HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: goldberg@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (Patti Twigg)
Subject: funny things they say
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 14:49:00 GMT

I couldn't decide if this belonged under funny things or you know you
are a parent when, you decide. Last night a dinner I gave my son the
last banana, which was on the mature side. I took it completely
out of the skin, as is my habit, and if you have ever done this you
know that at the bottom of the banana there is a little stem like
thing that sticks into the banana from the peel. In mature bananas
sometimes part is left behind in the banana. Well, my three year
old son looked at the bottom of the banana, showed it to me and said
'look, mom, pooh-pooh'. My six year old almost rolled on the floor
with laughter. My husband and I thought it was funny too.
                                   Patti Twigg
From: lhafner@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu (Laurie Hafner)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Siblings in Daycare
Date: 17 Apr 92 14:30:00 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr15.151805.5789@keps.kodak.com>, mbb@keps.kodak.com (Maureen Busch) writes...

>they choose.  We have never had the experience of having a teacher who didn't
>encourage them to visit each other, especially  if one or the other was having
>a rough day; allowances should always be made.  And of course, they are usually
>together evenings and weekends.  Are they close?  Well, judging from the way
>they choose to be together, their willingness to stick together (especially if
>there is a battle against Mom and Dad (-;), their conspiratorial pranks, etc.,
>I would have to say that they are.  I guess only time will really tell.

I didn't see the earlier posts on this topic (both kids had chicken pox last
week - I got a little behind!), but our children are in a daycare setting.  We
have had the same experience as the poster above.  Our children see each other
during the day upon request and they are *so* happy to see each other at the 
end of the day.  Sometimes I think this is a real plus.  They are so much more
willing to play with each other at home and really seem to enjoy the time they 
do spend together.  I'm very happy with the relationship they seem to be 
building - but as mentioned above, time will tell.  I think the most important
factor in how siblings feel about each other is not so much the *amount* of
time spent together, but the *quality* of the time they do spend together. 
How parents help their children build relationships with each other and with 
other people is so much more important than just lots of time together.

Laurie Hafner, Weeg Computing Center, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA
lhafner@vaxa.weeg.uiowa.edu
From: major@shuksan.boeing.com (Mike Schmitt)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Phone Ettiquette
Date: 7 Apr 92 20:24:15 GMT
Organization: The Boeing Co., MMST, Seattle, Wa.

> Oh, Mike, you just brought back a childhood memory: I was an army brat (the
> colonel's daughter, and yes we are as bad as you've heard!).  Anyway we had to
> answer the phone "McElrath quarters. Ann speaking".  And we NEVER lived in
> military housing, `quarters' was the same suburban bunker type house that 
> everybody else lived in!

  Officer's kids can really be snooty can't they?  (mine were, sometimes)
  My oldest daughter lived in 11 different sets of military 'quarters' in
  14 years.  (I moved 22 times in 22 years - don't ask - too complicated)
  Therefore they never really get too attached to a "home".  Even after I 
  retired and bought a "real home" - there was never (and still is not) 
  any real attachment.  Lori still refered to our house as 'our quarters'.
  And even today our 'home' is still called 'the house' (the term "quarters"
  is disappearing but it crops up once in a while.)  And we get the itch to
  pack up and move somewhere every 2 years!! :-)   

  So, where were you stationed, Ms Colonel's Daughter?

  

-- 
Mike Schmitt                   "Verify range to target.  One opinion Mr Vasily,
Boeing Defense & Space Group    and one opinion only, please.  And it's not my  
Seattle, WA                     employer's." 
major@@shuksan.boeing.com
From: jgt10@uts.amdahl.com (John G. Thompson)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: OB .vs. a Midwife
Date: 16 Apr 92 19:36:13 GMT
Organization: Amdahl Corporation, Sunnyvale CA

I thought I would just throw in my $.02 worth on the subject of OB vs
midwives.

We had our first son at Kaiser Walnut Creek under and OB.  As first 
deliveries go it was long.  Started (noticed) 6am Wednesday morning and
delivered 5:47am the next morning.  What made this birth difficult was
that Erik got stuck, she had been in the pushing phase for over an hour
and wasn't making progress.  They got an OR crew and moved us into 
the OR for a either a vaginal or C-section delivery.  We got 
lucky and she had a forceps assisted vaginal delivery.

