General discussion - Mom and Dad Esq.

Originally posted by NW Native
(lady bugs which eat aphids, birds, pets, and children)

Man, you guys have some tough ladybugs up there in the northwest.

[NW Native]

Originally posted by credit this
Man, you guys have some tough ladybugs up there in the northwest.

Let's just say that punctuation (and spelling) were never my strong points. :-)

Of course, if this were the FB, I'd just call you a Timmy and be done with it.

[dtb]

Originally posted by OscarCrease
Getting desperate to come up with a girl name before baby is born sometime this month. Anyone willing to post some of their favorites? Our two boys have relatively eclectic names - enough so that posting them could "out" me, but I bring it up to let you know that we're not looking for Emily, Hannah, Madison or Kaitlin (NTTAWThoseNames). At the same time, we're also probably not going to go with "Apple" or any other fruit or vegetable for that matter.

So, off the beaten path names that aren't totally loony?

Probably late to the party, but India is a fabulous name. Old-fashioned, but unusual too.

[dtb]

Originally posted by baltassoc
You can make kids get those instead of paying for it yourself? Whooo-hooo!

Oh, and

Hank had an SJD! Hank has an SJD! Na-na-na-na-Na-na!

What's an SJD?


[Pass me the Vaseline? HA! Good one.]

[Gattigap]

Originally posted by dtb
Probably late to the party, but India is a fabulous name. Old-fashioned, but unusual too.

One billion Indians can't be wrong!

[viet_mom]

Originally posted by tmdiva
Ditto on hostas--I just bought a couple more for my yard, which has extensive shady portions. Impatiens do really well in the shade, but they're an annual and I'm not much into that kind of thing (I also don't like the colors they come in much).

One thing I bought this year to go in my shady corner is Evergreen Huckleberry. Besides the berries (I'm big on edible gardening), it has lovely foliage (new foliage in the spring is red), and tiny pink-tinged white blossoms. In the shade, it can grow to 6-8 feet.

That same shady corner of my yard also has a lot of lady's mantle, which is beautiful (frothy chartreuse flowers) but self-seeds like the dickens. If you don't mind this, or are vigilant about pulling up all the little starts, it's really nice, seems to thrive in shade, and works REALLY, REALLY WELL in flower arrangements--like baby's breath or something, only chartreuse.

Also thriving in my shady yard are various ferns. Bracken ferns also work well to fill in flower arrangements (last week's had orange roses, lady's mantle and a few sprigs of bracken fern), but also can spread. Sword ferns spread less, and can get really really big (I have a few on the shady side of my house that are nearly six feet across).

I'll second the suggestion about having the tree professionally trimmed. I bit the bullet and did that this year on my very large (read: 30-40 feet) flowering plum, and it's made a world of difference.

tm

Whoah! I had no idea about the level of yard knowledge on here. Thanks so much to everyone for their responses. I have pictures of the new home and yard so if anyone feels like seeing and commenting on the tree, I can email it if I have your email. I think it's a big maple. Although the tree shades almost all of the back yard it is only the section of the yard with the roots (a big section) that is grass-less. Oh well. But after seeing the house again for the home inspection (the poor Inspector - single woman AND city dweller) I realize now the tree is not my problem. It will instead be ripping up the poop-colored carpet and then learning how to apply baseboard molding to cover the resulting gap between the hardwood floors and wall. Coincidentally an ex called the other day to say Hi (after 8 years!!!) and he's a carpenter. Shwing!

PS - Bilmore: so what the heck is going on with the baby loons? Is your son breast feeding them now?

Viet Mom

[Mmmm, Burger (C.J.)]

Originally posted by viet_mom
I think it's a big maple.

If it's a silver maple, you should have it taken out. They're cruddy trees and will start to die after about 40 years. In the meantime, they'll drop branches on you. If it's a sugar maple, though, do what you can to save it.

