Basically how to bathe the baby, how to touch him/her and how to play with him/her. As a dude, I'd probably find that useful, as weird as it may sound. And it's probably important for the baby now that I think of it. Sensory deprivation could hinder development. And that could happen if parent is clueless enough.
It only sounds weird because you prefaced it with "as a dude" implying what? That ladies have some sort of genetic knowledge of baby rearing techniques? That they receive special classes about it in highschool? I don't know, sounds weird though.
She had no idea how to bathe a baby safely, how to dress it, safely, how to hold it safely, how to play with it safely, how to clean its bum, how to put on a nappy, how to bottle feed it, how to breast feed it ....the list of things she didn't know was endless....
Neither did I.
We figured it out through a combination of trial and error ("oops, wet babies are slippery and easy to drop") parental advice and phamplets.
its not rocket science, its not easy and the "average" girl has NO insider information.
Exactly. Before the baby was born, I took a (men only) course on fatherhood. It was both very funny as well as informational. Afterwards, I knew a lot more than my girlfriend. This helped me because I found out some women can get quite possessive (for lack of a better term). She'd still blurt out "I know best because I'm the mother", but I definitely wasn't ignorant anymore.
Recognising that is not perpetuating or condoning it.
Just because things make you uncomfortable doesn't mean they are cliches.
Cliche is the wrong word. Gender roles in society are a topic that spans many disciplines and has a whole lot of detail to discuss. They are a huge thing, and you're right: the gender role assigned to girls does prescribe for them a lot of child rearing practice. That said, after seeing what some kids will do to a baby doll, I can confidently assert that such play is no substitute for actual instruction.
It makes me very sad.
But people will argue that it's innate until they're blue in the face, and use it as examples to 'prove' that our brains are sexed.
If "maternal instinct" is a real thing, then I guess there's something defective about me.
Learned behavior reinforced with toys of the same nature. Lots of girls these days don't have that extended family or siblings to learn with.
More women than men plan a large part of their life around being a parent.
Ok, maybe advanced stuff, stuff we've discovered after the introduction of modern medicine is not included, but doesn't the instinctive maternal bond also include some sort of generic component regarding behavior around children?
But there's no "this is how you rock babies," "this is how you breastfeed," etc. I don't see how that would even work. Genes aren't magical. And I've seen some really clueless mothers...
A man's and woman's oxytocin levels are elevated after child birth but it's much higher in women. So the PP reference that a man is more clueless when it come to playing and touching their baby is not without scientific basis.
It's pretty well-known...
The pregnancy book: http://www.publichealth.hscni.net/publications/pregnancy-boo...
Birth to Five: http://www.publichealth.hscni.net/publications/birth-five
https://www.amazon.com/Baby-Owners-Manual-Instructions-Troub...
My wife got this for me, she knows me well.
How to do the first maintenance of the kids is generally shown in the clinic where child is born, by the staff there. (How to change diapers, how to bathe the child, how to turn the baby, how to support the neck properly).
What's interesting to me is that half the book is Swedish and the other half Finnish, I had no idea that Finnish people learned Swedish so early- yet their English proficiency is so much higher.
Actually, if you look at Finland and Sweden as a whole, with Sweden having twice as many people, it's more like Finnish is French, and Swedish English.
In this analogy, the Swedish speaking finns are more like anglos living in Quebec.
Which is funny, considering how many years (6 I guess?) the Swedish language is a compulsory subject for Finnish-speaking Finns.
To get MSc one must theoretically prove to be able to communicate in swedish but the minimum acceptable level - how to put it - is not very high.
[0] http://www.linuxveda.com/2011/11/02/which-is-linus-torvalds-...
But then there are Finnish rock stars who lived a year in Stockholm and then pretended they've forgotten all about Finnish language. (Andy McCoy of Hanoi Rocks, I mean).
There are some commercial companies who sell boxes based on the ones here, but they look a little mixed. (Either too little "stuff", too expensive, or both.)
"deliver a baby box offering essential items for a child’s first weeks to the families of all newborn babies in Scotland, to promote the fair and equal start we want for every child regardless of circumstance. We will consult with key stakeholders and with parents in autumn 2016, with full roll-out in 2017"
Significantly more useful than the bag of freebies and coupons given to new mums in the UK.
For those unfamiliar with the shower concept here in the US we have a party that is generally more expensive then if you were to just buy the baby stuff. We invite people over and they give us stuff off a list that is at a few big box stores.
Registering for the baby shower was my eye opener of what we are getting ourselves into. I actually seriously wondered what we would do if we didn't have friends, family and/or money. I had no clue where to start. I wasn't even sure what car seat we needed (the baby store will tell you).
