School to Moms: No more PJ's!

A school in England is telling moms to stop dressing down when bringing kids to school. No PJ's! You can read a bit about that here.

Basically, after witnessing 50 mothers bring their children to school "not properly dressed" the school's principal felt compelled to send a letter home to instruct parents to wear proper attire when dropping kids off in the mornings. He said,

“People don’t go to see a lawyer, bank manager or doctor dressed in pajamas, so why do they think it’s okay to drop their children off at school dressed like that?”

 My question is, "How does he know how I dress to go to the doctor or to the bank?"

Now, I see his point. I do try to put on a pair of jeans and at least a decent shirt to drop my kids off at school each  morning. Seeing that I'm one of the fortunate few that doesn't have to be "at work" first thing in the morning, I take full advantage of that. My hair will be in a ponytail and if I find time to throw on some powder and mascara; consider yourself lucky. Perhaps as my youngest child gets older, I'll find more time to get ready needlessly each morning to simply drop my kids off and come home and work on the computer or train dogs all day. Let's not forget the proper clothing required to mop juice off of the floor and clean bathtubs...

I could see this argument if parents were sending their kids to school inappropriately dressed. I do think that getting up and putting on 'real' clothes can set a better pace for the day.. for me it signals "okay, lazy time is over - time to get to work!" However, if I choose to look like a slob when I drop my kids off at school... what's it to ya? Maybe my everyday clothes just LOOK like PJs? I know my dog walking clothes can certainly resemble clothes I might wear to lounge around the house. A long-sleeved tee, yoga pants, and tennis shoes. (and of course, the ponytail.) For what I'm doing after dropping kids off, that IS appropriate.

What do you think? Should a school be able to dictate how PARENTS look when dropping kids off at school?

Balloon Boy's Flight Just a Hoax?

Is there a bigger, or more bizarre story, right now than the "Balloon Boy"? If you've been living in a cave over the past week, here's the quick run-down.

Richard and Mayumi Heene claimed that their six-year-old son, Falcon, had climbed into a basket attached to a giant helium balloon that they created in their yard. When the balloon was to be inflated, it was supposed to be tethered, to avoid lift-off. Instead, it went soaring into the air. The Heene family claimed that they thought the little boy was being lifted off with the balloon, and went into total parental freak-out mode. (as would I...)

After authorities, and even the National Guard, were called in to help search for this poor child, and the balloon finally slowly drifted to the ground - no Falcon was to be found. No Falcon, and no basket attached to the balloon. Now the questions got more intense, "Did he fall out?" "Did we miss the basket falling away from the balloon?" "Where is he?!"

Long story short - he was found hiding in the garage at his house.. safe and sound. He had never been in any danger. At first this was a cause for serious celebration! Now, it is being called a huge scandal. Authorities are claiming that evidence suggests that the family planned the entire ordeal as a way of gaining media attention, in hopes of helping themselves get a reality show of their own.

"It has been determined that this is a hoax. We believe we have evidence at this point to indicate that this was a publicity stunt," Alderden told reporters. FOX News

Wow... would someone REALLY do such a thing? The family claims that they are not lying, but authorities are claiming to have factual evidence to suggest otherwise. I suppose only time will tell.

What do you think? Is this a family that is just purely motivated by publicity, or have they been wrongly accused over a truly horrifying event in their lives?

Read the complete story at Fox News.

Debate: Obama's Plan for Longer School Days - Shorter Summers

If you've not been informed of Obama's new plan for our public school systems, take a look here for a bit of information.

Obama and Duncan say kids in the United States need more school because kids in other nations have more school.



"Young people in other countries are going to school 25, 30 percent longer than our students here," Duncan told the AP. "I want to just level the playing field."

Kids in the U.S. spend more hours in school (1,146 instructional hours per year) than do kids in the Asian countries that persistently outscore the U.S. on math and science tests — Singapore (903), Taiwan (1,050), Japan (1,005) and Hong Kong (1,013). That is despite the fact that Taiwan, Japan and Hong Kong have longer school years (190 to 201 days) than does the U.S. (180 days).

I have to vote  big fat NO to this plan, Mr. President. My children are at school from 7:50am - 3:00pm. If they cannot learn what is necessary to succeed in life in these hours, then, pardon my saying so, but the curriculum, the staff, or the general make-up of schools needs to change. Not the time spent there.

I do understand one good point made: children in disadvantaged homes fall way behind during summer. I think having an OPTIONAL summer program for these kids is a WONDERFUL idea. However, my children do not need it. I can handle their schooling needs in the summer - I don't need Big Brother stepping in on this front.

