Log in

if mama ain't happy... [entries|archive|friends|userinfo]

[ userinfo | livejournal userinfo ]
[ archive | journal archive ]

(no subject) [Sep. 8th, 2006|07:56 pm]

ji. i'm nicole, new here. found this through a friend's journal.

and now my rant.

exactly why are my children's toileting habits anyone else's business? my son is autistic, 6, and not using the toilet. excuse me mrs kindergarten teacher, but if you have read anything about asd, you would know that the average age for boys to start using the toilet is 8. 8! he is 6, and has some other things going on. so what if he isn't ready? i do not push my kids, especially him, because they will not do it, and not do it in the most spectacular fashion ever. and- again mrs ktfh- why is why i am opting to stay at home after my daughter is in school any of your business? it's not that unusual here- or is it the visible tattoos and pink hair that's throwing you? if you must know, i am disabled. yes, i know i don't look it, but according to the american's with disabilities act i qualify. and if you really must know, i do work. i am a mom. and i blog. yep- i get paid to spout off about my disability. yep- really.

so- in conclusion, what i do is none of your business. my kid is working on it, and i stay home. got it?

i really do not like my son's teacher. she has been not so great since schoolstarted, and if he weren't autistic, and didn't need to be in school, i would homeschool at this point. at least then no one would comment on his lack of potty useage.
link1 comment|post comment

Little intro; My Mother/My parenting rage: [Jul. 13th, 2006|12:24 am]

First intro: I invite you to read my bio page; and I am mother of three. My name is Tasha. I am married and sometimes like the privilages that holds; but most days that privilage pisses me off.... My family of 5 live in my mother's house. My mother and sister live here too. My 5 sleep in one room. We do what needs to be done for the time being.

I am 22. My mother is 47(or older... I forget her age often..). I really am greatful for all that my mother does to help me, however, her underminding mine and my s.o.'s authority DOES NOT HELP!!! When I say I will swat my children for still talking after lights out, I do NOT want her to say "I will call CPS if you keep beating them"....
or when I hollar for the older two to stop tormenting the baby from another room I do NOT want her to say "Can't you ever speak to thoes poor children in a civil tone?"
And when I say things on my defense such as "You raised me and Allie [my sister] your way; which included spankings, soap in our mouth, yelling, and other such; Now allow Joe and I to raise our children as we see fit!" This is not your clue to say that I am doing it wrong! This is not your clue to say that you could do better. This is not your clue to try to berate me in to admiting that I am a crappy mother. Let me alone!

Argh! I need to get out of her house. *Silent scream*

link2 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Jun. 23rd, 2006|11:29 am]

Can somebody PLEASE explain to me why the "childfree" communities spend so goddamn much time yammering obsessively on about pregnancy and children and parenting?

Bueller? Bueller?
link8 comments|post comment

"Coached" pushing is not so helpful and may cause later harm [Dec. 30th, 2005|05:31 am]


WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Pregnant women coached through their first delivery do not fare much better than those who just do what feels natural, according to a study released on Friday.

Researchers at the University of Texas Southwestern found that women who were told to push 10 minutes for every contraction gave birth 13 minutes faster than those who were not given specific instructions.

But they said the difference has little impact on the overall birth, which experts say can take up to 14 hours on average.

"There were no other findings to show that coaching or not coaching was advantageous or harmful," said lead author Dr. Steven Bloom, the interim head of obstetrics and gynecology at the Dallas-based university.

"Oftentimes, it's best for the patient to do what's more comfortable for her," he added.

Bloom and his team studied 320 first-time mothers who had simple pregnancies and did not receive epidural anesthesia.

About half were given specific instructions by certified nurse-midwives during the second stage of labor, when they were fully dilated. The rest were told to "do what comes naturally."

On average, coached mothers trimmed the final stage to 46 minutes compared to 59 minutes, according to the study sponsored by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development at the National Institutes of Health.

Women in both groups experienced about the same number of forceps use, Caesarean deliveries and skin tears, among other complications.

The results were published in the January issue of the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Less clear was whether extra pushing encouraged by a coach could lead to bladder trouble.

In an earlier study, the researchers tested bladder function in 128 of the mothers three months later.

While such problems usually resolve on their own over time, women who had been coached had a smaller bladder capacity and felt the urge to urinate more often, they previously found.

Senior author Dr. Kenneth Leveno, a professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the school, said it was still not clear if the bladder problems could lead to long-term complications and more studies are needed.

"We don't want to alarm patients about this," he said.

Friday's finding that coaching "confers neither benefit nor harm might be pre-empted if it is confirmed that coaching has deleterious long-term effects," the study concluded.

Um, yeah. WTF? "Gee, we refuse to acknowledge the study showed this does harm, so we'll just hem and haw and say it doesn't show anything either way."

