In some small way, I wish we'd never started with the whole Santa Claus things. My kids are so deeply invested in it that I'm afraid finding out the truth is going to break their little hearts. My hope is that they'll learn gradually, like I did, and not all at once. Christmas is still magical to me, and I know that all those years experiencing the mystery and magic of Christmas is part of that feeling.

Cole Gamble, over at StrollerDerby, disagrees with me. He calls Santa Claus, along with the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny, one of the 14 lies we should stop telling our children. Others include:

• Just tell me the truth and you won't get in trouble.
• Do this or you won't get [something big you possibly can't take away anyway].
• Big kids eat their vegetables; aren't you a big kid?
• You'll make more friends if you play nice.
• Mommy and Daddy are "taking a nap."

Cole says it's also statistically impossible that your child is the prettiest/most handsome in the world, because in fact, his children already hold that title. Since we've been talking a lot about lying this week, I think Cole's timing with this hilarious list couldn't have been better.

Source

What kid doesn't like to play in the front seat of Mom and Dad's car? Whenever we're parked for any length of time, my kids beg to come up front and try out all of the buttons and knobs, so that when I finally turn the car back on, the radio is blasting and the windshield wipers work furiously, despite the fact that it's not raining.

But a three-year-old St. Louis boy recently decided that he was going to do more than explore the dashboard of his parent's SUV. He took the keys, told his mom he was going "bye bye," and then instead of heading out to the backyard, where his mother thought he was going, climbed into the family's SUV and put the keys in the ignition. He managed to get it into neutral, and then the vehicle rolled across the street and stopped only when it bumped into a neighbor's house.

The child wasn't hurt (and either was the SUV, the St. Louis Post reports), but stories like this one are a good reminder, especially during these hot summer days, to keep your car locked and your keys out of reach.

(via LilSugar)

Source

Say what you will about a smoker's right to light up in his car or her own home, but I think we can all agree that underage smoking is wrong, wrong, wrong. a new study suggests that menthol cigarettes are specifically formulated to attract and snag young smokers (and the keep the adult smokers hooked for life).

Menthol cigarettes are the minty ones, you know, the ones most like candy. they're also easier for a young system to tolerate than regular cigarettes. According to a new study out of Harvard, manufacturers of menthol cigarettes are using this information to nab the "vulnerable population." As smokers get used to menthol, like with pretty much anything else, they naturally prefer a stronger flavor or sensation.

The research also indicated that nearly fifty percent of smokers between the ages of twelve (yes, you read that right, TWELVE) and seventeen prefer menthol cigarettes. Menthol cigarettes make up about 28% of overall cigarette sales per year. There's no need to do the math here to realize that a big group of kids is smoking these cigarettes. Those who participated in the study are urging for stronger legislation. Phillip Morris, the company who owns Marlboro Milds, a milder form of menthol cigarette, deny such allegations, as does its parent company, Atria. Lorillard, owner of the best-selling Newport brand of menthol cigarettes, also denied they lure young smokers.

Cig pic by wetwebwork.

Source

Feist's hit song 1234 might not be what you want to use to teach your little one to count -- she leaves out a couple numbers on the way to ten. For an upcoming appearance on Sesame Street, however, she's changed the lyrics to focus on learning to count just to four. Stick with what you know, I say. In advance of the clip appearing on the show, it's made its way to YouTube.

Of course, Feist isn't the only celebrity to show up on Sesame Street. I remember seeing Itzhak Perlman, Yo-Yo Ma, and Billy Joel on the show when I was younger. Now that I have kids of my own, there have been even more great performances -- Ladysmith Black Mambazo, REM, Norah Jones, and Denyce Graves, to name a few.

Feist apparently enjoyed her performance with the Muppets an awful lot -- she told reporters at the Juno awards that "it was the best day of my life. I'm sorry Junos, but the Muppets trump everything!" Who could blame her, after all? Once upon a time, performing at Carnegie Hall was the hallmark of success, but if you ask me, getting to be on Sesame Street beats that hands -- or flippers, or paws, or whatever -- down.

Source

For someone who had little to say about her pregnancy, Minnie Driver is certainly opening up these days. She won't reveal the name of the baby's father and she has no plans on finding out the baby's sex before the big day, but she has a lot to say about the rest of parenting.

The actress recently revealed she has no real plans to stay with the baby's father and is seriously considering single motherhood. Now she admits she is prepared to be a "chubby" mother as well. As opposed to other Hollywood starlets who look like they were never pregnant to begin with (Keri Russell, I'm talking to YOU) or those who hit the gym moments after they shed the placenta and worked out frantically to reduce their size, Minnie has no plans to do anything other than be a mommy! Take that, Kate Hudson! (Hudson gained seventy pounds with son Ryder.)

Driver says to plan on seeing her around Malibu, and to plan on seeing her fat. As most of us realistic gals know, it takes a year to put it on, and heaven knows it can take at least a year to take it back off--if we ever do. Nice to hear someone from tinsel town taking a breath of reality! I doubt Minnie will stay 'chubby' as she likes to call it, given that she gained a ton of weight for her breakout role in Circle of Friends and lost all of it, but only time will tell. I just wish someone would advise Minnie she doesn't look fat now that she's pregnant--she looks fantastic!

Source

British man Gary Crutchley was enjoying watching his sons having fun on a large inflatable slide at an outdoor event and thought he'd capture the moment with a few pictures. Those innocent snapshots turned the family friendly event ugly, however, when the slide operator and a parent standing inline asked him to stop, even accusing him of taking pictures of their children to post on the internet. The word "pervert" was also thrown around.

