Thursday, February 17, 2005
Babyblogging: At Last, a Smile!
Finally, I was able to capture Preston smiling. It took many attempts and much shaking of toys. I'm glad he's in such a good mood today. Yesterday he got his first set of vaccinations, and it was not fun for either one of us. The emotional pain I felt when seeing him in pain, even though it was short-lived, was indescribable. I wanted so much to take away his pain, to comfort him. I've never felt that way before. I think the only thing that comes close is seeing a dear pet suffering. A friend of mine lost her son to a car accident when he was 12 years old. Last year he would have graduated from high school, and she's still grieving. I can't imagine the magnitude of her grief. I pray that Preston will outlive his parents, and have a long and happy life.
SuperMom Anxiety for Children Syndrome(SMACS)
Being a new mother, of course I want to be the best mother I can be to my son Preston. I want to make sure he eats enough, sleeps enough, stays healthy, is clothed properly for the weather, gets enough intellectual and physical stimulation for his proper development, and is in general a happy fellow. Sometimes mothers can drive themselves and their families crazy with their high expectations for themselves and everyone else. An article in Newsweek called Mommy Madness (via James Lileks) drew my attention today. It describes how many American mothers are not enjoying motherhood because they are so caught up with being the perfect mother. I have been thinking about this topic for a while.
I admit I am sometimes guilty of being an obsessive-compulsive mommy. The first week of Preston’s life, we took him to church so that he could receive the traditional LDS baby blessing with my whole family in attendance. I’d been told that babies should be kept at home for their first month to reduce the chances of contracting an illness while their immune system was still immature, but this Sunday was the only day that my whole family could be together to celebrate Preston’s blessing day. Well, the whole time we were at church, I was a nervous wreck. Every time someone around us coughed or sneezed, I thought, “If Preston gets sick because I brought him to church, I’m a bad mother and I’ll never forgive myself.” I was positively Monk-ish in my anxiety for him.
Well, Preston didn’t get sick, and I eventually forgave myself for taking him out too early. He’s happy, healthy, and growing at an astonishing rate. Yesterday I took him in for his two month check-up, and he weighed in at 13 lbs. 9 oz. (90% percentile) and measured 25 inches in length (97%). I’m finally starting to loosen up, and not be such a basket case over Preston’s health and happiness. It’s probably natural for first-time mothers to suffer from SuperMom Anxiety for Children syndrome (or SMACS, I made the name up) for the first few months because of the fear and doubt about their abilities as a parent. What’s not healthy is for moms to stay that way for the rest of their child’s young life and with all of the other children. Over-protectiveness and constant anxiety can cause a child to become co-dependent and anxious himself. A member of my extended family has SMAC and her adolescent children are nervous wrecks just like her. Holidays are a burden because she feels like she has to deprive herself of sleep so that she can make everything perfectly decorated, wrapped, and color-coordinated.
The SMAC-suffering mothers described in the Mommy Madness article fall into two categories: working moms trying to balance careers and motherhood, or stay-at-home-moms going crazy with boredom and lack of fulfillment. I think the major problem with these women is that they want everything at once—fulfillment via a challenging vocation and a traditional home life with adorable, perfect children. If they don’t obtain these goals, then they blame themselves for not doing enough. What women with this problem need to realize is that they can’t have everything at once. You can do one or the other thing, but you can’t do both at once and expect them to be the best. It’s just not humanly possible. Some people can make both work for them and not be basket cases, but one area will suffer and that’s just the way it is. If family is what’s most important, than focus on that and let the vocation slide and vice versa.
In my case, I was unable to have children right away due to health issues, so I opted to work on a Ph.D. for a while. There’s no way I could have had children and worked on my doctorate unless I let someone else raise them or got zero sleep. What would be the point of that? Since family is so important to me, I decided to give up a potential career in research so that I can stay at home and raise Preston. Later on when he goes to school, I may take my Ph.D. and work part- or full-time, but I’m content to wait and see. I don’t feel deprived; I feel fortunate that we have the means so that I don’t have to work. I do miss the intellectual stimulation of an academic environment sometimes, but I’ve found other ways to keep my brain nourished. I read a lot—books, magazines, blogs—and I enjoy watching the news and some favorite programs like CSI. The History and Discovery channels are a good diversion when I’m breastfeeding or folding laundry. I also try to keep up on my hobbies like playing the piano and writing. But I’m also trying to develop some new talents, like sewing and cooking.
Of course, most of my time is spent caring for Preston, but I make sure to set aside some time for me as well. My faith and my family are the two most precious things in my life, as I suspect they are with most people. My faith helps me keep things in perspective. My church encourages women to stay at home with their children if possible because we believe it’s important for their physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual development. Some mothers have to work due to financial circumstances, and I feel blessed that my husband makes enough money to allow me to stay at home. There’s a great article in the March issue of Ensign (a magazine published by my church) entitled “My Stay at Home Education” (this issue will be available in PDF format in March) that outlines things a stay-at-home mom can do to improve herself physically, intellectually, and spiritually. I’ve paraphrased the main points here:
I’ve tried to follow this advice as well as get involved in a playgroup, and I’ve found that I feel very happy and I don’t get bored that often. These suggestions are good for stay-at-home moms even if you’re not part of an organized religion. And of course, remember to go easy on yourself. You don’t have to be perfect and your child doesn’t have to be the next Mozart. The important thing is that you and your family are happy and enjoy being together.
There’s another article in the same issue of Newsweek called "The Good Enough Mother" that sums up what I’m trying to say perfectly.
Exactly.
