Babies & Kids Blog » News

I read a pretty “sad” article this morning from the ChicagoTribune.com which discussed a survey that found that today parents are saving less for their children’s future college tuition than they were last year.  According to the “The State of College Savings” survey: 

“This year was bleaker than last year for college savings, according to the report, which surveyed 800 parents. Forty-three percent of those who responded said they have saved nothing at all, compared with 27 percent last year.”

Now, grandparents have either been asked or have stepped up to the plate themselves to help pay college expenses.  There could be a number of reasons why parents haven’t been able to or do not save for their children’s college tuition.  Some parents may not value a college education as much as others, so if their child wants to go to college, it’s up to them to find a way to pay.  Some parents may not have the means, especially considering the current state of the economy. 

This was also troubling:

“Estimating that tuition and board will increase 5 percent annually, the projected cost of college in 15 years will be more than $100,000 for a four-year public college and more than $200,000 for a private college, according to the survey.”

Yikes! Here I thought my elementary private school education was pretty pricey.  I have some cousins who attend the same school I went to who’s parents are paying thousands more than my parents were paying back in the day. 

Sadly, money rules the world and having a college education these days seems vital with the competitive job market.

You should really read the entire article here.

Image Source

There is a large percentage of kids’ in America who are obese…yadda yadda…we keep hearing this.  I was happy to read an article today from the Canadian Press which discusses the fact that there seems to be a growing number of children in the U.S. between ages six to eleven who have gym memberships or who are participating in local fitness classes and activities.  I was thrilled to learn that fitness centers are trying to appeal to the kids with what’s currently popular:

“At Action Kids Fitness Center, with two locations in California, children can take a 40-to 45-minute circuit training workout with resistance machines and cardio stations, including stationary bikes that connect to PlayStation 2. The centre also has hip-hop dance, yoga, karate and monthly nutrition classes.”

And you thought video games were the enemy.  For those of you who don’t already know, the Wii Fit came out recently (Dreamgear Wii Fit 5-in-1 Fitness Bundle - $79.99 on Smarter.com) and promotes kids’ not sitting on their bums while playing video games, but interacting physically with the games.  
                                
                                    

I’ve heard there isn’t as much movement going on during the games as one would imagine.  But, I say…moving a little is still moving…period.   I’m sure the makers of the Wii Fit have heard complaints and will hopefully improve the games to make them a bit more “high impact” for their Wii Fit 2 release.

Another issue that was brought up in the article was the fact that kids are not going outside to play: 

“In the ’50s and ’60s, kids were playing and they were playing outside,” he said. “We didn’t have all these concerns about overweight, out-of-shape kids.”

Sadly, many would agree that playing outside is sometimes not an option considering how high their paranoia is about living in an unsafe neighborhood.

Click here to read the entire article.

More alternatives are needed:

I’ve mentioned some of these videos before, but if you want your kids to safely work out inside the house you should check out some of these fitness videos for kids: 

  Get Fit Kids, Vol.1: Hustle - Bustle Move Your Muscles!: $10.34

Roberta’s Fitness for Kids: $6.86

Fun House Fitness - The Swamp Stomp and The Fun House Funk: $3.58

What other ways do you try to help your kids stay fit?  That is, if they are not really into playing sports or dance classes?

We all know parenting is tiring and stressful at times, but how do you stay relaxed enough at night to get a good night’s sleep?  MSNBC.com gives us some tips on how to sleep better at night:

• Relax, relax, relax. By exercising during the day — but not too close to bedtime — you’ll likely have an easier time relaxing at night. Relaxation tapes and techniques also may help. If you have health insurance, check to see whether your plan would cover a visit to a cognitive behavioral therapist who could teach you relaxation techniques and other methods for falling asleep. (Find relaxation tapes at Smarter.com.)
• Who’s that sleeping in your bed? If you allow your children or pets to sleep in bed with you, this could be contributing to your sleep problems in a big way. Decide whether it’s time to reassess the situation. (It is my opinion that your bed should be your sanctuary.)
• Monitor your habits. Consumer Reports says these habits could affect your ability to sleep at night: long or late-day naps; watching TV in bed; drinking alcohol or caffeinated beverages close to bedtime; eating large meals at night; and varying your bedtime and wake-up times throughout the week.  (I always thought drinking a glass of red wine before bed helps you relax…?  I think it’s an exception to the no alcohol rule. Calming tea helps as well. )
• Think about your mattress. Is it more than eight years old? If so, it might be time to replace it. (If you aren’t in the market for a new mattress yet, flipping your mattress every season every 3 months helps.You can shop through a wide variety of mattresses at Smarter.com.) 
• Talk to your doctor. If these alternatives don’t work for you and you continue to suffer from insomnia, visit your doctor. You may be a candidate for a prescription sleep aid on a short-term basis.

Read the full article at MSNBC.com.  There is some interesting statistics and information on why sleep meds are bad and why you can’t sleep in the first place.

Does anyone have any products or other tips to recommend for better sleep?

