Everything Birth's Blog on Midwifery, Attachment Parenting, Cloth Diapers and More

So, it’s tax time, and some of us are lucky enough to be getting a refund check from the IRS. Whatever will you do with all that money?

Well, obviously, the best thing to do will be to pay off any high interest debt you have, but consider this for a moment: Cash invested in a cloth diaper is a better financial investment than even investing it into a Savings Bond. In fact a good cloth diaper is easily worth its weight in gold. In the past, we discussed preparing for the start up costs of cloth diapering. If you happen to be getting some money back though, saving and scrimping for your baby’s healthiest diapering option won’t even be difficult. Granted, you could convince people to buy you cloth diapers if you are lucky enough to have someone throw you a shower, but if you have some extra money coming to you, I say go for it!

Need a couple of financially convincing points to mention to your spouse:

• Cloth diapers last through multiple children. This is not just a cost saver once, it’s a cost saver, potentially many times over.
• When you’re all done having children, and you’re ready to retire the awesome cloth diapers you purchase, you can then resell them here for a few hundred dollars.

Right now, there’s a huge sale on the FuzziBunz limited series Diaper Talk diapers. In a previous blog, I explained the bizarre phenomenon that happens with FuzziBunz limited edition diapers and the kind of financial return you can expect to gain from getting in on these deals.

Suddenly you’ve saved thousands of dollars, made a good choice for your baby’s health, and in the end, you get much of your money back by selling them on top of the thousands that you saved. While your at it, maybe you could stock up on reusables for yourself too… Aunt Flo often comes to visit sooner than we expect!

It seems as though breastfeeding has been a hotly debated topic for centuries, and the stuff they came up with centuries ago was quite interesting. Some of it seemed to make some sense and some of it seems like pure insanity. I found a great piece by Sünje Prühle. It’s entitled, What was the Best for an Infant from the Middle Ages to Early Modern Times in Europe? The Discussion Concerning Wet Nurses. Here are some of the most interesting historical findings based on translated centuries old literature and journals.

Personality Passed on Through Breast Milk

Thomas Platter (1499–1582) was a Swiss author. In his autobiographical notes he wrote that that he had been fed via a horn, like the horn from a cow. Apparently his mom couldn’t nurse, so he received cow’s milk from a cow horn. He mentioned that this method of nutrition had been essential for him. Interestingly, Normally this procedure resulted in the deaths of many infants because cow’s milk was considered unsuitable and indigestible by a small child. That’s interesting that it was perceived that way given the stance breastfeeding activists feel that formula based on cows milk is much less digestible than human breast milk. What was exponentially more interesting to me though was that animal milk, back then, was suspected of transferring the attributes of the host animal onto the child.

Even more interesting, it was believed that a mother could pass on her love and also her character through her breast milk. They furthermore believe that was what happened via her blood in the womb. While I see no actual scientific reason to believe this, I do remember reading once that the mood of the mother is passed to the  unborn child and causes the child’s brain to become hardwired into his personality.  I noticed this same phenomenon with my own children, but that is very easily explained now that we understand brain chemistry. It stands to reason that similarly, hormones would be released to a child that could establish a habitual mood in an infant that could be passed on to a child though.

Jokingly, I wondered to myself, what attributes could soybeans possibly transfer onto a newborn child?

A Love Affair With The Breast

In the past,  breastfeeding was a sign and a symbol of motherly love and devotion.  The theologian and musician, Heinrich von Laufenberg (c 1390–1460), actually explained that the child should suck with “lust” at the breast of his mother. That was kind of a repulsive thought to me, and when I read it, I couldn’t help but wonder what the deleting -breastfeeding-photos patrol that works at Facebook  would think of that idea. Would they then allow more moms to keep there photos up given it would be sexualizing the act? Or is that pretty much what already think is happening ?

