Every so often, I hear from people (including my husband) about how lucky I am to be working from home. The assumption is that it helps remove those work-family conflicts that plague the 9-5 office worker.
Well, the last few days I've been consumed with managing one of those household mini-disasters that make homeownership (and working from home) such a joy. (Hear my sarcasm?) Yesterday morning my shower was interrupted by my husband's discovery that our basement was overrun with raw sewage.
Where is the phone number for the plumber? my husband wanted to know.
Dripping wet, I retrieved it from my Palm. Called. Husband said he'd work from home for a few hours but had a phone conference at 10 a.m. and a meeting in the office he couldn't miss later.
Translation: I'd be dealing with this.
For the next 8 hours, I was frantically calling contractors and insurance company and had visits from four different companies in four hours and I spent one hour in the basement (which smelled like a subway on a 100 degree day in August), helping a trash removal service haul out the disgusting, ruined junk from our basement.
My point: working from home brings its own work-family conficts.
Stumble It!

If anyone needed more evidence of the dangers of fast food, a new study by the Washington, D.C. watchdog group, US Center for Science in the Public Interest, shows that fast food restaurants, including chains like Ruby Tuesday and Cheesecake Factory, promote massive overeating.

"Burgers, pizzas, and quesadillas were never health foods to begin with," says Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the CSPI. But many restaurants are changing these dishes into even more harmful versions. "Now we see lasagna with meatballs on top," he says, and "ice cream with cookies, brownies, and candy mixed in." The CSPI mention products like "Colossal Burger" weighing in at 1,940 calories and 141 grams of fat. That is nearly a day's worth of calories and more than two days' worth of fat. The recommended fat level for a person on 2,000 calories per day is about 65 grams.

The response of the fast food industry to this argument has typically been that they also offer healthy menu options. They also point out that occasionally eating such meals isn't going to make anyone fat or unhealthy.

The problem is that we know that kids, and adults, are eating at fast food spots frequently. The CSPI research found Americans eat out on average about four meals a week. One stat that stuck in my mind from "Supersize Me," the documentary by Morgan Spurlock who ate McDonald's for a month: More than 70% of McDonald's customers are considered "heavy users," eating at the restaurant more than once a week.



Stumble It!

Today's New York Times has a story about the professionalization of PTOs. The article presents ample evidence of what we all know already: ex-professionals are using their skills to take on bigger tasks at schools. But a subtext of the story is that they're also meddling in school affairs and using their powers to help just their own kids (ie: get them the teachers that they want).

From what I've seen locally, though, the PTOs bring enormous benefits to the schools. They raise money and run programs that simply would not exist without them.



Stumble It!

A story by Po Bronson about the "inverse power of praise" is getting lots of attention. In the article, Bronson reports on research showing the fallacy of the self-esteem movement--this notion that if schools, teachers, and parents lavish our kids with praise and thus kids feel better about themselves, they will become happier, more successful people. In fact, psychological researchers have found that pumping up kids' self-esteem with empty praise doesn't lead to achievement but can lead to all sorts of problems, including narcissistic behavior.

Stumble It!

In today's New York Times, reporter Benedict Carey wrote a story about parents who were arrested after their four-year-old daughter died from an overdose of psychiatric medication. The girl was apparently diagnosed with bipolar illness and attention deficit disorder and had been on a variety of medications from the time she was 2 years old.

Wasn't she too young to be on such powerful drugs? Is this proof that these drugs are being overprescribed and are too dangerous for kids? Were the parents just drugging a kid who was a normal toddler and challenging them in normal ways? The story, with its quotes from experts about the dangers of medicating children, seemed to imply all this was the case and was a cautionary tale for other parents whose kids are on psychiatric medicines.

Well, shame on Mr. Carey for not having done his homework.

The story of this couple turns out to be far more complicated. This was more a tale of a dysfunctional family unraveling. An indepth story that ran in the local paper reveals that the father had been accused of molesting his teenage stepdaughter and was facing charges. The mother was herself bipolar and had obtained an order of protection against her husband, which she then let lapse. The mother also was keeping her daughter from school and from her child's therapy appointments. She'd previously been under investigation by state social services for her treatment of her children.

In other words: The checks and balances that normally are in place when a child is put on medications don't appear to have been functioning here. That seems to have been the big culprit here.

I worry, though, that all of the relevant details will be left out of the news reports and "experts" will start criticizing parents in general for putting their kids on psychiatric drugs. And the many parents whose kids are in real trouble and in real need will not take the steps they need to take for their kids' well-being. And the parents whose kids are on medication will feel guilt-ridden and ashamed.






Stumble It!

A new study finds that adoptive parents provide more nurture and support for their children than those with biological children.

Brian Powell, Ph.D., a sociologist, and a team at Indiana University, examined data from 13,000 households with first graders in the family and found that the 161 families, headed by two adoptive parents, were more likely to help with homework, be involved in their kids' schools, and take their families to cultural events and religious services.