On the second son we were again at Kaiser Walnut Creek.  What had
changed was they were in a two year test with midwives.  I have to
say it was nicer with the midwife.  She was checking in more often,
and was a little more talkative that the OB.  This delivery lasted from
6am to 11 something (egad! Its true, the second one does get 
short changed!!).  I even got to cut the cord!!

Both of the deliveries were "normal".  We didn't have a problem with
how either was handled.  We did like the midwife more and I think
it has to do with how she spends her time during her shift in the
labor and delivery room.

We have read recently that Kaiser is making the test program permanent.
It seems that the doctors, nurses and midwives are happy with how 
the relationships worked out.  There was some antaganism between all
thre to start, but once things got going everyone realized that the
turf war was imaginary.

One midwife commented that she really enjoyed the new relationship
because she (1) worked scheduled hours, (2) was able to do a wider
variety of deliveries (breach, twins, etc).

I am glad tehy made the program permanent.  It isn't that the OBs
aren't good, they are, they just have alot of other things to do and
the midwife fills the gap between nurse and doctor.

Enjoy!  JGT
-- 

John G. Thompson        Amdahl Corporation      jgt10@uts.amdahl.com 
                        P.O. Box 3470 MS 340    {sun,uunet}!amdahl!jgt10
#include <disclamer.h>  Sunnyvale, CA 94088     1-408-737-5708

Go ahead, flame me...I've got heavy duty surge protectors.
From: janem@hpfcdc.fc.hp.com (Jane Marcus)
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 20:20:29 GMT
Subject: Sibling Rivalry Question and Summary
Organization: HP Fort Collins, Co.
From: X045KF@tamvm1.tamu.edu (Kimberly Faircloth)
Newsgroups: misc.kids,alt.kids-talk,alt.parents-teens,misc.education
Subject: Re: Minors right of access to contraceptives?
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:13:07 GMT
Followup-To: misc.kids
Organization: Texas A&M University

In article <14APR199222054665@phobos.ucc.umass.edu>
s8486534@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (S8486534) writes:
 
>
>X writes, y writes....
>
>       The discussion of condoms in schools belongs on Oprah Winfrey, not
>in a forum devoted to education.  When are you people going to grow up!
 
But this *IS* discussion relating to the education of the children.  This
is a matter of life and death of those children going through the public
school system now.
 
 
Kimberly Faircloth                |x045kf@tamvm1.tamu.edu
Users Consultant                  |kdf8236@tamvm1.tamu.edu
Texas A&M University              |kdf8236@zeus.tamu.edu
(409) 845-8956
"But Soft!  What rock through yonder window breaks? It is a brick!
           and Juliet is out cold..."
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: valentin@netcom.com (Valentin Pepelea)
Subject: Re: Seeking information about Tuboplasty
Date: Sat, 11 Apr 92 06:14:48 GMT
Organization: Netcom Communications, Santa Clara, CA

In article <22533@alice.att.com> llf@alice.UUCP (alice!llf) writes:
>
>writes about things he knows nothing about (don't we all?).  A lot of what
>he says is "theoretical", and I have frequently wanted to strangle those child
>development theoreticians.  (What do they know?  Their WIVES raised their
>kids! :-) )

This is unfortubately a widely held view. In reality parents are amateur
"theorists", as might also be religious leaders and politicians, while
researchers such as Eric are the only ones qualified to discuss rearing
methods.

A parent's view will be based on observations of his children and his own
childhood; both life experiences are rather irrelevant when it comes to
projecting the outcome of child rearing to the general population.

Researchers on the other hand will study experiments and statistics polled
among dozens, houndreds and thousands of children in controlled groups. Does
the typical parent have a thousand children to experiment on?

The most experience I ever gathered handling children has been while I was
19 and 20, lifeguarding an appartment complex pool. Never before that had I
corraled 20-30 kids a day, nor have I had a chance to do that in my second
life. I bet most parents haven't even had the benefit of such an experience.