Image Source

Speaking of baby kangaroos (Freebie Friday question), I was searching for some news to share with you all and came upon an column from BradentonHerald.com which explains the term “Kangaroo Care” and the benefits of this type of nurturing. It is exactly what you think it is: skin-to-skin contact with you baby right after birth which studies have shown “amazing results” in premature babies:

“….they found mothers and babies thrived as a result of KC. Mothers report they get to know their babies better, have a greater milk supply, have feelings of confidence and competence in the care of their babies and feel prepared to take their babies home.

The babies also benefit. They are able to maintain a normal temperature, heart rate and breathe better while doing KC. These benefits can last up to three hours after the KC. They are calmer, as are their mothers. They seem to have less pain and gain weight quicker.

For the hospitals, KC also has benefits. The babies are discharged sooner than those that do not have the benefit of KC. The parents are involved with the care which gives nurses more opportunities to teach parents about the care of their infant.”

No matter if your baby was born premature or not, it would be great if all mothers were able to stay in the hospital longer for free in order to learn how to properly bond with their newborn, but unfortunately that’s not how our medical care system works. Let’s see what happens in November. Vote, people!

I found the following books on Kangaroo Care on Smarter.com:

Kangaroo Babies: A Different Way of Mothering: $19.40 - Lowest Price on Smarter.com  

Kangaroo Care: The Best You Can Do to Help Your Preterm Infant: $13.50 - Lowest Price on Smarter.com

Baby slings also promote a bit of Kangaroo Care.  They serve as your own mommy kangaroo pouch and fathers can also bond this way.  I happy that the trend is has caught on for a while.

Shop for baby slings at Smarter.com.

I heard on the radio this morning that Mattel was “finally” awarded $100 million in the lawsuit against the makers of Bratz dolls.  Mattel actually asked for 1.8 billion dollars!  You may have heard about this a while ago.  Mattel believes the idea for the Bratz dolls was developed while the Bratz designer, Carter Bryant was working with their Barbie dolls - copyright infringement.  So, basically Mattel sees it like this:  Carter Bryant was busy making Barbies when he looked at one and said, “You know, if I make this doll’s head abnormally large for her body, slap on some whorish makeup, clothes & long stripperish-extentions…we might have something that little girls will DIE for!”  Mattel is just mad they didn’t think of it first (just kidding).

I went to ABCNews.com for more details: 

“A federal jury awarded toy giant Mattel the damages Tuesday in their copyright infringement lawsuit against MGA, but lawyers for the two playtime powerhouses are still wrangling over whether MGA can continue to make the saucy Bratz line. U.S. District Judge Stephen Larson must also consider whether any of the damages are duplicative before setting a final amount to be paid to Mattel.”

I know many-a-parent who would be thrilled if Bratz dolls were off the shelves.  Same with this Kennedy doll.  Why so much makeup (first of all)!?  I don’t know about you, but I don’t want my daughter playing with “Video-Ho Kennedy.”

Read the full ABCNews.com article here.

I was browsing around for an interesting article to share with you all, and I actually found a couple of interesting ones.

First, from the Associated Press: France bans broadcast of TV shows for babies. 

There are two cable channels aimed just for babies 24/7 and France’s minister for culture & communication called them “a danger” to a child’s development.  Now, shows aimed at children 3 years and under are completely banned!  Also, if any foreign shows air on French cable channels there must now be a warning message: “Watching television can slow the development of children under 3, even when it involves channels aimed specifically at them.”

This warning massage is probably to help prevent parents from simply changing channels around after one “baby show” is finished.  They hopefully just won’t ignore the message.  You have to read the entire article here.

I get why there needs to be laws against TV because of lazy parents who’s kids’ are actually raised by TV, but I do think that “just for babies” type television channels mean no harm.  It is up to parents to control how much television their baby will watch. 

Second, if you happen to be under 30 (but pretty close) and you stress about how your clock is ticking and you need to have all you babies ASAP…chill out and read this article from FoxNews.com:  Baby born to 61-year-old surrogate mother.

Yes, that’s not a typo….61!  This wonderful grannie carried her daughter & son-in-law’s child for 9 months because she has no uterus. 

Of course, having kids at such a young age is not recommended, but what I’m saying is: ladies, you still have time.

Does anyone happen to know the age of the oldest surrogate mother in America?

I read an article from MSNBC.com that discusses social networks sites like Facebook and how concerned parents are creating their own accounts to monitor their kids’ activity.

“Rod Carveth, 53, of New Britain, Conn., made his teenage daughter include him as a friend when she signed up for MySpace and Facebook. He wanted to make sure she wasn’t posting anything inappropriate or revealing too much personal information.He has had to ask her to remove messages that contained vulgar language.”

It would be pretty easy to set up an account as an attractive yet older man to see if your young under age daughter responds back.  I would hope that my daughter would simple click “DELETE” when she notices his age.  Realistically, you can pretend to be anyone and see how your teen reacts to eat type of person.  That can be a bit PSYCHO, but I’m sure there are parents who have thought about doing this.  The news freaks parents out about networking sites, for God sakes!  However, being this overprotective can backfire and “embarrass the kids and their friends and create resentment,” as Michael Solomon, a professor of marketing at Saint Joseph’s University in Philadelphia states in the article.