The researchers found that the advantages adoptive parents brought were most marked when compared to step or single parent families.

There was one area in which adoptive parents fared worse than other parents, however. They reported speaking less often to parents of other children. I wonder if this is because adoptive parents still feel less support (and understanding) from biological parents because they are non-traditional families.

When I adopted my daughter five plus years ago, I already was a biological parent; what I found striking about becoming an adoptive parent was how backward much of the public discourse was about adoption. I'd sometimes encounter parents in my kids' schools who would say such ignorant, thoughtless things about my daughter or adoption. I'd read articles about adoption that seemed clueless. (This was one of the reasons why my friend, Jill Smolowe, and I put together our book, A Love Like No Other.)

The authors of this study conjectured that one reason why adoptive parents fare better as parents may be because they tend to be older and wealthier and really wanted to be parents. Of course, that describes most parents I know these days--including those with bio kids. So I'm not sure I'd conclude from this study that adoptive parents necessarily make for better parents--just that they can be good ones, too.

Stumble It!

In recent years, much has been written about post-partum depression among women. But it turns out that new fathers are vulnerable to depression too.
Robin Cook Kopelman, Ph.D., a psychiatrist at the Iowa Depression and Clinical Research Center at the University of Iowa, surveyed 808 new fathers in eastern Iowa, and found that 10.7 percent of them tested positive for depression. For new mothers, the rate usually is around 13 percent.
This doesn't come as a surprise to me. While my husband didn't experience post-partum depression, I remember he was exhausted and run down and came down with a nasty cold--and many of my friends' husbands also got a variety of ailments (from hurting their backs to bronchitis) after their kids were born. At the time, I found this amusing. We just went through 20 plus hour of labor, and they're feeling under the weather? But now it's clear to me that, as gender roles have become less rigidly defined, men are beginning to experience many of the same emotional pressures during pregnancy and after.





Stumble It!

A new government study found that 1 in 150 children are autistic. While that rate is far higher than previous estimates, the study didn't look at whether the autism rate has risen.
So the verdict is still out on the important questions: Is there an "autism epidemic"? Are doctors just more adept at diagnosing autism, or is there some environmental explanation for more kids developing autism?
Stumble It!

I opened my email this morning and received notice of a speaker to appear at a local PTO meeting:

Being a Parent to a Boy;
Being a Parent to a Girl,
Unique Differences
This discussion will look at the unique developmental, educational and relational differences of the two genders, [my emphasis] and how to parent them. A great deal of recent research points to the needs of each.
Dr. William R. Lutz, is a Licensed Family Therapist, State of New Jersey. He was the founder and Executive Director of the Montclair Counseling Center, with an office in Short Hills, until his recent retirement. His education includes a Doctorate in Adolescence, and post-doctoral work in child development at Erickson Center, Harvard University.

It's amazing how it's become accepted to assert there are these deep gender differences--when solid scientific research consistently refutes this notion. Same Difference, a fascinating and exhaustively researched book by Rosalind Barnett, Ph.D., a psychologist at Brandeis University, and Caryl Rivers, a journalist, completely debunks the gender myths that have gained popularity recently.

The notion that girls don't do math, boys don't like to read, or that there is an inherently male or female "learning style" is exposed as pure nonsense by Barnett and Rivers. The authors did a lot of digging and found that the studies that "experts" like Dr. Lutz cite often aren't studies at all, but sketchy anecdotal reports by non-social scientists, like Michael Gurian, author of The Wonder of Boys and other best-selling bunk.

Gurian calls himself a "philosopher"--he has no educational credentials, no doctorate, no training. (A year or so ago, his publisher sent me the galleys to one of his books, and I was stunned that I could find no foot notes, no documentation at all, for the sweeping assertions he was making about boys and girls. Then I looked up his background and saw that he had no educational training or credentials. Just an "institute" that he set up based on his precepts based on god-knows-what.)

Just because something feels true doesn't make it true. Generations ago, it "felt" true that girls weren't as smart as boys, or that they could somehow be "injured" by studying too hard. The "truth" was that when these gender myths were accepted as fact, both sexes were hurt and constrained by them.

Let's stop talking about gender differences and focus on individual differences, so that each kid gets what they need to learn and thrive.

Labels: boys, differences, gender, girls, myths

Stumble It!

It looks like New Jersey is going to become the second state in the U.S. to offer paid leave for new parents or those caring for a family member. Yesterday, NJ's Senate labor Committee passed family leave legislation by a 3-1 vote, paving the way for the bill's passage.

The law would allow for up to 12 weeks of paid leave after the birth of a child or to care for a seriously ill family member. The employers won't be financing this benefit, either. Workers would pay for the benefit through a 1 percent deduction from salaries into state Temporary Disability Insurance, which is essentially how the California law--passed in 2004--works.

The small business community is up in arms about NJ bill, saying it will be a huge burden to hold a job open for 12 weeks. But family leave advocates argue that small business owners already give time off for a new baby or family illness--they just have a hard time providing pay when they do. Advocates also point out that this legislation might cut back on turnover and the cost of hiring and training new workers.