I admit I am sometimes guilty of being an obsessive-compulsive mommy. The first week of Preston’s life, we took him to church so that he could receive the traditional LDS baby blessing with my whole family in attendance. I’d been told that babies should be kept at home for their first month to reduce the chances of contracting an illness while their immune system was still immature, but this Sunday was the only day that my whole family could be together to celebrate Preston’s blessing day. Well, the whole time we were at church, I was a nervous wreck. Every time someone around us coughed or sneezed, I thought, “If Preston gets sick because I brought him to church, I’m a bad mother and I’ll never forgive myself.” I was positively Monk-ish in my anxiety for him.
Well, Preston didn’t get sick, and I eventually forgave myself for taking him out too early. He’s happy, healthy, and growing at an astonishing rate. Yesterday I took him in for his two month check-up, and he weighed in at 13 lbs. 9 oz. (90% percentile) and measured 25 inches in length (97%). I’m finally starting to loosen up, and not be such a basket case over Preston’s health and happiness. It’s probably natural for first-time mothers to suffer from SuperMom Anxiety for Children syndrome (or SMACS, I made the name up) for the first few months because of the fear and doubt about their abilities as a parent. What’s not healthy is for moms to stay that way for the rest of their child’s young life and with all of the other children. Over-protectiveness and constant anxiety can cause a child to become co-dependent and anxious himself. A member of my extended family has SMAC and her adolescent children are nervous wrecks just like her. Holidays are a burden because she feels like she has to deprive herself of sleep so that she can make everything perfectly decorated, wrapped, and color-coordinated.
The SMAC-suffering mothers described in the Mommy Madness article fall into two categories: working moms trying to balance careers and motherhood, or stay-at-home-moms going crazy with boredom and lack of fulfillment. I think the major problem with these women is that they want everything at once—fulfillment via a challenging vocation and a traditional home life with adorable, perfect children. If they don’t obtain these goals, then they blame themselves for not doing enough. What women with this problem need to realize is that they can’t have everything at once. You can do one or the other thing, but you can’t do both at once and expect them to be the best. It’s just not humanly possible. Some people can make both work for them and not be basket cases, but one area will suffer and that’s just the way it is. If family is what’s most important, than focus on that and let the vocation slide and vice versa.
In my case, I was unable to have children right away due to health issues, so I opted to work on a Ph.D. for a while. There’s no way I could have had children and worked on my doctorate unless I let someone else raise them or got zero sleep. What would be the point of that? Since family is so important to me, I decided to give up a potential career in research so that I can stay at home and raise Preston. Later on when he goes to school, I may take my Ph.D. and work part- or full-time, but I’m content to wait and see. I don’t feel deprived; I feel fortunate that we have the means so that I don’t have to work. I do miss the intellectual stimulation of an academic environment sometimes, but I’ve found other ways to keep my brain nourished. I read a lot—books, magazines, blogs—and I enjoy watching the news and some favorite programs like CSI. The History and Discovery channels are a good diversion when I’m breastfeeding or folding laundry. I also try to keep up on my hobbies like playing the piano and writing. But I’m also trying to develop some new talents, like sewing and cooking.
Of course, most of my time is spent caring for Preston, but I make sure to set aside some time for me as well. My faith and my family are the two most precious things in my life, as I suspect they are with most people. My faith helps me keep things in perspective. My church encourages women to stay at home with their children if possible because we believe it’s important for their physical, emotional, intellectual, and spiritual development. Some mothers have to work due to financial circumstances, and I feel blessed that my husband makes enough money to allow me to stay at home. There’s a great article in the March issue of Ensign (a magazine published by my church) entitled “My Stay at Home Education” (this issue will be available in PDF format in March) that outlines things a stay-at-home mom can do to improve herself physically, intellectually, and spiritually. I’ve paraphrased the main points here:
1. Develop new skills that can come in handy caring for kids, e.g. first aid.
2. Read good books.
3. Develop talents with worthwhile hobbies (I guess this leaves out collecting Elvis paraphernalia).
4. Accept callings in church (or volunteer in your community).
5. Use community resources e.g. plays, concerts, education courses, book clubs, museums etc.
6. Take time for personal scripture study, prayer, journal writing, temple (or church) attendance etc.
7. Set goals and work towards them.
I’ve tried to follow this advice as well as get involved in a playgroup, and I’ve found that I feel very happy and I don’t get bored that often. These suggestions are good for stay-at-home moms even if you’re not part of an organized religion. And of course, remember to go easy on yourself. You don’t have to be perfect and your child doesn’t have to be the next Mozart. The important thing is that you and your family are happy and enjoy being together.
There’s another article in the same issue of Newsweek called "The Good Enough Mother" that sums up what I’m trying to say perfectly.
There's the problem with turning motherhood into martyrdom. There's no way to do it and have a good time. If we create a never-ending spin cycle of have-tos because we're trying to expiate senseless guilt about working or not working, trying to keep up with the woman at school whose kid gets A's because she writes the papers herself, the message we send our children is terrible. By our actions we tell them that being a mom—being their mom—is a drag, powered by fear, self-doubt and conformity, all the things we are supposed to teach them to overcome. It just becomes a gloss on that old joke: Enough about me. What about you? How do you make me feel about myself? The most incandescent memories of my childhood are of making my mother laugh. My kids did the same for me. A good time is what they remember long after toddler programs and art projects are over. The rest is just scheduling.
Exactly.
Friday, February 11, 2005
A Little Light Reading?