Baby's Diaper Absorbs Snake Venom
Jun 25, 7:29 am ET

JERUSALEM (Reuters) - A diaper proved to be a life-saver when a venomous snake bit an Israeli infant, a doctor said Friday.
The 12-month-old baby, who had been playing in the backyard, was rushed to a hospital only after his parents noticed fang marks on the diaper and swelling on his bottom while giving him a bath in the evening.

"He had been bitten by a venomous snake," Dr Kobi Assaf of Jerusalem's Hadassah hospital told Israel Radio. "Luckily, the snake injected its venom into the diaper on coming into contact with it and most of the poison did not penetrate the skin."

Doctors said there was no need to administer an antidote but the baby would remain in the hospital for observation.


LINK

[Tyrone Slothrop]

I'm curious when people started reading books without (many) pictures to their kids, and what books they started with. Not sure L'il Ty would go for this yet, but maybe it's worth a try.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm curious when people started reading books without (many) pictures to their kids, and what books they started with. Not sure L'il Ty would go for this yet, but maybe it's worth a try.

I think 4 or 5, but try. If he's not ready then no big deal, put the book on a shelf for a year.

fwiw, One great early book is "Boy" Raoul Dahl's autobio of his school years. funny for you and little Ty.

[dtb]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm curious when people started reading books without (many) pictures to their kids, and what books they started with. Not sure L'il Ty would go for this yet, but maybe it's worth a try.

I started reading the Harry Potter books to my son when he was about four and a half.

He was able to pay attention to "chapter books" (for example the "Magic Treehouse" series -- at least I think that's what it's called) before he was four. It had to be a subject that he was interested in, however. (For him, it was dinosaurs -- which reminds me, every time I'm logged into lawtalkers from home and he sees your avatar, he asks me to go back so he can look at it some more.) He was interested in dinosaur books ("scientific" ones -- you know, with bones and scientific names and things) long before he turned four, but he wouldn't have been able to sit through Harry Potter.

He also liked the "Junie B. Jones" series when he was about four (and still likes it). Some parents don't like JBJ, because Junie uses a lot of incorrect grammar -- but I think the books are funny and really speak to kids his age. Besides, my son points out her grammatical errors (he is, after all, his mother's son!), so I'm not worried that he'll pick up bad habits from that.

I think the first "real" book he sat through in its entirety was Charlotte's Web, and that was two summers ago, which means he was almost four. That was followed by James and the Giant Peach -- another big hit with him.

[taxwonk]

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm curious when people started reading books without (many) pictures to their kids, and what books they started with. Not sure L'il Ty would go for this yet, but maybe it's worth a try.

I started reading to both the Wonk Princess and the Wonk Monster when they were newborns. The first book I read to them was "I'll Love You Forever." After that, I moved on to other simple books like "Hello Moon." I found that even though they couldn't follow the story, the cadence of my voice as I read and the pictures both soothed them and helped them get to sleep.

I think that starting at a very early age made them curious about books and I attribute the fact that they were both early readers to that fact.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by taxwonk
I started reading to both the Wonk Princess and the Wonk Monster when they were newborns. The first book I read to them was "I'll Love You Forever." After that, I moved on to other simple books like "Hello Moon." I found that even though they couldn't follow the story, the cadence of my voice as I read and the pictures both soothed them and helped them get to sleep.

I think that starting at a very early age made them curious about books and I attribute the fact that they were both early readers to that fact.

Ty obviously likes to read, but he has very poor reading comprehension skills.

Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
I'm curious when people started reading books without (many) pictures to their kids, and what books they started with. Not sure L'il Ty would go for this yet, but maybe it's worth a try.

The Velveteen Rabbit. Winnie the pooh - the original books and poetry from When We Were Six. The Littles series (tiny people with tails). Ty, I will ask my mom this afternoon - she teaches Pre-K.

Originally posted by taxwonk
I started reading to both the Wonk Princess and the Wonk Monster when they were newborns....I think that starting at a very early age made them curious about books and I attribute the fact that they were both early readers to that fact.

I started about 2mos old with the Lexling. He adores books - he flaps his fat little arms when he sees them and makes monkey noises. It's a riot.