Diaper free journalism
I'd like to thank each and every one of you out there who thought of, and then refrained from, emailing me yesterday's New York Times article (subscription required, but maybe you'll have some luck if you try Bug Me Not?) about diaper-free babies entitled, "A Fast Track to Toilet Training for Those at the Crawling Stage." As you can probably imagine, here at the Scribbler Mansion, where we dream of having a diaper-free kindergartner, the idea of infants in underpants occasions no small amount of bitter laughter. I've seen signs up for diaper-free baby support groups around town, but, up until now, I've been comforted in the belief that only a didactic fringe of parents are childrearing according to diaper-free techniques.
But now the New York Times informs me, in ways both subtle and obvious, that my children have dropped off the fast track to success through my parental inadequacy. Why, just look at wee little Hannah Rothstein of Newton, Massachusetts, using a potty at seven months! Clearly, when it comes time to apply to Harvard, little Hannah will have an unbeatable advantage over Baby Blue, who, if she takes after her brother, may still be wearing diapers during the college application process. See how I have already curtailed my children's chances in life?
But it's not just their success I'm jeopardizing. According to the article, little Hannah will also be emotionally healthier for having been diaper-free.
Also, and perhaps most damning, my diaper-bound children are falling behind their peers around the world, which will undoubtedly prevent them from being able to compete effectively in the job markets of the future, in which the length of time one spent in diapers will be customarily included on the c.v., right after "education." The Times cites Contemporary Pediatrics, apeer-reviewed research journal publication for practicing pediatricians including helpful articles like, "You Can Provide Efficient, Effective, and Reimbursable Breastfeeding Support -- Here's How," with the statistic that more than 50 percent of the world's children are toilet-trained by one year of age.
This statistic I do not doubt. I once had a conversation with my brother-in-law about toilet-training techniques in the country of his birth. In China, he said, babies are indeed toilet-trained at very early ages. A caretaker holds the infant over a toilet for long periods of time, awaiting the child's need to pee or poop, until finally the baby gets the idea that toilets are the place to go for such business. I was flabbergasted, since my failures in the potty-training department were already becoming apparent at the time of this conversation. I said something inarticulate in response, like, "Wow! That's amazing!" He responded with a deprecating gesture: "Well, usually it's the grandmother who holds the baby over the toilet. Because it just takes so much time, you know? It's really time-intensive. I don't know how you'd do it without extended family in the house."
Oh. Right. The Times notes that little inconvenience briefly. They quote poopies guru Dr. T. Berry Brazelton: "'I'm all for it, except I don't think many people can do it,' he said of elimination communication. 'The thing that bothers me about it is today, probably 80 percent of women don't have that kind of availability.'"
(In case your underpants are twisted over the, ahem, gender assumptions of the previous sentence, let me rush to the Times' defense. They also quote the author of the self-published book, Infant Potty Training: "Ms. Boucke, the author, noted that many fathers really enjoy infant potty training. 'They can't breast-feed, but they can work on the other end," she said. "Some dads get really good results.'")
Well, yes, Dr. Brazelton. According to the Census Bureau, 54.6 percent of women who had an infant in 2002 also participated in the labor force. Their chances of having the time to practice elimination communication are approximately zero. Of course, some of that slack may be picked up by the estimated 98,000 stay-at-home dads in this country. But when you add in again the numbers of at-home parents who are caring for more than one child at a time, or just the number of children's caretakers who would like to, you know, LEAVE THE HOUSE with their charges occasionally, I bet you get damn close to a number even higher than 80 percent.
In fact, let's see just how many people have jumped on the bandwagon of this new social trend, one which the Times compares to the nascent breastfeeding movement in the 1970s. Hmmm. They say that "2000 people across the country have joined Internet groups and mailing lists" in support of diaper-free parenting techniques. In addition, "One author's how-to books on the subject have sold about 50,000 copies." Ok, so we've got 52,000 potential elimination communication experts. The Times also notes that there are 77 local groups devoted to diaper-free childrearing around the country, but declines to provide an estimate of the membership of these groups. So let's arbitrarily and quite indefensibly decide on a 1-10 ratio of diaper-free practitioners captured by the New York Times (in its never-ending quest for accurate statistics) to total diaper-free practitioners, giving us an estimate of some 520,000.
Some perspective. The current American population estimate as of 11:19 this morning: 297,386,321. That means that .1 percent of the population may be advocates of a diaper-free lifestyle. In other words, you're ten times more likely to be schizophrenic than to be diaper-free.