Can you please STFU and let a woman's biology work for her? Oh, nope, lay her on her back so her lower spine can't open and gravity is against her and then have her push literally until blood vessels burst in her frigging eyes. Uh yeah, can't see as that does any harm...

Women have every right to do things the way they choose, but they deserve real information to make those choices, not fucking rhetoric. THERE'S A REASON WOMEN HAVE THE URGE TO PUSH ya freakin' morons!!
link1 comment|post comment

(no subject) [Dec. 9th, 2005|08:53 pm]

ok.  im going to admit im a rather shitty moderator.  i have a tendancy to shut down, rather than confront, discussion - major personality flaw.

also, i have very very limited access to the computer and internet time.  ideally, the post in question would not have happened if i would have been around to nip in it the bud. 

ive been sitting on this post for a few days because of the above circumstances

i have asked, and birthwarrior  has agreed to be a moderator.

so if anyone has left because of me, please know that i will be taking a very backseat to this community and birthwarrior will have most control of it.  i invite anyone to come back, if they wish.

link2 comments|post comment

wheres the banzilla icon when you need it. [Nov. 25th, 2005|11:21 pm]

on_a_hillhas been removed from this community for this lovely comment

apparently i didnt catch the demsforlife community she was a member of.  im sorry.

for the love of pete!  this is a PRO-CHOICE FEMINIST community.  that kinda means you have to be both to be a member.

also, this is not a debate community.  please re-read the rules. 
link11 comments|post comment

OK or Not OK, what do y'all think? [Nov. 25th, 2005|06:11 pm]

[mood |curiouscurious]

Hi! I know a lot of you enjoy escaping judgmentalism here, but I'm going to put a hypothetical situation out there and I'm asking for judgments. Just purely for the conversation. Here goes.

Say there is a single mother of 2. She has no family nearby and is too poor to afford babysitting above the cost of the weekday daycare. Now, she lives in a nice neighborhood, on a cul-de-sac. Well, she has an older child who is past taking naps. Then she has a 1-yr old who takes two naps a day. She is a really good sleeper, and once asleep the Mom can count on her to stay asleep for 2 solid hours minimum. She sleeps in a sturdy, safe crib.

The problem is that with the 1-yr old's schedule, on the mother's days off she can't do much with the older child. Except for grocery shopping or brief trips to the nearby park, the little family is usually home-bound and the Mom and older child get cabin fever. So, one sunny summer afternoon, the baby goes to sleep and the Mom takes the older child to a swimming pool for an hour. She unplugs the phone, makes sure nothing electrical except the AC is on, and locks her door. She and the older child have a great time at the pool and return home to the baby still sleeping and everything is OK.

Have you ever done this sort of thing? Would you do it? Do you think it's all right?

I think that it is OK. A long time ago, our grandparents supervised our parents a lot less than we supervise babies today. Now, I realize that if the mailman came by and saw the baby alone through a window, that would be a DHS report right there. But personally, I just don't see any harm in it.
link37 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Oct. 5th, 2005|02:03 pm]

goddammit indiana youre making me look bad

so indiana wants to pass a law saying if you are using fertility methods other than getting it on "the way God intended", you better be married first or be charged with a crime.

its offessive on multiple levels.  ultimately its taking away the ability of the woman in question to decide what to do with her body.

one - its attack on single mothers who are easy prey for CPS and other agencies anyway.  just as "lacy's law" is a backdoor for fetal personhood, this law is a backdoor to criminalising single mothers - regardless of the method used.

two - there is a segment of the population that usually relys on surrogacy and other fertility treatments that IS NOT "ALLOWED" TO GET MARRIED. 


link5 comments|post comment

mama isolation [Jul. 22nd, 2005|12:57 pm]

[mood |discontentdiscontent]

I'm going out of my mind today. See, currently I'm a SAHM, but not entirely by choice; I work at home but just a little. I have plenty to do at the moment: clean house for company coming next week, make a new resume for my sister as a favor, and write an advertorial about dentures. But a playdate with my best friend's kids this morning got canceled due to her son coming down with something, and I was looking forward to it more than my kids were.

I used to work at an office, and words cannot describe how much I miss the daily contact with other adults. I'm introverted and often solitary by choice, so for me to say I'm lonely...!
link6 comments|post comment

(no subject) [Jul. 22nd, 2005|10:36 am]



What is this, the 50s? Women who have sick children but have a job, are all of a sudden horrid mothers who don't think about their kids?

We're not supposed to work if we can afford to stay home?

Children are magically healthy because their mommies are at home?

If my kid gets bronchitis, I'm not going to QUIT MY JOB, to stay at home. That does NOT MEAN I'm a bad mommy who puts myself before my child, it means I'm bloody well realistic. My kid won't heal magically the second I quit. And that whole "Yeah, some people shouldn't have kids" remark is pissing me off to no end.

I feel sorry for the girl they're talking about, to have such a closed minded "friend".
link2 comments|post comment

[ viewing | most recent entries ]
[ go | earlier ]