There is always the concern with your child revealing too much personal information on their profile alone, which can be seen by anyone on MySpace if your child sets themselves up to be older than 18.  I’ve never agreed with revealing too much personal info on social networking sites, unless your are close to everyone on your friends list (all family member, etc). 

Parents are setting up their own social networking accounts to keep in contact with family members as they are great for sharing pictures, emailing & etc, so this issue is kind of tough.  Does this mean that Facebook and MySpace will seem uncool to teens and they will eventually cancel their accounts?  Probably not.

I can really go on and on about this issue, but I’ll let you read the article.

Check out the full article here. 

Image Source

So, we all enjoyed/wanted to yack at/were affected by the documentary Super Size Me.  Soon after McDonald’s replaced their “super size” menus with healthier options & many other restaurants followed.  These days we are more consciously aware of the need for us to “go green” not only take care of nature, but take care of ourselves. It’s no surprise that a national poll conducted by C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital on Children’s Health lists parents’ top concern as obesity.

Here are the top ten overall health concerns for U.S. children in 2008 compared with 2007:

1. Childhood obesity -This was bumped up from number three.  

2. Drug abuse - This concern remained at number two.  I don’t think this concern will fall from the top ten anytime soon.

3. Smoking - Same with this concern.  This basically switched places with childhood obesity and was at number one last year. 

4. Bullying - This concern goes along with the “school violence” concern at number eight last year.  It jumped four spots.

5. Internet safety - This was bumped up a couple of spots I’m assuming due to the growing popularity of the internet with kids these days & shows like “To Catch a Predator.”

6. Child abuse & neglect - This concern was at number ten last year.

7. Teen pregnancy - This concern actually moved down a spot.  Could this maybe be evidence that teens are not learning to get pregnant from movies & TV?

8. Alcohol abuse - This one was pushed down four spots.  Maybe parent gave up & think kids will drink as long as they have peers to help them along.

9. AD/HD - Sexually transmitted infection - This concern stayed put at number nine.

10. Chemicals in the environment/Not enough opportunities for physical activity - This concern is new to the top ten and frankly, I’m glad it made it!  I do think that “not enough opportunities for physical activity” goes along with the concern over childhood obesity.

The concern from last year that did not make the top ten this year is driving accidents.  I’m sure if we compared top news stories in the media to this year’s top new stories we can tell why parent’s concerns change from year to year.

All these ”issues” are what parents feel they have no control over.  However, parents do have some control over this, and not too sound too “The More You Know”, but really….talk to your kids about these things before their friends do!  How would you suggest parents bring up issues like these with their kids?

Click here for more information on these poll results.

Okay, don’t get freaked out. I just thought the Poltergeist picture would be funny.  :)  Also, these are just studies & there is no “conclusive evidence.”  I read an article this morning from Canada.com that explained the research that was conducted on background television & a baby’s growth & development.  Americans sure love their television & kids’ are often raised by television so I’m sure that’s another reason why the researchers were curious to find out if  having the TV on constantly has any effect on kids’ development. I feel that children this young watch TV for the colors, sounds & shapes.  They are not necessarily learning anything from the TV shows they are watching yet anyway, but I’m no expert.  Here is a portion of the article:

Researchers studying children aged one to three found that when a TV was on and playing an episode of Jeopardy, the toddlers spent half as much time playing with a toy before moving onto another activity and three-quarters as much time in intense, focused play as they did when the TV was switched off.

“It’s all just play, but it’s thought to be very important and essentially the child is programming their own brain with this kind of activity,” says author Daniel Anderson, a psychology professor at the University of Massachusetts. “At the very least, parents should make sure children have plenty of quiet time for play.”

You would think that adult shows like Jeopardy would be GREAT to have on in the background because kids can somehow store that information somewhere deep in their memory for retrieval later in life.  It seems to me that they may be trying to link being distracted by TV at a young age to ADD.  Also, what about background music?  That can sometimes be “distracting”…right?

Click here to read the full article yourself.  It will be interesting to see the results of further research.

This news story I found on WILF.com reminds me of  NBC’s The Office: Season 3 “The Merger” episode when Hannah from the Stamford branch is breastfeeding in the main room in the office.  She gets upset because Ryan was staring at her and says, “Take a picture.  It’ll last longer!”  Then Creed takes a picture of her and sets it as his desktop picture.  LOL!  I love that show. ( I couldn’t find a video clip anywhere! )

So, the article discussed a law that was passed in Indiana for working mothers:

“Businesses with at least 25 employees must provide a private place, other than a bathroom stall, for nursing mothers to use a breast pump. Companies must provide a cold storage place for the milk, during the mother’s shift. The new law also requires reasonable paid breaks for the mother to pump.”

I have a feeling this one will pick up speed across the country.  It’s a privacy issue & an issue of concern for who strongly believe that breastfeeding is the best for their child.