If there are any insomniacs out there that need a sure-fire sleep-aid, here's a link to my Ph.D. dissertation entitled "The Role of the Scaffolding Protein InaD in Localization of Signaling Complexes to the Rhabdomeres of Drosophila Photoreceptors." I can't believe I actually finished that monstrosity. Anyway, if you ever wanted to know in gory detail how those pesky fruitflies see well enough to dodge your fly swatter, THIS is the dissertation for you. No takers? Don't worry, you won't hurt my feelings by telling me that the topic bores you to tears. It nearly killed me just doing the experiments for this dissertation, over and over and over....
Friday Catblogging
Here's a pic of Omni sitting on the top of my book shelf gazing out the window. It's his 2nd favorite spot to sit when I'm blogging (the 1st being right on top of the monitor). Omni's much easier to photograph than my other cat, Asia. In fact, I suspect he's a ham. The elusive Asia, on the other hand, will either attack the camera strap, or run away and hide under the futon. I'll try to capture her next week.
PrestonWatch: Week Eight
I've been desperately trying to snap a picture of Preston smiling, but usually he wiggles his head around when he does it and I get a blurred image. The best I could manage was this one where's he got this small "I'm up to something" smile. He's growing so fast, it's hard to keep him in clothes. He's about 14 lbs. and his 3-6 month clothes are already getting too short. Between my husband (6'1") and me (5'11"), he'll definitely be taller than average. I don't know if he'll be as tall as my brother who is 6'5", but maybe he'll play basketball when he gets older. Then again, he might be interested in science like his mom, or the law like his dad. Or maybe he'll have musical or artistics abilities. The possibilities are endless at this stage of his life!
Tuesday, February 01, 2005
Carnival o' Cats Numero 45
This week's Carnival of Cats is hosted by Watermark, a gorgeously designed poet's blog. Grad school seems to have sucked all the poetic juices out of me, but hopefully my poetic heart will reawaken with the joys of motherhood. First, though, I have to figure out what the heck I'm doing. Anyway, go to Watermark, and enjoy the feline pics and sample some poems.
Monday, January 31, 2005
Birth of an Iraqi Democracy: The Elections in Iraq
I've been following the upcoming Iraqi elections with great anticipation. Finally, the Iraqis got to vote yesterday. Friends of Democracy has complete coverage of the Iraqi elections. I also suggest reading some of the personal Iraqi blogs such as Iraq the Model and Healing Iraq (my two favorites). I wish my Iraqi brothers and sisters the best for their country. I’m pleased that they got out and voted despite the dangers posed by Zarqawi and his gang of Islamofascist thugs. The Iraqis have suffered so much as a people, and now they finally have a chance for self-determination.
The pessimists of the left and of the international community seem not to want democracy to succeed in Iraq. I don’t understand that mentality. The Iraqis may not have a perfect government free of corruption and cronyism, but what country does? Does Canada, France, or Russia? Don’t make me laugh. The U.S. government has many problems too that I could write pages and pages on. But I’d much rather focus on the possibilities of a democratic Iraq.
One of the reasons why I support the War in Iraq is because of the horrible abuses that took place under Saddam's regime. All segments of the Iraqi people were brutalized--Sunni, Shia, Kurd, Christian, Jew--in one way or another. I was pretty young when Saddam persecuted and gassed the Kurds so I didn't know about it until I was in college, and I was shocked that the U.N. didn't even try to haul him into the Hague after the first Gulf War. Some anti-war people that I've talked to say that Halabja was a long time ago (1988), and that doesn't justify Saddam's removal by the Coalition forces without the U.N.'s ok today. Well, in most countries, there is no statute of limitations on murder, and it should certainly apply to genocide as well. There are no higher crimes than the ones Saddam committed against his own people and his neighbors in Iran and Kuwait.
According to several human rights groups, Saddam murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people. If the international community doesn't feel Saddam's crimes warrant his forced removal, then what is the standard? If not hundreds of thousands of dead, then must we wait until millions are murdered? Of course, the typical anti-war person always comes back with, "Well, there are many evil regimes in the world. Why don't we do something about them too?"
What they fail to see is that in Iraq, we had the perfect opportunity to liberate that country for several reasons. First, the U.S. and her allies were technically still at war with Saddam. The cease-fire depended on Saddam's compliance and he violated the U.N. Security Council resolutions repeatedly by firing on our aircraft and playing games with the U.N. inspectors (Clouseaus). Whether or not he had stockpiles of WMDs at the time of the Coalition invasion is not the point. He never lost the ambition to possess WMDs, and with the help of corrupt nations like Russia and China that helped him violate the U.N. sanctions he would have obtained them eventually and used them on his enemies (including the U.S).
Second, Saddam was constantly "rattling his saber" against Israel, the U.S., Kuwait, and the West in general. He may have been full of hot air, but he had attacked Israel and Kuwait before. Plus, he tried to assassinate a former U.S. president in an act of revenge which could be construed as an act of war. I don’t care if you’re Republican or Democrat, other governments cannot be allowed to assassinate our citizens, private or public.
Third, he also gave material support to various terrorist groups including Hamas and al-Qaeda. After 9-11 President Bush believed, based on intelligence that seems to have been faulty, that Saddam was a threat to the U.S. and his neighbors because of his terrorist connections and his development of WMD. Some think that groups like Hamas only want to “free Palestine” (hah!) and harm only Israel, but many of the Islamic terrorist groups are interconnected. I just finished reading Steve Emerson’s “American Jihad,” in which he elucidates the links between all of the Middle-Eastern terrorist groups and their operations within the U.S. that have been going on since the late 80’s. Scary stuff. I wouldn’t trust that these groups won’t attack the U.S. when they get the chance, if they haven’t already. The U.S. is the “Great Satan” while Israel is only the “Little Satan” after all.