America's family unit is falling apart as it is. Should we have children spend even more time away from home? What would this mean for after school activites? If my kids were at school for even ONE more hour a day (and this plan could mean up to 3 more hours of school each day) then there is no way I'd allow them to play sports or do other extra curricular activities. Cheer and football practice would simply not be allowed. The family meal trumps all to me. Is THIS good for kids? I say no.

My children love sports. Madison loves dance. I love the family time spent together at their events. I don't feel we should be put into the position of giving them up or spending even less time together. The only thing I really dislike about sending my kids to school is the huge amount of time I am NOT with them. Those are my kids.. I take great pride in raising them, and I grew them in my body. Parting with them Monday-Friday is not something I take lightly.

I will say that if this plan ever comes into action - and our schools become on the list of those to change - I will absolutely take my kids out of school. There is nothing more important than family time. It is proven that kids that spend more time with their family earn better grades, have higher self-esteem, and generally are more successful in life. Why should this time be stripped away further? I say NO! What say you?

Debate: Antidepressants

I haven't had a debate in a while, but I heard a startling stat on the news this morning that gave me the perfect idea for one.

According to the Today Show, 1 out of every 10 Americans is on antidepressants. The number is steadily RISING.

Now, I am certainly not a "Tom Cruise." I definitely personally know good friends of mine that truly suffer from REAL depression and they have had their entire lives changed by the benefits of the right medication. I also know a woman that was handed antidepressants one week after birthing her first baby because she was crying randomly throughout the day. "Umm.. it's called Baby Blues Doc... most women get that and it's NORMAL!"

This makes me wonder: "Should antidepressants be allowed to be prescribed without the patient also seeing a psychologist/psychiatrist?" Should any old family doctor be able to just write out an rx for any antidepressant he or she sees fit.. with no psych eval? Is our country combating it's crazy way of living by drugging itself? What say you?

Having Children: Selfish or Selfless?

While doing research for an article I'm contemplating writing, I accidentally stumbled upon a blog written by and for child-free people. Not infertile people, mind you, but people that actively choose not to have kids. I did not spend too much time there,but left with my head spinning!

Much of what I read indicated that they believed all reasons for having children are purely selfish, and that women are constantly nagging and bothering men to have more babies to fill voids in themselves. They claim that MOST women would lie about using birth control or even cheat on their husbands in order to have more children. (yikes!)

In the thread that I happened upon, there was a lot of women bashing other women for wanting children - or wanting more children.

"It's so selfish! They don't even care if the men don't want more!"

"What if the man wanted more and the woman didn't? It would be considered outrageous for him to pressure her to have more so why isn't the reverse true?"

I am not sure how to feel about all of what I read.

I assume it is no surprise that I'm "one of those women" that would probably keep having kids until I physically couldn't. (having 3 csections already, my physical ability to have more kids is already in jeopardy - my husband is so happy about that!) However, does this make me a crazy, selfish person? According to this blog, YES!

I will say that I do think having kids is selfish. Sure, you typically give up a lot in order to have children, especially infants, but in the long run, I like having kids. I'm having them for how they make me feel, the experience in life I want, and to have the controlled chaos I need to thrive. I didn't have kids for what I wanted to give to them.. if I did, I'd have been happy to stop at one. I could give Madison 100% of me if she was the only child. Nope.. I like having babies, I like raising kids, I like the noise, the fun, and never being able to go through the "20 items or less" checkout line at Wal Mart. Print me out a "SELFISH" label and I'll stick it to my forehead.

My next question is, "So what?" So what if I want 10 kids? So what if I only want 3? Is one number more selfish than the next? Where does the REALLY selfish line become officially crossed?

Right now, with our 3, I feel like life is pretty darn easy most of the time. We're financially comfortable, emotionally secure, and our kids get a heck of a lot of face time with Mom and Dad. I can totally see things being very much the same if we added another kid to this bunch... so does that make me selfish? Does wanting more children when things are so good make you a crazy, selfish woman?

Or...

Does wanting more kids when things are already at peak insanity make you selfish? This was always my personal opinion.. having more kids when you cannot handle the ones you already have. (financially, emotionally, quality time, etc) Not that it's still anyone's business - unless it's a really abusive or neglectful situation of course.

The final question - "What's wrong with women?" Seriously... why does any woman care what another woman chooses to do? I have friends with no kids, with lots of kids, with adopted kids, with foster kids... lots of variety in my bunch and I LOVE IT. I have childless friends that are that way by choice - I let them do my partying for me. My friends with more kids than me - I call them for advice! Can't we all just get along? Do we really need blogs started just so we can bash women who want children? Do we need to bash those who remain childless by choice? Is there anything else on earth that brings up as much emotion as the topic of having kids?