Valentin
-- 
"An operating system without virtual memory      Name:      Valentin Pepelea
 is an operating system without virtue."         Phone:     (408) 985-1700
                                                 Usenet:    netcom!valentin
                     - Ancient Inca Proverb      Internet:  valentin@netcom.com
Xref: sparky misc.kids:12472 alt.satanism:1273
From: tim@hoptoad.uucp (Tim Maroney)
Newsgroups: misc.kids,alt.satanism
Subject: Re: Raising Satanic children
Date: 7 Apr 92 18:31:13 GMT
Reply-To: tim@hoptoad.UUCP (Tim Maroney)
Organization: Very Far Indeed from the Solar System

>>(Just in case you are wondering, we do not engage anything criminal you
>>might be thinking is associated with our religion, e.g. human sacrifice,
>>animal sacrifice, drug use, abuse of any form...etc.)

In article <house.702528709@helios> house@helios.usq.EDU.AU (ron house) writes:
kenr@sol.usc.edu (Ken Richards) writes:
>Then what do you do?  If it has nothing to do with what most people
>consider Satan to refer to, then are you just grandstanding, with your
>children the victims?  That is, if you believe in a non-evil religion,
>why give it a bad name when (I am sure) you could find a more
>descriptive title?

I agree completely.  Did you know there are also people who are using
the name of "Jews", even though they don't run the international banking
conspiracy or sacrifice Christian children at their ceremonies?  Why
would they subject their poor children to such a label when they are
really nothing like what we all think of when we think "Jew"?
-- 
Tim Maroney, Mac Software Consultant, sun!hoptoad!tim, tim@toad.com

"I may be nuts but a speedfreak I ain't!" -- Robert Crumb
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: mimi@apollo.hp.com (Mimi Wellington)
Subject: Re: Other Goofy Songs (was Re: Worm song?)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Corporation, Chelmsford, MA
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 14:34:48 GMT

Regarding the Unicorn song...

The lyrics (and perhaps the tune) were written by Shel
Silverstein, a writer of both great kid's poetry and great music.
The words to the Unicorn song are in _Where the Sidewalk Ends_.
If you haven't read any Shel Silverstein, you've missed a
great treat!

BTW, Silverstein also wrote "I'm Being Swallowed by a Boa
Constrictor," which has been performed by Peter, Paul, and
Mary, the Chenille Sisters, and probably many other folks.
I see Silverstein's name pop up in weird places:  he wrote a song
for a strange movie called "Montenegro," and he wrote the
song that Meryl Streep performs at the end of the movie
"Postcards from the Edge."

(Gee, I would've stumped you all if I'd included the chorus
of the Unicorn song in one of my quizzes... :-)

                                        --Mimi Wellington
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: staffan@ca.serum.kodak.com (Kenneth Staffan (x37507))
Subject: Re: At what age is day care appropriate?
Organization: Eastman Kodak
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 19:08:18 GMT

>|> So, finances aside, if you cannot take 5 years out of your career and whatever
>|> personal satisfaction that gives you to devote to the upbringing of another
>|> human being, then, IMO, you should rethink having children.  
> 
>I agree completely.  It's a tragedy for our entire society, not just for the
>children who miss out on that "Mother's at home" feeling of security that can
>form the basis for a lifetime of self-confidence and happiness.

I try to stay out of this discussion, really I do, but come on.  Speaking of
basis, what is the basis for the assumption that the "Mother's at home feeling
of security" contributes to a lifetime of self-confidence and happiness?
If I was going to go strictly by impression, I would say that the daycare
kids are starting out with more self-confidence (and actually, didn't someone
earlier refer to an article that confirmed this in school entry-aged
children?), and that self-confident children tend to be happy children.
(seems to go for adults, too...)

Ken
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: lauraf@notavax.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Laura Floom)
Subject: Re: Golden books "chain letter"???
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1992 15:26:25 GMT

In article <Sandra_Petit.0blo@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US> Sandra_Petit@agwbbs.new-orleans.LA.US (Sandra Petit) writes:
>     I received one of these two several months ago.  I threw it away
>believing, as you do, that it is illegal.  I'd be interested to see if
>anyone knows whether it is indeed okay to do this.

I am pretty sure that only chain letters that involve money are illegal.

Laura Floom
From: ajayshah@almaak.usc.edu (Ajay Shah)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Suggestions for a present?
Date: 7 Apr 1992 16:02:55 -0700
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: almaak.usc.edu

We'd like to do a nice present for a 2 year old next month.
We don't quite know the alternatives available for a 2 year old.
(We don't mind getting something which is not so hot by her
right now, but she will enjoy "in a while").

Could you send us interesting suggestions?  Thanks,

        -ans.

