Strollerderby : wall street journal

Morning News - Farrah Fawcett Hopeful

Brett Singer — Tue, 12 May 2009 13:00:00 GMT

Before I say anything else, I should point out that I didn't really get hit by lightning yesterday. In case you were worried.

The Twitter feed Haiku Headlines isn't exactly news, but it is ABOUT the news, and is kind of clever so I thought I'd share it with you. Not every haiku on the feed is brilliant, but I like the idea. One of my first tweets was a haiku; this was a long time ago, and I predicted Twitter wouldn't succeed -- smart! There is now a "movement" of haiku on Twitter, with some actually calling them "Twaiku". Anyone else have trouble saying "tweeting" without grimacing?

Farrah Fawcett is very sick and it seems likely that she will soon no longer be with us. It's sad when anyone dies from cancer, of course. With her, it's not any more sad, but it does seem vaguely surreal since when I was young she was the best looking woman on the planet in a way that couldn't happen in today's more crowded media landscape. She told the L.A. Times back in August that she was hoping to recover and that she was less than pleased to see details of her illness leaked. "It seems that there are areas that should be off-limits," she said. Hard to disagree.

Reverend Run's son was arrested and charged with possession of marijuana. Jojo Simmons panicked, tried to escape the police, and "once his escape efforts failed, the MTV reality star got out of his car and tried to fight the officers." That's not good.

Look kids! An electric motorcycle! (I'm still waiting for a flying car.)

Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal (I like to call him Darth Murdoch, or Rupert Vader) has a new survival plan. "A sophisticated micropayments service" for individual articles. The struggling daily newspaper ("struggling" pretty much describes every newspaper these days, doesn't it?) will also try to gain ground in the local news market online. Senator John Kerry "told the Financial Times it was conceivable that publishers could be given limited exemption from antitrust laws to discuss online models." Um, hang on. Does that mean even less competition? Oy.

And CNN tells us that "Fish, olive oil, nuts good for eyes too" according to studies published in the Archives of Ophthalmology. See, I eat olive oil and I still have glasses. Obviously this study is wrong. (Note: that statement is not only foolish, it has no basis in fact. But hey, why should I be any different from a certain major news channel?)

Happy Tuesday, everyone.

Image: Amazon

SNL Mother's Day Skits

Did This Woman Commit Suicide Because She Couldn't Breastfeed?

FEMA Coloring Book Features 9/11 Image

10 Year Old Author Alec Greven Is Back

Stay-At-Home Moms are the Best, Aren't They!

Madeline Holler — Tue, 14 Apr 2009 14:02:00 GMT

Oh, for God's sake, Dr. Laura, put a lid on it.

The conservative call-in radio show host (and her kid's mom!), Dr. Laura Schlessinger, has written a book that lays out her life's philosophy -- or at least the philosophy she's pounded listeners over the head with since her show first aired 600 years ago.

"In Praise of Stay-at-Home Moms," the introduction of which is excerpted here in the Wall Street Journal, appears to be one unwittingly fortunate woman's hearty pat on her own back for raising her child as she saw fit and admonishing those who didn't follow the same script.

In a nutshell, Dr. Laura thinks children should not be put in daycare and parents should not get divorced. Period. It's not that moms shouldn't work, she argues. It's just that moms shouldn't be away from their kids. (Which gets a little complicated for the widowed forklift operator with a 9-month-old in her lap!)

From the introduction:

My husband and I came to the practical conclusion that I needed to go back to radio work to be our family's primary financial support, while he would manage my career, the home, and our finances. Nonetheless, I refused to take any job which would require me to be out of the home every day while our son was home or awake! I would take care of him all day and then go to work on radio, leaving the home at 9:00 PM after putting him to bed. Eventually, when he started kindergarten, I landed a daytime shift while he was in school.

In order to do the writing and necessary research, I would get up at 5:00 AM and work a few hours before I woke him up to get ready for school. I always worked my career around my family, never the other way around.