Fourth, Saddam was using the oil wealth of his country to enrich himself (and bribe U.N. members) rather than aid his people in violation of U.N. resolutions. So removing Saddam and liberating the Iraqi people is a win-win situation. Saddam is no longer in control of Iraq's oil wealth, the Iraqi people are. He and his monstrous sons can no longer torture and kill his people. In fact, they can choose their own leaders now. Saddam can't support terrorist organizations that threaten us and our allies. And Saddam won’t ever have the opportunity to re-expand his WMD weapons programs and possibly use them against the U.S. or its allies. So why aren’t Democrats like Ted Kennedy and John Kerry happier about the Iraqi elections?
The pessimists of the left and of the international community seem not to want democracy to succeed in Iraq. I don’t understand that mentality. The Iraqis may not have a perfect government free of corruption and cronyism, but what country does? Does Canada, France, or Russia? Don’t make me laugh. The U.S. government has many problems too that I could write pages and pages on. But I’d much rather focus on the possibilities of a democratic Iraq.
One of the reasons why I support the War in Iraq is because of the horrible abuses that took place under Saddam's regime. All segments of the Iraqi people were brutalized--Sunni, Shia, Kurd, Christian, Jew--in one way or another. I was pretty young when Saddam persecuted and gassed the Kurds so I didn't know about it until I was in college, and I was shocked that the U.N. didn't even try to haul him into the Hague after the first Gulf War. Some anti-war people that I've talked to say that Halabja was a long time ago (1988), and that doesn't justify Saddam's removal by the Coalition forces without the U.N.'s ok today. Well, in most countries, there is no statute of limitations on murder, and it should certainly apply to genocide as well. There are no higher crimes than the ones Saddam committed against his own people and his neighbors in Iran and Kuwait.
According to several human rights groups, Saddam murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people. If the international community doesn't feel Saddam's crimes warrant his forced removal, then what is the standard? If not hundreds of thousands of dead, then must we wait until millions are murdered? Of course, the typical anti-war person always comes back with, "Well, there are many evil regimes in the world. Why don't we do something about them too?"
What they fail to see is that in Iraq, we had the perfect opportunity to liberate that country for several reasons. First, the U.S. and her allies were technically still at war with Saddam. The cease-fire depended on Saddam's compliance and he violated the U.N. Security Council resolutions repeatedly by firing on our aircraft and playing games with the U.N. inspectors (Clouseaus). Whether or not he had stockpiles of WMDs at the time of the Coalition invasion is not the point. He never lost the ambition to possess WMDs, and with the help of corrupt nations like Russia and China that helped him violate the U.N. sanctions he would have obtained them eventually and used them on his enemies (including the U.S).
Second, Saddam was constantly "rattling his saber" against Israel, the U.S., Kuwait, and the West in general. He may have been full of hot air, but he had attacked Israel and Kuwait before. Plus, he tried to assassinate a former U.S. president in an act of revenge which could be construed as an act of war. I don’t care if you’re Republican or Democrat, other governments cannot be allowed to assassinate our citizens, private or public.
Third, he also gave material support to various terrorist groups including Hamas and al-Qaeda. After 9-11 President Bush believed, based on intelligence that seems to have been faulty, that Saddam was a threat to the U.S. and his neighbors because of his terrorist connections and his development of WMD. Some think that groups like Hamas only want to “free Palestine” (hah!) and harm only Israel, but many of the Islamic terrorist groups are interconnected. I just finished reading Steve Emerson’s “American Jihad,” in which he elucidates the links between all of the Middle-Eastern terrorist groups and their operations within the U.S. that have been going on since the late 80’s. Scary stuff. I wouldn’t trust that these groups won’t attack the U.S. when they get the chance, if they haven’t already. The U.S. is the “Great Satan” while Israel is only the “Little Satan” after all.
Fourth, Saddam was using the oil wealth of his country to enrich himself (and bribe U.N. members) rather than aid his people in violation of U.N. resolutions. So removing Saddam and liberating the Iraqi people is a win-win situation. Saddam is no longer in control of Iraq's oil wealth, the Iraqi people are. He and his monstrous sons can no longer torture and kill his people. In fact, they can choose their own leaders now. Saddam can't support terrorist organizations that threaten us and our allies. And Saddam won’t ever have the opportunity to re-expand his WMD weapons programs and possibly use them against the U.S. or its allies. So why aren’t Democrats like Ted Kennedy and John Kerry happier about the Iraqi elections?
Friday, January 28, 2005
Friday Catblogging
Ok, any politispeak is strictly banned on Fridays. I usually drive my husband and myself crazy with my politics obsession. Now, cats have the right attitude about everything. You might say they're comparable to Jamaicans (at least the ones in those rum commercials) as far as animals go. The only things they're uptight about is their food. Don't mess with it! Here my 4-year-old tortie Asia shows the best attitude to take when deadlines are looming, the weather is awful, and you just can't get out of bed. She says, "Take it easy, mon. Life is too good to waste by getting up." Note: The photo is courtesy of my hubby using my Canon S1 IS Powershot. He's a much better photographer than I am.
PrestonWatch
Sorry for the light blogging, folks. Being a Mom is more time-consuming than I thought. Some days I'm lucky to squeeze in a shower or a walk. So I guess I'll be blogging when I can. But here's this weeks BabyBlogging.
Here Preston (6 weeks old) discovers (for the umpteenth time) that one's hand is quite tasty and delicious. Yummy!