Gary showed them the pictures he had taken, pictures of his own children, and even grabbed two police officers walking by to confirm he'd done nothing wrong. He hadn't, of course, but it ended what had turned out to be a pleasant day.

In this age of easy technology, parents can be understandably protective about strangers photographing their children. But does that mean that parents can no longer take pictures of their own children in public? I think this is a case of over-protectiveness gone bad, but there have been instances when I was uncomfortable with another parents' photography. Just last week, an older couple who appeared to be endeared by my children at an outdoor event turned their camcorder on them. I was left momentarily speechless; my gut told me they were harmless, yet I wasn't sure why they'd want video of my two kids.

How do you feel about parents taking pictures of kids in public places?

Source

President George Bush has signed into law the Children's Gasoline Burn Prevention Act, which is designed to prevent kids from being burned or otherwise injured from gasoline. The Act requires portable gasoline containers to conform to child resistance safety requirements already in place for other flammable liquids. This new requirement applies to containers manufactured for sale in the United States on or after January 17, 2009.

"Families who purchase gasoline cans with child resistant gas caps and who keep all flammable liquids out of the sight and reach of children are improving the safety of their homes," said Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) Acting Chairman Nancy Nord.

Keep your kids safe around gasoline by following this tips, courtesy of CPSC:

• Buy a gasoline container that is child resistant.
• Place a gasoline container in a well ventilated, cool area.
• Never store gasoline or other fuel inside the house, in the basement, or near a fuel-burning appliance, open flames, pilot lights, stoves, heaters, electric mowers, or any other sources of ignition.
• Never smoke near gasoline.
• Never carry gasoline in the trunk of the car. Escaping vapors can easily ignite.
• Keep gasoline, kerosene and other fuels out of the reach of children. Never permit children to play with matches or fuel.

The Children's Gasoline Burn Prevention Act was introduced to Congress by Dennis Moore, D-Kansas, after he learned of a tragic accident involving two children in his state. A four-year-old boy died and his younger brother was permanently scarred after they opened a gas can and spilled its contents near a hot water heater.

Source

Ever read the book Brave New World? In Aldous Huxley's science fiction masterpiece most people stop having babies the old fashioned way; instead humans are the product of test tubes, petri dishes and the like. With the advent of that seventy-year-old woman recently giving birth to twins, I'm starting to feel like the "fiction" part of sci-fi isn't so far-fetched.

Turns out scientists themselves don't think so either. A new report in the July edition of the Nature journal, scientists are predicting that within 30 years artifical wombs will be commonplace and it will be ethically acceptable to perform experiments on human embryos. Creeped out enough yet? They're also predicting infertility could go the way of the dinosaur, that labs will be able to manufacture eggs and sperm and that "genetic cassettes" will be used to correct diseases among other things.

In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) will be available for everyone and anyone from babies to grandmas will be able to have children. It was also noted that designer babies will remain an impossibility and people will still generally prefer making babies the old-school way, as it's less expensive and more fun. Having that kind of technology is one thing, but using it is another. Ethics take interesting turns throughout the years, and I don't necessarily think everyone would agree with all the possibilities mentioned above.

What do you think? Is this sort of progress inevitable and we should embrace it, or is there a good reason why infertility exists and we should let mother nature take her course?

Source

Who should decide whether a book is age appropriate for your child? Is it you? Is it her teacher? How about the librarian? What about the entire education system? Or, perhaps the publisher? In a move that is sure to gain controversy, publishers are attempting to put age-appropriate information on the covers of their books.

The guidelines would be much those of the movies, which determine what may or may not be appropriate for someone of a given age. Authors among others are vehemently against such guidelines. Among them is none other than J K Rowling, author of the Harry Potter books (the movies of which naturally are advertised with such guidelines). Also among them is Philip Pullman, the author of the His Dark Materials books on which the movie the Golden Compass was based.

Pullman perhaps put it best when he said that by adding age limits it would exclude a group of readers and that he doesn't want to do that. I would imagine the last thing an author would want is to have fewer readers of his books! Look, I read Clan of the Cave Bear when perhaps I was a little too young to fully understand it--but I turned out all right. I think books are different than movies, somehow, but I can't put my finger on it. I don't know how I feel about age guidelines for movies--those don't mean anything anymore as the studios use them to get more viewers--but I can't say I champion the idea of putting restrictions on books. Henry Miller will spin in his grave!

Pic by Nils Geylen.

Source

According to new research, they just might. A recent study suggests that pregnant mothers who eat nuts may impact their child's health later on. Women who consume nuts or "nut-products" like the beloved peanutbutter may increase the risk of asthma in their children by as much as 50%.

Before we go any further, I would like to point out for the record that peanuts are NOT nuts, they're legumes. It's true. Anyway, the Dutch researchers in charge of the study are leary of advising pregnant women to forego peanuts as they provide protein and nutrients. Although seafood also causes similar allergic reactions in children, the researchers were only able to make a connection to peanuts.

Four thousand women were surveyed for what they ate while pregnant along with their children's eating habits over eight years. The research indicated that women who ate nut products daily were more likely to have children with asthma. The link persisted despite factoring for the children's diet. Although there is no conclusive evidence at this time, the researchers think the toxin from the peanuts could pass through the placenta and sensitize the unborn baby. Needless to say, more studies are needed before anyone throws out her peanut butter jar!

Photo by Dr Stephen Dann.

Source