She takes on her critics, who call her a hypocrite for having a career when she tells other women not to. She also responds to women who say they simply don't have the kind of flexibility in their work that she had. What makes her different -- and, let's face it, perfect! -- she explains, is that she never waivered from the following tenets (and you shouldn't as well):

It is so very doable if you are:

-- committed to the priority of raising your children yourself;

-- part of a marriage, which obviously provides two parents;

-- willing to sacrifice some opportunities for the sake of family;

-- willing to "do without" many things -- but not family time and attention; and

-- not willing to compromise your conviction, no matter how pressed you get by circumstances or naysayers.

Actually, it's not bad advice. And I don't see where it requires being a SAHM/a radio DJ/unwilling to put kids in daycare to meet these goals.

I think that's what really gets on my nerves and is actually destructive: Dr. Laura found a way of being a mother -- a working mother with a flexible workplace (how about a book "In Praise of the Office Secretary Who was No Doubt Stuck Watching Dr. Laura's Son While She was Working") -- that fit her life, personality and goals. And her philosophy as a mother. It's easy to write a book praising yourself, especially when you're looking back. We should all hope the choices we made work out and are deemed praise-worthy, if not by Dr. Laura, or a book publisher, then at least ourselves.

What I always think about the SAHM/working mom debate is that (1) the labels are way too simple -- I'm sort of a SAHM yet also a working mother with childcare and (2) every mom/family is different. Our kids will be who they are, and, yes, that will have to do in large part with how we raised them, including being half-way up their asses from daybreak to sundown, absent from day break to sundown nearly 24/7, or some other work/home combination. Like us, our kids will all have their own history -- they're own story -- based on their family life, what their parents did with them and for them. And good thing, too. Otherwise, it's all a little Stepford ... right?

Family circumstances influence how kids are raised; parents' personalities matter; there's more to parenting than face time. As long as our kids are safe, fed and educated, why nitpick at the particulars? Why focus on just one thing?

What do you think? Nothing matters more than weekday lunches with Mom? Or did Dr. Laura change your life?

Image: WSJonline

When Grandma Wants to Be 'Glamma'

Jen Chaney — Sat, 24 Jan 2009 21:28:00 GMT

As Shirley MacLaine made abundantly clear in "Terms of Endearment," not everyone immediately gets jazzed about being dubbed a grandmother. It's a signal that you are undeniably, unequivocally old, the sort of person who keeps a pair of square-framed glasses perched at the tip of her nose and has lengthy conversations about arthritis pain.

But as the Wall Street Journal reports, some Baby Boomer grandparents are rejecting the dentures-and-early-bird-dinner trap. How? By refusing to call themselves Grandpa, Grandma, Granny, Bubbe or any of those other Oldy McOlderson monikers that stand in stark contrast to the forever-young attitude of their generation. Some of the alternatives they're going with: Papa Doc (for a grandfather who happens to be a doctor), Coco (an homage to Coco Chanel) and -- for my money, the most ridiculous -- Glamma, the "glam" version of Grandma.

I have no problem with bucking tradition. I also completely understand why someone might want to put his or her personal stamp on grandparenthood. But at the same time, it seems a bit absurd to try to "young up" that important new role. I mean, Glamma? Really? Something about that choice reminds me of those 57-year-old woman who still try to shop in the juniors department. It seems to me there must be a way to stay young at heart and age gracefully, but still acknowledge the fact that you are, indeed, aging.

Then again, this could be one of those things that's all about context. When you personally know the people choosing these nicknames, and they aren't being depicted in an article that lumps them together with all those stubborn Baby Boomer stereotypes, their choices might seem much less inane. Plus, 25 years from now -- when I decide to call myself Super Nana -- I might find Glamma much less goofy.

But what do you think? Do you know any grandparents who have given themselves hipper sounding names? Do you embrace the idea or think Grandma and Grandpa still works just fine?