Carnival of the Cats
Here's a link to this week's Carnival of the Cats hosted by Kimberly at Music and Cats. She has three beautiful kitties of her own. Laurence Simon of the hilarious blog this blog is full of crap came up with the Carnival of Cats which is the best carnival yet IMHO. Cats rule.
Friday, January 21, 2005
Friday Catblogging
I like instapundit's tradition of Friday catblogging, so I'm going to start doing it too. Thursdays will be babyblogging. I love this picture of my cat Omni because he looks so P.O.'d, like he's gonna rip my face off if I don't give him his Whisker Lickin'treats NOW!
Hail to the Chief: The Second Inauguration of President George W. Bush
(Note: I actually wrote this yesterday, but didn't get a chance to post it until today due to mommy duties.)
Blogging has been light since I’ve been sick with a cold and there’s been nothing to spark my fancy until today. Today is the historic second inauguration ceremony of President George W. Bush (I wonder if the heads of my Bush-hating colleagues are exploding yet?). This is the first time I’ve had the opportunity to watch a Presidential inauguration live and I thought President Bush’s inaugural address was fantastic. One thing I kept thinking was that with each and every mention of God, Michael Newdow must be filing a brand-new lawsuit. If he wants to live in a country that is guaranteed God-free, he should move to China. Sheesh! He can’t change the Judeo-Christian heritage of this country, and he sure can’t suppress the expression of beliefs by the religious majority of the present and future. I think this past election showed that religious people are sick and tired of people like Newdow and the ACLU forcing their fundy atheist agenda on the public sphere. We will fight for our rights of free speech and exercise of our religion.
Anyway, back to the speech. Since I became a resident of Texas, I carefully watched then Governor George W. Bush, and I was impressed by his ability to work with both political parties and by his strong moral convictions. I thought that he would make an excellent president, and for the most part he has fulfilled my expectations. His speech today was reminiscent of the great speeches of Washington and Lincoln, with many references to liberty and freedom. But they weren’t hollow references because he has been the force for freeing tens of millions of peoples in Iraq and Afganistan from tyranny. While the corrupt bureaucrats in the U.N. debate society are content to make pretty speeches about human rights, President Bush has actually carried out actions to ensure human rights. His administration has implemented a major shift in U.S. foreign policy. No longer are dictators to be tolerated, but our dealings with them are based on their willingness to reform. No longer will we say “pretty please, don’t hurt us” to tyrants that threaten our way of life e.g. Saddam and Mullah Mohammed Omar (try to say his name 10 times fast).
Here’s some of my favorite phrases from his speech:
“The best hope for freedom in our land depends on expansion of freedom in other lands.”
I agree that elimination and/or reformation of tyrannical governments that support terrorism against the U.S. will prevent future 9-11 type attacks. Are you listening Iran and Syria?
“No one is fit to be a master and no one deserves to be a slave.”
Our Founding Fathers and the Great Emancipator would be proud, I think. I do believe that all people are equal in God’s eyes.
“Success in our relations [with other countries] will require decent treatment of their people.”
I hope that we’ll be leaning harder on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, China, Egypt, and other countries in this regard when it comes to human rights abuses.
“There is no justice without freedom, and no human rights without human liberty.”
Put that in your hat and smoke it, you Amnesty International freaks, and remember it the next time you whine about alleged U.S. human rights abuses while ignoring those occurring in places like Sudan and North Korea.
“Liberty will come to those that love it.”
“The United States will not ignore your oppression, or make excuses for your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.”
I think this was a message to the Iranian people that the U.S. will support their fight for freedom if they rise up against those nuke-crazy mullahs.
“To serve your people, you must learn to trust them.”
I think this line could be aimed at communist dictatorships like China, but also at socialistic Democrats with all of their nanny-state policies (e.g. San Fran Nan). Why not trust us to invest our social security dollars in 401k-type accounts or wisely spend our tax refunds? We’re not all imbeciles, you know.
“The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: ‘Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it.’”
Quoting Lincoln is always a good choice. I bet Saddam is wishing it weren’t so.
“Americans, at our best, value the life we see in one another, and must always remember that even the unwanted have worth.”
I think this line clearly applies to unborn babies. Really the only difference between my son, Preston, and a baby that has been aborted is that Preston was wanted. Their lives are both of value. I’m so sick of the pro-abortion (pro-choice) advocates always putting the value of woman’s life (and often her lifestyle) above that of the unborn baby.
And I especially loved the closing hymn, “God of Our Fathers, Whose Almighty Hand.” It must have sent the heads of Newdow and the ACLU spinning. Saying the word God to a fundy atheist like Newdow is like the Knights Who Say Nee saying “nee” over and over. I love it!
Blogging has been light since I’ve been sick with a cold and there’s been nothing to spark my fancy until today. Today is the historic second inauguration ceremony of President George W. Bush (I wonder if the heads of my Bush-hating colleagues are exploding yet?). This is the first time I’ve had the opportunity to watch a Presidential inauguration live and I thought President Bush’s inaugural address was fantastic. One thing I kept thinking was that with each and every mention of God, Michael Newdow must be filing a brand-new lawsuit. If he wants to live in a country that is guaranteed God-free, he should move to China. Sheesh! He can’t change the Judeo-Christian heritage of this country, and he sure can’t suppress the expression of beliefs by the religious majority of the present and future. I think this past election showed that religious people are sick and tired of people like Newdow and the ACLU forcing their fundy atheist agenda on the public sphere. We will fight for our rights of free speech and exercise of our religion.
