Author |
Message |
Julieboo
Member
02-05-2002
| Tuesday, February 17, 2009 - 9:50 pm
I don't see many posts here at all about exploitation and/or endorsements. (And the bit I have is just an opinion, not a major bash.) Personally, I don't really care (and I say good for them) if they do get the endorsements. The only negative I see is as I said above, it takes me farther away from connecting with them. I still don't like seeing Kate treat Jon so badly, but like I've also said before, Jon is a big boy and if he takes it, so what... Also after seeing this whole octomom issue, I have truly realized even more what a good mom Kate is. (Even though IMO she should treat the 'tups like almost 5 year olds and not 2 year olds. But then I have a child who I am getting off of sippy cups and high chairs, etc. So maybe it is more blatant to me than to people who don't have toddlers/preschoolers.) I also wonder if Kate/Jon have told TLC to back off of Mady. I hope they have, cuz what a horrible thing to have the whole world see so much of a person's worst behavior out there. Especially as she gets a little older. One last thing, if they really did get dogs, was that their idea or was it a "cousin oliver" move?
|
Seamonkey
Moderator
09-07-2000
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 4:41 am
I have no idea what a cousin oliver move is, so .. I don't know.. They have been highly criticized for exploitation, using the kids, etc., for taking free (if they were) state of the art appliances.. but I'm betting the Roloffs also got their wonderful washer and dryer the same way and it was featured a couple of times.. both families have demonstrated that they have Wii game systems, etc. Kelly from Regis and.. seems like she would have adequate income from singing, from the talk show AND the soaps but she's happy to be paid to advertise washers and dryers, Sally Field pushes Boniva, and there are scores of examples I could give. This family gets "stuff" donated and it helps to support their family.. very cool; they actually need it and good for them for being able to provide and then be able to be home with the kids when they aren't travelling to speak.. unlike a certain mom of 14 who thinks she can jam infants into a university day care and go play student. And I really don't see why there are strict rules for when individual kids must give up sippy cups, high chairs, even diapers.. I'm happy to see that Kate doesn't fixate on that sort of thing. I thought it was really practical that she let the little boys potty train later than the little girls. It really took child development into the equation.
|
Dannysgirl
Member
08-08-2007
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 5:40 am
Seamonkey - "cousin Oliver" move is a reference to the Brady Bunch--when cousin Oliver came to live with them the show s*cked - sorta like the "jumped the shark" saying when Fonzi jumped the shark on Happy Days; the show wasn't the same.
|
Egbok
Member
07-13-2000
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 8:16 am
I learn something new here all the time! Seamonkey, I'm glad you didn't know what a "cousin oliver" was all about either...lol! Thanks Dannysgirl!! Sea, ita with your post, especially tying in the child development aspect of raising babies. I've raised 3 and gosh! I wish I had the foresight back then to try and sell the idea of "reality tv" show to tv execs!! Although I didn't have 2 and then 6 like my heros Kate & Jon, it SURE felt like it a lot of times...LOL!!
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 8:29 am
Yep ... they thought that the Brady kids were getting too old and losing some of their little cute attributes so they brought in "cute" Cousin Oliver (who IMO and that of many fans didn't fit and was more annoying than cute).
|
Spitfire
Member
07-18-2002
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 8:40 am
Great post Sea, ITA with everything you said. All of the things they accept and do on a daily basis is not harming their life IMO. They are only gaining by it. Take it while you can, enjoy it while you can and milk it while you can.
|
Julieboo
Member
02-05-2002
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 9:14 am
Why do pediatricians push for so many things such as no bottles after 12 months, (I could understand no pacifiers as they do change the shape of the mouth, but a bottle??? OR a sippycup?) Why the push to lose these things?
|
Scooterrific
Member
07-08-2005
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 9:47 am
I don't understand why you would want your child to have a bottle after 12 months of age? And alot of it has to do with iron deficiency.
|
Spitfire
Member
07-18-2002
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 10:14 am
Some kids do and will carry around a bottle 24/7. Some parents also put their children to sleep with bottles which we all know is not good for teeth. I wold say it's recommended more on the fact that it's a easier habit to break at 12 months rather than 18 or 24.
|
Beekindpleez
Member
07-18-2006
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 10:36 am
I remember seeing articles about Suri Cruise carrying her bottle around at the age of 2. Just thought I'd mention it. lol
|
Julieboo
Member
02-05-2002
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 10:46 am
Why do they push losing the sippy cup? And have you heard the latest recommendation?? To leave a kid in a carseat (yes a carseat-not a booster!) Until age 8! Whoa. Glad Ryan is 9!
|
Escapee
Member
06-15-2004
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 10:47 am
In a booster until 8 because of safety reasons.
