-
Wow. Actually, I thought knowledge was for free. That's why my husband and I learned basic ASL on our own. Our son, now almost two, is flourishing in his own way, at his own speed knowing basic ASL. You're putting a weird, consumerist slant on the desire to teach sign language.
As for weather it made my son smarter or "better" in any area, I have no idea. He's going to grow up only once. All I can say is I can't imagine him any other way.
posted by : deer signers mom on 4/2/2008 at 7:55 PM Flag For Abuse
-
We didnt go to classes or read books. We did basic signs based on ASL but our daughter morphed them into what her little hands could handle. The form of the sign doesnt matter as much as both you and your child understanding it.
I don't have any illusions that my daughter will be smarter or more verbose but I do know it cut way back on tantrums since we knew when she was hungry, tired or had a tummy ache or teething pain. I recommend baby signs to all my friends. It takes patience but it is well worth it.
posted by : Baby Mama on 4/7/2008 at 10:11 AM Flag For Abuse
-
We tried teaching some basic signs to our daughter at home. By nine months (the same time she said Mama and Dada), three of them had stuck: "more," "all done/gone," and "cheese" (which she used to request any treat or favorite food). These signs turned out to be absolutely adequate until she started to talk a lot at fourteen or fifteen months. We did notice that "more" was one of the later simple words that she learned to speak. She only decided to spit out "mo" when her part-time daycare provider absolutely refused to respond to the sign.
posted by : Sheri on 4/7/2008 at 10:58 AM Flag For Abuse
-
Yeah, I don't care if it makes my kid smarter or better or whatever. We bought one cheap book of signs and used some that made sense for us. It cut down on tantrums and whining when he figured out he could communicate that he needed milk, or he was finished, or he liked something. Which was all we wanted. I don't understand how it could possibly hurt a kid, that seems like a ridiculous claim. Before we even offered him a few signs he was making up his own. When he wanted something he would smack at it repeatedly. Don't all kids have signs to communicate with their parents, official or not? Who are these mythical parents that spend a crap load of money to make their kid be "the best." I don't believe they exist. I think it's just strawmen for people like the author to publish books about.
posted by : mcglory13 on 4/7/2008 at 12:58 PM Flag For Abuse
-
Another tempest in a teapot piece--let's create a controversy! I taught my son a few signs using a book from the library. It was fun, cute, reduced his frustration level--and it was completely free. Parents who want to spend money on a class can do so. It's a fun way to meet other parents with kids the same age. But I've never in my life met a parent who felt "pressured" to take a class to learn this, and just about everyone I know views any kind of scheme to raise a child's IQ in 3 easy steps with extreme skepticism. Give us a little more credit, please.
posted by : Darkandstormy on 4/7/2008 at 1:06 PM Flag For Abuse
-
The article is fairly well-balanced but the title is obviously designed to stir up controversy and therefore views.
The answer is neither. Your baby will not die, and will most likely turn out more or less as well, with or without sign language. So, not essential to your child's well being.
On the other hand, baby signing does allow a child to communicate earlier--which can have all sorts of benefits, depending on the child and family. If you have a child who frustrates easily, signing can be a wonderful way to communicate early on. Like any second language, it also helps introduce the idea that multiple signs (in the semiotic sense) can have the same meaning. And it can give children an increased sense of their own place in the family. So, while the article focuses on the (theoretically) measurable--IQ and vocabulary size--the author doesn't discuss some of the less tangible benefits in more depth.
If, as a parents, you notice these benefits, then it is a fit for your family.
The "Rip-Off" also implies that you must spend hundreds of dollars. I taught her some signs myself (without any previous experience). Sure, if she shows an interest in becoming proficient, she may need more instruction. But for now, we are perfectly capable of learning signs on our own.
posted by : CaliMama on 4/7/2008 at 1:24 PM Flag For Abuse
-
Everyone else is saying it, but why spend money on classes when you can learn the signs yourself and teach them at home for very little money... the Baby Signs books are great, we have one and my daughter has learned 12 signs in the past 2 weeks. Its been easy to incorporate into our day and we've seen some real benefits from it so far!
