Babies paraded as parents' fashion accessories
CURMUDGEON - KARL DU FRESNE
The Dominion PostRelevant offers
Who would want to be a small child in the 21st century? Virtually from the moment of birth you'd be given the message that other people's needs take priority over yours.
Within hours of being born, you're bundled out of hospital because the health system considers there are more important things to do with the health dollar than allow new mothers time to bond with their babies. Mother struggling with breast-feeding? No support at home? Tough. Out you go.
Before you're a few months old you're likely to find yourself being left at a creche each morning so that Mum can go to work, because a relentlessly acquisitive, consumerist society has convinced a generation of parents that owning a flash house, driving a late-model car and pursuing a career are more important than raising their children.
At weekends, you're liable to find yourself being dressed in cute designer-label clothes and dragged off to a trendy cafe, where you're expected to behave yourself patiently while your parents slurp latte and read the Sunday paper.
And on the rare occasions when you're taken for a walk in a pushchair – or baby-buggy, to use the cutesy-wutesy name now preferred – you're propelled toward a procession of bewildering, and possibly frightening, strangers.
The recent report of a Dundee University study that showed forward-facing pushchairs might impair children's development shouldn't have come as a surprise to anyone.
When a small child is facing its parent there is constant interaction between the two. The Dundee study found, predictably, that this stimulated brain development.
Conversely, the study concluded that babies facing away from the pusher could be "emotionally impoverished" and even suffer stress. The language is a bit melodramatic but the message is simple enough.
There are obvious practical reasons, too, why the rear-facing pushchair is preferable. It means that whoever's pushing can see instantly if anything is wrong, such as the child choking or being dazzled by the sun, or a wasp landing on its face.
But the vagaries of fashion dictate that the forward-facing buggy is the way to go. Forward-facing pushchairs are now so prevalent that it's hard to find an old- fashioned one in which the child faces the pusher.
I suspect the appeal of the forward-facing pushchair has more to do with the gratification of parents than with the comfort and wellbeing of the child.
Couples are delaying having children because their careers take priority. When they finally get around to it, they often behave as if this most basic biological feat is something no one has ever accomplished before.
The child then becomes an advertisement for the parents, a fashion accessory to be shown off for maximum advantage. This is accomplished far more effectively when the unfortunate infant is facing forward.
***
Two Wairarapa women recently organised a litter cleanup in which an estimated 10 tonnes of rubbish was picked up from rural roads.
The forensic evidence pointing to the culprits responsible for this roadside detritus couldn't be clearer. Discarded McDonald's and KFC packaging predominates, along with beer cans, stubbies and alco-pop bottles.
The problem, of course, is that the slobs who get most of their nutritional intake from fast food, washed down with vile beverages such as Lion Red, Red Bull or Woodstock bourbon-and-coke, are the very people most likely to thoughtlessly discard packaging, bottles and cans out the car window.
There exists an entire sub-class that is oblivious to the economic cost and aesthetic offence of the rubbish they leave behind.
What's the answer? The Greenies want punitive taxes on the companies that produce the rubbish, but a better solution might be an old-fashioned one. The community can take matters into its own hands not by cleaning up the Neanderthals' litter – that simply gives them licence to continue – but by showing its collective disapproval.
The litterers must be made to feel guilty every time they drop a beer can or Big Mac wrapper. Stop and glare at them. Encourage your children to point at them and ask loudly why they're making a mess.
Try suggesting politely to the litterers that they take their rubbish home. Being polite to such numbskulls may go against the grain, but getting angry and abusive just gives them an excuse to be abusive back. Guilt and shame have become unfashionable emotions, but even the dimmest-witted, greasy- fingered KFC eater has a faint, residual trace of social conscience that can be activated. Tolerance of bad behaviour is the curse of the liberal sixties generation, and never more misplaced than when it comes to littering.
***
I have been lobbying quietly but persistently for the broadcasting of Snoopy's Christmas to be made a criminal offence and for a government bounty to be paid on all copies.
Once that's achieved, the next step will be to persuade the United Nations to declare the playing of Snoopy's Christmas a form of torture, marginally more subtle than waterboarding but no less cruel and unnatural. Readers will be kept informed of the progress of this campaign.
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
Gosh, all those defensive mummies out there; truth hurt lovies? Ifyou have to struggle to maintain your lifestyle, change it. Use your brains and think of your children not your status. Good on you Karl.
Yay for Snoopies Christmas!
If one gave disaproving glares to litterers one would likely be in line for abuse - or worse; ditto saying something to the selfish morons - whose parents were probably the ones you write about in the first part of your article :).