|
Julieboo
Member
02-05-2002
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 10:59 am
Not a booster. A 5 point restraint carseat. I am torn though, cuz I am all for safety, but until they make it a law, where every kid til age 8 is in one, I am not sure i would make my kid. At least not when he's in a car with his friends. And then, carpools would be crazy, cuz every mom would have to get a ton of 5 point carseats. I don't see people going for it. And I wonder how many parents put their 5, 6, 7 year olds in 5 point carseats... Keep in mind, this is just what my pediatrician said the newest recommendation is.
|
Hukdonreality
Member
09-29-2003
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:11 am
I see nothing wrong in general with a booster seat and shoulder harness if the child isn't a certain height or weight, but a car seat!?!?!? How ridiculous is that? My nephew was as tall as me when he was 9 or 10, so probably close to that at age 8. Can you imagine? I'm shocked I tell ya!
|
Escapee
Member
06-15-2004
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:15 am
I've never heard of that, Julie. I thought it was a 5 point until they were 4 or 40 pounds then a booster until they were 8 or 80 pounds.
|
Rissa
Member
03-20-2006
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:17 am
My understanding is that the recommendation is UP TO A certain age dependant on height and weight. My doctor told me to STOP putting my four year old in her booster for safety reasons. She was tall enough that her head was over the back seat and in an accident would have snapped her neck backwards. She is now 5'4" and just turned 12.
|
Scooterrific
Member
07-08-2005
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:17 am
Booster 6 or 60?
|
Escapee
Member
06-15-2004
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:20 am
This is the california law: California Child Restraint Law Guidelines for Law Enforcement Officers and Educators It is important to be accurate and consistent with wording used in presentations and written materials. Some provisions of the law are complicated. Basic statement about the child restraint law: Children must ride properly buckled up, in the back seat, in a safety seat or booster until they are at least 6 years old OR weigh at least 60 lbs. Main exceptions: A child under age 6 who weighs over 40 lbs. may wear a lap-only belt in the back seat if the vehicle has no shoulder belts in the back seat. A child under age 6 who weighs less than 60 lbs. may ride in the front seat if there is no forwardfacing rear seat in the vehicle; the child restraint cannot be properly installed in a rear seat; all rear seats are occupied by other children under age 12; or for medical reasons. An infant (riding in a rear-facing child restraint or under one year or less than 20 lbs.) may not ride in front if there is an active passenger air bag. Examples of children who are not specifically required to use a safety seat or booster or to ride in the back seat: Age 3, 65 lbs., in any vehicle Age 2, 61 lbs., in any vehicle Age 5, 55 lbs., in a vehicle with no shoulder belts in back Age 6, 50 lbs., in any vehicle Age 2, 42 lbs., in a vehicle with no shoulder belts in back Older children: All children under 16 years of age must ride properly buckled up in a safety belt, safety seat, or booster. Children under six years old may ride in a safety belt, properly used, if they weigh more than 60 lbs. However, safety belts do not fit most children properly until they are 8–11 years old. Boosters fit most children from about age 4 until at least age 8. They must be used with a lap and shoulder belt. Boosters may be purchased from stores that carry other safety seats and baby furniture. There are special products* to protect children... over 40 lbs. who are not ready to ride in a booster (under age 3-4 or very active) who ride in vehicles without shoulder belts in the back seat who are too wide in the hips to fit in a booster, but not tall enough to use a safety belt Shoulder belt positioning devices (fabric sleeves, plastic or metal clips) are not certified or regulated to meet federal safety standards. It is illegal to sell them in California (V.C. 27302). Suggestions to educators: Provide a copy of the 5-Step Test* so the parent can determine if the child is big enough to use just a safety belt. Point out that they can be cited if the child puts the shoulder belt under the arm or behind the back. Explain the exemption for children over 40 lbs. in older vehicles with only lap belts in the back seat, which are used by almost one-third of the families in California. It is essential to make it clear that the law is a minimum requirement, not a recommendation for parents who want the best protection for their children.
|
Escapee
Member
06-15-2004
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:21 am
http://www.carseat.org/Legal/636_CAlaw_guide.pdf
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:28 am
Can someone explain to me why they use weight and age as the criteria and not height? It makes absolutely no sense to me.
|
Scooterrific
Member
07-08-2005
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:38 am
May I say that my kid threw her booster seat in the garbage can on her 6th birthday?
|
Julieboo
Member
02-05-2002
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:42 am
Ryan threw his on his 8th. (In Illinois is it not a law, just a recommendation. And that recommendation just bumped it up to a 5-pt/8 years/80 lbs. And if they made it 80 lbs without an age, he'd still have almost 20 lbs to go!!)
|
Scooterrific
Member
07-08-2005
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:43 am
He threw it away? You didn't save it for Abby?
|
Jimmer
Moderator
08-30-2000
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:43 am
What on earth does age have to do with whether it is safe or not?
|
Escapee
Member
06-15-2004
| Thursday, February 19, 2009 - 11:43 am
Jimmer, I believe height is a factor if the back of their head is taller than the back of the seat. Weight and age I think is just criteria used for parents who are clueless as to what is best for their children, safety wise.
|