-- 

Ajay Shah, (213)749-8133, ajayshah@usc.edu
From: walsh@sugaree.uu.net (Christine Walsh)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Irish names, was names
Date: 13 Apr 92 21:19:45 GMT
Organization: IKEA US, Phila PA



Previous list of Irish names deleted..

But add for boys: Con(n)or, Declan, or Manus (means hands) 
And for girls: Sinaed (means accent I think) and Naimh (means Saint, 
pronounced Nave), Deirdre

-- 
Christine Walsh,                                  (__) 
IKEA US Services                                  (oo)   Just say Moo
Plymouth Commons, Plymouth Mtg., PA 19462          \/
From: BSS_GRAEME@vd.seqeb.gov.au
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Choosing a Preschool
Date: 15 Apr 92 12:04:15 EST
Organization: South East Queensland Electricity Board

In article <11294@borg.cs.unc.edu>, sgauch@corwin.ccs.northeastern.edu (Susan Gauch) writes:
> I guess I need to pick the lesser of three evils
>    - change to another school with less adult supervision
>    - allow her to be one of possibly 1 or 2 girls in a room of boys
>    - allow her to be the youngest child joining an existing class
> 
> I'm leaning towards having her join the 4 year old class, although
> she'll be the youngest.
> 
> Any comments?  Experiences?  Advice?

	Hi Susan,
	We had a similar experience with our now 7 year old twins.
	We chose to place them in their "correct" year ie in your
	case the 3 year old class.
	We did this for two reasons. Firstly, having 2 years of the
	same 'experiences' and 'learning program' would probably be a
	bit boring the second time around. The second reason, was that
	although they would settle into the older group ok, when the time
	came for the younger class to move up, friendships and 'groups' 
	would already have been made, and our kids would be the 'outsiders'
	or 'new kids' which would mean that making friendships would be
	that much more difficult. Having 2 years with the same kids is
	great as kids get very social at his age, and friendships mean
	much more to them than we as parents probably realise. Seeing
	their friends going off to school, while they have to 'repeat'
	with the younger kids, can cause upset and disappointment.
	Most of their 'friends' at preschool will end up going to school
	with them, and this makes the transition much easier for them,
	in the long run. Our kids enjoyed their Kindy and preschool years
	and now they both absolutely LOVE school.
	As you say, there is no way of knowing what the gender proportions
	are going to be, in our preschool, the directors had to contact
	nearly 60 families before getting firm enrollments. In another
	preschool in our area (one which is VERY popular) they had to
	get up to nearly 80 family contacts before their enrollments
	were filled. My advice would be not to sweat it too much. The
	gender thing is really not an issue that kids bother themselves
	with. Some girls are boylike, some boys are girllike. Go with
	the flow, and consider the children as a whole, not because of
	their gender. Which group will best suite your daughter, socially,
	program, developmentally etc. All these things are far more
	important than the gender of your daughters friends at preschool.

			Philippa Wightman
	>>Avenge yourself, live long enough to be a problem to your kids!<<
	Email: bss_graeme@seqeb.gov.au

	
Xref: sparky misc.kids:13019 alt.kids-talk:631 alt.parents-teens:667 misc.education:1925
From: jh4o+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jeffrey T. Hutzelman)
Newsgroups: misc.kids,alt.kids-talk,alt.parents-teens,misc.education
Subject: Re: Minors right of access to contraceptives?
Date: 15 Apr 92 15:37:50 GMT
Organization: Sophomore, Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

On 14-Apr-92 in Re: Minors right of access ..
user Carl Reimann@auvm.americ writes:
>I enjoyed your summary of the key arguments on both sides of the issue
>of making contraceptives available to teenagers. I shall brief you on
>a related, currently-breaking topic in Wisconsin. Some years ago, the
>White House decided that states should be more inventive in their poli
>cies regarding welfare systems, which vary from state to state. Wisconsin
>is one of perhaps ten states which have decided to try new approaches to
>reducing welfare dependency. Wisconsin has decided that in the case of
>childbirth to a welfare mother, marriage shall be economically rewarded, and
>the birth of a second child shall see a smaller increase in welfare payments
>than the birth of the first child saw. Most controversially, the birth of
>a third child shall be met by no extra payments.