Signing is great, no doubt about it, but paying lots of money for sign language classes... that seems silly.
posted by : mamalamadingdong on 4/7/2008 at 1:27 PM Flag For Abuse
-
Pamela, the awful headline of your article and the first page or so present a completely false choice. You conflate teaching children sign-language with PAYING for sign-language classes. And your headline is just unforgiveably sensationalist and, well, just ignorant.
Why is the choice between paying for signing classes or not teaching signing at all. What about just teaching the signs YOURSELF. Get a $20 book and have at it. If you really didn't consider that option maybe you shouldn't be writing about parenting.
For goodness sake - learn how to present an issue accurately.
My wife and I tought our son to sign before he spoke and I definitely think it helped him. It seemed to reduce his overall frustration levels in his attempts to communicate with us.
And yet he's also very verbally precocious. The sign-language, for us, seemed to complement verbal development, not detract from it.
Of course, this is just anecdotal and I certainly agree that this is something that parents should just choose to do or not do as best fits their family.
The latter part of your article is a bit better in that it presents some interesting opinions and studies on the topic.
posted by : k1 on 4/7/2008 at 1:34 PM Flag For Abuse
-
Wow, you PAID for classes??? Sorry, but that's just dumb.
My ex-wife and I borrowed a sign language for babies book and video from the library (fabulous new invention, by the way, the library), just to learn the signs we wanted to teach. Then we discovered online resources that had sign language in video form so we could see the signs whenever we wanted to teach a new word.
Our aim was not to make our son smarter, we wanted to help him overcome the frustration that kids commonly experience when their cognitive abilities outweigh their communication abilities. It was satisfying to SEE the relief in his face when he would sign to us and we'd understand him.
He took to it like a duck to water, at 11 months we started and within a month he was signing back. His speech developed in tandem with his signs, but he often preferred signing because he was understood faster. He worked up a vocabulary of about a hundred signs. He used both for a few months and by age two, he was speaking very well, signing, oddly enough, only when he was really tired.
We tried sign language when our second son was born, but he was freakishly advanced in the speech department, becoming highly verbal at 12 months. He didn't need sign language like his older brother.
So, what is more essential than sign language for your baby is not succumbing to the yuppie parent traps called "classes."
posted by : Big Daddy on 4/7/2008 at 1:35 PM Flag For Abuse
-
Get used to it Big Daddy.
The writers at Babble.com are absolutely expert at presenting false choices in a very black and white manner to foment controversy.
It's a way to garner discussion and page views that's cheaper than actually have compelling content or writing.
I actually have come to quite enjoy waiting for an especially egregious case and ranting about it. Quite satisfying, if also pretty pointless.
posted by : k1 on 4/7/2008 at 1:47 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I bought a baby signing kit with a book, cards and a cd for less than $20. We learned about 10 or 20 signs and started using them with our son at about 10 months. He is 20 months now and uses about 12 signs regularly. Without them I would be crazy. He doesn't talk really, except to repeat words back. The signs help us to communicate basic needs like when he's hungry, tired, or wants more of something. So we haven't seen it boosting his speech-readiness, but neither has it hindered him (as far as I can tell).
I agree that paying for classes seems like a stupid idea, unless you want the social aspect for either the parents or child.
Baby sign language is just another parenting tool. Not necessary and not detrimental.
posted by : froggemom on 4/7/2008 at 2:03 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I don't see the point of taking classes if you want to teach your child a few signs (Everyone's already said it, but the library has good resources.)
However, don't expect your child to be able to communicate with Deaf or Hard of Hearing people with signs from a library book. For that, you're going to need classes - ASL has a very different grammar than English. Also, there are a lot of regional variations of signs ... IIRC, food signs in particular are highly regional.
But as long as you aren't expecting your child to get a second language out of this, then by all means, go to the library.
posted by : Linnea on 4/7/2008 at 2:17 PM Flag For Abuse
-
My daughter started to sign on her own at 9 months. Over time she has created more and more signs. She can shake her head yes and no, wave bye and hi. She also has a sign for hungry. But generally we don't need signs. We can tell what she wants because she gets a book or food or a toy and starts pushing it towards us.
posted by : dhsredhead on 4/7/2008 at 2:18 PM Flag For Abuse
-
You're conflating learning sign language with a micro-industry that has sprung up around it to cater to certain types of parents. Signing is an excellent tool and I can't imagine raising our daughter without it. I don't care if it boosts her IQ temporarily, or at all. What I do care about is that we can communicate more easily during what might be a brief but is certainly a critical period before she can truly verbalize.