Lucky for us that we have the New York Times to uncover these latest groundbreaking social trends.
But now the New York Times informs me, in ways both subtle and obvious, that my children have dropped off the fast track to success through my parental inadequacy. Why, just look at wee little Hannah Rothstein of Newton, Massachusetts, using a potty at seven months! Clearly, when it comes time to apply to Harvard, little Hannah will have an unbeatable advantage over Baby Blue, who, if she takes after her brother, may still be wearing diapers during the college application process. See how I have already curtailed my children's chances in life?
But it's not just their success I'm jeopardizing. According to the article, little Hannah will also be emotionally healthier for having been diaper-free.
Oh my god! I've been failing to respond to my children's cues all this time! I've utterly failed to develop the "elimination communication" aspect of our relationship. If I start saving for their therapy funds now, do you suppose they'll ever forgive me?Most important, they say, is an increased emotional bond with the baby, forged by the need for the parent to pick up on subtle signs and act on them quickly. Proponents of the practice use the phrase "elimination communication."
"It is enhancing that interaction and closeness, the intimacy between baby and mother," said Thomas Ball, a psychologist in California who is helping develop a documentary about the technique. "Here's another set of cues the child is giving that may be ignored or may be responded to."
Also, and perhaps most damning, my diaper-bound children are falling behind their peers around the world, which will undoubtedly prevent them from being able to compete effectively in the job markets of the future, in which the length of time one spent in diapers will be customarily included on the c.v., right after "education." The Times cites Contemporary Pediatrics, a
This statistic I do not doubt. I once had a conversation with my brother-in-law about toilet-training techniques in the country of his birth. In China, he said, babies are indeed toilet-trained at very early ages. A caretaker holds the infant over a toilet for long periods of time, awaiting the child's need to pee or poop, until finally the baby gets the idea that toilets are the place to go for such business. I was flabbergasted, since my failures in the potty-training department were already becoming apparent at the time of this conversation. I said something inarticulate in response, like, "Wow! That's amazing!" He responded with a deprecating gesture: "Well, usually it's the grandmother who holds the baby over the toilet. Because it just takes so much time, you know? It's really time-intensive. I don't know how you'd do it without extended family in the house."
Oh. Right. The Times notes that little inconvenience briefly. They quote poopies guru Dr. T. Berry Brazelton: "'I'm all for it, except I don't think many people can do it,' he said of elimination communication. 'The thing that bothers me about it is today, probably 80 percent of women don't have that kind of availability.'"
(In case your underpants are twisted over the, ahem, gender assumptions of the previous sentence, let me rush to the Times' defense. They also quote the author of the self-published book, Infant Potty Training: "Ms. Boucke, the author, noted that many fathers really enjoy infant potty training. 'They can't breast-feed, but they can work on the other end," she said. "Some dads get really good results.'")
Well, yes, Dr. Brazelton. According to the Census Bureau, 54.6 percent of women who had an infant in 2002 also participated in the labor force. Their chances of having the time to practice elimination communication are approximately zero. Of course, some of that slack may be picked up by the estimated 98,000 stay-at-home dads in this country. But when you add in again the numbers of at-home parents who are caring for more than one child at a time, or just the number of children's caretakers who would like to, you know, LEAVE THE HOUSE with their charges occasionally, I bet you get damn close to a number even higher than 80 percent.
In fact, let's see just how many people have jumped on the bandwagon of this new social trend, one which the Times compares to the nascent breastfeeding movement in the 1970s. Hmmm. They say that "2000 people across the country have joined Internet groups and mailing lists" in support of diaper-free parenting techniques. In addition, "One author's how-to books on the subject have sold about 50,000 copies." Ok, so we've got 52,000 potential elimination communication experts. The Times also notes that there are 77 local groups devoted to diaper-free childrearing around the country, but declines to provide an estimate of the membership of these groups. So let's arbitrarily and quite indefensibly decide on a 1-10 ratio of diaper-free practitioners captured by the New York Times (in its never-ending quest for accurate statistics) to total diaper-free practitioners, giving us an estimate of some 520,000.
Some perspective. The current American population estimate as of 11:19 this morning: 297,386,321. That means that .1 percent of the population may be advocates of a diaper-free lifestyle. In other words, you're ten times more likely to be schizophrenic than to be diaper-free.
Lucky for us that we have the New York Times to uncover these latest groundbreaking social trends.
posted by Phantom Scribbler at 9:36 AM 
<< Home