Anyway, back to the speech. Since I became a resident of Texas, I carefully watched then Governor George W. Bush, and I was impressed by his ability to work with both political parties and by his strong moral convictions. I thought that he would make an excellent president, and for the most part he has fulfilled my expectations. His speech today was reminiscent of the great speeches of Washington and Lincoln, with many references to liberty and freedom. But they weren’t hollow references because he has been the force for freeing tens of millions of peoples in Iraq and Afganistan from tyranny. While the corrupt bureaucrats in the U.N. debate society are content to make pretty speeches about human rights, President Bush has actually carried out actions to ensure human rights. His administration has implemented a major shift in U.S. foreign policy. No longer are dictators to be tolerated, but our dealings with them are based on their willingness to reform. No longer will we say “pretty please, don’t hurt us” to tyrants that threaten our way of life e.g. Saddam and Mullah Mohammed Omar (try to say his name 10 times fast).
Here’s some of my favorite phrases from his speech:
“The best hope for freedom in our land depends on expansion of freedom in other lands.”
I agree that elimination and/or reformation of tyrannical governments that support terrorism against the U.S. will prevent future 9-11 type attacks. Are you listening Iran and Syria?
“No one is fit to be a master and no one deserves to be a slave.”
Our Founding Fathers and the Great Emancipator would be proud, I think. I do believe that all people are equal in God’s eyes.
“Success in our relations [with other countries] will require decent treatment of their people.”
I hope that we’ll be leaning harder on Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, China, Egypt, and other countries in this regard when it comes to human rights abuses.
“There is no justice without freedom, and no human rights without human liberty.”
Put that in your hat and smoke it, you Amnesty International freaks, and remember it the next time you whine about alleged U.S. human rights abuses while ignoring those occurring in places like Sudan and North Korea.
“Liberty will come to those that love it.”
“The United States will not ignore your oppression, or make excuses for your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you.”
I think this was a message to the Iranian people that the U.S. will support their fight for freedom if they rise up against those nuke-crazy mullahs.
“To serve your people, you must learn to trust them.”
I think this line could be aimed at communist dictatorships like China, but also at socialistic Democrats with all of their nanny-state policies (e.g. San Fran Nan). Why not trust us to invest our social security dollars in 401k-type accounts or wisely spend our tax refunds? We’re not all imbeciles, you know.
“The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: ‘Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it.’”
Quoting Lincoln is always a good choice. I bet Saddam is wishing it weren’t so.
“Americans, at our best, value the life we see in one another, and must always remember that even the unwanted have worth.”
I think this line clearly applies to unborn babies. Really the only difference between my son, Preston, and a baby that has been aborted is that Preston was wanted. Their lives are both of value. I’m so sick of the pro-abortion (pro-choice) advocates always putting the value of woman’s life (and often her lifestyle) above that of the unborn baby.
And I especially loved the closing hymn, “God of Our Fathers, Whose Almighty Hand.” It must have sent the heads of Newdow and the ACLU spinning. Saying the word God to a fundy atheist like Newdow is like the Knights Who Say Nee saying “nee” over and over. I love it!
Thursday, January 13, 2005
PrestonWatch Part 3
Here's Preston (4 weeks old) chillin' with Daddy. He's already developed a taste for Sci-Fi, specifically Battlestar Galatica.
PrestonWatch Part 2
Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the cutest baby of all? I think we all know the answer to that question.
PrestonWatch Part 1
Darling, you look mah-velous! Here's a close-up of Preston at 4 weeks of age. I don't know what we'd do without that binky. He loves to chomp on everything, Mom especially. Ouch!
Friday, January 07, 2005
Thoughts on the Aftermath of the Tsunami: Wrath of God or Act of Nature?
I wasn’t able to blog immediately after the tsunami destruction. But the plight of those that died during the tsunami, and those left suffering in the aftermath has often been on my mind. Many people may look at his as a random act of nature, others may say that it was an act of God for one reason or another, while others may question “If there is a God, how could God allow so many people to suffer?” The question of how a benevolent God could allow or cause human suffering is an age-old question, and one that I’d like to address from the LDS perspective.
In LDS theology, we believe that before man came to earth there was a grand council in Heaven (see Pearl of Great Price, Abraham 3:22-28). We were all spirit children of God the Father. Jesus Christ and Lucifer (or Satan) were likewise spirit children of God, and therefore our brothers, but they were the most advanced or intelligent of them all. Jesus is termed the Beloved and Chosen of the Father, which I take to mean that he was the wisest, most intelligent, and most perfect of all His children. In the council, God told us that we would be sent to Earth to receive bodies of flesh and blood, and that it would be a testing period to see if we could learn how to become like God, and then return to His presence. Two plans were proposed. The first plan was God’s: we’d receive a body of flesh and blood on Earth, be tested, and then die.
Through acceptance of the sacrifice (or atonement) of Jesus Christ, the greatest of us all, we’d be able to return to the presence of God the Father. The atonement would be necessary because we are all imperfect beings, and would inevitably fall short of perfection through sin. The Fall of Adam in the Garden of Eden caused our bodies to be subject to both spiritual death (separation from God) and physical death (separation from our bodies). And because “no unclean thing can enter the kingdom of God (see Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 15:34),” we would need a method of atoning for or becoming clean from our sins. Through repentance and faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ, we become purified and are able to return to God’s presence. Some of us would be unable to return to God’s presence because of our own choices and failure to repent of our sins, but that would be up to us.