Hi Karl, I enjoyed meeting you briefly at Michelle and Geoff's wedding - what a great occasion. And it's good to know that we agree on some points - particularly your views on new babies and mothers needing time to bond and have qualified support to learn the basics of breast feeding and the need for the infant to have a relationship with a carer, preferably a parent, that helps to develop a physically, emotionally, cognitively and socially competent child. UNICEF is launching a report tomorrow that sounds a clear warning about the 25 rich countries of the world (includes NZ) using out of home child care to such a large extent (80% of children under 5)as economic imperatives require both parents to be in the work force. Most at risk are very young infants in regular, long term care. It's a wake up call to all of us. Do you want me to send you a copy? Best wishes...and o goodwill to you and yours for the season of the year. Barbara Lambourn, National Advocacy Manager, UNICEF NZ.
Hey, people who hate Snoopy's Christmas, here's an idea: Just turn off the radio if you don't like it. GAWD.
As to the pushchair story: BS. My kid wants to see the world, and if I turn the pushchair seat to face me, he fusses. He sees me all day long, and if he wants to see passing people, dogs, trees, shops, why shouldn't I let him? He's happy and laughing when he faces outward. "Emotionally impoverished", what nonsense. Do you have a kid? Have you ever in fact ever MET a kid? I doubt it.
So you're saying that women should get back in the kitchen where we belong? Get a grip. We work because we need the money to put a roof over our children's heads, to provide good food and nice clothes. How about suggesting that at least 50% of fathers quit their jobs and become full time parents? Or doesn't that fit in with your world view and tightly defined gender roles?
Light hearted or not, what a load of crap this article is.
"A surcharge (which would be passed on to consumers)" All this means is that the rest of us will still subsidise the yobbos. Possible a refundable charge (like the 5c in SA) may work better.
I'm surprised you found the results of the study on forward-facing pushchairs so obvious. It is not at all clear to me (based on my experience as a father) that the stimulation from an ever-changing environment is worse than the stimulation from a familiar one.
Also, I think you're being overly simplistic when it comes to Mums heading out to work. Why did you feel the need to insert "flash" in your comment that "society has convinced a generation of parents that owning a flash house" is important? Get with the times.
Hello All,
I agree with the author on several points re the 'first rant'. However, I can only assume that his comments are about some people in society and not all 'people of child bearing age that work'. If it is about all people, then it's stereotyping in the extreme...
I have seen some terrible behaviour in public by both parents treating their children as 'accessories'. The most recent one concerned a woman at a licenced karaoke restaurant. It was 10.30 at night and she was having a good time - half cut and dancing around with her friends singing karaoke. That's fine in itself (well, except for the singing ;)) but what was her child doing there? He was about 4 or 5 years old and she was using him as a 'look at my cute child dance' object. He should have been home asleep.
The issue I have is with prams is the mountain buggees. They aren't prams but mechanical monstrosities that takes up all the room on the footpath. They don't just hold the child anymore but have tyres that look like they belong on a luner excursion model, and huge compartments so that mum can stow away all of her high end consumer goods that have just been purchased. Where are they taking their children in these things? The Milford Track? Are they going to try and scale Mt Cook? And yes, snoopys christmas must go. The only trouble is that it would be replaced by an equally annoying offering from the likes of Jessica Simpson, Britney Spears or whatever struggling pop star/boyband decides to try and revive their diving career by subjecting us to a god awful christmas album.
Another twitch in our race relations fidget
Golden Mile risks being tarnished if plans go awry
New bill has us searching for the truth
It's what you do with potential that counts
Obama's Pacific ambitions play well for sidelined New Zealand
The confusing signals teens must decipher
Do kids need tests? Answer the questions below
Simple pidgin offers everyone a mouthful of exciting subtleties
Let's drive buses off the Golden Mile
The perpetual problem of superannuation sustainability
There's false economy in this ACC measure
All Blacks beat England in dour test
Police dob in drink driver to Air NZ
Wallabies humiliated by Scotland
Shyla's a purr-fect little mum
Bitter MP seeks reconciliation
Nice Kiwi blokes - shame about the women
Griffin's moves biscuits to Fiji
$450,000 march is political manipulation
Cyclists gone but their trash lingers
Mall campaign pays for 'protesters'
Playing chicken with the markets
My 6 month old faces me in the pram but I don't talk to him because: a) if I look at him and not where I'm going I tend to run into lamp-posts b) if I talk to him, people stare at me strangely like I am talking to an imaginary friend c) he's usually much more interested in his feet.
Surely it matters how much you talk to them at other times of the day?
And babies as fashion accessories?! I didn't realise that snot / vomit / carrot stains was so trendy...