The U.S. is the only wealthy, industrialized nation that doesn't guarantee paid maternity leave, according to a recently released study by Harvard and McGill University researchers. In its survey of 173 countries, it found only the U.S., Lesotho, Liberia, Swaziland, and Papua New Guinea didn't have a federal law insuring paid leave. At least 145 countries provide paid sick days, with 127 providing a week or more annually. The US, in contrast, provides only unpaid leave.


Stumble It!

Texas became the first state to require girls over the age of 9 to get a new vaccine against human papillomavirus, a sexually transmitted disease that can cause genital warts and cervical cancer.
And the consensus in the medical establishment is that girls should be vaccinated before they become sexually active. The U.S. Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommends that all 11 and 12-year-old girls should be vaccinated against HPV.
That leaves parents with an interesting quandary: Should they have their daughters' vaccinated at this young age, and if so, what kind of conversation will they have about it? For parents, who have avoided having the Facts of Life talk with their kids, this could pose a real challenge. On the other hand, if you don't vaccinate your daughter before she is sexually active, that could pose a real and unnecessary risk to her health.
My oldest daughter is about to turn 11; I'm sure she'll get the vaccine. And I'm sure we'll have an awkward conversation about it (even though we have had many conversations with both our daughters about sex.) THe conversation will probably go like this:

Me: So, this vaccine can prevent sexually transmitted diseases that can lead to cervical cancer.
Her: GROSS! I am not going to have sex so why do I need this?
Me: Well, I understand it seems gross now. It did to me when I was your age. But when you're an adult and you fall in love, you probably will fee differently.
Her: No, I won't. I don't want to have children EVER. And if I do, I will adopt.
Me: I can understand you feeling that way now, but you might feel differently when you're an adult in love.
Her: That's like a hundred years away. So why can't I get it then?
Me: Because by the time you're 25, you may forget about this vaccine. Scientists think it's better to get it long before you are sexually active.
Her: But why?
Me: I just told you!
Her: GROSS!


Stumble It!

I've never used my blog before to report on my customer service travails, but I'm hoping that one of the execs at Comcast will stumble across this and take action. I'm simply at a loss of what else to do in order to get my internet and email account re-activated.
Let me briefly tell you what happened. This is not a story about me not paying a bill. My problems began more than a week ago, on January 23, when I signed up for a Comcast promotion.
I already had Comcast cable and internet service; this would add phone service to my bill and upgrade my cable TV offerings.
The next day, four burly men showed up at my door. One of them was climbing up a ladder leaning against my telephone bill. The head burly guy says, "The previous tenant David Rosenzweig terminated service. We're here to terminate service." David Rosenzweig is my husband! I tell them. We did NOT terminate service. My cable bill was in David's name; the internet was in mine; in order to upgrade and take advantage of this package, we had to switch cable into my name. They won't listen. He flashes an order form in front of me and tells me if I write a check for $20, my service won't be terminated.
Instead, I call 1 800 Comcast and the person who answers confirms that we had put in a request to upgrade service, not terminate it. The person even tells the four burly guys that. The leader calls his dispatch who says, Never mind, you've got your order to terminate.
So they did.
After many phone calls, Comcast sends a truck to my house the next day, and my service is turned back on.
Then, the real problems begin.
The following Tuesday, January 30, a Comcast technicians installs a new modem so I can receive my new digital phone service. 30 minutes later, I am shut out of my email account. "Account inactive," the message reads.
I make many calls. Get nowhere. I am told the problem has to go to "Engineering," which will take 24 hours. The next day I call again. This person tells me Engineering normally takes 72 hours, but now they are backed up. "Who knows" when it would be fixed.
Oh, as a final indignity, I am told to call the "business office" to arrange for credit for missed service.
Instead, I insist and finally get a supervisor on the line, who promises action. He thinks this can be fixed by the end of the day.
30 minutes later, my Internet service is gone.
The end of the day, someone else calls me to tell me that it has to be fixed by Engineering. Now, I'm told that will take seven days.
So, now I have no internet or email service. People who email me find their message bounced back, with a strange message that says my email doesn't exist. Great for business.
Today, I muster my strength and call 1 800 Comcast. I talk to another technician who seems sincere. He promises he will look into it. I want an appointment to have my old modem installed. He thinks he can make that happen. I hope he will. I do my best to sound needy, grateful, pathetic.
But the problem is, Comcast is so busy signing up customers, it doesn't have enough people to actually service their clients. The old Ma Bells may have been greedy and gouging customers, but when service wasn't working, they would have a crew to your house in a day, and it would be fixed. Internet service is now as essential, perhaps more so, than phone service.
And where is the business press in covering this? Well, the New York Times wrote a slavish profile of Comcast just recently, praising them for signing up so many customers. No mention of their abysmal customer service.
Stumble It!