Teaching our daughter, who is now 12 months, to sign, cost us a pack of flashcards and a little bit of time. We started using signs at about 7 months, and she picked them up within a month. We started with a half dozen signs, and kept those flashcards on the fridge, to remind us all (baby likes to look at them, too) of the signs we were using. Then we started adding more signs. Now, she knows dozens of signs and she has over a dozen spoken words. It's definitely helped her keep her cool, and me too - she can tell us (and does) when she wants milk, more, a bath, her bed...also what she sees and is excited by in the world around her (fan! lights! turtle! shoes! bears!). The idea that this is somehow stunting her growth or disturbing her development is outright laughable.
posted by : bookmama on 4/7/2008 at 2:23 PM Flag For Abuse
-
The article completely ignores the fact that sign language and transliteration are not just parenting industries, but ACTUAL languages that entire communities use to communicate. If I were going to rail on the baby-sign industry, I would point out that much of it has bastardized actual ASL.
Teach your children ASL or cueing and they just might get the benefits of communicating without speech as well as learning a second language they can use every day right here in the good old U S of A.
posted by : WSP on 4/7/2008 at 2:29 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I agree that marketers target new parents and try to suck them into spending money with promises of smarter, happier children. But, with that said, you shouldn't throw the baby out with the bath water. Signing is great and classes can be great too. If you have the disposable income and want a fun, educational way to spend time with your baby...maybe a singing class is perfect for you. If you want to teach your kid sign language but want to avoid spending the dough all the tools you need are available free online. If you think it's silly to teach babies to sign, that is fine too, as signing for hearing children is not "essential".
I taught my son to sign when he was one. I spent $13 on a book with usefull signs for babies. I think it was well worth it. He picked the signs up easily and seemed very happy that he could communicate on a new level. I'd like to believe that we avoided some frustration and a few tantrums by giving him early communication tools. He is now 21 months old and speaks well for his age but still uses his signs regularly...especially for words he has trouble saying, like "thank you". I am pregnant with my second child and will teach the this one to sign too. It works for us.
posted by : mamadrama on 4/7/2008 at 2:43 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I think this article is great, everyone who teaches their kid to sign is so smug about it clearly communicating that they believe its the best choice. The comments above further prove that.
Teaching my son to sign was never an option-why not just let the little man move into the world in his own way and speed....
posted by : cocosmalls on 4/7/2008 at 2:43 PM Flag For Abuse
-
cocosmalls - wow, so you've met EVERYONE who teaches their kid to sign? that's impressive. because, you know, i'd hate to think you would characterize people who you have never talked to, met or even seen as smug.
posted by : k1 on 4/7/2008 at 3:04 PM Flag For Abuse
-
K1: I agree with everything you've said. Rock on. I've taught my son to sign and am grateful he can tell me he wants more milk or is all done with his bath. For us, it's a personal choice. No smugness required.
posted by : mombo on 4/7/2008 at 4:14 PM Flag For Abuse
-
It is true that the research does not show that signing per se is the reason that children have shown increases in IQ and vocabulary abilities. However, as a teacher of signing and a mother who has signed with my 2 kids, signing gave me and my children a way to interact with each other in a more intimate and communicative way. Because I signed with my kids, I spoke more with them, I expected them to respond to me (in sign, grunts, looks or whatever) and my kids had fewer tantrums. I have been watching and working with families for 6 years and never have seen any negative effects for kids. This is not rocket science and does not require that a person learn an entire language (ASL). It just means using 10-50 signs to help your child express her needs while she cannot speak. That is it. NO RIP OFF. Give me a living break!
posted by : SignBabies on 4/7/2008 at 4:17 PM Flag For Abuse
-
ughhhh....Why do babies need sign language "taught" to them. If parents pay close attention, they will see that their child is communicating with them all the time with hand gestures, facial expressions, wiggling, eye contact etc. Why not let your baby teach YOU their system of communicating. This whole teaching babies to sign YOUR way seems the first step to being controlling and forcing your unique little one into a rigid system.