I have to say though I'm amazed by the quality of the cardboard box stuff. Some of that stuff looks better than the stuff we registered for :).
1. You can suffocate the baby by breathing on their face while you are asleep. The baby will not cry and will not wake while this is occurring.
2. You can crush your baby by rolling on to them while you are asleep.
3. Your baby can suffocate from their nose and mouth being covered by a blanket or pillow or even the soft mattress if they are get rolled over.
These very sad infant deaths happen frequently even in the US where co-sleeping is not as common as elsewhere in the world. Here are some recent news articles: http://www.nola.com/health/index.ssf/2016/04/co-sleeping_dea... , http://woodtv.com/2015/06/05/mom-hopes-babys-co-sleeping-dea...
Co-sleeping advocates will tell you "as long as you do it safely you can sleep with your newborn." This is false. There is no safe way to sleep with a newborn. Newborns cannot turn their heads away if you breath on them. They cannot move if you get too close. While, many parents sleep with their babies and the babies do not die that does not mean that it is safe.
Update: The mayo-clinics prevention guide for SIDS: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/sudden-infant-... . TLDR; Newborn babies should sleep by themselves on their back in a crib with no stuffed animals, pillows, or "crib pads."
Another note: http://thescientificparent.org/crib-notes-is-cosleeping-real...
Do you typically fall off the bed? No? Why not? It's because you retain awareness while you sleep.
People who should not cosleep include people on medications, extremely heavy sleepers, sleepwalkers, and the very overweight.
For most people it's just fine. You go to sleep knowing "there is a baby here" and you will be aware of that all night.
Hmm. I go to sleep knowing "my wife is there" and I've still elbowed her in the face countless times accidentally.
We didn't hear from them for two weeks once, and when we saw her next, she had her nose all in white gauze and tape.
They said she tried to wake the husband and he hit her square on the nose, and since it was broke, they went for the rhinoplasty!
I hope they never read this :)
I'm not sure about their story, but I believe you! I know there are some people who are more physical sleepers. I don't think it is most people.
And yet, Japan where co-sleeping is the norm, seems to be tied with the Netherlands for lowest rate of sudden infant death syndrome. Tatami might be a good idea if you want to co-sleep (softer bedding increases risk).
Parenting is a very personal issue, and I am not on a mission to change anybody's parenting decisions. At the end of the day, it is your family business. I have always questioned things, though, and I was very surprised at some of the things I learned when I first looked into co-sleeping and the warnings from mainly US institutions or government. The ads and posters are creepy to an extreme (a sleeping baby next to a meat cleaver!), and betray the scare propaganda vs. data approach [1].
>There is no safe way to sleep with a newborn.
You state this, and yet you list common sense things or precautions to take even if they are in a crib. Why not the same common sense applied to co-sleeping? Firm mattress, on back, no pillow, or headboard they can jam a bodypart through?
"The United States has a higher infant mortality rate than any of the other 27 wealthy countries..." by the CDC [2]. And this is with one of the highest expenditures on health care than other nations. And it gets worse as the baby ages in the postnatal period, so it is not just more premies or bad neonatal care where the US is not as bad.
The sharp difference is in disadvantaged or uneducated groups. A poor person's baby in another wealthier nation has more of a chance than one in the US, and that is the key to the disparity.
In one of your links they cite a waterbed! I think if co-sleeping deaths are lower elsewhere than in the US it is for lack of education, common sense, parenting knowledge or all three. I am from the US. I raised my first two there, and now I live in a very poor village in East Java, Indonesia where most of the houses have dirt floors. All of the families in this village co-sleep as far as I have seen or had answered to me. I still apply the same common sense guidelines we both have listed in our replies.
For me and my family, we feel the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. We kept the newborns flat on their backs with no loose sheets to entangle them, or other accessories. We have always had fairly firm mattresses. We don't drink alcohol, and we are not hypermobile sleepers. We are also strangely aware of where the baby is, and we still manage to get more sleep distributed across the night between smaller, more frequent feedings.
I loved waking up to watch my little ones' chests rise and fall! I'd say we were more diligent and aware and monitoring them against SIDS than if we had them in a crib in another room with audio monitor, across the same room, or at the bedside.
The US report which cites deaths from co-sleeping didn't bother to check or factor in drugs or alcohol. There is also the potential of the horrible MBPS (Munchausen By Proxy Syndrome) not discovered in some cases.
The article of the Arizona parents that left their 2 year old in the house alone, only to be discovered walking outside while they were gone for two hours playing Pokemon speaks to the level of idiocy of some parents, so I am sure in a country of 320 million you will have some numbers to cite if that is the sample population.