Christ’s atonement and subsequent resurrection also allows us to be resurrected as well, where our physical bodies are reunited with our spirits in an immortal state. The resurrection is supposed to take place when Christ returns to the Earth, with the righteous being resurrected first and the wicked (this means you Osama et al.!) being resurrected last. Immortality is a gift for everyone, but then we all will be judged according to our thoughts, words, and deeds, and then given a reward according to our judgment. This is pretty daunting stuff. I figure I’m a pretty average person, neither very good, nor very bad. Anyway, I’m getting off track.
Now Lucifer also had a plan and it was that everyone would return to God’s presence because none of us would sin. Lucifer would be the enforcer, and see to it that none of us ever made a mistake. We would have no agency to make decisions so we wouldn’t learn from our own mistakes, but we’d all be “happy” because we’d all return home having never sinned. Lucifer also wanted all of God’s glory for himself in return for his leadership (see Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:1). Jesus on the other hand said to his Father, “…thy will be done and the glory be thine forever (see Moses4:2).” Lucifer’s plan was rejected, and as a result he rebelled and became the devil, the “father of all lies,” who is dedicated to frustrating the plan of God (see Moses 4:3-4) i.e. tempting us to screw up so we can’t return to God. So anyway, a scripture sums all of this up as “…this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God… (see Book of Mormon, Alma 12:24)”
So getting back to the tsunami and other natural disasters, what is the purpose of such an event if there is any? Well, I don’t believe that God causes such disasters, but I think he does know when they will happen and permits them to occur. Why? I believe such events are part of living on a planet like Earth. I mean if you live on the coast, there’s a good chance that there may be a hurricane or a tsunami in your lifetime. You assume the risk by living there. In Texas (a.k.a. tornado alley), for example, it’s possible that our house may be obliterated by a tornado, but that’s the risk we take by living in Texas. We can’t stop tornados from occurring, but we can prepare by building a storm shelter and use technology to warn each other of impending tornados. In the case of the tsunami, many lives could have been saved if there had been a well-organized tsunami/earthquake warning system. Sadly, we humans do not have the gift of foresight and we often don’t implement such changes until after a major disaster has already occurred.
But the real question is how do we react to events such as the tsunami? Do we “curse God and die (see Job 2:9),” do we focus on saving ourselves or perhaps profiting from others’ distress, or do we exhibit Godly characteristics such as self-sacrifice (Greater love has no man, than he layeth down his life for his friends, John 15:13), charity, faith, and courage? Such trials bring out the noblest and the basest instincts in people, and I believe that God judges us on how we react to them. I think about all the wonderful people that are over there aiding the survivors of the tsunami, or those that have sent money and supplies to help out. Then I think about the looters, the child traffickers and the con artists posing as representative of charities.
Also, I do believe miracles occur in these modern times and during such catastrophes. The lives of many people were miraculously preserved, e.g. a man and a woman were each plucked from the ocean over a week after the tsunami struck and a child was found alone on a raft alive. Why were their lives preserved when others’ lives were not? It may be that the person’s faith in God helped them survive, or perhaps they were not religious people but God saw fit to extend their lives on earth for some unknown reason. I don’t think that the people who died were necessarily wicked while the ones that were saved were necessarily righteous. I believe God loves all of his children, even Osama Bin Laden. But he’s probably a big disappointment. He had the potential to do so much good with his wealth and position in life.
What would you do with your life if you had survived such a catastrophe when so many others had died? I’d like to think that I would try to live the rest of my life in a more charitable and spiritual manner.
In LDS theology, we believe that before man came to earth there was a grand council in Heaven (see Pearl of Great Price, Abraham 3:22-28). We were all spirit children of God the Father. Jesus Christ and Lucifer (or Satan) were likewise spirit children of God, and therefore our brothers, but they were the most advanced or intelligent of them all. Jesus is termed the Beloved and Chosen of the Father, which I take to mean that he was the wisest, most intelligent, and most perfect of all His children. In the council, God told us that we would be sent to Earth to receive bodies of flesh and blood, and that it would be a testing period to see if we could learn how to become like God, and then return to His presence. Two plans were proposed. The first plan was God’s: we’d receive a body of flesh and blood on Earth, be tested, and then die.
Through acceptance of the sacrifice (or atonement) of Jesus Christ, the greatest of us all, we’d be able to return to the presence of God the Father. The atonement would be necessary because we are all imperfect beings, and would inevitably fall short of perfection through sin. The Fall of Adam in the Garden of Eden caused our bodies to be subject to both spiritual death (separation from God) and physical death (separation from our bodies). And because “no unclean thing can enter the kingdom of God (see Book of Mormon, 1 Nephi 15:34),” we would need a method of atoning for or becoming clean from our sins. Through repentance and faith in the atonement of Jesus Christ, we become purified and are able to return to God’s presence. Some of us would be unable to return to God’s presence because of our own choices and failure to repent of our sins, but that would be up to us.
Christ’s atonement and subsequent resurrection also allows us to be resurrected as well, where our physical bodies are reunited with our spirits in an immortal state. The resurrection is supposed to take place when Christ returns to the Earth, with the righteous being resurrected first and the wicked (this means you Osama et al.!) being resurrected last. Immortality is a gift for everyone, but then we all will be judged according to our thoughts, words, and deeds, and then given a reward according to our judgment. This is pretty daunting stuff. I figure I’m a pretty average person, neither very good, nor very bad. Anyway, I’m getting off track.