Image: senior-monitor.com

Related Links:

Desperately Seeking . . . Grandparents

Why Doesn't Hallmark Care About Nanas?

Mom Takes her Potty Mouth to Work

JeanneSager — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:30:00 GMT

I really gotta go potty. Which would be all well and good, but I just told my boss.
Actually, the exact words were, “I’ll do it in a minute. First I hafta go potty.” He wasn’t impressed. And I was more than a little embarrassed. Ever stop and realize your potty mouth isn’t the adult variety?

The comments on this Wall Street Journal Juggle article were your usual been there, done that, still have the pee smell on the backseat. It was the comment from a mom who’d dubbed herself “AllBoys,” that made me gulp.

“I cannot stand hearing grown women say, ‘Mommy needs to go potty now’,” she said.

Sorry, grown woman over here. I say potty. I say stinky and boo-boo. I also spend an inordinate amount of time with someone who won’t be allowed into a PG-13 movie for another decade.

Being a parent means dropping the cuss words – which can be eminently helpful in upping the professional image. But does our new vocabulary list put a target on our backs the size of Alaska? I’ll let you know what my boss says next time I ask if he remembered to say “thank you” to the guy who refilled the printer with paper.

Image: Ky_Olsen

How Much Money Do Parents Owe Their Kids?

Madeline Holler — Mon, 15 Sep 2008 17:33:00 GMT

If this were your teenager, what would you do? A Wall Street Journal reporter and his son had a dispute over who should pay for the kid's new guitar strings? The dad thought the kid should; the kid thought the dad should. After all, the high school senior argued, the family has enough money. Why should he have to spend his own?

The two write about their disagreement in the first of series of columns about money matters with kids. The father writes his perspective, the son, his.

While the teens are still a handful of years away for my oldest, I'm already unsure about money matters involving her: allowance, how much, what she should be expected to save, what she shoud buy herself, etc. On the one hand -- it's great having the power of saying "yes" and "no" right now. Only because I get to pretend I'm instilling my values in her. (Yes, you more thoughtful readers realize pushing kids around is no lesson at all.)

So what do you plan to do to teach your kids about money? Considering today's news about more banks melting down -- and then on-going story of way over-extended families -- what's the lesson? And how do you teach it?

Because I'm inclined to agree with the father's first response, which was the budding Jimi Hendrix could pick up his own strings. The father caves at the end, since the son pointed out that Dad doesn't hesistate to pay for the piano to be retuned and that he was likely being a musical instrument bigot. Still. Won't the kid take the guitar with him to college? It's his guitar! It's likely the family's piano.

Photo: rd.com

The Unkindest Cut: Paid Time Off Gets the Ax

Madeline Holler — Thu, 12 Jun 2008 22:04:00 GMT

Just when we started making progress on things like paid maternity leave (we were making progress on that, right?), the economy goes in the shitter. Now, companies are having to cut back on family-friendly benefits like paid time off for having a baby/adopting a baby/raising a baby.

Sucky!

In fact leaves and pay for time off for both parents are at lower levels than they were a decade ago.

From WSJonline:

Only 16% of employers offer full pay for childbirth leave, down from 27% in 1998, based on a nationally representative sample of 1,100 employers by the nonprofit Families and Work Institute. The average maximum length of job-guaranteed leaves for new mothers shrank too, to 15.2 weeks from 16.1 weeks a decade ago; leave for dads fell to 12.6 weeks from 13.1.

It's not that The Man is evil (I guess). Instead, it's the growing cost of disability insurance, which is what covers most maternity leave costs in the U.S. So moms are taking much, much less time off after baby. Parents are also having to take on more debt, or plan very carefully (and hope for no glitches) when deciding whether and when to have a baby.

Photo: WSJonline.com

Baby-Proofing the Pooch

Amy Kuras — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 21:03:00 GMT

As modern parents we spend money and time on childbirth classes, baby gear and books galore to get ourselves ready for a new baby joining our family. If it's kid #2 or more, sibling preparation classes might be added to the mix.

