alison Tooth
>
> Kandee Wright wrote:
>
> > I've never insulted your choice to continue to work or lack of choice and
> > need to work. You may not have liked what Aimsmith wrote (I didn't either)
>
> I am really curious which part you disagreed with, since you also stay
> home.
I don't work, and I stay at home with my 3. I didn't like what you said
either.
For a start, there was the simplistically sexist "mothers" - why not
either parent? (I know a step-father who spent about 9 years at home
with his wife's children, and has done a wonderful job.)
Then there was the "choose" bit - sadly some parents do not have a real
choice in whether to work or not.
Then there was the "not raise their own children" bit. Which was just
rude. My husband works - he's out of the house for 55-60 hours a week.
Does he not raise his children? I think he'd be quite surprised to learn
that he didn't.
As Michelle Spina says, there is no real evidence one way or another to
show the superiority of having a stay-at-home parent, or being in a good
quality daycare situation. There's not a clear-cut,
statistically-supported distinction between the two, like there is with
BF v FF.
I stay at home because it is right for me and my family. I wouldn't
presume to tell anyone else what was right for them. I've had a couple
of friends who have stayed at home with their children, because they
thought it was the 'right' thing to do, and obviously did not enjoy it,
which seems daft.
--
Alison
http://www.theportico.co.uk
AGreen1209
>high quality day-care is actually *better* for kids, and that stay at
>home parenting is better), which, as far as I'm concerned, means that
>there actually isn't any difference (sorry aimsmith!).
Exactly.
>This is all
>predicated on *quality* child care, of course. Obviously, lousy child
>care (whether it's parent or not) is bad for kids.
>
>m.
We are very careful about who watches our son. FWIW, we have never gotten a
sitter just to have an evening out together. If we don't have to be at work,
we are together as a family. DH and I are adamant about that.
Amanda
mom to Elijah - 10/9/99
Expecting Baby #2 6/22/02
AGreen1209
Okay, here's why I said that.
1) I personally haven't seen any of your posts before now
2) you brought up something that was OT to the original thread, and that was
controversial
3) you have made spiteful, catty, and uncalled for remarks, like the ones about
Jess.
If you aren't a troll, you are doing a good job acting like one.
AGreen1209
>said children who spent significant time in day care were more agressive
>in kindergarten? (don't remember the specifics - it was all over the news).
>
>Ok, tell me *all* the reasons this study was flawed, yada, yada, yada...
Well, actually that study was flawed. If I recall correctly, it didn't take
into account quality or amount of childcare, and I don't think it took into
account economic status of families, either. I thought there was also another
problem with that study, but I can't remember it now.
AGreen1209
>someone else all day?
Well, in a nutshell, it's like tearing your heart out and leaving it. It's
hard. In my case, also necessary.
>If it's an infant, what if they miss the first
>rolling over, laugh, crawl, walk, whatever?
I worried about this until I realized there often really isn't a "first" one of
those - those just gradually happen. And I don't recall anything that we
"missed". When DH or I pick up our son from daycare, we usually spend 30
minutes to an hour hearing about everything he did, my dcp takes pictures, the
other kids (her homeschooled kids) talk about what they did with him that day,
etc. My dcp has an open door policy and I can call any time I want to.
Beth Kevles
Hi -
Hoping I don't get flamed ...
There appear to be two different arguments running here. One is about
bf vs ff, the other about care-by-parents vs. daycare.
The best studies I've heard about seem to say that high-quality daycare
is as good as high quality parenting, for the statistical child in the
statistical family. But they also indicate that high quality daycare
isn't easy to find or afford, and that high quality parenting is ALSO
not that easy to come by.
As for bf vs. ff ...
BF is better, health wise, for MOST babies. But not all babies. BF can
increase the risk of allergy if the lactating mother has active
allergies, for example. And BF'ing is NOT a magic bullet against deadly
diseases. It just improves your baby's odds of recovery. (Native
Americans all bf'd their babies, and still lost 90% of their population
to smallpox.) There are some other health conditions (on mom's or
baby's part) which would make bf'ing a bad decision from the standpoint
of baby's health. But these are unusual cases.
But how MUCH better is it to BF? Is it so much better that the mother
should stay out of work for 6 weeks to establish bf'ing, and then pay to
use a pump? That probably depends upon individual circumstances. Is it
so much better that a mother should continue even if she resents doing
it, and thus comes to resent her baby? (And yes, I know a number of
mothers who are excellent parents, but HATED bf'ing.)
And remember, the advantages and disadvantages of bf'ing apply to the
statistical baby, not to the individual one. Sometimes the health
advantages of bf'ing are obvious right from the start (as with the
infant with eczema) but usually the effect of bf or ff won't be apparent
for years (as with, say obesity or asthma) and even then the infant
feeding decision is only one of several factors that might (or might
not) have helped.
I'm all in favor of bf'ing, and spreading bf education so that many more
moms do it. But I don't think it's necessary to make MORE of the
feeding decision than is necessary.
By the way, my form of proselytising is at the playground, and is in the
form of:
I know a pediatrician who's supportive of breastfeeding, Want the
number?
Followed by:
Breastfeeding can be difficult at first, but it's worth it. Please
try for eight weeks before deciding whether or not to continue. By
eight weeks you'll be enough recovered from the delivery to make a
good decision that you'll be happy with.
My two (or more!) cents,
--Beth Kevles
bethk...@aol.com
http://web.mit.edu/kevles/www/nomilk.html -- a page for the milk-allergic
Disclaimer: Nothing in this message should be construed as medical
advice. Please consult with your own medical practicioner.
aimsmith
> For a start, there was the simplistically sexist "mothers" - why not
> either parent?
Read some of my later posts. I retracted and said mother or father. I
simply misspoke (typed).
> Then there was the "choose" bit - sadly some parents do not have a real
> choice in whether to work or not.
Certainly! I am thinking of a divorced mom or a widower. But like I
said earlier, it is still a decision and has consequences, either good
or bad. (and not to worry, according to Michelle S. Spina, daycare is
better, right?)
> Then there was the "not raise their own children" bit. Which was just
> rude. My husband works - he's out of the house for 55-60 hours a week.
> Does he not raise his children?
Of course he does. I am talking about an outside caregiver doing our
responsibility. You are at home so he can work. (Ok, flame me
everyone, but essentially that's the way the family works.) And if the
mother works (as in Jess' case), the dad is at home so she can work or
get her degree or whatever it is she is doing. The family is a give and
take responsibility, as we all know.
> As Michelle Spina says, there is no real evidence one way or another to
> show the superiority of having a stay-at-home parent, or being in a good
> quality daycare situation. There's not a clear-cut,
> statistically-supported distinction between the two, like there is with
> BF v FF.
We have to agree to disagree on that point. Let me give the example of
Ferberizing. People who don't do the CIO method say they don't because
it makes them *feel* horrible, and how could they ignore those "not
right" feelings within themselves. Well, I have those "not right"
feelings if I leave my children, so that's enough for me.
> I stay at home because it is right for me and my family.
I'm glad for you. I feel the same. Hopefully someone who is wavering
or is trying to decide is reading this and maybe it will influence their
decision.
You never know.
Charlotte M.
news:3D068598...@hotmail.com...
