I do believe it is possible to distinguish a baby's cries. I also believe that some babies need to fuss themselves to sleep (not mine, but I know parents who say it about their child(ren) and I certainly don't think they're lying!), and I absolutely believe everyone here loves their children. But now here's the issue... A lot of pro-CIO chatter out there suggests that babies are manipulating us when they cry, that if a baby isn't wet or hungry they are absolutely fine and you should let them cry until they sleep -- however long that takes, and all manner of other extreme recommendations. I think this type of advice is dangerous, and yes, I think there are parents that take the experts' advice at face value and don't use their own common sense when it starts warning them through the sick feeling in their stomach. And I think this is why people want to stand up and say "wait a minute..." when these discussions take place. Because above all, parents need permission to listen to their own hearts. And when you're reading someone like Ezzo (baby's are little sinners out to manipulate you) or Ferber (if they throw up from crying just clean them up and put them back in the crib) from a place of sleep-deprived desperation, then it's important to really understand what you might find yourself doing because you looked outside of yourself and your baby for an answer. (And yes, I understand that some parents will find their hearts to say that leaving their baby to cry for a few minutes is the right answer for them.) Oh, and 5LM... I wasn't questioning your methods or commenting on your parenting. I was simply questioning your comment about the difference between an adult and a baby crying for attention vs. need.

Except that Facebook has legal rights to do pretty much whatever they want with your information, and they certainly do use it. I don't blog right now, but I don't have any worries about something awful happening because of blogging. I don't think there's much risk there. I do wonder about how a lot of kids will feel when they grow up and realize their parents put their whole lives out there on the Internet for everyone to see. I've seen some blogs that would rival reality television in that regard. (I'm not a fan of kids being used for entertainment on tv.) And what will these kids think of what their parents said about them when they're old enough to go search it out? Because of course they will. I also wonder about people getting busted by family members for things they say online. There's an awful lot of public venting that happens on the internet. I guess I think people shouldn't say things online that they wouldn't say to a person directly. If you'd hate for your kids/parents/friends to read it, then maybe you should reconsider writing it.

Also, imagine for a minute that someone came here and posted to say that last night she was upset and laying in bed crying, feeling like she needed a hug, and asked her husband for a little attention but the husband patted her on the back and left the room without a word. I'm willing to bet big dollars that people would respond with outrage on the part of the abandoned wife, and not many would be suggesting she simply stop crying for attention and learn to sooth herself already.

So if you're crying because of a bad dream or a toothache, then that's a good enough reason and not a "just for attention" reason, and your husband should respond? What if your baby has an equally valid reason, but simply can't explain it to you? Or are the only valid reasons for crying those that involve obvious injury? Serious question. I have a really hard time understanding the viewpoint that crying babies are simply being manipulative and should be ignored until they get over it. (Not saying anyone used these exact words on this thread, but that's the vibe I get from pro-CIO folks.)

What a fun gift idea! How about this book with a tea ball and loose leaf for some of the recipes?

I'm still in the first half of the book, which talks about the history of homemaking and the impacts of our consumer culture. The second half is the practical examples of real-life radical homemakers, so I expect that to generate a lot of ideas for me. One big thing that is coming out of my reading so far is a draw (back) toward less consumption in my life, in general. I have long felt inspired to create more and consume less, but I often find myself back to the treadmill and need to reach for inspiration to shake things up again. This book is definitely doing that for me. I've been relaying bits and pieces to my husband as I read (mostly stuff he's heard me say before) and I think I'll be starting a discussion with him about drastically lowering our consumption, and what that might look like for us. I think this seems especially relevant right now as we look around at the major amounts of consuming that happen at this time of year. I am toying with the idea of aiming for no/low first hand consumption in 2012. Basically, I'd like to plan for purchases that we will need to make, and go with used whenever possible, with very few exceptions. I alternate between feeling like this should be easy, and thinking this might be very difficult. It's not that the book is saying to do these things (not at this point, anyway), but rather that these are the ideas it is inspiring in me. It's good stuff! :D

I just started reading Radical Homemakers: Reclaiming Domesticity from a Consumer Culture and I'm feeling so inspired! I was on the library list for this one for several months, but I'm enjoying it so much I think I might have to buy myself a copy so I can highlight and make notes in it. (Somewhat ironic, I know.) I am nearing the end of the first half of the book, which discusses the history of homemakers, and it has been a fascinating read. I'm finding it very thought-provoking, and am looking forward to digging into the second half with examples of modern day homemakers. Has anyone else read this? Did it lead to any life changes/shifts for you? Do you consider yourself a radical homemaker?