But for many of us, a baby will be joining an already established family, with cats or dogs playing the role of "furry children" before the first human one ever came along. And the pets can have just as difficult a time with the changes in their lives wrought by a baby as a human sibling would. I (and my poor, peed-upon couch) can attest that my daughter had an easier adjustment to her brother's birth than our dog did to her arrival.

According to this Wall Street Journal story, more and more people are working with trainers to prepare their dogs for their baby's joining the family. Now some of these people are the real "Best in Show" nutjobs who carry their dogs in purses and have an extensive wardrobe for little Pupster, but most people who do this seem to be nice, caring people who maybe love their dogs a little too much (and I'm someone who lets her cat sleep on her actual pillow, so I have no room to talk).

I did a story on this for a local daily a few years ago, and the trainer told me that adjusting the dog's routine before the baby arrives is a good idea. Get her used to shorter, less regular walks, for example, because you'll be unlikely to have the time for an extended stroll in those first few months.

Worst-case scenario? It's legal to lock the dog in a crate when it gets annoying.

Dooce Envy

Adrienne Martini — Wed, 16 Apr 2008 19:30:00 GMT

Whether you love Heather B. Armstrong or hate her, you can't avoid her. Dooce.com is everywhere, including the august (and not a little bit condescending) pages of the Wall Street Journal, which actually used the phrase "mommy blogs."

The story itself has been dissected to death -- because everything about Armstrong has to be parsed a billion different ways in the blogosphere -- most attack who she is rather than what she represents.

While Armstrong herself is like any other human being with flaws, her online persona is a lightning rod for many of the issues faced by all moms. Is it OK to be mentally ill? Is it acceptable to not be charmed by every last thing your kid does? Can we talk about our experiences without being written off as mere "mommies who blog?" Do profit margins and personal stories contradict each other?

That's what I'd like to talk about, rather than if Leta and Chuck and the new puppy are going to be ruined by dooce or something equally trivial. How about you?

Son, perhaps you should consider a trade

Brett Singer — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 18:15:00 GMT

Not only is it impossible to get junior into that elite Kindergarten, once you do, the little rat won't be able to get into college. At least that's what the numbers are telling us this week.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Harvard admitted 7.1% of students who applied this year, down from 8.9%. Yale and Princeton showed some drops as well. OK, you say, that's the Ivy League. As Garfield might say, big fat hairy deal. But, in yet another example of why we really shouldn't listen to Garfield (especially regarding college advice), state schools such as the University of Texas are showing a similar trend.

Although The Journal reports that many high school students are "freaking out" about the news, I would like to remind children everywhere that Dr. Phil McGraw attended the University of North Texas, which, according to U.S. News and World Report, is a fourth tier school. And he's done pretty well for himself.

In all seriousness, I think it's possible to get a good education in a number of different venues, but it's undeniable that the Ivy League and other top-tier schools offer connections and resources that are sometimes harder to come by at other institutions. The other aspect of this is the pressure it places on kids, the ones who are "freaking out" because they may not get into the college of their choice. More stress is never a good thing. Hopefully this news won't make crazy parents who started obsessing over college while their children were in utero start to act even crazier.

Look at it this way -- you can use all that money you saved to take a really nice vacation.

image: College Planning Specialists, and webdesign-guru.co.uk

Pregnancy Discrimination Complaints On the Rise

Kelly Mills — Sat, 29 Mar 2008 13:31:00 GMT

The Wall Street Journal reports that pregnancy-bias job complaints to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission were up by 14 percent this year, and up by 40 percent from a decade ago. Employers aren't allowed to discriminate against the with child in hiring, firing, and lay-offs--which doesn't mean they can't do all those things to you, it just means they can't treat you worse than men. So essentially you have to prove that the actions were motivated by the fact that you were pregnant, which isn't always easy.