> According to this very study - and an article on it is here:
>
>
http://www.parenting.com/parenting/article/article_general/0,8266,3720,00.ht
ml
I read the article and found it very interesting. It wasn't the most
in-depth piece I've seen written about the study, but the perspective was
non-biased, which is a nice change.
> And honestly, is a noncompliant, demanding, talkative child such a
> terrible thing? Seems like a sign of a developing personality and
> ability to think for him or herself, to me. :)
Can O'Worms, anyone?
Seriously, that is one loaded question.
In most children, questioning the status quo is a GREAT sign. But in other
children, it is the sign of bad parenting. As long as it is a process that
is liberally sprinkled with good manners and respect for others, then it is
a desired development. If it is an unfolding of a kid who is both a menace
to herself or himself, as well as to others, then it is roughly as desirable
as pinworms and planter's warts.
Charlotte
Aimee
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Jess" <jess...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:s29cgugl5cvk5ea66...@4ax.com...
> >I think that leaving children in day care all
> >day long, to be raised by non-family members
> >is more damaging to a child than not
> >breast-feeding.
>
> Let me guess. You don't work.
>
> http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2000/02/24/pros/
>
> Did you major in French literature in college?
>
> -- j.
>
>
>
aimsmith
> Okay, here's why I said that.
> 1) I personally haven't seen any of your posts before now
Because I lurk and write under an assumed name. No spam for me.
> 2) you brought up something that was OT to the original thread, and that was
> controversial
I thought it related perfectly to what Kandee said about "society".
Sorry if it is controversial. Seems like everything on m.k.b. can be
construed as such. Even "what bottle to use"...or "when to pump"...
*Someone* will take offense!
> 3) you have made spiteful, catty, and uncalled for remarks, like the ones about
> Jess.
Only after she blatantly attacked me. Go back and read. But we all
overlook Jess, right...
Michelle S. Spina
>
> Michelle S. Spina wrote:
>
> > Huh? Do you know my particular situation?
> >
> > Anyway, *I* didn't say it - studies did.
>
> You're right. I don't know your situation. I will retract that.
:-) Thanks!
> Let me rephrase: it's sad that someone *could* believes the studies
> that say they can be replaced as a mother/father (that's for Jess).
So you think that *those* studies are flawed, but the ones that support
your point of view aren't? I'm really not trying to be a pain in the
butt, but that attitude is pretty silly, isn't it? Of course everyone
believes that they are the best parent for their child. You believe
that. I believe that. We both TRULY believe that. That doesn't mean that
your child couldn't benefit from having another point of view or
approach, and that doesn't imply that these other people are *replacing*
you as a *parent* (that's totally inflammatory and isn't what those
studies are saying at all). I don't know of ANY child in real life who
has been confused as to who mommy or daddy are. And I know a number of
kids in day care who LOVE it, and absolutely thrive there (yes, I know
that's anecdotal - I'm not trying to *prove* anything here, just
explain). This doesn't mean that those parents are lousy parents - it
just means that the kids truly benefit from outside influences and
experiences.
> I'm
> sure if their children - and infants, specifically - could talk, they
> would say they'd rather have their own parents take care of them.
But since when are the desires of children always in their best
interest? I can guarantee you that my son would MUCH prefer to eat
Fritos all day long if he had the choice. That doesn't mean that's
what's *best* for him! ;-)
I think that the only conclusive statement that has ever been made on
this topic is that poor quality care (whether it's parental, or outside
child care) is indeed *bad* for kids. Otherwise, it's a wash, and
probably very parent/child dependent.
m.
Kandee Wright
> Kandee Wright wrote:
>
> > I've never insulted your choice to continue to work or lack of choice and
> > need to work. You may not have liked what Aimsmith wrote (I didn't either)
>
> I am really curious which part you disagreed with, since you also stay
> home.
For one there isn't any conclusive study data that hasn't been contradicted by
another study. It's not like with breastfeeding where there are numerous studies
and many are done with conservativeness in favor of formula because some are
sponsered by formula companies.
It's also not as easily measurable. How do you compare personalities which range
hugely and is determined subjectively not objectively? I think in an ideal world
mom and dad should stay home to raise their children together, but somone has to
earn the bean and in some cases both do.
Also I've seen some lousy stay-home moms and some amazingly great work-out-home
moms. Michelle S and Barbara (circ) come to mind. I honestly believe that if
there were any negative effects to daycare or nanny care these moms offset it
with their skills as great moms. I believe you can balance work and raising a
family, but I think it's tougher to keep it all good. And it's crucial that good
childcare is provided.
I also believe that strong attachments to people outside the immediate family is
extremely beneficial. It makes up for lack of close extended family being in
their lives which is much less common today. I also do not believe these
attachments hurt WOH moms and their bonds with their children but in fact helps a
child feel more secure in general.
So if I think this why am I not pursuing a career instead of being home you
wonder? Simply put: "Because I can and wanted to." And I hate pumping milk
since I don't let-down well for it. :)
>
>
> > Part of me can't believe this came out of your mouth, but part of me isn't
> > surprised.
>
> Wasn't surprised even a tiny bit.
She's my friend, and her comments hurt me, a lot. Anyone else could have said it
and I could have cared.
aimsmith
> So you think that *those* studies are flawed, but the ones that support
> your point of view aren't?
Touche. Could be.
>>sure if their children - and infants, specifically - could talk, they
>>would say they'd rather have their own parents take care of them.
>
> But since when are the desires of children always in their best
> interest? I can guarantee you that my son would MUCH prefer to eat
> Fritos all day long if he had the choice. That doesn't mean that's
> what's *best* for him! ;-)
Really! You are *not* using this argument to support your case, are
you!?!?! I don't even know how to respond?! A parent being there with
their own child(ren) is *usually* (stress, stress USUALLY) best for
them! (I'm thinking maybe not if the parent is a crackhead or
something...)
> I think that the only conclusive statement that has ever been made on
> this topic is that poor quality care (whether it's parental, or outside
> child care) is indeed *bad* for kids. Otherwise, it's a wash, and
> probably very parent/child dependent.
Again, gotta agree to disagree. I just don't think it's a wash. Maybe
based only on my feelings, but oh well!
Aimee
I wanted to try the cloth diapers, but gave in because the baby came so
quickly.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Joshua Levy" <joshu...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5fa44575.02061...@posting.google.com...
> "Brigitte" <ba...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:<ae3uuv$ifv$1...@iac5.navix.net>...
> > I hope that anyone who would use this
> > arguement would also be so environmentally
> > conscious as to use cloth diapers. They are
> > truly a much bigger problem in our landfills
> > than anything else.
>
> Only if you clean them youselves. Now the pollution
> is different: disposables generate more solid waste
> while cloth w/service generates more air and water polution.
> Remember the chemicals used by cloth cleaning services are
> really toxic, plus their trucks polute. But in terms of one
> being worse than the other, it's pretty much a draw.
> Unless your town happens to have specific problems with one
> type of polution over another, this is not a big issue.
>
> Check out this article for an overview:
>
http://family.go.com/raisingkids/baby/care/feature/wisc117diaper/wisc117diap
er.html
>
> Here is a quote from the Siera Club's web site:
> Franklin Associates in Prairie, Kansas, found that the manufacture,
> packaging, and disposal of single-use diapers uses one-quarter as
> much water and one-half as much energy as the manufacture and
> maintenance of cloth.