So, we’ve established that it was believed that a woman could pass along a part of her essence to her child when she nursed. They also had some ideas for what would happen if an improper wet nurse was chosen. If a child were to nurse from and take in the character of a woman that was a complete stranger, it could be nearly lethal. They meant this not so much in a physical death, but in the death of the child’s intended self. They believed that when nursing from a strange woman’s breasts, if it wasn’t a good fit, the entire course of that child’s life could be permanently modified and ruined.

Dr. Spock, The Reincarnate of Bartholomeus Metlinger?

Just as famous pediatric doctor, Dr. Spock, was highly revered for his bizarre parenting tips in the middle of last century, Bartholomeus Metlinger was one of the most famous doctors of his times, and the stuff he came up with was just plain out in left field. Metlinger was the first pediatrician in Germany and worked in Noerdlingen (now in Swabia) and Augsburg (now in Bavaria) and he authored ‘Regiment der Kinder’ which was essentially a book for parents on parenting from the late 1400′s.

While Germany went through many different idioms, Metlinger’s propositions never changed in any of the editions of his book. He gave advice for parental care until the child was seven years old. His audience was made up of  mostly German bourgeoisie parents. He told parents that a baby should not get the milk of the biological mother until the fourteenth day. Before then, he explained, the quality of the milk would not be good for the infant. Oh yes, he wrote that. But wait, it gets even crazier! He also proposed that to avoid engorgement and drying up, young puppies should suck the milk out of the mother’s breasts. I suppose he found that more prudent than the “Pediatric Authors of Antiquity” who recommended that the waiting period be about two or three days before a child should nurse off of his actual mother’s breasts.  Oh, but these older doctors- they didn’t suggest puppies. No. No. No. They suggested instead that another woman could suck this early milk from the mother’s breasts! I have to assume Facebook would be fine with that.

Or Just don’t Nurse at All!

In the area around the cities of Augsburg and Noerdlingen it was most likely normal to feed babies cereals at a very young age.  For centuries, it is theorized that women in those parts likely by the suggestion of the quack  Bartholomeus Metlinger just didn’t feed their children breast milk at all. Interestingly Obviously, for centuries the infant death rate in this area was extremely high in comparison to other regions of Germany.

At the beginning of the nineteenth century, physicians guessed that in these geographic regions where breastfeeding simply didn’t occur for many generations, an atrophy of the female breasts happened because they surmised that the mammary glands became mutated after a long period of disuse for generations. Who knows if there is any merit there. Who even knows why the doctor suggested they not nurse. Perhaps there’s more. Perhaps there was some kind of toxin the the food supply there and he just happened to notice breastfeeding wasn’t working?  The doctors in the early 1800′s there thought that women simply lost their ability to nurse their children.

Reading through these stories, I simply can’t believe the theories that coincided with breast feeding throughout history and I sometimes wonder how our parenting choices will be viewed centuries from now.  What do you think? How do you suspect our society be viewed when we become history?

This cake recipe is so simple, even a child can learn how to do it. (Well, perhaps ONLY a child can learn how to do it.)

My daughter, expert baker, made this for me last night and as I watched her prepare it, I saw it for the first time through her eyes.

You will need:

• Wooden blocks like these:

• Magic

Step 1.

First you will need to prepare each block for cooking.

1. Wash each block under the imaginary sink while you count to twenty. Pay close attention, because I think it might be some kind of magic spell:  ”one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, weven, quelve, firstteen, secondteen, sixteen, secondteen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty.”
2. Blow on each block, being careful not to spit on them. If you spit on them, you will need to rewash them ALL.

Step 2.

Next you will flavor your batter.

1. Take each block individually and put it in the refrigerator while you count to five normally then move on to the next block.
2. Take all the blocks and shove them under your bed.
3. Seal off the flavoring by shoving a coat or blanket in front of the blocks.
4. Remove all blocks and put them into your shirt. If a block accidentally falls down into your pants, you will have to throw it near, but not at something of value. For example, a 55 gallon fish tank will do.

Step 3.

Cook your batter.