SIDS is said to increase with co-sleeping, although again, the studies are not too detailed, and the same recommendations then go on to say SIDS decreases when it's a bassinet opened to the bed as opposed to in another room or across the room.
[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/16/co-sleeping-ad-baby...
[2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/29/our-i...
Parenting is personal, very personal, so do what you feel is right for yourself and your child.
Yes, infant deaths are horrific, no matter the cause(s), and make for emotionally compelling reports.
Do you have numbers on infants who die while in a crib in the same room? Another room? Bedside bassinet?
My current wife, myself and my ex all had agreed that we prefer to be more responsive to our children. My wives both are light sleepers, and woke to the slightest disturbance to check, but went right off to sleep at the all clear. I also developed this sense. A cough, a wheeze, and somehow my brain triggered me to pay attention, but not routine noises.
I never fall out of bed, never have, and neither do the majority of the population. NOTE: I prefer a mattress on the floor anyway, so even if I did, it is 7 inches to the ground. We are aware of our surroundings when we sleep. The babies have always slept between us.
Of course there are exceptions: Drugs, alcohol, people with sleep disorders like 'night terrors', hybermobile sleepers, PTSD-affected people and so on. Again, reason and education.
I will look into the 'breathing onto the face of the baby' bit, since being a technical diver, CPROX-certified and aware of related things, I would think you would have to have your exhaling nose or mouth right up against your baby rather than at breast height where they normally sleep. Ambient air usually is around 21% O2. It would take a high concentration of CO2 to displace the ambient air and to develop right at the nose or mouth, and babies tend to breath twice as fast as parents, so it doesn't seem to add up. I'd like to find numbers on that one.
Again, in the US I kept an old drafty house with lots of air exchange by default, not the typical modern American construction which tends to seal and caulk everything and keep closed doors. This keeps harmful off-gassing products trapped in your breathing space. I also didn't use much energy, since I prefer it a bit chilly vs. toasty, so the drafts and fresh air were welcomed.
It's the reason Radon remediation saw people adding active ducts to remove it from basements and such. Too tightly sealed, no air circulation. Radon is naturally occurring, and it is only when you trap the radon progeny that attach to surfaces or dust that it becomes a respiratory/radiation health concern.
For the past year, I have been living in a house in East Java, where I can see daylight through the roof tiles, and the room is very airy due to the night breeze. We sleep on a mattress on a floor, and the rice fields and trees are all around us with a volcano 13 miles due SSW (Now, that could be a risk!).
[UPDATE] Here's an interesting take from a pediatrician for 35 years, who co-slept with all 8 of his children, and wrote 2 books on the subject regarding Sids[1].
Obesity is also a barrier to co-sleeping, and usually carries other issues like sleep apnea. The US doesn't practice co-sleeping anywhere near the numbers in Asia, and I think the obesity problem is well-known.
[1] http://www.parenting.com/article/ask-dr-sears-co-sleeping-a-...
Waking up every 2 to 3 hours, but mildly and not turning on lights or getting up for a diaper change.
My son was only one who really cried, but usually during the day when overtired, or gas, or whatever. He didn't cry when in bed at night.
Some people both get up every single time the baby wakes up, and don't do sleep in days on the weekend. I think these people are insane.
If you don't have friends or family, the only money saving option really available in the US (that I know of) is used/thrift shops and consignment sales.
So yea, both coming and going, these local groups were troves of good cheap items.
I'm not sure what's so vague about preventing kilograms of nappies containing plastics and chemicals from being fed to landfill.
watch the expiration dates on those.
Why do some people say 'baby' without any article? Shouldn't it be 'your baby', 'a baby' or 'the baby' or something like that? You wouldn't say 'sister doesn't know' or 'boss doesn't know'. I'm not a native English speaker.
Oh, and you may in fact here the phrases 'sister doesn't know' or 'boss doesn't know' in some circumstances, although in those instances it would be more of a slang/affectation/colloquialism and not as common as 'baby'.
In this case 'Baby' is a standin for the baby's name. I would characterize this as 'reasonably standard' for spoken language, but a little odd in written language, but could help convey a conversational tone.
I originally thought this was an example of metonymy, but I don't think it is (this is more like 'role-instead-of-name'), so I don't know what the term for this is, and I'm finding it surprisingly hard to search for. I can imagine using it for a profession or job as well, but the contexts of use seem reasonably specific.
-- sometimes babies don't immediately have names, and we need a way to refer to them
-- professionals who work around babies and in birthing tend to address both the baby and the adults by their family relationships (it's Mom, Dad, Grandad, etc. instead of George and Laura). This is presumably because that helps it keep clear what everyone's the relationships is to the baby, and what role they should play in the whole process.