>
> The only way to make an impact on diaper pollution is to clean them
> yourself, using environmentally friendly soaps, and line drying.
>
> Joshua Levy
>
Aimee
from their mothers until they are at least 2 years old or later.
I don't believe in giving your children to someone else to raise. I think
it's wrong, and has a very big impact on them. It has become so acceptable
and in the norm to do this now, that the stay at home moms who choose to
raise their own children are getting the bad rap, and less and less women
are choosing to raise their own children because of the pressure today.
I feel like I have a huge responsiblity to my children to teach them and
raise them. They grow soooo quickly, I think of how many monumental moments
I would have missed had I given them away to someone else to raise.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"aimsmith" <aims...@nospam.here> wrote in message
news:3D06113B...@nospam.here...
> Kandee Wright wrote:
>
> > No one ever wants to talk about it, but what of the emotional impact of
not
> > breastfeeding on children? How does it affect them, thus affecting
society at
> > large? We are bombarded in the news with children doing horrific
crimes, maybe
> > it's an attachment issue that stems from not having been breastfed.
Like
> > formula feeding some babies thrive fine, but others who are more
sensitive may
> > not.
>
> If we are going to talk about the emotional impact of adults' choices on
> children, why not talk about the *most obvious* one, which has *far*
> more negative impact on them than not breastfeeding:
>
> mothers who choose to work outside of the home and not raise their own
> children
>
>
>
Aimee
with my personal feelings. I don't know what your mother did or didn't do
for you and your brothers and sisters, but it is still a mother's
responsibility to raise her children, and it is her responsibility to make
them friendly and outgoing, not some daycare owner! This isn't saying much
for a mother's ability, that a daycare is necessary to make them friendly
and outgoing. I just disagree with that statement. My daughter is 3 1/2
now, and has never been to a daycare, she is very outgoing and very
friendly, and I credit myself with that. All children have different
personality types, and that's the mother's (or daddy's) responsibility to
work with them, teach them, guide them.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"AGreen1209" <agree...@cs.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20020611132746...@mb-cm.news.cs.com...
> >You can just feel the guilt oozing
> >out of Jess, but she can't argue with the fact that a child does better
> >on the whole with a parent (correction: mother or father) who stays home
> >with them.
>
> I can object to it. Case in point: my mother never worked. We never had
a
> daycare provider. All four of us have trouble in social situations. My
nieces
> and nephews are not in daycare, same thing.
>
> My son is in daycare 2-3 days per week. He is outgoing, friendly, and can
play
> with children of all ages, and he is not even three years old. My daycare
> provider is like a grandmother to him - she buys him birthday and
Christmas
> presents!
>
> Please don't overgeneralize, and then turn around and smugly say anyone
who
> attacks your general, stereotypical statements is just feeling "guilty".
I for
> one don't feel guilty, because I think my son is better off for having
been in
> the daycare situation he is in.
aimsmith
>
> For one there isn't any conclusive study data that hasn't been contradicted by
> another study. It's not like with breastfeeding where there are numerous studies
> and many are done with conservativeness in favor of formula because some are
> sponsered by formula companies.
>
> It's also not as easily measurable. How do you compare personalities which range
> hugely and is determined subjectively not objectively? I think in an ideal world
> mom and dad should stay home to raise their children together, but somone has to
> earn the bean and in some cases both do.
>
> Also I've seen some lousy stay-home moms and some amazingly great work-out-home
> moms. Michelle S and Barbara (circ) come to mind. I honestly believe that if
> there were any negative effects to daycare or nanny care these moms offset it
> with their skills as great moms. I believe you can balance work and raising a
> family, but I think it's tougher to keep it all good. And it's crucial that good
> childcare is provided.
>
> I also believe that strong attachments to people outside the immediate family is
> extremely beneficial. It makes up for lack of close extended family being in
> their lives which is much less common today. I also do not believe these
> attachments hurt WOH moms and their bonds with their children but in fact helps a
> child feel more secure in general.
Very good post. It is impossible to measure and I'm sure we will never
know conclusively. It all boils down to making your own decision based
on all the info you can glean.
Like I said earlier, I engaged in this thread/discussion/flame war
hoping to influence some lurkers out there (like I usually am) who might
not have made the decision yet. I usually just sit back and let the
"Jess'" of the world make everyone think they are the only view. I
decided to make a different voice be known for once.
Aimee
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Kavvy" <sefa...@dtgnet.com> wrote in message
news:qJqN8.120$%V2.6...@newsfeed.slurp.net...
>
> AGreen1209 wrote in message
>
> >Please don't overgeneralize, and then turn around and smugly say anyone
who
> >attacks your general, stereotypical statements is just feeling "guilty".
I
> for
> >one don't feel guilty, because I think my son is better off for having
been
> in
> >the daycare situation he is in.
> >
>
> It is very easy to over generalize isn't it? It is dangerous territory
and
> can be an 'out' for people to blame things on. (I am not saying that
about
> you btw, just an in general statement). I think it is impossible to take
a
> kid that turned into a 'bad' adult or is a 'bad' kid and say it is because
> of x. It most probably is because of x y and z - and probably more.
> Likewise I think it is just as dangerous to say a child turned out 'good'
> because of a SAHP. I've seen to many contradictions. That parent was
doing
> other things right too.
>
> I think by generalizing that daycare is evil, you (again I know it isn't
> *you* :-) overlook a lot of the positives that children get from being in
> that situation. The negatives can be heightened by parents that don't
make
> an effort to minimize them. That is when there is trouble. I put forth
> extra effort to be home for my children when I'm not working, I plan to
put
> forth extra effort to be involved when they start school and other
> activities, etc. etc. I plan to do those things to minimize the negatives
> that I feel they are getting from some pretty hefty amounts of daycare. I
> do have misgivings about that but I don't feel 'guilty' because I have
> weighed all the (particular to my family) pros and cons, and I'm doing
what
> I think is best overall.
>
> Just another anecdote to add. I have a shy son. We were at a ball game
the
> other day and two other little boys asked him if he wanted to play and he
> literally ran in the other direction and watched them play from the dug
out
> :-) He *is* in daycare and plays just fine there, he is just shy. I
can't
> 'blame' that on anything, it is his personality. Inherited from both of
his
> parents. It isn't even bad, just who he is.
>
> Nikki
> Mama to Hunter (3) and Luke (1)
>
>
>
aimsmith
> that the stay at home moms who choose to
> raise their own children are getting the bad rap
And the put downs are becoming more and more creative! According to
Jess, we are now "financial leeches"! Who else had a good laugh at that
one!!?!?
Aimee
and vice versa.... I don't mean to start a war there, but that's just what
I've noticed with the exception of one person that I know who pumped and bf
while she worked for 6 months, and then weaned, and then gave the formula
since babies have to have bm or formula for their first year of life.
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"aimsmith" <aims...@nospam.here> wrote in message
news:3D063867...@nospam.here...
> AGreen1209 wrote:
>
> > Please don't overgeneralize, and then turn around and smugly say anyone
who
> > attacks your general, stereotypical statements is just feeling "guilty".
