Wednesday, August 18, 2010

What would you do?

Rather than writing a lengthy diatribe on a specific incident today, I thought I'd outline the topic on my mind and pose a question. Then, as comedian Mike Meyers would say on Coffee Talk with Linda Richman - you can "talk amongst yourselves."

The latest airline controversy does not involve minors taking to the friendly skies alone, or disgruntled flight attendants flamboyantly quitting their jobs. This issue is a bit more complicated and really has less to do with the fact that it occurred in mid-air and more to do with the fact that it occurred in public.

On Monday, a flight attendant witnessed a mother hitting her one-year-old baby in the face while on a flight from Dallas to Seattle. She says she also saw the mother slap the child's legs and tell her to "shut up." After witnessing these actions, the flight attendant took the child away from the mother and walked with her to the back of the plane to soothe her. The father then came to retrieve the child and held her inflight until she fell asleep. The parents had previously argued about the mother's reaction and the father later told police that his wife would sometimes "pop" the child during a tantrum but he'd never seen her slap her face (though the child did have a black eye that the mother says came from a dog bite?)

So, the question is....did the flight attendant overstep her bounds or was she a good Samaritan stepping in to rescue an innocent victim? If you witnessed something similar in public, what would you do? Might you also intervene? Ignore the behavior in disgust? Contact the authorities? As a mother, how would you accept parenting criticism from a total stranger? When is it ok to step in and take action in such situations and when is it expected that we should "mind our own business"?

Now, talk amongst yourselves.....

Friday, August 13, 2010

Plane Stupid

I must admit, there have been times that I've had one one of those "Calgon, take me away" moments and fantasized about hopping the next flight to anywhere that doesn't involve me cooking dinner, driving carpool or changing diapers. But in reality, I would never skip town without warning. For one, my family needs me. Two, it would be completely irresponsible, not to mention, expensive. And three, flying off at a moments notice is just not the way I do things these days.

It seems that a group of teenagers in Florida didn't exactly share my sensibilities this week when they used babysitting money to fly to Nashville alone. Never mind that their ages were 15, 13 and 11 and their parents had no idea they were planning this little excursion. What is really amazing is that they were able to do it without any flack from the airline (Southwest), which didn't bat an eyelash when the trio paid cash for their tickets and weren't made to show identification in order to board the plane.

Apparently, kids who are under 18 are not required to show ID by the Transportation Safety Administration. And Southwest Airlines policy is that kids ages 12-17 are free to fly without adult supervision. In fact, it turns out most public transportation companies wouldn't think twice about selling tickets to children considered minors under the law. For example, kids as young as 8 years-old can ride without an adult on Greyhound Bus. And those younger than 8 are considered a-ok as long as they are traveling with someone who is at least 15 years of age.

Since most 15 year-olds don't have driver's licenses, I'd love to know how the bus company verifies their age. Teens who are at least 15 are also free to take Amtrak without an adult companion.

Some people might read this story and think, "Who cares?" Perhaps they feel that the parents should keep their kids on a shorter leash so that things like this won't happen in the first place. But to me, the fact that these kids managed to take this impromptu trip unbeknownst to anyone else isn't really what scares me the most.

What frightens me is that this is yet another loophole in our transportation system that is just waiting to be exploited by people who would seek to inflict harm on America like those who perpetrated 9-11. In certain foreign countries, it's common practice to recruit young people to carry out the dirty work planned by adults behind the scenes. Many terrorists prey on the naivete and vulnerability of disenfranchised youth, and this is yet another scenario that could very well have deadly consequences. What's to stop them from planning a mass attack on various transit systems by using kids who can theoretically slip under the radar because they aren't required to show identification?

In the case of the kids from Florida, they landed in Nashville, realized they didn't have enough money left to reach their destination of Dollywood (my, what lofty aspirations they had!) and called their parents. Southwest Airlines then refunded their money (an odd move if they stick to the line that the company did nothing wrong in the first place) and sent them home to mom and dad.

This time, the hijinx were completely harmless. Let's hope some clever copycat with more nefarious notions doesn't get the same idea.

Monday, August 9, 2010

No Kidding!

This morning when I checked my regular news websites, I woke to some of the most disturbing news I've read in quite a while. It seems a new study in the Journal of Pediatrics has found that it isn't considered unusual for girls to begin hitting puberty as young as 7 or 8 years old.

No, that is not a typo. Seven or eight years old....the same age most kids are discovering Barbie and learning to ride a bike.

While it hasn't been definitively established exactly why girls are "developing" so much earlier nowadays, some scientists speculate that it may have to do with exposure to chemicals in plastics (such as BPA), that mimic estrogen. Others expressed concern over diet and perhaps hormones in meat and dairy products being a culprit. Some feel that the obesity epidemic is to blame.

