Travelling with Baby

Will not elaborate on the recent nightmare trip to and from Corpus Christi, Texas (where the hubby's grandmothers reside) other than to mention several cancellations, detours, last-minute car reservations, waiting on tarmacs, and arriving in the wee hours of the morning both in Texas and back in NY. Still traumatized, to say the least, though C was quite the trooper. But what I did want to mention briefly was a pretty ingenious invention for parents travelling on planes with babies/toddlers.

Like most parents flying economy (i.e., on a budget), we've had C on our laps when stuck in planes. Given my paranoid personality, I've always been freaked out about having C completely unrestrained, held only by my admittedly out-of-shape arms. In any sudden turbulence (think of that airplane scene in the "Lost" pilot), C would pretty much be a rag doll, tossed overhead and severely injured, if not worse. Enter the Baby B'Air, which is an FAA-approved safety vest, with a strap that loops around your own safety belt. The strap is mercifully long enough to allow your child some mobility but short enough to keep him/her from flying out of your lap in the event of sudden turbulence. C never seems to mind it once it's on, and it's peace of mind for me. Here is the link to their website, if you want to check it out (the video on their site is extremely cheesy, but it makes the point):

• http://babybair.com/

In the meantime, bon voyage!

Late Talker

So while flipping through an issue of "Westchester Family" the other day -- preparing for our eventual move to the 'burbs (gasp!) -- I saw an ad page that caught my eye. Entitled "5 Myths Every Parent of a Late Talker Needs to Know the Truth About", it was written by a speech therapist who was advocating her services (Isa Marrs, if anyone in Westchester is interested). While I'm no specialist and have no familiarity with speech development issues, and while the argument could be made that Marrs is scaring parents into using her services, I thought the information in this ad was important enough at least to share with any mama out there who might be concerned that her little one may be lagging behind speech-wise.

The 5 myths are as follows:

1. He's not talking because you don't make him.
2. She's not talking because her older sibling talks for her.
3. He's not talking because he's lazy.
4. He's not talking because boys develop later.
5. Don't worry; she'll grow out of it!

Marrs shoots down the first three by claiming that, no matter what, a child will talk if s/he can. But it's her response to #4 that I found really interesting: apparently, gender accounts for no more than 3% of the difference. Regardless of gender, your child should be using at least 10 words by 18-20 months and no fewer than 50 words by 21-30 months. If your child misses either of those milestones, have him/her evaluated.

And, lastly, apparently 1 out of 4 will not grow out of it. The longer it takes a child to start talking, the more likely s/he will have other difficulties. "To put it another way," she writes, "late talking is often an indicator that something else is wrong."

I am obviously not in the business of assessing childhood developmental problems, but I thought I'd pass on some information that I personally found useful. (After all, who knows what surprises Kid #2 will hold for me?)

NurtureShock

A friend of mine recommended this book to me, and I couldn't put it down. Dubbed the "Freakonomics of child-rearing", it certainly lived up to its hype, turning so many of my assumptions upside down. Like, apparently, the best predictor of your child's relationship with a new sibling is his/her existing relationship with a best friend. Or that praise is not necessarily a good thing (which, to be fair, I had read about in SuperBaby). Or that kids in diverse schools are less likely to have cross-racial friendships. Or that there's a specific way to get your baby to start talking. Or that spanking does not necessarily damage a kid (and that it may, in fact, actually have positive effects -- but, not to worry: neither the authors nor I are advocating spanking as a disciplinary method!). Etc. Etc. Such an interesting read -- and one that will no doubt inform the way I parent going forward. Highly recommended!

• http://www.amazon.com/NurtureShock-New-Thinking-About-Children/dp/0446504122

To Slather or Not to Slather

As an admittedly paranoid mama, it's been a relief this horrifically long winter (NY mamas, you know what I mean) not to have to worry about slathering toxic sunscreens on C. In fact, quite the opposite: I've been fretting about C not getting enough sun. But now that the leaves are starting to bud, we've been fine wearing hats and long sleeves/pants for prolonged outdoor play. Fine for now, but as the weather gets warmer and warmer, there will come a day, I'm sure, when C will be whining to run around in nothing but her diapers.

So, for prolonged outdoor play in the sun, what to do? There are serious, hormone-disrupting toxins in most of the chemical sunscreens we've been slathering on our kids, and the efficacy of most of these sunscreens are questionable at best. I've included a couple of links that I think are must-reads for anyone on the hunt for a good sunscreen. And hopefully the EWG (Environmental Working Group) site will be an eye-opening journey for anyone confused about the pros and cons of sunscreen.

• http://naturemoms.com/blog/2008/04/21/safe-sunscreens/
• http://www.ewg.org/2010sunscreen/9-surprising-facts-about-sunscreen/

So, if chemical sunscreens are a no-no, what about physical sunblocks? Well, then, you have to start worrying about the whole nanoparticle controversy. It's enough to drive a mama mad. But after doing all my research, I decided that I felt comfortable enough with Badger, which I ordered on Diapers.com, to start using it on C. It was also one of the EWG-recommended sunscreens.

• http://www.ewg.org/2010sunscreen/best-beach-sport-sunscreens/

And I appreciate all the information Badger posted on its website about the whole nanoparticle controversy (even if they concluded that nanoparticles weren't dangerous) and about its sunscreen (which doesn't contain nanoparticles):

• https://www.badgerbalm.com/t-SPF_tech.aspx

(But note to mamas out there running out to grab some Badger, MUST KNEAD THE TUBE!!! The natural oils separate, so lots of nicely scented oils squirted all over me when I first squeezed the tube.)

Finally, here is the EWG's list of sunscreens in its Hall of Shame. And to think: some mother has been duped into letting her little one roast for hours under the sun, under the mistaken impression that, with an SPF 100 sunscreen, he was protected. So infuriating:

• http://breakingnews.ewg.org/2011sunscreen/hall-of-shame-whats-wrong-with-the-sunscreen-protection-business/

Hopefully this post helped more than it confused? In the meantime, look for us this summer at a playground near you. I'll be the one with the hat large enough to cover Texas, and my kid will be the naked one, wearing a hat and reeking of lavender oil.