I for
> > one don't feel guilty, because I think my son is better off for having
been in
> > the daycare situation he is in.
>
> This is totally an aside, but I couldn't help but make the comparison in
> how the arguments sound so similar to those who argue the "bf/ff thing."
>
> Usually it is the formula feeder everyone is attacking, knowing full
> well they have no leg to stand on, since everyone knows bf is far
> superior. But everyone continues to make general, stereotypical
> statements not knowing their individual situation.
>
> Now we have the stay home vs. day care argument and some of the same
> people who attack the ff-er mercilously are asking for those to not
> judge them and consider their individual situation...
>
> Hmmm...
>
> (not saying you do this, Amanda, just couldn't help but see the
similarity)
>
H Schinske
>How sad that you actually admit you can be replaced by a day care
>worker. That someone else is a better "mother-figure" to your
>child(ren) than you can be.
Personally, I don't think mothers were intended to raise children all by
themselves. They were intended to raise them in a community of extended family
and friends, where adults and children of all ages were around all the time,
and work and play were not clearly divided. Most of us have not got that kind
of community any longer. We have various social substitutes, including
playgrounds, nursery schools, daycares, help from family, etc. These
substitutes can work more or less well for different families in different
situations.
I don't see it as greatly different from whether we are better off working for
wages, or better off sending children to public schools, or better off doing x,
y, and z that are the default choices in our society. In each case, the average
effect may be somewhat detrimental, because so many employers are bad, or so
many schools are bad, or whatever, but the overall average does not dictate
that every employer or every school is bad.
--Helen
Aimee
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Michelle S. Spina" <sp...@mit.edu> wrote in message
news:3D0654F6...@mit.edu...
> "Mary S." wrote:
> >
> > AGreen1209 wrote:
> >
> > > I can object to it. Case in point: my mother never worked. We never
had a
> > > daycare provider. All four of us have trouble in social situations.
My nieces
> > > and nephews are not in daycare, same thing.
> > >
> > > My son is in daycare 2-3 days per week. He is outgoing, friendly, and
can play
> > > with children of all ages, and he is not even three years old.
> >
> > Isn't this an exact parallel to the BF/FF arguments? Grandmothers who
> > insist that their kids were formula fed and were never sick a day in
> > their lives, while their neighbor breastfed and those children were
> > always coming down with ear infections... the old "but we were all FF
> > and we turned out fine" argument?
>
> Yup. Lousy argument!
>
> >
> > There is objective research that shows that breastfed children are
> > healthier than formula-fed children. Is there research about children
> > who are raised by a full-time parent vs. children who are put into
> > full-time daycare? For the sake of this argument, we should compare
> > working part-time to combifeeding, which is much harder to get data on.
> > There ought to be studies out there on SAH kids and daycare kids and
> > what the effects are.
>
> There are studies that show conclusions in both directions (i.e., that
> high quality day-care is actually *better* for kids, and that stay at
> home parenting is better), which, as far as I'm concerned, means that
> there actually isn't any difference (sorry aimsmith!). This is all
> predicated on *quality* child care, of course. Obviously, lousy child
> care (whether it's parent or not) is bad for kids.
>
> m.
> James 12/17/99
> munchkin #2 EDD 10/23/02
>
Charlotte M.
news:XLtN8.282$NQ1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> I'm trying not to get involved with this huge fight, but just responding
> with my personal feelings. I don't know what your mother did or didn't do
> for you and your brothers and sisters, but it is still a mother's
> responsibility to raise her children,
Just out of curiosity, are you planning to homeschool?
Charlotte
Kavvy
aimsmith wrote in message
>
>How about this: how does it make one *feel* to leave their child with
>someone else all day?
Lonely, sad, anxious, nervous, worried. Not great things. I feel that way
regardless of who I leave them with, even their dad. I think that is more
about me then about them to be honest. Dad is their parent too. He loves
them just as much. I trust him. I'm just selfish and want to be with them
instead. My actual *feelings* are pretty much the same regardless of who
they are with when they are babies. How do I *feel* when I go to work and
get a paycheck. Tired ;-) but also secure and independent. Those are
pretty good feelings. But I don't base my decisions on feelings only, life
gets in the way. Lots of things feel good but they aren't the best for us
and vice versa. Somethings that don't feel good right now are better in the
long run. Whether or not this is the case with WOH versus SAH really
depends on the individuals in the family and their circumstances. I've
never seen anything that proves there is 'one right way' when applied to
actual people.
If it's an infant, what if they miss the first
>rolling over, laugh, crawl, walk, whatever? Personally, I would feel
>horrible.
Neither of mine up and walked across the room in one 5 minute window so I
don't feel like I really missed those things.
Aimee
least until they're 1-2), so it's a pretty bad thing imo, like a double bad
wammy.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Brigitte" <ba...@rocketmail.com> wrote in message
news:ae5a8a$j65$1...@iac5.navix.net...
> Do you honestly feel that breastfeeding is
> more important than having one's child in
> daycare all day?
>
> "Jess" <jess...@pobox.com> wrote in message
> news:s29cgugl5cvk5ea665u4308sgnfqskne51@4ax.c
Aimee
lactating mammary glands. Although, I have been tempted to see if I could
somehow lactate him.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Jess" <jess...@pobox.com> wrote in message
news:t38cgug7b11eakq0d...@4ax.com...
> >mothers who choose to work outside of the home and not raise their own
> >children
>
> Explain to me, exactly, how having my husband raise my children while
> I work is detrimental to them. Moreso, explain how allowing my
> children to be in a good supportive environment with trained educators
> during the daytime is detrimental to them.
>
> Christ, you're a sexist pig. "Women should stay home with their
> children!"
>
> Has it ever occurred to you that some of us WANT to be
> self-supporting, as opposed to dependent and helpless? Do you realize
> one of the strongest predicters for post-divorce poverty is not
> returning to full-time work by the time a child is one year? With 60%
> of marriages collapsing, it's not as if you can just ignore divorce as
> a possibility.
>
> Moreover, why do you assume only women are the ones that can stay at
> home with kids?
>
> Jess
>
>
>
aimsmith
> Like the fact that you're a trolling cunt? No shit, Sherlock.
Boy does your age (or lack thereof) sure rear it's ugly head!
Charlotte M.
news:20020611172304...@mb-mt.aol.com...
> Personally, I don't think mothers were intended to raise children all by
> themselves.
I am SO glad you finally said this. I was just wondering where I could
interject this point and here you are! (kiss)
Personally, I think that children should be given more rounded versions of
how to participate in society. If we subdivide the world into "moms who
stay at home" vs. "moms who stick their kids in daycare", even with the
later amendment of "...or dads" we have just given the children a very small
look at what is possible in this world.
Personally, I *love* my career. I find huge amounts of fulfillment each time
I step out the front door and go do my thing. I am not making huge sums of
money and yes, it does require more organisation and effort on my part, but,
unpopular though this may be, I think my work is GREAT!
I have a dollar value placed on what I can do. I get my own money for the
work I do. At the end of the day, yeah, all the money gets thrown into the
household budget, but I like making a financial contribution.
That said, I also think it is beneficial for Brigitte to see me model the
values I want her to have, namely, I want her to be financially independent.