While many women also assume they get maternity leave, the truth is that only a couple states guarantee the leave must be paid. And though some ladies do pursue claims against employers, many opt to drop claims because of the time and hassle entailed. With a pregnancy or newborn, I'm sure you have all kinds of free time to work with attorneys and amass evidence and so on. But ultimately some women are successful, like the HR manager who was laid off as part of a reduction-in-force, only to discover the reduction encompassed only her. And if we can do anything to encourage women to pursue action, we'd damn well better do it, or employers will be able to continue to shut out those that are in a family way.

Judgment Day: Thy Neighbor's Children

Karen Murphy — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 19:30:00 GMT

Would you tattle on a neighbor's nanny? In today's increasingly isolationist society, we're less and less It Takes a Village and more and more Turn a Blind Eye. Or are we? WSJ's The Juggle examines this very question this week, and most commenting parents agreed that they tend to watch out for their neighbor's kids as well as their own. But when does "keeping an eye out" become "butting in"? In other words, where's the fine line between being the village and being an asshat who doles out unwanted, unwarranted advice?

It's a delicate matter to report something you think is untoward that's happening to a neighbor's kid or to a classmate of your own kid. Many families are private by nature and don't welcome unsolicited advice. Other families are aware on some level of the problem but choose in their own way to ignore it, as often that's easier than admitting there's a problem in the first place.

But where do you draw the line? What if you suspect abuse, for example? Maybe not bruises-and-black-eyes abuse, but something more difficult to detect. Do you say something? And to whom? Does it depend on the situation?

It would be wonderful if we all lived in tight communities where everyone looked out for everyone else, where you knew your kids were protected because they were surrounded by people you knew and trusted. But we don't all have that, not today. I hate the idea of anonymous tattle sites where you could report something you suspected, but without those tight communities, what alternatives are there?

What about you? Do you feel you have some sort of community you can turn to, rely upon, and contribute to? And if not, how would you handle The Juggle's bad-nanny situation?

Photo: www.sciencemuseum.org.uk

Strollerderby Playdate: Where Will Our Kids Meet Their Spouses?

Amy S.F. Lutz — Thu, 31 Jan 2008 12:42:00 GMT

I never really tallied it up until I read this interesting post on the decline of college romance in The Wall Street Journal's parenting blog, Juggle, but most of my friends met their spouses while they were undergraduates - which is pretty typical for the members of my generation. That has since changed, however. Both men and women are marrying later than ever before - at age 27.5 for men, 25.5 for women - and that means that the office has eclipsed the university as the most common place for couples to meet.

But I couldn't help wondering: was the internet included as a choice of meeting places when this data was collected? Because it seems obvious to me that's how 90% of our kids are going to find the loves of their lives. I mean, why restrict your choices to the handfuls of potential mates who share your workspace, or who cross paths with you in college, when the internet opens up so many more possibilities?

Of course I understand that there are risks involved, and that there are lots of creeps online. And I will definitely encourage my kids to take every precaution if (when) they venture into the world of internet dating. But the whole process seems so much easier, so much more streamlined, when interested parties can screen thousands of candidates and only actually spend their time pursuing those who are the most appealing across a broad spectrum of categories - including appearance, hobbies, education, goals, etc.

Lord knows, if my husband were suddenly vaporized by aliens, J-Date would look mighty tempting - although, to bastardize Groucho Marx, I don't think I would want any man desperate enough to go out with me, a mother of five. Fortunately, when my kids set out on their quest for life partners, that won't be an issue (at least, it better not be.)

Too Much Childcare? It Happens.

Madeline Holler — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 23:04:00 GMT

Our babysitter went and got a job. A real job. How could she? What about our needs?

Sure, we hardly ever used her. And only on evenings, usually on the weekends. Do you think she had better stuff to do besides hanging out at our unexciting, tiny house?

What about when the opposite happens, particularly with your full-time nannies or household help? Do you just kick her to the curb when all the kids go to school? Cut back the hours? Turn her into a full-time housekeeper?