-- babies aren't really people with their own unique identities when they are first born, so maybe it is kind of awkward to address them with their full adult name.
Plus saying "your baby" is potentially overly familiar and possibly confrontational. Using baby with no article makes it indeterminate - it's the idea of their baby as opposed to the actual baby itself.
Parents do sometimes use "brother" or "sister" without an article when speaking to their young children.
Although, I believe in the U.S. you can get a free car seat from any fire station (or hospital?)
Source: Parent of 3 kids, uncle to 4 more.
For one the baby boomers (parents of soon to be parents) have large financial burdens themselves. They may want to help but lack the funds to do so and/or time (because they haven't retired yet themselves and might even be taking care of their parents).
Second people are having kids much later. I am 35 almost 36 and most of my friends and family are now geographically disparate.
Combined with above and the modern-busy-self-consumed-technology era we live in you seriously cannot rely on anyone organizing an event for you.
I don't blame this on my friends and family. It is just a reality.
Furthermore the expectation and cost to host an event has become far greater over the years.
Just remember: you can get lots of dumb crap for your kids, but you do not need most of it.
Car seat, yes. Somewhere safe for them to sleep, yes. We had a changing pad on a dresser with the first one for a while, but switched to the floor pretty quickly and didn't bother with it at all for the second. You're usually not gonna want to take the kid to wherever the changing pad/table is, and it's easier to dress them on the floor anyway. And you don't have to worry about them falling off of the floor. My conclusion: changing table/pad = junk, unless you have some kind of problem getting down to/up off of the floor.
Bottle warmers. Waste of space and money. Also slow. Just nuke it. Shake it and stick your finger in to make sure you haven't done something horrible. It won't take long (a day) to figure out the right amount of time, at which point you'll almost never mess up anyway.
Favor 8oz bottles, not 4oz. They'll outgrow 4oz ones too fast and then they're basically garbage. Buy ONE BRAND AND STYLE ONLY so the parts are interchangeable. Do the same with sippy cups when those become relevant.
This part's (apparently) controversial, but: you don't need a giant diaper bag and a huge amount of storage on your stroller. When you go out you need: 1-2 diapers, 3 tops, a little plastic bag with wet wipes in it, one bottle, stuff to go in the bottle (this is easier if that's formula, you can acquire warm water one way or another almost anywhere so you just need the pre-measured powder in a baggie). THAT IS IT. You don't need crackers and fruit snacks and a dozen toys and that junk for your toddler. Just don't give them food when you're out shopping or whatever. Real easy if you don't set the expectation that they get snacks and toys all the time when you're out of the house, and that's as easy as... not doing it. So you don't need to carry that crap. You don't need a backpack. You don't need a massive $200 baby bag that you could fit 10 of your baby in and still zip it up. You don't need a stroller that could double as a truck. If you're getting a stroller optimize for ease of maneuvering in crowds (so, small), comfort to push (not too short if you're tall, for example) and ease of transport (collapsible). With one kid especially, consider just getting one of those strap-on carriers and skipping the stroller entirely. When they start to walk, make them walk whenever possible to reduce the amount of time you're dependent on that stuff.
You can buy giant loads of kids clothes off Craigslist or that Facebook Swap-Shop thing (I dunno much about it, my wife uses it, I don't have an FB account, but it seems to work well). It's even cheaper than the thrift store. You can buy for next year at the end of each season, works well. Then you sell anything that's not ruined when they grow out of it (or hand it down to a sibling). Clothes end up being nearly free unless you choose to spend more for some reason. Protip: hold out for batches of clothes from nice parts of town and then pounce on them immediately, the clothes will be in much better shape (sometimes brand new) than stuff from poorer areas and usually aren't more expensive(!). Difficulty: you will have to buy new shoes, usually. Just get the cheapest thing that works, they'll ruin/outgrow them quickly anyway.
If you have older relatives and they're not destitute, you'll soon be donating or throwing out excess toys and books by the bin-load. Buy way fewer toys than you think you "need" if this is your situation.
Remember you can always go get more stuff if you decide you need it. Err on the side of starting with too little in general, once the basics are covered. Keep most of the baby shower stuff you don't obviously need in the packaging until you decide you need it, and keep the gift receipt. You may never open it.
Won't they be very biased?
...but yeah if you go to some small boutique in NYC that might be the case I suppose.
What other items have you bought? How large of a variety are the clothes they send - does everyone get the same stuff?
Things we would have otherwise bought:
* Pram.
* Cot - for when the box is out of use.
* More clothes.
This video makes the contents more explicit, but yeah lots of stuff:
* http://imgur.com/a/I0NYI