Madison pictured with friend Gracie as they were waiting for their turn to practise during dance dress rehearsal - the one who started my addiction to having children.

Debate: Most Harmful Parenting Style

In the parenting group I attend twice monthly, we've been discussing different parenting styles. There are typically three styles of parenting that we all can fit into: Permissive, Authoritative, Authoritarian.

Permissive parents would be those in which strive to be "friends" with their children, have little to no rules and do not provide consequences when rules are broken. A common phrase of the permissive parent would be, "Aww... it's okay, they're just being kids." This phrase could be applied as easily to accidentally spilling a cup of juice as it could be to them punching their friend in the eye.

Authoritative parents would be considered the "middle ground" parents and the type that is deemed most healthy for children. Parents in this group know how to pick battles, how to be attentive but not overly protective, know how to let children fail without making them feel like failures, and also stick to their guns on important issues.

Authoritarian parents would commonly be those in generations past, but many parents today still use this method simply because it was what was taught to them. These would be "I'm right and you're wrong" parents. No explanation for "being in trouble" is typically seen as necessary from parent to child, children's emotions are often overlooked or deemed unimportant, and parents in this category can often be verbally, emotionally, and physically abusive. (not always.. but it is common.)

So, up for debate today: Which extreme parenting style, Permissive or Authoritarian, is most detrimental to children long-term? Is being allowed to live without rules and consequences more harmful once you become an adult than never learning how to make mistakes without being extremely hard on yourself? Is having your way most of the time going to make your life harder as an adult than having your self-esteem constantly beaten down?

What do you think?

Debate: Gender Selection

Technology has done amazing things in the lives of many that have struggled with infertility. From medications that help a woman's body finally mature and release an egg to procedures to actually fertilize egg with sperm outside of the body and then place an embryo into the mother's womb. When does technology go to far?

There is a procedure now where infertility specialists can analyze and take a 'xy' (male) or a 'xx' (female) sperm with the specific purpose of giving a couple a child with the gender they request.

Debate: Should couples be allowed to choose their child's gender when undergoing IVF?

Rules:
1. Play Nice
2. Stay on Topic - only debate the question presented and do not go into other areas of the topic.
3. Debate format - no fighting.
4. HAVE FUN!

Debate: Seat Belt Laws

This is a debate that even my husband and I have had, so I thought others might enjoy telling their views on the topic.

Debate: Are seat belt laws fair? Do you feel the government has the right to tell you that you must wear your seat belt or face a fine, or do you believe it should be each individual's choice to take the risk to not wear his or her seat belt?

Different note: As soon as my computer will upload it, I will have a picture of our newest foster dog. A gorgeous, white, Border Collie mix.

Debate: Animal Testing

Your debate question for the week is:

Is it morally acceptable to use animals for experimental testings for things like vaccinations, new medications, make-up, etc.?

Run Down of Rules:

1. No anonymous comments. Please put your name if you must post anonymously.
2. Debate - don't fight.
3. Stay on topic.
4. Think about what the other side says with an open mind, and have fun!

Debate: Child Beauty Pageants

Here is this week's debate topic. It was brought on due to the pageant season and seeing all of the little princesses dolled up to ride on floats in our town's parade last week.

The question up for debate is:

Are beauty pageants harmful to children?

Remember the rules of debate.
- No anonymous comments. All anonymous comments must be ended with your name or they will be deleted.
- No attacking. Please state your opinion in a thoughtful and organized way that makes each reader think about what you are saying - not become offended and want to attack you back.
- Try to back up anything you state. If you can give first hand experiences with the debate topics, it will help your cause.
- Have fun! Debates are supposed to be thought-provoking and enjoyable. When debates turn into fights, the debate has ended and turned into something else. Stick to debate-format, please.

Debate: Are you a believer?

I thought that it might be fun to have a debate once a week or so. Sometimes it might be serious and others just for fun. I love hearing every one's opinions on all kinds of crazy issues! One rule: NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS! If you're not a blogger and have to use the ann. option to comment, include your name at the bottom. Come on.. the rest of us are out here for the world to see. It's only fair!

So, first debate: Are you a believer.. in aliens? Do you think Earth is the best thing in the universe and we humans are "it" when it comes to intelligent beings like us? Are people just crazy that think there could possibly be flying saucers and little green men visiting our planet from time to time to abduct people and snoop around?

Do you think it's ridiculous to assume that we are the most advanced beings in the entire vastness of space? Do you just know you saw something that had to be UFO material in the past?

Be brave, post your opinions! I'll post mine after a few roll in. Don't worry, I won't change mine to suit the majority. When do I ever do that?

Happy debating!