It's a problem I'll never have -- what to do with too much childcare. But it's one they tackled over at the Wall Street Journal's "The Juggle." A blogger wanted to know what arrangements the readers had with their beloved babysitter/nannies who they no longer need full time.

The writer said:

Fortunately, our sitter already does some light housework (doing the kids’ laundry, emptying the dishwasher and so on), and we’ll probably expand her into more of a household-manager kind of role when both kids are out of the house more often.

I'll refrain from poking fun (in a jealous rage) of outsourcing household management, because I think it's great they guy is showing loyalty to a person who had been obviously loyal and caring and helpful to his family.

A lot of the commenters started "sharing" the nanny, or changed their responsibilities from changing diapers to cleaning the house. Others, seeing the financial windfall of no longer have to pay for so much help, found the women new families to care for.

What do you plan to do?

Should Presents be Linked to Good Behavior?

Amy Kuras — Mon, 10 Dec 2007 23:36:00 GMT

When I was a kid, my parents had –and used – what proved to be a pretty effective bad-behavior smackdown.

Santa Claus. Yes, the jolly old elf himself. If I acted up, my parents had me convinced they had a direct line to Santa Claus and would call him on the phone and tell him not to come if I kept it up.

The fact that this works proves not so much that it is a really stellar parenting technique as that I was not the brightest kid. But it ties in with this Wall Street Journal post on the Love and Money blog, which suggests that presents should be an expression of parental love and affection, not a reward or punishment for behavior.

His post focuses on older kids, because let's face it, teens are a hell of a lot more likely to do something really heartbreakingly terrible. I pretty much disagreed vehemently with the post; I'm a firm believer that handing your kids expensive material goods when they behave like ungrateful little shits for what they have already been given is a good way to produce, well, more ungrateful little shit behavior. I wouldn’t take it so far as to remove presents for minor misbehavior or have a kid get nothing, but if they’ve crashed my car they don’t get an iPod, either.

What do you think? Is it smart to link holiday gifts to behavior, or should kids still get really nice presents even when their behavior doesn’t warrant much more than your posting bail?

Teens Don’t Go to Homecoming: One Father’s Lament

Madeline Holler — Tue, 06 Nov 2007 21:07:00 GMT

I can only read this as good news: teens no longer go to Homecoming dances.

I think the asinine and completely outdated habits these types of traditions hold on to are worth tossing out. Teens seem to agree. Across the country – even in conservative, heartland cities like Wichita, Kan. -- schools are canceling the dances due to a lack of interest or attendance.

But this Wall Street Journal writer and father of three girls is deeply saddened by the lost tradition, the waning chivalry, the new “cool” status bestowed on those who opt not to go. He blames hot-blooded, freak-dancing teens who left school officials with no other choice but to ban the dances or the dancing. He blames the “easy” girls who, he hints, are luring the boys away.

His poor daughter and her friends! They only wanted to show off their news dresses, their fancy hairstyles, themselves – but their dates decided that very evening not to go. These damn boys left them with no other choice but to not attend the dance!

Teachable moment, Daddy. You can remind your daughter that, if she’s so hell-bent on going, she can go with her friends. She can go by herself! Give her the keys to the minivan! Tell her to be home by midnight! Tell her to girl-up and decide right there whether she's going to move with the pack or without them, social conventions or not.

Don’t blame the sluts, sir, for the fact that your daughter kept her mouth shut when, while parents were taking pictures of the dressed-up teens, she decided to go along with not going to the dance. Blame whomever gave her the idea that Daddy (and his substitutes) know best.