Early onset of puberty is troubling for other reasons as well. Several studies have linked it with an increased risk of breast cancer. Many girls who develop earlier than their peers run a higher risk of self-esteem issues linked to negative body issues. In the past, puberty was considered "normal" around age 11 or 12.

The idea that my almost-six-year-old could get her period in the next year or two is more than startling to me. Something is inherently wrong with that. I mean, she has not even learned how to read yet and still often needs help wiping #2 when she uses the bathroom. Somehow I doubt that adding tampons and sanitary napkins to the mix will make things easier. And I really had hoped that she'd be out of the little kids clothing section by the time we had to go bra shopping! Not to mention the new reality show potential when kids under age 10 start having babies themselves. Perish the thought!


A few years ago, a good friend who is the mother of only boys, noticed that her oldest was starting to develop what looked suspiciously like breasts when he was in the first grade. She took him to the pediatrician who asked her how much milk he drank and suggested that she go "organic" to help combat the issue. She was shocked as she was a person who had never really bought into the whole "green" lifestyle.

While we can't entirely eliminate environmental threats, I've worked hard to do what I can to go mostly organic in our home and use only glass or BPA/Phthalate-free plastics. We avoid buying products containing parabens as preservative as they've also been shown to be hormone disruptors. Though my daughter whines and complains, I won't let her use regular play-makeup or nail polishes, opting instead for non-toxic varieties like Piggy Paint. But when we're out, at school or at a friends house, all bets are off.

Without going overboard, I do feel it's getting harder and harder to protect our kids from things that our parents just never even thought twice about. I doubt my mom even thought she had any control over when her children hit puberty and figured it just "happened when it happened." Now, as with many other things, we know that our lifestyles and daily choices can have a major impact on our health and on our growing bodies.

Perhaps new studies will emerge refuting this one, or adding other concerns to the mix. With so many unanswered questions, I'll continue to be do what I can to ensure that my kids remain kids as long as they can -- and should.

Saturday, August 7, 2010

Everybody in the Pool!

Way back when, I thought my biggest fear regarding swimming pools and kids was drowning. While I still worry about that, I was surprised to learn that there are many other potential dangers lurking in that sparkling, blue water. I'm not advocating that parents abstain from swimming in the pool with their kids (as if that is even a possibility here in the south...hello, heat index of 110 degrees!), I'm only passing along information you may want to consider next time you take a dip with the wee ones (or by yourself, for that matter). 


Though I abhor the heat, I've spent most summers of my life submerged in various swimming holes -- wreaking of chlorine, my hair dry and brittle. Little did I know that the very chemical that makes it seemingly safer to swim in pools since it kills most germs, actually poses other risks as well. Several studies have linked the chlorine to asthma and skin irritation (especially for those with eczema). More disturbing, it's been determined that chlorine can react with other compounds found in water to create carcinogens that can be stored in the body for an extended period of time that can result in an elevated risk of several types of cancer including that of the breast and bladder. 


Thankfully, more people are entertaining the idea of converting their pools to salt water these days (which does still contain chlorine, though much less) -- even better, some pools are going high tech, using UV technology to disinfect. But since most pools still contain lots of chlorine, there are a few tips you'd be wise to keep in mind during these remaining summer months. 


First, beware of pools that smell too strongly of chlorine. It IS possible to over-chlorinate a pool and it's bad enough to swim in a normal amount of chlorine. Avoid taking a dunk in a pool that appears to be filled with too much of the chemical as it is a powerful additive that certainly isn't beneficial in large doses. Make sure you feel confident that a professional (or at least someone who knows what they are doing) is regularly checking the pool's Ph levels. You may even want to limit the time you spend in a chlorinated pool in general and always remember to shower off with clean water after swimming to remove as much of the remaining residue as possible (though it is indeed, absorbed through the skin). 


And don't be fooled into thinking that chlorine actually kills ALL germs in pools. One of the most prevalent pool polluters -- cryptospordium -- is resistant to chlorine and can cause major gastrointestinal distress. According to the CDC, these pesky parasites can survive in the water for days. This is especially something to keep in mind when swimming in a public pool. Even an infinitesimal amount of poop can do more than stink up the joint - it can seriously compromise the safety of the entire area.  


Other viruses often found poolside include norovirus and giardia, which cause vomiting, nausea and diarrhea, as well as the virus that causes swimmers ear (not deadly, but certainly annoying). 


So, before you take the Nestea plunge (yes, I'm dating myself), use a little common sense and try to be sure you don't come home with more than just a damp suit and collection of wet towels. And here you thought you were so well prepared after my previous entry on sunscreen...have you not yet learned that just when you tackle one concern, there is always something else to worry about these days?