All the simple things that babies were communicating in these comments...milk, cheese, all done, cookie, eat...my three kids could communicate to me in their own way before they could speak. The only time we had tantrums was when I refused to give them what they wanted for whatever reason, not because I didn't understand them.
Tune in to your baby, spend time with her and you'll know she wants, instinctively. You don't need books or programs to "teach" you how to communicate with your own baby.
posted by : me on 4/7/2008 at 4:21 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I must agree that the headline of this piece--and the accompanying poll--is highly sensational. I'm disappointed by some of the reader feedback, which is contributing to the polarization of this issue. I am not aware of any parent or pediatrician who would suggest that baby signing is an "essential" skill. It's nice for a child to be able to communicate with their caregivers--whether it's using their own, made-up signs or signs they have been taught (does it really matter that some parents choose to take a class and some parents borrow a book from the library?) Baby signing is a communication tool that some parents and educators choose to use. There is no reason to get incensed about the cost or the method or to put down parents who may find it helpful.
posted by : adfoodie on 4/7/2008 at 4:43 PM Flag For Abuse
-
dear me
sign language is neither a book or a program.
that's the problem with this ridiculous article. it framed the entire sign language thing as either you pay for it or you don't do it. as i said before, it's a false choice.
sign language is just another form of communication -- NOT something you pay for. how can you possibly judge sign language as inferior or superior to anything else?
just because you don't like it doesn't mean it's not valid. congratulations for being so "tuned in". that's great. parents who use signing are not any less "tuned in" then you. They just choose a different approach.
the editors of Babble.com would do well to observe how poorly this article framed this issue. just look at the comments and you'll see that a crappy and poorly framed article creates a crappy and poorly framed debate.
posted by : k1 on 4/7/2008 at 7:37 PM Flag For Abuse
-
k1 -
Hear Hear! On all fronts.
I have an 18 month old who, once she started talking, dropped signing because it was no longer useful. But until she started talking she not only used signs that I taught her, but also her own made up signs. I distinctly remember watching her for several days before I figured out what one of her made up signs meant (It was 'spider' for those of you who care.).
Everyone Else who reads all the comments -
"Baby Signs" is not about paying too much money for a class or joining the rat race to get your kid prepped for those all-important standardized test by boosting her IQ right now, it's about communication. Some toddlers, mine included, are prone to extreme frustration when they cannot communicate their needs and desires. A couple of signs, whether you take them from a book, your head, or your child's own creations, can help reduce the frustration. Which means you can have more fun playing with your kid rather than coaxing them out of a tantrum.
Signing doesn't work for every family. And there's nothing wrong with that. But don't bash it unless you've tried it. And if you have tried it and decided it didn't work for you, how about a little acceptance anyways?
posted by : serahrose on 4/7/2008 at 8:09 PM Flag For Abuse
-
This is a discussion. I don't have to agree or accept anything. And "polarization of the issue" that one poster complained about is the last thing in the world any of us need to worry about. Chill out people. I didn't insult anyone. I offered an alternate view. I actually hope someone could read it and go away with a new and different perspective.
posted by : me on 4/8/2008 at 12:44 AM Flag For Abuse
-
k1--
Although I agree with the thrust of your comments (see my comments and you'll not that we're on the same "side"), remember that most writers have little control over the headlines of their pieces. And before anyone rail at a writer for "compromising" her integrity, remember that we're talking about freelance article writing, not a great work of art. Most people make little compromises in the pursuit of a fair living and I don't personally think this is a major one. The article misses some points and the whole idea that baby signing requires a huge financial investment is clearly silly, but she was more or less balanced in the article itself.
And the editors are giving the readers what they want--we obviously keep coming back for more.
posted by : CaliMama on 4/8/2008 at 10:43 AM Flag For Abuse
-
Yeah, it's mainly the headlines and I understand that the writers often don't control that. I'm as miffed with the editors as the writer.
This whole headline thing is a pet peeve of mine for a lot of publications because I think that the headline REALLY does frame the entire article. You read the sensational headline and it basically frames the whole debate and you read the article with that frame of mind and you go into the comments in the context of a false framework.
These days, the comment-stream of an article is as much a part of the article as the text itself. And when the headline of an article does a bad job of framing the debate, then the debate is bad. And that does me, the reader, a dis-service.