I had a girl and boy and everyone said the same thing about how I now had a perfect family. Then four years later we had another boy, followed by a girl this past summer. Now everyone talks about how perfectly balanced it is that we have two of each! :001_wub: lol! So sorry for your loss. :grouphug: OP, I think the larger age gap is way easier than the shorter one. Going from two to three when my oldest two where 6 & 4 was actually pretty sweet. Much easier than the baby + toddler set-up. On the other hand, I will be honest and say that I can understand the "in the clear" comments. When my third was born I was just starting to feel like I had gained a little personal/family freedom, and that disappeared again when I jumped back into the baby stage. As much as I adore my sweet little ones, I'm looking forward to moving back out of this stage so that I have more time for myself, and our family can move into a more active stage together. It is different. Best to you, whatever you decide!

No, I would not. If I were crying at night and my husband ignored me, I would be devastated. I can't imagine doing that to my babies. Wishing you some restful nights with a happy, sleeping baby. :grouphug:

We recently signed up for Supercharged Science and I`m quite impressed. The videos make the experiments much more useful for me and the kids (6 & 9 yrs). Plus some of the activities are really cool... my kids didn`t stop talking about the plasma grapes for a week. I also like that you can leave comments on the site and the author will respond. Reading through the comments for various experiments is like an enhancement activity in and of itself!

I would not be ok with smoking around my kids, so I`d have to be clear about that. I might try a playdate once (at my house or a park somewhere) and address the smoking if or when it came up. Or, I might just say upfront that the smoking from the party caused some issues for us, and ask if the other mother would still like to get together knowing that smoking around the kids would not be acceptable. I guess it would depend on my relationship with the mother, or my sense of how that conversation would go. Either way, I would not allow my child play dates in a home where people smoked, even if they didn`t smoke in the home while my kid was there.

I'm with Rosie. I'd listen to any concerns, offer some reassurance, and if it persisted we'd have a conversation that goes something like this: "I'm good. You're good. We're good. Get over it." Then I would support him in his efforts to do just that, whether that meant a new hobby, some counseling, etc. I do not feel it is my job to change so that someone else can feel better. People are allowed to feel how they feel, but if they're unhappy with that, then they need to do the work to change things for themselves. That doesn't mean I wouldn't agree to reasonable requests that someone made of me, but no way would I carry the burden of someone else's insecurity. And I would expect the same from my husband in the reverse scenario. Best of luck to you. I'm sure this is all very challenging, and probably confusing and exasperating to boot. :grouphug:

Speaking of Waldorf, a friend of mine just launched her web site selling her AMAZING handicrafts. http://joyfulgypsy.wordpress.com/ She's incredibly talented, and her work is very high quality. I have some of her beautiful wool felted dolls, and have ordered a gnome house and a mushroom bowling set for my kids for Christmas. She has other items she's also selling, but they're not yet listed on her site. I think she plans to get to that soon. (There's an adorable little dress that is knitted on top with a cotton fabric bottom, which we've also ordered for our little girl. You can also purchase a pattern if you'd like to make one yourself. :D) Andrea's beautiful baby girl was recently diagnosed with Cystic Fibrosis, and they've started this family business to help with her medical costs. So shopping with them is a way to get lovely gifts while directly supporting a sweet family and their precious daughter. Happy shopping! :D

From what was written, it sounds as if the father was presenting a problem (no one wants to take the time to read the Singapore teacher materials) and the OP offered a possible solution -- a program that has instructions written to the student right there on the page, and so requires less teacher involvement. The father is now considering that option. That could be seen as a parent looking for a solution to a problem, yes. Is it ideal? Of course not. But it's certainly better than nothing, which is what has been suggested is happening. My point isn't that these parents have great educational goals and we're just misunderstanding. My point is that these parents may be open to options that can improve their situation, and so reporting them (the original question at hand) would seem a bit extreme. That, and I'm still curious about what things they are actually learning.

As someone who mentioned alternate learning opportunities such as these, I would like to clarify that I wasn't making an assumption like this at all. I was suggesting that there is more to an education than academic pursuits, and wondering what these kids might be learning as they go about their day. As you actually know this family you might have some insight into this and have therefore already formed an opinion on the matter. But it seems that many people jumped to conclusions of neglect without knowing an answer to the question "what are they learning?" Personally, I think the answer to that question is important when considering something as huge as whether or not to report a family for neglect.

No, the door isn`t being shut. Tibbie said the father told her this was an issue, so she suggested Math Mammoth so helping the child would be easier, and the father is looking into it. That doesn't sound like a parent that doesn't care, or someone who is actively withholding education from a child. Yes, it sounds as if this family has very low academic standards. Beyond low when compared to what most here consider minimum standards. But low/different standards do not equal neglect. And waiting until 12 yrs old to begin reading instruction is not the same thing as raising children to be illiterate, which is what some people here are saying is the case. Again, I think trying to help this family is a very good idea. I also think it's sad that kids who want to jump ahead in learning aren't supported in those efforts. But -- and this is a huge BUT -- those things in and of themselves do not warrant government intervention, IMO.

