Dispelling second baby myths

Lately we've been talking again about having another baby.  Some days (usually when I've had at least 8 squares and a few drinks), I think yeah, maybe.  Other days, I'm more like the Tui side of this ad I made up:

Before we go further, there are some myths surrounding second babies that I felt the need to explore and/or dispel.

You forget the pain of childbirth

No you do not.  Nor do you forget the nine months of alcohol, caffeine and nice cheese deprivation.  And don't even get me started on the sleep deprivation.

What's another fart when you've already shit your pants

Or, more accurately, what's another 9 pound baby when your vagina already looks like last week's used dishcloth and your stomach, no matter how much of that god damned cream you put on it, will forever slightly sag over the top of your jeans?

It's cost effective

Yeah, ok, so you might as well get full use of the cot, high-chair and umpteen bags of baby clothes, but frankly getting to use your baby crap again does not equate to cost-effectiveness.  Secondly, "cost-effectiveness" is not a good reason for going through the aforementioned nine months of alcohol, caffeine and nice cheese deprivation, not to mention the 25 years of sleepless nights that are likely to follow.  Sorry, did I mention these two things already?  I'm a bit sleep deprived.

The second time around will be easier

Yes, the second time around we might actually have some clue as to what we're doing, but that doesn't guarantee it will be any easier.  My sister and I are a case in point on this one.  In fact, my sister can claim to have single-handedly forced my parents to relinquish their dreams of having a large family.  Three months worth of colic resulting in hours of crying in the evenings will do that.

Milkbaby needs a sibling

Does he?  I'm pretty sure he would see things differently.  There are variations on this theme: "you need an heir and a spare" (this argument only holds water if you actually have something for your kids to inherit).  Or: you'll want more than one kid to look after you in your old age.  Yeah, maybe.  

So why exactly do we have children?

Looked at in the cold hard light of day, even on limited hours of sleep, it doesn't really add up.  Put succinctly, children will ruin your body, your house, your bank account and your mind.  And all your nice shit that you've forgotten to put out of reach.

The only way I can explain humans' urge to breed is that we are, at base, animals.  And therefore we are programmed to do our part to continue the human species.  Though overbreeding - and by extension - overpopulation - is probably what is going to bring the human race to its knees, if not decapitate it altogether.

So there we go folks: another blog post with no pithy ending, no answer.  And I haven't even begun to explore the feminist angst raised by more time off from my career.  All that "can women really have it all?" stuff.  For another time.

Okay, so it's an ad

But it's pretty hilarious...

What we're reading: another vintage classic - Outside Over There

As a child, this book scared the bejesus out of me.  The kind of scary that makes you want to read it over and over again.  I suspect it's the same kind of scary that makes adults watch horror films, though I wouldn't know as I didn't progress beyond picture-books in the scary-stakes.

Or as one expert puts it: "From the very earliest age, when adults play the game of 'Boo!' with infants, the young learn the surprising fact that scariness can be discomforting fun." (Jerry Griswold, Feeling Like a Kid: Childhood and Children's Literature).

I'm now subjecting Milkbaby to the same thrills and intrigue that had me hooked.   Now, as an adult, it still holds the same intrigue, not least because I now know its chilling backstory.  We'll come to that.

Let's start with the story.  Ida, whose papa is away at sea, is playing her wonder-horn to rock the baby still.  But she's not watching, preferring instead to look out the window.  

First crucial mistake.  The goblins come and steal her baby sister away - "to be a nasty goblin's bride" - leaving an ice-baby in her place.  So Ida, making her second crucial mistake, climbs backwards out her window into Outside Over There.  Finally, on her father's advice, she tumbles right side round and finds herself "smack in the middle of a wedding".  Luckily, she's brought her goblin-taming horn with her.  Long story short, she manages to use the horn to sort the goblins from the baby, and retrieve her sister from the hubbub.  Phew.  You can see why the story had an addictive appeal to a dark-haired little girl with a younger sister.

Wikipedia suggests that Ida is jealous and resentful of the baby, for whom she is largely responsible while their father is away.  I didn't take this from the story, though Mama in the arbor does seem strangely unperturbed by the goings on in the back garden.