That is not to say that I think households who arrange their finances
differently are wrong or inferior, I am saying that this is a value I want
Brigitte to have, and by modelling what I feel is important, I am teaching
her that work is valuable.
Over the years, the amount of childcare I have paid for has gone down
considerably. Part of this is that now I have a spouse and I believe that
he should help shape Brigitte's life... something he can't do by seeing her
from 6pm - 8am, Monday through Friday, with time on weekends. So, with much
arranging, rearranging, and re-rearranging, we both work many hours each
week, but we both share the raising of Brigitte.
As a child, I did not know my father well. He was someone who cut the
grass, blew smoke rings, and who had a low tolerance for noise. As far as
family memories go, all of my early happy memories were of my mom.
I would like Brigitte to have happy memories of both of us. She will only
get happy memories if she actually spends time with my spouse, so I
encourage it, and I use their time together as my work time, the same way
Vern uses the time Brigitte and I are together as his work time.
Before anyone accuses me of being a career woman and part-time mom, I
homeschool Brigitte. A legitimate part of homeschooling Brigitte has been
to take her to work with me. I have very much rearranged my life to make
very little separation between motherhood and career.
Obviously, I don't think my way is the right way for everybody. I know that
my way is working for us, because Brigitte is a very likeable person. I
don't raise her alone in the same sense that my mother raised me, and I
think that Brigitte benefits from the modifications I have made on my own
childhood.
Charlotte
Kavvy
Aimee wrote in message ...
>Actually, having your child in daycare means you are not breastfeeding (at
>least until they're 1-2), so it's a pretty bad thing imo, like a double bad
>wammy.
That isn't true. Lots of working mothers breastfeed......for as long as
they want to.
Charlotte M.
> Actually, having your child in daycare means you are not breastfeeding (at
> least until they're 1-2), so it's a pretty bad thing imo, like a double
bad
> wammy.
Not so, not at all.
Early posters here will remember that for a portion of Brigitte's first two
years, she spent time in day care, sometimes it was full time, sometimes it
was part-time.
Given that she's nearly six and I'm still breastfeeding her, it's a pretty
safe bet that some mothers can have their children in daycare and
breastfeed.
Charlotte
--
Maternity Photographer and Doula
Visit www.birth.bc.ca and connect with other parents from around BC.
Aimee
>
> Seriously, that is one loaded question.
>
> In most children, questioning the status quo is a GREAT sign. But in
other
> children, it is the sign of bad parenting. As long as it is a process that
> is liberally sprinkled with good manners and respect for others, then it
is
> a desired development. If it is an unfolding of a kid who is both a menace
> to herself or himself, as well as to others, then it is roughly as
desirable
> as pinworms and planter's warts.
LOL, and I almost took the bait, but decided, I better not.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Charlotte M." <SPAMHEREbir...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:potN8.129644$Ka.89...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
aimsmith
>>Financial leech? Glad to know what you think of SAHMs. As someone who I
>>think of as my friend, that sucks that you see me as a fucking leech. Good
>>to know though that my choice is not respected by you.
>
>
> Hey, SHE's a leech.
Oh no! Backpedal, backpedal, backpedal...
Kavvy
Jess wrote in message ...
>>I've considered doing an overnight shift once my husband is employed and I
>>can afford to take a (significant) pay cut. I've done that job before but
>>I'm wondering, when do you sleep? That is what is concerning me. How do
>>you make that work?
>
>I made it work by doing overnight shifts until 3 a.m. and then
>sleeping until 7 a.m.
>
>FYI, it doesn't work.
Actually it might for me, I don't require much sleep and my kids sleep till
8 or 9 if they go to bed late enough. But, the shift is more like 11-8 or
there abouts so there would be no sleeping during the night. If I could
find a position where I had certain night time duties but was allowed to nap
off and on during the night, then I could make that work I think. It would
only be 4 nights a week and if I had solid sleep the other 3 nights I'd
survive ;-) I'm not sure that is an option though?
Thanks for the response. I think it makes a difference if you still have
small ones getting up on the nights you are able to sleep.
Aimee
get into trouble every time. There are so many factors that contribute to
children's personalities, even a parent's personality can effect a child.
The facts are still there though, bf is superior to ff, and parents raising
their own children is also superior providing that they are not lousy
parents to begin with.
Even though my mom didn't bf me, she would not put me in a daycare. She
tried, one day, and was so heartbroken she came and got me out.
Just like breasts are there for a reason and produce milk for your baby, I
believe if couples choose to make children, they should also choose to
parent/raise them. That's just my opinion, I don't mean to be mean, rude,
or otherwise. Someone else posted how it was like leaving her heart when
she left her child at daycare, and I am glad that she was at least honest
about it, so many are not. In definition, raising your child means actually
doing it??
A family member once said to me, I can't afford to stay at home with my
children, or have more children, because I need to pay for his/her college
education. The cycle continues.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"DGoree" <dgo...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020611145253...@mb-cs.aol.com...
> little black pot iamthe...@man.com wrote,
>
> <<I have oten wondered this. I ff 2 babies and bf #3. There is a huge
> difference in the way they all behave. Tantrums ect. 2 are very angry
> and up an down on the emotional scale all day but my bf baby is much
> different. He has his moments but they are nothing like the other 2 were>>
>
> Well, I breastfed all three of mine--#3 is still breastfeeding; I nursed
the
> boys until about age three and a half. (Yes, I nursed through pregnancy
and
> tandem nursed.) All three babies were nursed on demand, co-slept,
frequently
> held or carried, etc.
>
> Son #1 is intense, moody, thin-skinned, perfectionistic and easily
frustrated.
>
> Son #2 is noticeably less intense and moody, far less easily frustrated,
but
> also less able to entertain himself than son #1.
>
> Daughter is a far calmer baby than either of her brothers were, and much
better
> at keeping herself entertained than *either* of her brothers were at the
same
> age. The difference in temperament is so pronounced that the pediatrician
> commented at her 2-week visit that she seemed calmer than her brothers.
>
> I don't think it's breastfeeding, I think an awful lot of temperament is
just
> inborn.
>
> Mary Ellen
> William 2/14/95
> Matthew 4/13/97
> Margaret 9/1/01
>
Kandee Wright
> again, I am with you on this one also. Children should not be separated
> from their mothers until they are at least 2 years old or later.
Why is it ok at 2? Is there something that happens to make them need you less?
I don't agree. I think if anything they need you more and just as much as they
get older, at least in an emotional sense..
>
>
> I don't believe in giving your children to someone else to raise. I think
> it's wrong, and has a very big impact on them. It has become so acceptable
> and in the norm to do this now, that the stay at home moms who choose to
> raise their own children are getting the bad rap, and less and less women
> are choosing to raise their own children because of the pressure today.
As a SAHM I disagree that other people are raising a working family's children.
My husband works fulltime, yet he's as much an influence in their lives as I
am. Raising children isn't about being there 24/7. It's a lot more complicated
than that.
> I feel like I have a huge responsiblity to my children to teach them and
> raise them. They grow soooo quickly, I think of how many monumental moments
> I would have missed had I given them away to someone else to raise.