Yes, yes. But my point is that it`s *possible* that a family would deem it more important for young children to focus on skills that are different than the ones I focus on in my family. If a 10 yr old can do an oil change on a car and build an adirondack chair by himself (not things my child is likely to be doing solo at 10), but can`t read Percy Jackson by himself, does that mean he`s neglected and my kid is the one that is better off because she reads 2000-2500 pages a week? Some people have different goals for their kids. I`m not convinced, from what little we`ve been told, that this family is *neglecting* their children.

Right. But there's a difference between being academically prepared for college, and reading and writing on level with peers, which is what I referenced. Are you suggesting that not being academically prepared for college is the issue here? I think there are a lot of people who don't feel college is the goal when raising children, and I think that can be a valid perspective. I have been reading this thread with fascination. I would love to hear what the kids in this family are learning, as it's impossible for them to be learning nothing. I wonder what they are capable of at 6 & 9yrs that my own kids of that age wouldn't be able to do. Can they garden? Cook a meal? Bake bread? Build a table? I'm not prepared to say that those kids are worse off than mine just because we focus on reading while they're doing something else.

But Bill, she said that they do learn to read as teens, and that the current teens are reading/writing at level with their peers. So the issue isn't that these children are being raised to be illiterate, which is what everyone seems to be focusing on, but rather that this family is not actively teaching until a much later age than what is currently the mainstream norm. That, in and of itself, does not seem to be a reason to tar and feather this family. Tibbie, I think what you're doing -- offering suggestions, engaging the children and parents on terms that work for them -- is great, and the best you can do. I definitely thing reporting to any state officials would be a bad idea.

I would take a pregnancy test in this situation.

Have you homeschooled all of your kids from the beginning? If so, just think back to what it was like doing school with toddlers and babies under foot. Gack. lol! Actually, I've seen quite a few posts here from mothers that send their own 2-3 yr olds off to preschool so they can get stuff done with their older kids. I think that speaks volumes. For me, I'm trying not to wish away these days with my two youngest as I look forward to life being easier as they get older. I cannot imagine jumping back into this stage with someone else's kids when mine are finally all school-aged.

Maybe you can just write yourself some assessment/check lists and note your own evaluation at set times throughout the year. For example, you would create a line for reading level and note that he is working on CVC words. Then at the end of the year, you would note that he is now reading level one readers. Or as another similar option, take samples of his work in various areas at set times of the year and keep it in a notebook. Certainly you will be able to see progress simply by looking at the samples.

Well, you could have a person asking for a pair of jeans and so it sounds like a need, but in reality they have 30 pair of pants in the closet at home and just like clothes. Needy or greedy? Then you can have a person asking for knives because they really want to go to chef school after losing their job, and that's on the required tools list. Or perhaps there's a teen out there who asked for ceramic knives to gift to his mother, who never gets anything for herself but has been wanting knives forever. Or or or... Who knows what motivates people? When in doubt, assume the best of a person's intentions. I think if we can't do that, we shouldn't participate in these types of things. Not that I don't understand some of the frustration... I just think when we're easily frustrated should we either work on that, or chose another service/charity option that we can participate in with a light heart.

If she's using a Moby Wrap, she can tie it on herself first so that she can put baby in and out with it on, rather than putting baby on part way through tying. The instructions for this are on the Moby site (I think) and certainly in the instruction packet that came with the wrap. If she can't find them let me know and I'll find a link for you. I would also suggest she practice, practice, practice putting the sling/wrap on by herself. If she can't figure it out, she should get a carrier that works better for her in this regard. The Ergo is one of the best for quick in and outs, and especially good for back carries. (Though if she's having trouble with her carriers, she might find doing a back carry solo a challenge without practice.) If she has to take baby out for any reason, can she put him in the infant seat? She should be carrying that on the plane with her anyway, so it will have to go through security as well and will conveniently be right there. No real advice for on the plane, other than having positive thoughts for a good outcome. I had a surprisingly easy time flying with all my babies, even the super fussy one. So it can happen! :) Sending good thoughts her way!

Yes, this has been my experience as well. Interestingly enough, I am more like the thinking person you describe above. I am not at all emotional (unless you count those button pushing kid moments!) and tend to think through everything. I had to learn to understand my own feelings and really dig into it all to even be able to label anything past 'good' or 'bad'. I definitely don't respond emotionally to things, and have to consciously do the work of emotional processing. So no, not an emotional person here! It is my belief that our thoughts and beliefs dictate our feelings. I believe that God is a Divine spark in all of us, and that I can think, and ultimately feel, my way to that connection. That belief means I have the ability to feel God any time I want to reach for that feeling. To me, that's all very logical, and it's how I have thought my way to God. lol! Perhaps this could be described under the faith umbrella by some, and I'm simply misunderstanding what people mean by faith. But it's very much an experience that proves out my beliefs, for me.