Photo: www.nicoleshow.com

Kmart Accuses Shopper of Buying Shoes

Madeline Holler — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 14:43:00 GMT

There was the 39-cent stick of fruit leather. The marked-down tube of Sonia Kashuk lip gloss. The $12 ham for which we only paid $5. All stuff I or my daughter have left a store with after paying too little or nothing at all. Unknowingly, of course. And I can't be the only one who has ever been an accomplice to accidental thievery, especially among those of us who regularly shop with small children.
Oh, it could have been bad, real bad, though. Like what happened to an editor at the Wall Street Journal, after she underpaid for a pair of flip-flops during a Kmart buying spree.
The short version: she found a pair of size 9 flip-flops, plopped them in a box marked “9,” loaded her cart and that of her step-daughter-in-law’s with $800 worth of goods, paid and walked out. A tap on her shoulder. It was store security. Please come this way.
Security held her in a windowless room for an hour and pretended to be Sam Waterston in the courtroom, accusing her of trying to get the fancy flip-flops for a lower price. Turns out she had put the shoes in a box for a pair of children's size 9s. Was the mix-up her fault? Store workers searched the shoe section and couldn't find the right box either.
Almost as baffling as the fact that this woman found $800 worth of stuff to buy at Kmart is the fact that she had so few rights. The store, apparently, was within the law in holding her, taking her driver's license and credit card, and expecting her to pay a fine or wage her own fight with the company contracted to run the store's theft prevention.
Retailers lose more than $40 billion dollars a year to scams, many of which include some form of ticket switching, which is what Kmart thought this woman was up to. But have Kmart VPs of shrinkage ever shopped at their own stores? It's rarely very clear how much something costs at a Kmart -- items don't have tags, the store shelves are often a disaster, signs on shelves seem randomly placed, and their markdowns are a complete mystery.
In the end, the editor, a regular shopper at the struggling retailer, was set free, refunded her money for the flip-flops (and not allowed to purchase them!) and banned from that store. Shrewd, Kmart, very shrewd.

Moral of the story? Pat down the kids before lining up at the register and don't buy anything in a box.

Preschool Search: Uber-Competitive Parents Stop at Nothing to Achieve Admission

Stefania Pomponi Butler (CityMama) — Thu, 15 Feb 2007 17:02:00 GMT

Preschool admissions. It's where the parenting strong are separated from the parenting weak. It's where you dig deep, way down deep inside, and see just what kind of parenting stuff you're made of.

Would you schedule a C-section in order to ensure your child will get one of 5 slots a school offers newborns each month? Would you fill out preschool application forms with an epidural stuck in your back? Would you start calling preschools at 5 weeks pregnant (essentially, as soon as the stick turns blue)? Or phone your desired school twice a day, everyday, for six months? How about sending flowers each week until your child is accepted? Or refusing to leave the preschool building until your child is secured a spot?

You wouldn't do that? Pfffffft. *cough* wusses *cough* Good luck getting your kids into Oxford, say these London parents.

Times Online's List Of Ten Great Parenting Blogs

Patti — Fri, 19 Jan 2007 00:00:00 GMT

UK news outlet The Times Online's Alpha Mummy blog has posted their list of the ten great blogs that every working mum should read--good to know that the US doesn't have the market cornered on the assumption that to be a parent means to be a mother, and the qualifier "working" is somewhat puzzling, as their list is not at all specific to working parents.

The list features a few of the usual suspects: Dooce, Parent Hacks, Kiddley. Also included are a couple of blogs that aren't necessarily parenting blogs per se, but that a parent could definitely benefit from reading: Lifehacker and The Happiness Project. Alpha Mummy rounds out the list with fellow Times Online blogger India Knight's Isn't She Talking Yet, the Wall Street Journal's Juggle, and new-to-me reads MamaPop and Motherhood Uncensored (sometimes I don't know where I am when everyone else is blogging great stuff).

Oh, and the top of the list? Just a little site called Babble.

And now comes the best part of any top-something list: What's Wrong With It. Who's missing from Alpha Mummy's top ten? Is this list really what it claims to be, the top ten blogs for working parents (at least one of the blogs, MamaPop, is written by self-described stay at home parents)? Where all my daddybloggers at?