1. Don’t worry if you don’t have an oven, because a backpack will do nicely too. If you don’t have a big enough oven, you can split the cake layers up- putting half into the oven and half into the backpack. If you are using a backpack, make sure to remove all of your brother’s homework and pencils first by dumping them on the floor.
2. Wait twenty seconds while counting out loud: ”one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, ten, weven, quelve, firstteen, secondteen, sixteen, secondteen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty.”
3. Remove the cake from the oven(s) and assemble on any flat surface.

If you’ve followed the instructions, once assembled your cake will  now look like this:

PS. This is also exactly how you make the world’s best pancakes too.

I understand that there are still some moms (and even pediatricians) who worry about the Belladonna in teething tablets. I’ve had some mothers even send a frantic private message when their baby “accidentally” ate an entire bottle of Hyland’s teething tablets. In reality, I’m sure it was deliberate on the part of the child because they taste so dang good. The only “accident” was leaving the bottle where the baby could reach it.

A Very Costly “Accident”

A bottle of Hyland’s is right around seven bucks. That bottle should last months… That’s seven bucks out the window.

I guess seven dollars isn’t really that much actually… I’m just being a sassy pants. I know the real concern is for safety. Some random know-it-all told you that Belladonna is one of the most toxic substances on earth and Hyland’s teething tablets are dangerous, huh?

Well, fear not. If your child ingests an entire bottle of Hyland’s your baby will be completely fine. 

Each Teething Tablet from Hyland’s weighs about 65 mg and contains 0.0000000000003% Belladonna alkaloids. So, in terms of weight, each individual Hyland’s Teething Tablet contains 0.0000000000195 milligrams of Belladonna alkaloids. There are 125 tablets in each bottle of Hyland’s. Which means that an entire bottle contains 0.0000000024375 milligrams of Belladonna alkaloids.

Conventional medicine uses Belladonna alkaloids too. They use around 0.2 mg of Belladonna alkaloids but one dose of. 0.2 mg is not considered toxic. At that does, you may start to see the first signs of side effects such as dry mouth, blurred vision and urinary retention. You start to approach a dangerous level of Belladonna Alkaloids at around .75 mg.

So, let’s pretend that your baby DID ingest an entire bottle of Hyland’s and put it in a visual graph for better comprehension:

Feel better now?

Get some today:

Sources:

1. drugs.com
2. hylands.com
3. onlinecharttool.com

Photo submitted by: barefootocmama. blogspot.com

I didn’t co-sleep with my mother when I was little. Nope. I don’t even think they had co-sleeping when I was little. What they did have though, was 24 hour parenting. That’s what my mom did. I knew that my mother was available to me at any time.

I had my own bed. I slept in it… sometimes. Other times, I slept in her bed. I slept in my mom’s bed when I was sick. I slept in my mom’s bed when I had a bad dream. I slept in her bed when I got lonely. Simply, I slept in her bed whenever she or I felt like it.

Photo submitted by: Lydia Loe

Why do we have to have so many labels? In truth, labeling ourselves is what makes it easy for people who don’t parent exactly like us talk a bunch of smack about us or try to control our parenting. Do you think the pediatrician would have the same condescending look on his face if we said, “No, I don’t co-sleep. Though she regularly comes to bed with me when she’s lonely, sick or scared.”

I co-slept with my first son, and I got a lot of crap for it even though I did it safely. These days, he falls asleep easily on his own just a few minutes after I tuck him in. The pediatrician warned me that if I co-slept with him, he’d never feel safe sleeping alone. The pediatrician was wrong. On the contrary, I could even shut off all the lights and leave the window shades open if I wanted to and the little pumpkin would still fall asleep.

Photo submitted by: Vanessa Radley

But you see, after all that crap I went through for “co-sleeping” with my son, I finally learned my lesson. (Though maybe not the lesson the peds were hoping for.) I don’t “co-sleep” with my daughter anymore, in case they were wondering. Nope. She’s got her own bed. She sleeps in it… sometimes.