I stayed home because I didn't want to miss those moments. That part I agree
with. However, I still feel as though parents who work have the most influence
in a child's life and thus are raising them, not just the childcare provider. I
also happen to see childcare providers as an opportunity for a child to see what
other people think, believe. In a society that does not support extended-family
closeness, I see this as a great thing.
--
Aimee
something but you stated that sometimes bf can make an allergy worse in a
baby if the mother actively has an allergy, but in your page I read that bf
is best to preven allergies in babies. Can you explain what you mean to me?
Your page was very informative.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Beth Kevles" <kev...@mit.edu> wrote in message
news:3d066238$0$3940$b45e...@senator-bedfellow.mit.edu...
>
> Hi -
>
> Hoping I don't get flamed ...
>
> There appear to be two different arguments running here. One is about
> bf vs ff, the other about care-by-parents vs. daycare.
>
> The best studies I've heard about seem to say that high-quality daycare
> is as good as high quality parenting, for the statistical child in the
> statistical family. But they also indicate that high quality daycare
> isn't easy to find or afford, and that high quality parenting is ALSO
> not that easy to come by.
>
> As for bf vs. ff ...
>
> BF is better, health wise, for MOST babies. But not all babies. BF can
> increase the risk of allergy if the lactating mother has active
> allergies, for example. And BF'ing is NOT a magic bullet against deadly
> diseases. It just improves your baby's odds of recovery. (Native
> Americans all bf'd their babies, and still lost 90% of their population
> to smallpox.) There are some other health conditions (on mom's or
> baby's part) which would make bf'ing a bad decision from the standpoint
> of baby's health. But these are unusual cases.
>
> But how MUCH better is it to BF? Is it so much better that the mother
> should stay out of work for 6 weeks to establish bf'ing, and then pay to
> use a pump? That probably depends upon individual circumstances. Is it
> so much better that a mother should continue even if she resents doing
> it, and thus comes to resent her baby? (And yes, I know a number of
> mothers who are excellent parents, but HATED bf'ing.)
>
> And remember, the advantages and disadvantages of bf'ing apply to the
> statistical baby, not to the individual one. Sometimes the health
> advantages of bf'ing are obvious right from the start (as with the
> infant with eczema) but usually the effect of bf or ff won't be apparent
> for years (as with, say obesity or asthma) and even then the infant
> feeding decision is only one of several factors that might (or might
> not) have helped.
>
> I'm all in favor of bf'ing, and spreading bf education so that many more
> moms do it. But I don't think it's necessary to make MORE of the
> feeding decision than is necessary.
>
> By the way, my form of proselytising is at the playground, and is in the
> form of:
> I know a pediatrician who's supportive of breastfeeding, Want the
> number?
> Followed by:
> Breastfeeding can be difficult at first, but it's worth it. Please
> try for eight weeks before deciding whether or not to continue. By
> eight weeks you'll be enough recovered from the delivery to make a
> good decision that you'll be happy with.
>
> My two (or more!) cents,
> --Beth Kevles
> bethk...@aol.com
> http://web.mit.edu/kevles/www/nomilk.html -- a page for the
milk-allergic
> Disclaimer: Nothing in this message should be construed as medical
> advice. Please consult with your own medical practicioner.
>
Meghan
>FWIW, several of my friends whose children are grown or almost so feel strongly
>that their presence was more needed with the older children. An awful lot of
>things can happen between school and dinner, and an awful lot goes on in school
>that needs a parental ear.
I really have to agree with your friends. Tristan is 13. I stayed at home
with him for the first couple of years except for night classes once a week.
When he was almost 3, he went into daycare part-time while I took classes in
the morning. When he was 5, he went into kindergarten and then daycare for
the remainder of the day while I worked, and was in after-school care until he
was 10. At that point he was a latchkey kid. Just after he turned 11, I lost
my job (5 months pregnant, too) and never went back to work. At first I was
freelancing from home but found I'm just not disciplined enough for it. :) We
got ourselves in a better financial position and now I just SAH.
(FWIW, Tristan really took off socially, cognitively, and verbally once he
started daycare. The difference was amazing.)
Anyway, it's been tremendous for me to be home for Tristan. There's someone
here when he comes home, I talk to him about his day, he does his homework and
chores, etc. instead of screwing around like he used to. There's no 3-4 hour
gap where he's alone every day. I really don't want to knock his friends'
parents, having been a single parent myself, but out of his three closest
friends none has both parents living at home. One, whose mother died last
winter of cancer and lives with his socially inept father, has serious
odiferous hygiene problems and was just recently caught shoplifting - as a
consequence, he got grounded until the end of the school year, less than 2
weeks. Tristan would have been grounded until the end of *next* school year,
because since I'm home we can enforce it. Another has introduced Tristan to
words like "dildo" and "multi-orgasmic," wears a Dead Kennedys t-shirt (it's
so cute!) and talks about drugs a lot. The third pretty much plays video
games all day. ALL day.
The difference between Tristan as a latchkey kid and Tristan with a parent at
home is really huge, just like the difference between Tristan with one parent
and Tristan with two. Yes, he's old enough to take care of himself after
school until we came home but it's not ideal. At least he will talk to me
about his friends still. I don't expect that to last. :)
--
Meghan, mom to Tristan (12/6/88), Killian (7/18/00), and EDD Aug/Sep '02
Sew for your kids? Join Kidsew! http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kidsew
Alison Tooth
>
> Alison Tooth wrote:
> > Then there was the "not raise their own children" bit. Which was just
> > rude. My husband works - he's out of the house for 55-60 hours a week.
> > Does he not raise his children?
>
> Of course he does.
Well then, why say that mothers who work aren't raising their children?
You don't make any sense.
> You are at home so he can work.
I'm not at home so he can work! I'm at home because *I want to be*.
(And Jess, if you think I'm a leech, fuck you ;-P )
DH quite happily admits that if I was working/dead/whatever, there is no
way in hell that he would stay at home with the kids all day.
> > I stay at home because it is right for me and my family.
>
> I'm glad for you. I feel the same. Hopefully someone who is wavering
> or is trying to decide is reading this and maybe it will influence their
> decision.
I'm not trying to convince anyone. If someone doesn't want to stop
working, I think it's stupid, pointless, and harmful to them and their
child(ren) to try to make them stop and become a SAHP.
--
Alison
http://www.theportico.co.uk
Aimee
"Charlotte M." <SPAMHEREbir...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:zhuN8.221625$xS2.16...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
> "H Schinske" <hsch...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20020611172304...@mb-mt.aol.com...
>
> > Personally, I don't think mothers were intended to raise children all by
> > themselves.
>
> I am SO glad you finally said this. I was just wondering where I could
> interject this point and here you are! (kiss)
>
> Personally, I think that children should be given more rounded versions of
> how to participate in society. If we subdivide the world into "moms who
> stay at home" vs. "moms who stick their kids in daycare", even with the
> later amendment of "...or dads" we have just given the children a very
small
> look at what is possible in this world.
When I ask my daughter what she wants to be when she grows up, she doesn't
say a STAHM, she says a photographer, like mommy. I'm sure other moms who
have hobbies, like gardening, their children would want to be a gardener. I
tell my daughter all the time all the things she can be when she grows up.