I think the theory behind this is that there are families on welfare who
deliberately have more children in order to get the money.  This isn't
an attempt to control teen pregnancy or anything else; it's an attempt
to reduce the number of people who misuse the system.

>The arguments against this plan are somewhat comples. First of all, it is ar
>gued that reducing payments upon the birth of a third child will in effect
>punish children for their parents' behavior.

This is probably the only reasonable argument I can see against such a
policy.  It might work, but it's more likely that the kids will suffer. 
On the other hand, some people will argue that the kids suffer anyway,
because they never see the extra money.  Rather, the people who have
children just to get the extra money spend it on other things than the
kids.

>Fourth,
>it is argued that reducing teen pregnancy should really be dealt with by en
>forcing statutory rape laws, not by punishing poor women whose behavior is no
>different from that of other women. This latter point about poor women is in
>fact a fifth reason  for rejecting Wisconsin's policy.

See above; this is not about teen pregnancy.
As for statutory rape...  In theory, that is designed to protect people
who aren't able to make their own choice, not to try to reduce the
number of pregnancies resulting from young women who CHOSE to have sex. 
It's not the right solution to the problem of teen pregnancy.  The
problem that stems from the concept of statutory rape is the same as the
problem that is caused by any number of other laws and rules that
control who can do what based on age, which is often a very poor
measurement of maturity.

-- Jeffrey Hutzelman
jh4o+@andrew.cmu.edu, jhutz@drycas.BITNET, or JeffreyH11 on America Online
From: goldberg@nssdca.gsfc.nasa.gov (Patti Twigg)
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Re: Starting Kindergarten
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:58:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: nssdca.7APR199210581842
Followup-To: misc.kids
Organization: NASA - Goddard Space Flight Center
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Apr06.141556.22851@afit.af.mil>, mgaudrea@afit.af.mil (Michele L.D. Gaudreault) writes...
> 
>What about those of us who won't be given a choice?  My husband and I
>were August and September babies and started school the year we turned
>five (and did pretty good, I think).  My daughter was born Aug 9, and if
>she continues at the pace she's at now, she will be more than ready for
>kindergarten when she turns five.  But Ohio is considering changing the
>cutoff to August 1.  I think the idea of a cutoff date is stupid - if
>they're ready, let them go.  If they're not ready, wait a year.  Like
>Paula said, it (ought to) always depend on the child, not his birthdate.
> 
>Michele

I agree. But, the problem is no matter what you do, short of starting
a new school session every couple of months, there will always be
a 'youngest' child in the class. I don't have any answers, just making
an observation!
                                 Patti Twigg
Newsgroups: misc.kids
From: lauraf@classy.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Laura Floom)
Subject: Re: At what age is day care appropriate?
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, CA
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 20:05:17 GMT

In article <4851@umriscc.isc.umr.edu> davem@mcs213i.cs.umr.edu (Dave Mentis) writes:
>In article <TIGGER.92Apr15203229@satyr.Sylvan.COM> tigger@satyr.Sylvan.COM (Grace Sylvan) writes:
>>
>>someone wrote (it got too confusing):
>
>How true, how true. :-)
>I believe it was Judy Tyrer responding to Laura Floom ??
 
Yes, that was it. Dave gets high marks for being able to follow this!
>
>>
>>   >Yes, you ARE lucky.  You are choosing to have a family member care for your
>>   >child.  This is the equivalent of having a parent care for the child.  Your
>>   >mother shares your values, your ethics, and is not going to disappear.
>>
>
> [ excellent point made by Tigger (Grace Sylvan) that grandparents"
>   approach not necessarily === parents" approach deleted by davem 
>   for brevity ]
>
And that seems to be the point of the whole thread. For me using my mother
has been a perfect situation with all parties (Me, mom, Jeffrey) thriving.
For Judy and Ron, Ron staying home has worked out well. For Dave and his
wife, finding a good daycare provider had been great. For Tigger and Kayvan,
it has been great for Tigger to stay home. Many other people on this thread
have described their situations, and seemed to think that is was working out
well for the children and family.
 
The reason this thread seems to be going on so long is that some people are
phrasing thier posts in a very judgemental way, making it seem to the readers
that the posters are thinking there is only ONE way. Can we now admit that
there is more than one perfect way to care for children, and that in each
situation there will be a different solution. Judy? Everyone else?

Laura Floom


Newsgroups: misc.kids