The right debate on this issue never got off the ground because of the way the headline biased the conversation.
And frankly with this article it was the headline AND the first four paragraphs. By the time the writer got to what was a mostly even-handed discussion of signing, most people had cemented into their brains that the issue was "should we PAY for sign-language classes". Yet the rest of the article had nothing to do with CLASSES but with SIGNING.
So even though 80% of the article was good, it was set up in such a bad way that the good content was lost.
My 2 cents. Obviously I have a hang-up about this. It's because I want to like Babble.com but I'm having a hard time putting up with their bad editing.
posted by : k1 on 4/8/2008 at 12:26 PM Flag For Abuse
-
Doesn't anyone else (whether shelling out $ or not) think teaching signing is about the dumbest idea ever, unless you are in a hearing-impaired family? Will someone please tell me the point? Teach a kid to dance, throw a ball, say sounds\words. It's almost like a "look at what my kid can do trick" than anything useful. Seriously, you can't figure out what your baby is trying to tell you unless you teach her a sign?
posted by : trippin on 4/8/2008 at 1:17 PM Flag For Abuse
-
trippin,
If you think it's ridiculous, then don't do it. But why, just because you don't think it's effective (although I doubt you've tried it with your own kids), does that automatically mean it's stupid or useless? Understanding your child and having her understand you is one of the basic acheivements of parenting. Signing is not about showing the rest of the world what she can do - as a matter of fact, very few people even notice my daughter is signing to me when we're out in public. But I notice, and I'm able to carry on a dialogue of sorts with her, talking about the things she notices or responding to her needs before she resorts to a toddler type tantrum. Why is that the dumbest idea ever? It's just another part of our day together, along with learning to throw a ball, say lots of spoken words, point out body parts, and all the rest of the stuff you do with 1 year olds.
posted by : bookmama on 4/8/2008 at 9:32 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I think there are tremendous benefits to teaching sign language to infants and toddlers, and children of all ages for that matter. It's not just to 'show off' to friends (however, I chuckle that it is pretty impressive!). The benefits that we have seen with our children go beyond basic communication before they develop verbal language. We've seen enhanced vocabulary, once they learn to speak words, their first words have often been those that they learned the signs for first, most definitely because they have made connection to the meaning of the word, the sign, and hearing it spoken. It has served as a bridge for learning concepts such as colors when you can sign the color, point to the color and say the color - it makes learning much more tangible!
It really has gone beyond our initial goal of communication! And, how wonderful to teach our monolingual children a hands-on second language! I hope that someday if my child meets a hearing impaired child they will be able to communicate and offer that hearing impaired child friendship! Just as we desire to introduce our children to other spoken languages, ASL is one of the most common languages of our country and we should all know it!
It sure does help to be able to communicate with full mouths "thank you, more, please", when in a noisy place and can't hear each other speak ("baby's sleepy"), during potty training when our children can sign "potty" rather than yell loudly in a public place that they 'gotta poop!' or when on opposites ends of an aisle in a grocery story and I can sign 'milk and bread' to my husband so that he can run over to the milk and bread aisles and grab what we need!
Ah - so many benefits!!
A GREAT ASL resource is Signing Time! www.signingtime.com -- a video series that begins with Baby Signing Time and progresses to the alphabet, colors, phrases. Great songs and very entertaining!! Even parents won't get sick of them!! They also have some great resources on their website and sell flash cards and board books! You won't be disappointed!!
posted by : j9ck on 4/8/2008 at 9:51 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I think that it is a personal choice as to whether to teach your child sign language. If you opt not to, that doesn't make you a bad parent. If you opt to teach them sign language, that doesn't make you the perfect parent.
Sign language is a language, one that is now being offered for foreign language credit in school across the country. When babies are born, they begin communicating with hand gestures. It’s the natural progression towards spoken language. Sign language can help a parent understand the wants and needs of their children.
I started teaching my daughter sign language when she was a baby. Unfortunately, I didn’t follow through after the basic signs. After my triplet boys were born, I was introduced to Baby Signing Time and Signing Time. I would have never thought to enroll my babies in a sign language class. From the first time my boys saw Baby Signing Time and Signing Time DVDs, they were hooked. I was hooked, too! I found a very family friendly series of sign language videos that worked for us all. They are very educational.