Just the other day, she said she wanted to be a "spaceshipper", I explained
that's an astronaut. So, it boils down to what you teach your child when
you stay at home with him/her.
Aimee
> how to participate in society. If we subdivide the world into "moms who
> stay at home" vs. "moms who stick their kids in daycare", even with the
> later amendment of "...or dads" we have just given the children a very
small
> look at what is possible in this world.
I'm not sure what you mean, how do you think this debate gives children a
very small look at what's possible in the world?
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Charlotte M." <SPAMHEREbir...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:zhuN8.221625$xS2.16...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
Kandee Wright
> >Financial leech? Glad to know what you think of SAHMs. As someone who I
> >think of as my friend, that sucks that you see me as a fucking leech. Good
> >to know though that my choice is not respected by you.
>
> Hey, SHE's a leech. She's so useless as to obviously serve as a life
> support system for the gash between her legs that is her only purpose
> in life. I know the type, although she snipped the Ann Marlowe
> article I referenced, on women who sell their pussy in exchange for
> marriage.
So you didn't mean all SAHMs are leechs, just Aimsmith? Hmm. Whatever. Why is
she a leech and not me? We're both none-working stay-at-home moms.
> You, on the other hand, have a *job*. I fail to see the relevance to
> you. So you work at home. I work at home about 1/3d of the time
> myself. Your point? The point is, you do something other than spend
> your husband's money, bitch about how there's not enough of it, and
> yell at your kids to shut the hell up while you're on the computer,
> like some people. You actually have a job, you have something to talk
> to your husband about besides kids, and you don't bitch at him
> constantly about how you need more money when you're not willing to
> earn some yourself.
I work once in a blue moon, Jess. I can honestly say that my working just a
little bit actually costs us money so technically speaking I'm not contributing
to the funds. You said financial leech, sounded very distinctly that you called
her that based on the fact she's a stay-at-home mom. That is why I'm offended.
> I've seen the entitlement-due-to-vagina attitude here entirely too
> fucking often, and I hate it. No quicker way to become a misogynist
> than to listen to some woman say, "I earned my right to stay home!"
> Damn, no one else in the world did.
I honestly never seen anyone say they earned the right to stay home. But I have
seen people (myself included) work hard to put themselves in a position to stay
home/wah with their children. In that sense they earned it. It's not easy, you
know.
> The rest of us have to work and have jobs and bring money into our
> homes. Never mind the rates of depression among stay at home moms,
> the incredible correlation between unemployment and divorce, and the
> fact that a stay at home mom is very unlikely to be able to maintain a
> standard of living for her children after the divorce similar to the
> one previously known to them. That's all irrelevant at the moment,
> although that should all play into the decision, the point is, women
> like this think because Miracle of Birth happens for the 40th billion
> time or thereabouts, they get the right to never have to work again.
Women like this? I think you're over-generalizing. If you're angry with
Aimsmith, fine. However you might want to think about how word things because
I'm not the only one who took that comment as a general statement of SAHM.
> Moreover, because Miracle of Birth has happened for 40th billion time,
> this makes everyone else who wants to be independent and not suck off
> of someone else's money indiscriminately a Bad Mommmmmy. I suppose
> day care centers became these baby torturers' spots.
See comments like this: "...independent and not suck off of someone else's
money..." are what is pissing me off, Jess. I'm sucking off my husband if I'm
not working partime or fulltime is what you're saying. Oh, I know, it's doesn't
apply here as I work just enough for a distinction, right? You are back
pedaling. You called her a financial leech which you base off the fact she
stays home.
I see parenting as a team effort and my husband and I have made decisions
together based on what works best for us and what we feel is best.
>
>
> -- j.
Andrea Phillips
Charlotte M. wrote:
>>And honestly, is a noncompliant, demanding, talkative child such a
>>terrible thing? Seems like a sign of a developing personality and
>>ability to think for him or herself, to me. :)
>>
>
> Can O'Worms, anyone?
>
> Seriously, that is one loaded question.
I didn't mean it in an inflammatory way, honestly. :) My point was that
that was the definition of "aggressive behavior," and that it in and of
itself is not an inherently bad thing (though of course it could be),
and could even be construed as a good thing. Especially as compared to
what I think most people would call "aggressive behavior," that being
hitting, biting, picking on smaller children....
--Andrhia
Mommy to Sasha 5.20.02
Kandace Wright
>
> >How sad that you actually admit you can be replaced by a day care
> >worker. That someone else is a better "mother-figure" to your
> >child(ren) than you can be.
>
> Personally, I don't think mothers were intended to raise children all by
> themselves. They were intended to raise them in a community of extended
family
> and friends, where adults and children of all ages were around all the
time,
> and work and play were not clearly divided. Most of us have not got that
kind
> of community any longer. We have various social substitutes, including
> playgrounds, nursery schools, daycares, help from family, etc. These
> substitutes can work more or less well for different families in different
> situations.
I agree wholely with you. Mothers and fathers were not meant to raise their
children alone. I believe we were meant to live in larger groupings which
would typically be comprised of extended family members who would also
influence the way children are raised. This aspect is sorely missing in
today's society. I think daycare/playgroups help to compensate for this
lacking.
>
> I don't see it as greatly different from whether we are better off working
for
> wages, or better off sending children to public schools, or better off
doing x,
> y, and z that are the default choices in our society. In each case, the
average
> effect may be somewhat detrimental, because so many employers are bad, or
so
> many schools are bad, or whatever, but the overall average does not
dictate
> that every employer or every school is bad.
--
Kandace
Mom to Jackie 8/28/96, Jake 10/21/98, Jessie 7/24/01
http://www.kandacewright.com/
Kandace Wright
> >That said, I also think it is beneficial for Brigitte to see me model the
> >values I want her to have, namely, I want her to be financially
independent.
> >That is not to say that I think households who arrange their finances
> >differently are wrong or inferior, I am saying that this is a value I
want
> >Brigitte to have, and by modelling what I feel is important, I am
teaching
> >her that work is valuable.
>
> more prone to DV and abuse. If you have no way to leave, where's the
> incentive to treat you well?
You don't honestly believe that is the only way a man will treat his wife
well? That is so....backwards to me. Keith treats me well because I am a
person, and someone he loves and respects. My god, I can't imagine feeling
like I had to work to be sure my husband would continue treating me with
respect. That would make me feel pretty insecure in my relationship with
him.
Kandace Wright
> Has it ever occurred to you that some of us WANT to be
> self-supporting, as opposed to dependent and helpless? Do you realize
All moms who stay home are helpless? Keith is as dependent on me as I am on
him. If I leave, he'll need to put the kids in fulltime daycare or hire a
nanny, how much of his income do you think will go to that? He would need
to find more income or downsize to afford reputable childcare for 3 kids.
In some respects, I'm less dependent on him, because I am skilled in a field
which encourages working-at-home.
> one of the strongest predicters for post-divorce poverty is not
> returning to full-time work by the time a child is one year? With 60%
> of marriages collapsing, it's not as if you can just ignore divorce as
> a possibility.
Jess, some of us are very confident in our marriages. I can gaurantee
barring death Keith and I will celebrate 40 years together one day.
>
> Moreover, why do you assume only women are the ones that can stay at
> home with kids?
I don't assume only women.