Now to the illustrations.  Quite simply, they are captivating, magical, and every time I read the book I see something new or decide I should try and locate a print of this or that picture for my wall.

And finally, the intrigue.  Sendak says this story was inspired by his fascination with the Lindbergh baby kidnapping case, and in his recent biopic, suggested that at least one illustration of the baby in the book was based on Charles Lindbergh Jr.

 Frankly, to me, all babies look very similar, but the suggestion of a link to a real case is enough to send shivers up my spine.  And there's no denying the clear similarities between these two button noses and rosebud lips.

Or these two innocent expressions:

The magic (and science) of kiss betters

I'd always secretly scorned parents who used the old "kiss it better?" with their screaming child.  And believe me, having worked in a children's store throughout my teenage years, I've seen my fair share of this parenting trick.

Recently, I've had outstanding success in deploying the "kiss-better" on Milkbaby.  Our conversations go something like this:

[bump, bang, stubbed toe/banged elbow/head etc]
[inconsolable screaming]
Me: "oh no, what's happened?"
Milkbaby: [more screaming]
Me: "Where does it hurt? Show me"
Milkbaby: [through vicious sobs] "on there" [pointing to hurt body part]
Me: "Want me to kiss it better?"
Milkbaby: [still sobbing] "yea"
Me: [administering a kiss] "there, all better"
Milkbaby: stops sobbing immediately, runs off to play.

It's incredible!  From screaming to silence in a 5 second interaction.

A kiss better also works better if administered
while wearing your best dress and high-heels -
though beware the surreptitious
nose-wipe-on-the-shoulder. 

Turns out there's actually some science behind it - it's the toddler version of the placebo effect.  One study even suggests that the placebo effect may be doubled in children.


However, like any parenting technique, google it and you'll find advice suggesting it's not such a good idea.  Apparently, one should not kiss better:

• a snake bite
• a jellyfish sting
• an open wound.

You would think that in all of the cases above, you'd be better off administering first aid than a smacking great kiss.  Or even thinking about removing your child from the situation causing the jellyfish sting or the snake bite?

You may also want to refrain from administering a kiss better on a bitten tongue.

What we're reading: An Introduction to the Criminal Law

There are some books that, despite being remembered with fond glow of childhood, don't quite retain that same magic upon rereading as an adult - even when reread with an enthusiastic two-year-old.

Perhaps it's the politically correct mother in me, but when the Avocado Baby came straight home from the hospital and started eating solids, I was all "hey! what about the milk?" I'm sure Milkbaby was thinking the same.

Lately I had a similar experience after coming across The Elephant and The Bad Baby at the library.  It's about a baby who doesn't say please.  Picking up this book was strangely well-timed, as we also have someone in our household who can say any other word he cares to repeat, but he will not say please.  Even if his life depended on it, I am sure he'd just stubbornly hold his mouth shut, smiling innocently and waiting to be given whatever he's requested.

Back to my critique of The Elephant and the Bad Baby.  For a start, babies aren't bad. Just lacking in knowledge of the rules and a few social graces. And in this case, mislead by a large elephant.  And I couldn't help noticing that not only is this baby labelled "bad" from the outset, he's a flaming ginger - the only one in the book.

Quick summary - *spoiler warning* - An elephant meets a baby.  The elephant asks baby if he'd like a ride.  Baby says yes.  Elephant asks baby if he'd like an ice-cream.  Baby says yes.  Angry shopkeeper chases.  Elephant asks baby if he'd like a biscuit.  Baby says yes.  Angry shopkeeper chases.  And so it goes.  Until the elephant comes to the realisation that that baby has NEVER ONCE said please.  But in the end it doesn't really matter because the baby's mummy cooks pancakes for everyone.

After a few reads (ie, at least fifty repeats), I realised it was basically an introduction to the principles of the criminal law, though thankfully (largely due to the baby's mummy's mad cooking skills) law enforcement officers do not have to get involved.

Theft, simpliciter - As you should have gathered from the short description above, this book is a rollicking tale of shoplifting, the elephant leading the bad baby astray and stealing ice-creams, pies, biscuits and all manner of tasty treats, supposedly on the baby's behalf.