I hope my kids decide to continue learning more sign language as they get older. It’s a beautiful language and will give them the opportunity to communicate with deaf children and adults.
posted by : clrnm on 4/9/2008 at 9:37 PM Flag For Abuse
-
In my opinion, the article completely missed the point in an effort to create controversy (which it was successful in doing.) Research can be manipulated... and for any research there seems to be research that counters it. As a mom, what matters to me is what works. $20 for one Signing Time DVD and my kids and I had a few signs that made all the difference. No tantrums--clear communication. Higher IQ's? There is no way for the average person to ever know that. What I DO know is with earlier communication...a toddler feeling truly understood and empowered to clearly express needs and wants...the proof of the value is right there in the quality of life.
Parents can sign or not and be just fine. But for me, something SO easy that makes such a big difference for my kids is a no brainer. Honestly, research or marketing ploys don't hold any weight with me. What I have seen actually WORK for my friends, family, etc. is what I rely on. I never needed classes or a big book. I watched a little Signing Time...which is free on many PBS stations, free at many libraries, and $20 if you want your own copy.
Oh, yeah...my kids have used their signs with deaf friends, since we use ASL signs...not a bad bonus benefit for this diverse world of ours. That alone is worth the effort. It doesn't take fluency--bridges can be built with small efforts.
posted by : mommy on 4/10/2008 at 12:31 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I agree with clrnm. I will use whatever tool I find that works for me and my family. I took ASL as my language requirement in college little did I know it would come in very handy years later. I landed a job in a classroom that used simple basic signs with the dev. delayed children. And then later when I had a baby it was only natural to use signs with him. In the begining I did buy the "baby signs" book but was unpleasantly suprised when I found out many of their signs were made up and their beliefs that you should stop using signs when they can talk. I think the classes are so popular because people just want to go out and do something with their baby. I entered a raffle and recieved a prize of a full session of the Baby Signs play class and I have to say I really enjoyed it and so did my baby but we had an awesome teacher who showed both signs to say the word. So she would show it in ASL (American Sign Lang) and the Baby signs and she let us choose which one we wanted to use with our child. But if I had to pay for it I am not sure I would. After my class was over I did create a playgroup for families in my area who were learning ASL and it worked out great and best off it was free!
I ofcorse encouraged my child to use ASL and we then later discovered the Signing Time series. I really appreciated the beautiful voice of Rachel and music that signing time has and my child responded well to hearing music and seeing the signs.
posted by : gfcfmama on 4/12/2008 at 7:00 PM Flag For Abuse
-
"This whole teaching babies to sign YOUR way seems the first step to being controlling and forcing your unique little one into a rigid system."
Idiotic opinion. If one were to apply your logic, then we wouldn't teach children languages at all. That's what language is -- verbal or sign -- a symbolic system that you have deemed rigid! Yeah, we are all so screwed because we use ABCs.
And shame on Pamela Paul and Babble.com for trying to use the whole commercial or baby industrial complex angle on a story that could have been about communication with toddlers. Blame the market! Blame capitalism! Blame the parents! Blame you, blame me. Point your finger, oh wait, that's a sign. Stop using sign language!
posted by : foxfyre on 4/13/2008 at 2:04 AM Flag For Abuse
-
Obviously sign language for babies is not essential. But any one with common sense will realize that it can be very helpful.
We taught our 15 mo. old just a few essential signs..."more", "all done", "help", "eat" & "drink". It has really been helpful to prevent whining & tantrums...& taking the guess work out of what he wants.
When he touches the little tips of his pudgy fingers together, so carefully & sweetly, signaling he needs "more" of whatever it is (crackers, marshmallows, a book read for the 20th time...), it is impossible to say no.