Suzanne Dallapè
> home with kids?
For what it's worth, other mammals are raised by their mothers. Sometimes
the fathers are a part of the family unit, but they do not raise the young,
and in many species they don't stay around long enough to light a cigarette.
Biologically speaking, young mammals are wired to be with their mothers. We
have prolactin and breasts and high voices and soft arms and all those other
things that babies love. Human fathers are wonderful, because of their
large brains--they have the capacity to make the conscious decision to
parent equally or even more than the female parent, and we are very lucky
for this. But it generally isn't that way with most mammals, strictly
biologically speaking.
--S.
Charlotte M.
> > Personally, I think that children should be given more rounded versions
of
> > how to participate in society. If we subdivide the world into "moms who
> > stay at home" vs. "moms who stick their kids in daycare", even with the
> > later amendment of "...or dads" we have just given the children a very
> small
> > look at what is possible in this world.
>
> I'm not sure what you mean, how do you think this debate gives children a
> very small look at what's possible in the world?
Well, look at this thread. Right now, a bunch of grown women (no men so far
as I can see) are taking this debate and sending it in two very distinct
directions: either you stay at home with the kids OR you put them in
daycare. This thread has been clearly one side OR the other. There is no
grey in here.
What I want Brigitte to learn is that grey exists. I want her to not simply
believe that grey is possible, like Santa and the tooth fairy might be
possible, but to actually see the living proof of other options in action. I
am modelling *exactly* what I think is possible, which is that moms can have
a fulfilling career as a right AND be full-time moms.
Let me put it this way: how many of the people on either side of this debate
actually believe they can have it all? How many people believe that it is
possible to have it all, but haven't the foggiest clue where to start? How
many people believe I'm dreaming and haven't got the foggiest grip on
reality because I don't know what limitations exist for other mothers?
FWIW, this is not a new debate on this newsgroup. From past debates, I can
tell you that few people believe they can have it all; some people think
it's possible, but don't know where to start; and a whole buncha people
think I'm not too firmly planted in reality and have told me that my
suggestions are impossible for most women.
When my mother and father divorced, my mother became the FT caregiver of me,
as well as the sole breadwinner of the family. My mom had been a SAHM for
*thirty* years. You wanna talk job skills that were out of date? My mother's
last job was during WWII. Not only was my mom unskilled for the modern
workforce, she was 50+ (too old by most standards) and she had a serious
heart condition, diabetes, high blood pressure, and Belle's palsy, all of
which made her HUGELY unmarketable.
My mom was a tough cookie, though, and she taught me everything I now know
about business, entirely because she did with me as I do with Brigitte: she
took me with her to work. My mom's new career, started after 30 years out of
the workforce was to spend Saturdays at garage sales buying other people's
junk, then Sundays at the flea markets selling it all at a marked up price.
It wasn't glamorous, but it was a helluva living.
My mom didn't tell me to get a job or go to University or get married and
stay home. She instead taught me to see the difference between sinking and
swimming. Throughout it all, she simply modelled a credo I rarely see: when
the going gets tough, the tough get creative.
That's what I mean. My mom taught me. I'll teach Brigitte. And we have a
world with choices.
Charlotte M.
news:ovvN8.77345$KD3.4...@typhoon.ne.ipsvc.net...
> You don't honestly believe that is the only way a man will treat his wife
> well? That is so....backwards to me. Keith treats me well because I am a
> person, and someone he loves and respects. My god, I can't imagine
feeling
> like I had to work to be sure my husband would continue treating me with
> respect. That would make me feel pretty insecure in my relationship with
> him.
I don't believe that is the only incentive. Some men are good, wonderful
people.
But, some men are toads. Some women have _no_ money to call their own and
are afraid to leave their abusive husbands because they do not know how they
will survive. Some women live in beautiful gilded cages with men who
literally do "own" them, and who will continue to do so for a long time,
entirely because these women do not have the change they need to call a cab
from a payphone, never mind pay for the cab, or pay for a destination.
Five years in a Women's Centre in two provinces, I appreciate having my own
money.
Charlotte
Aimee
into the benefits of homeschooling her as she gets older. I think you
homeschool don't you? Are you involved with other homeschooling moms, or
groups? I know that would be a very important tool.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Charlotte M." <SPAMHEREbir...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:EXtN8.129733$Ka.89...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
> "Aimee" <aimeespla...@jps.net> wrote in message
> news:XLtN8.282$NQ1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > I'm trying not to get involved with this huge fight, but just responding
> > with my personal feelings. I don't know what your mother did or didn't
do
> > for you and your brothers and sisters, but it is still a mother's
> > responsibility to raise her children,
>
> Just out of curiosity, are you planning to homeschool?
>
> Charlotte
>
>
>
Kandace Wright
> >You don't honestly believe that is the only way a man will treat his wife
> >well? That is so....backwards to me. Keith treats me well because I am
a
> >person, and someone he loves and respects. My god, I can't imagine
feeling
> >like I had to work to be sure my husband would continue treating me with
> >respect. That would make me feel pretty insecure in my relationship with
> >him.
>
> earned income translates into brutal beatings and sticking around
> regardless -- how are you going to get an apartment and feed 3 kids
> with no assets?
>
> The fact is, earned income can quickly turn into a chance for freedom
> and no earned income can quickly turn into prison. I'd hope that my
> kids never were in a position to have to find that out, but I'd hope
> even harder that if they were, they weren't forced to borrow a buck
> from a neighbor for the crosstown bus to a battered women's shelter.
>
> Of course I hope my kids don't end up in abusive relationships. But
> earned income can be the thing that sets you fre in them.
It's all or nothing? I hope your children are able to recongnize an abusive
person and avoid that as well. I also hope that if they are in a healthy,
loving relationship they are secure enough to make decisions they want
whether it be stay home, stay home and work, work out of home or whatever.
What really sets you free in my opinion is a healthy, secure relationship
with a partner who has your best interests in mind as well as their own.
And vice versa. I feel free to leave whenever I want. I choose to stay
because I'm having a great time with Keith.
Aimee
bottle being fed to them by daycare provider. Breastfeeding in itself means
more than just giving the baby a meal.
--
Aimee
Lucky to be a SAHM to Amber-Ravelle born 9/18/98, and Aidan Hunter born
4/28/02
So proud of my breastfed babies!
Aimee Hood Photography - http://www.aimeehoodphotography.com
Pictures of my babies -
http://hometown.aol.com/auburnmist1/myhomepage/index.html
Aidan Hunter's very own webpage -
http://www.babiesonline.com/babies/a/aidanhunter
"Kavvy" <sefa...@dtgnet.com> wrote in message
news:JiuN8.178$%V2.8...@newsfeed.slurp.net...
Charlotte M.
> I am already homeschooling my daughter. She's 3 1/2. I'm still looking
> into the benefits of homeschooling her as she gets older. I think you
> homeschool don't you? Are you involved with other homeschooling moms, or
> groups? I know that would be a very important tool.
Yep. I homeschool. Until recently, Brigitte and I were only moderately
involved in the homeschool community, but as time has marched on, I've
noticed it is increasingly more important to keep Brigitte very social in
the homeschool community. Basically, school is just *easier* when we are
with people of like mind.
Charlotte