Yoink.

The getaway - "and the elephant and the bad baby went rumpeta, rumpeta, rumpeta, all down the road, with the ice cream man and the pork butcher and the baker all running after".  Need I say more?

Defences to crimes - Is it entrapment? - What say the elephant is an undercover cop?  In criminal law, entrapment is conduct by a law enforcement agent inducing a person to commit an offence that the person would otherwise have been unlikely to commit.  However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the government agents merely provide what appears to be a favourable opportunity for the person to commit the crime.  So, if the elephant is an undercover cop, did he induce the baby to commit a crime he wouldn't have ordinarily committed, or just provide an opportunity to commit the crime?  It's a fine line.  We know this baby's already bad, so perhaps the elephant was just the vehicle for the crime spree the baby had been planning for months.

The law of parties - It's more likely that these two are in cahootz.  The law says that if you aid, abet, incite, counsel, procure or somehow otherwise convince an elephant to go on a stealing spree (even if you do little more than ride on his back and eat the treats), you're in the gun for just as much time as the elephant.


Matters of justification or excuse - No person shall be convicted of an offence by reason of any act done or omitted by him when under the age of 10 years.  Explains why this story is delightfully consequence free: the Crimes Act doesn't apply to animals, nor to children under 10.  Even bad ones.


Alternative dispute resolution - If all else fails, invite everyone home for cups of tea and pancakes. The baby's mummy will cook.

Are you "mom enough" for these weird toddler nursing positions?

I know you've all (all 6 of you, that is) been waiting for me to blog about this Time Magazine article:

Let's start by noting that this is a good example of the sensationalist schmaltz Time has been lowered to lately.  But hey, it got headlines and probably sold a few extra copies - so I guess it achieved its goal.

By all accounts (and there are many) the article is not much better.  In case you're wondering, it's about this weird thing that some strange "moms" seem to be doing called "attachment parenting".  And if you're totally green and wondering what "attachment parenting" is, it's a term invented by a man named Dr Sears for a parenting philosophy that suggests that if you are physically and emotionally available to your baby, the baby will form a secure attachment with you.  Well duh!  Except that the term has also become shorthand for more natural or alternative baby-raising-styles, including practices such as bed-sharing, baby-wearing and "extended" breast-feeding.  I hate to use the word "extended" like that - like somehow you've unnaturally managed to "extend" your breast-feeding career contract.  It's just breast-feeding, no matter how long it goes on for.

I digress.  Back to the cover photo.  My first reaction?  Huh, that's an interesting breastfeeding position.  I wonder if I have a milk crate about the right height at home?  I could cook dinner and breast-feed at the same time!

Anyone who has breastfed a milk-addicted toddler has had these thoughts.  Toddlers don't give a rats where you are or what you're doing, they just want the milk RIGHT NOW!  And if you've been clever enough to teach them a cuss-word or two, they might say RIGHT NOW GODDAMMIT!!

We've all seen these lovely diagrams with sleepy, milkdrunk newborns, nursing all quietly.

I thought I'd draw a few of my own that were more relevant to where Milkbaby is at in his "breast-feeding journey" (featuring Jamie Lynn Grumet's new one).

Toddler Nursing Positions:

Give them a go sometime.  But be careful, your toddler might get all attached to you or something.  And not just by your nipple.

Swearing: it's all about context

Everyone knows toddlers are like little parrots - they have an uncanny knack of picking out the most important or worst word in a sentence and repeating it back to you, usually more than once.  Over the last few weeks I've collected a few examples to suggest that it's not just parroting.  Because when it comes to swearing, context - and timing - is everything, right?

Milkbaby, immediately after throwing up ALL OVER his bed: "oh shit".

Milkbaby, upon the discovery by mum and dad that the car keys had been left at creche for the weekend: "fuck".

Milkbaby, after peeing all over the lounge floor: "oh gawd".

and the kicker:

Milkbaby, tonight, instead of saying goodnight to his dad and yelling down the stairs: "see ya, sucker!"

I'll worry about the odd swearword when they start to get used out of context.  Hopefully that won't happen until the teenage years.