posted by : HappyMama on 4/13/2008 at 9:21 PM Flag For Abuse
-
TILA TEQUILA NIP [url=http://www.mixx.com/photos/711739/tila_tequila_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures]TILA TEQUILA NIP[/url] TILA TEQUILA NIP [url= http://www.mixx.com/photos/711739/tila_tequila_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures ] TILA TEQUILA NIP [/url]
posted by : TILA TEQUILA NIP on 10/1/2008 at 2:20 PM Flag For Abuse
-
BRITNEY SPEARS PHOTO [url=http://www.mixx.com/photos/711730/britney_spears_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures]BRITNEY SPEARS PHOTO[/url] BRITNEY SPEARS PHOTO [url= http://www.mixx.com/photos/711730/britney_spears_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures ] BRITNEY SPEARS PHOTO [/url]
posted by : BRITNEY SPEARS PHOTO on 10/3/2008 at 9:59 PM Flag For Abuse
-
JENNIFER LOPEZ PICS [url=http://www.mixx.com/photos/711849/jennifer_lopez_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures]JENNIFER LOPEZ PICS[/url] JENNIFER LOPEZ PICS [url= http://www.mixx.com/photos/711849/jennifer_lopez_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures ] JENNIFER LOPEZ PICS [/url]
posted by : JENNIFER LOPEZ PICS on 10/4/2008 at 3:23 AM Flag For Abuse
-
JESSICA SIMPSON BLOWJOB [url=http://www.mixx.com/photos/711908/jessica_simpson_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures]JESSICA SIMPSON BLOWJOB[/url] JESSICA SIMPSON BLOWJOB [url= http://www.mixx.com/photos/711908/jessica_simpson_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures ] JESSICA SIMPSON BLOWJOB [/url]
posted by : JESSICA SIMPSON BLOWJOB on 10/4/2008 at 9:40 AM Flag For Abuse
-
CARMEN ELECTRA TITS [url=http://www.mixx.com/photos/711731/carmen_electra_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures]CARMEN ELECTRA TITS[/url] CARMEN ELECTRA TITS [url= http://www.mixx.com/photos/711731/carmen_electra_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures ] CARMEN ELECTRA TITS [/url]
posted by : CARMEN ELECTRA TITS on 10/4/2008 at 9:58 AM Flag For Abuse
-
ANGELINA JOLIE NIP [url=http://www.mixx.com/photos/711668/angelina_jolie_nude_naked_gallery_sex_tape_porn_pictures]ANGELINA JOLIE NIP[/url] ANGELINA JOLIE NIP [url= http://www.mixx.com/photos/711668/angelina_jolie_nude_naked_gallery_sex_tape_porn_pictures ] ANGELINA JOLIE NIP [/url]
posted by : ANGELINA JOLIE NIP on 10/4/2008 at 4:54 PM Flag For Abuse
-
KIM KARDASHIAN ASS [url=http://www.mixx.com/photos/711968/kim_kardashian_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures]KIM KARDASHIAN ASS[/url] KIM KARDASHIAN ASS [url= http://www.mixx.com/photos/711968/kim_kardashian_nude_naked_topless_sex_tape_porn_pictures ] KIM KARDASHIAN ASS [/url]
posted by : KIM KARDASHIAN ASS on 10/15/2008 at 11:02 AM Flag For Abuse
-
i think "me" has a point-- kids naturally use gestures and i know that when my daughter raises her arms she means "pick me up" etc. so we are doing okay without a formalized system.
we taught my son a few signs. he learned them immediately and it was really useful. he said enough words by 18 months that signing became obsolete.
with my daughter however, we had to repeat the sign for "more" hundreds of times and she still will only repeat it when she sees it, she won't really use it on her own. at 18 months she only says 10 words-- many, many fewer than my son at this age
makes me think that the kids who take to sign language would be early speakers anyway-- it isn't the sign language that enables them to speak earlier, it's that they naturally have a stronger ability to learn languages, including sign language, faster.
posted by : phillymom on 11/24/2008 at 3:16 PM Flag For Abuse
-
I have no intention of teaching my twins sign language. I don't speak sign language, just as I don't speak Russian. However, this has become a hot button issue for me, as every time I bump into friends w/ kids (or their friends or their family members) I am treated to a lecture about how important baby signs are. The tone and attitude is that by not using baby signs I might as well be randomly hitting them with sticks. There is a superior attitude about it - as in Not Baby Signing? Well, then you suck as a parent!
Baby signs is just not where my husband and I place our parenting priorities and my husband and I should be allowed to make that decision for our family. I don't give other people crap about their parenting choices.
posted by : Marj on 4/13/2009 at 1:38 AM Flag For Abuse