Now Lucifer also had a plan and it was that everyone would return to God’s presence because none of us would sin. Lucifer would be the enforcer, and see to it that none of us ever made a mistake. We would have no agency to make decisions so we wouldn’t learn from our own mistakes, but we’d all be “happy” because we’d all return home having never sinned. Lucifer also wanted all of God’s glory for himself in return for his leadership (see Pearl of Great Price, Moses 4:1). Jesus on the other hand said to his Father, “…thy will be done and the glory be thine forever (see Moses4:2).” Lucifer’s plan was rejected, and as a result he rebelled and became the devil, the “father of all lies,” who is dedicated to frustrating the plan of God (see Moses 4:3-4) i.e. tempting us to screw up so we can’t return to God. So anyway, a scripture sums all of this up as “…this life became a probationary state; a time to prepare to meet God… (see Book of Mormon, Alma 12:24)”
So getting back to the tsunami and other natural disasters, what is the purpose of such an event if there is any? Well, I don’t believe that God causes such disasters, but I think he does know when they will happen and permits them to occur. Why? I believe such events are part of living on a planet like Earth. I mean if you live on the coast, there’s a good chance that there may be a hurricane or a tsunami in your lifetime. You assume the risk by living there. In Texas (a.k.a. tornado alley), for example, it’s possible that our house may be obliterated by a tornado, but that’s the risk we take by living in Texas. We can’t stop tornados from occurring, but we can prepare by building a storm shelter and use technology to warn each other of impending tornados. In the case of the tsunami, many lives could have been saved if there had been a well-organized tsunami/earthquake warning system. Sadly, we humans do not have the gift of foresight and we often don’t implement such changes until after a major disaster has already occurred.
But the real question is how do we react to events such as the tsunami? Do we “curse God and die (see Job 2:9),” do we focus on saving ourselves or perhaps profiting from others’ distress, or do we exhibit Godly characteristics such as self-sacrifice (Greater love has no man, than he layeth down his life for his friends, John 15:13), charity, faith, and courage? Such trials bring out the noblest and the basest instincts in people, and I believe that God judges us on how we react to them. I think about all the wonderful people that are over there aiding the survivors of the tsunami, or those that have sent money and supplies to help out. Then I think about the looters, the child traffickers and the con artists posing as representative of charities.
Also, I do believe miracles occur in these modern times and during such catastrophes. The lives of many people were miraculously preserved, e.g. a man and a woman were each plucked from the ocean over a week after the tsunami struck and a child was found alone on a raft alive. Why were their lives preserved when others’ lives were not? It may be that the person’s faith in God helped them survive, or perhaps they were not religious people but God saw fit to extend their lives on earth for some unknown reason. I don’t think that the people who died were necessarily wicked while the ones that were saved were necessarily righteous. I believe God loves all of his children, even Osama Bin Laden. But he’s probably a big disappointment. He had the potential to do so much good with his wealth and position in life.
What would you do with your life if you had survived such a catastrophe when so many others had died? I’d like to think that I would try to live the rest of my life in a more charitable and spiritual manner.
Thursday, January 06, 2005
Democrat Congressional Whiners Can't MoveOn
Unbelievable! I was so disappointed that I missed blogging the 2004 election, and then I see that the Democrats are continuing their suicidal shenanigans. Earth to Senator Boxer et al., you lost! Get over it! I think most Americans will see this move by the Dems for what it is: sour grapes. They can protest all they want about how it's about protecting democracy and the electoral process. Right. Sure. Nobody likes a sore loser.
I was so relieved when I learned that President Bush had won his second term in office. To me, the vote confirmed that the majority of Americans decided to reject the baby-boomer/hippie mentality of "blame America first." We said "no" to the debasement of our soldiers by "peace" protestors, "no" to moral relativity, and "no" to scraping and bowing to the corrupt and inept U.N. The sooner the Democrats get the message, the sooner they can reform their party into a worthy opponent for the Republicans. I don't want the Republicans running everything. A one-party system would be detrimental to our country's progress. But the Dems seem intent on running their party into the ground. How else to explain Howard Dean's probable selection as the DNC chairman, and now this?
I was so relieved when I learned that President Bush had won his second term in office. To me, the vote confirmed that the majority of Americans decided to reject the baby-boomer/hippie mentality of "blame America first." We said "no" to the debasement of our soldiers by "peace" protestors, "no" to moral relativity, and "no" to scraping and bowing to the corrupt and inept U.N. The sooner the Democrats get the message, the sooner they can reform their party into a worthy opponent for the Republicans. I don't want the Republicans running everything. A one-party system would be detrimental to our country's progress. But the Dems seem intent on running their party into the ground. How else to explain Howard Dean's probable selection as the DNC chairman, and now this?
Wednesday, January 05, 2005
101 Uses For Science Magazine
#82 Diaper-changing pad
#43 Sleep-inducing device (when read to small child in soothing tones with low lighting)
Now that my schedule has somewhat stabilized, I'm attempting to blog regularly now. I'm bringing back this feature, as well as the Friday Science Round-up. I removed my email address from this page because I was getting a ton of spam. Feel free to leave suggestions or notes in the comments and I'll do my best to respond.
#43 Sleep-inducing device (when read to small child in soothing tones with low lighting)
Now that my schedule has somewhat stabilized, I'm attempting to blog regularly now. I'm bringing back this feature, as well as the Friday Science Round-up. I removed my email address from this page because I was getting a ton of spam. Feel free to leave suggestions or notes in the comments and I'll do my best to respond.
Cute Picture Alert!
Here's a picture of our son Preston at 8 days of age. Aw, isn't he cute? We can't decide who he looks like more, but he definitely has my highly intelligent-looking forehead. I'm still trying to get the hang of using our new-fangled digital camera, but I'll definitely be posting more pics of Preston as he grows for your cute baby-viewing pleasure.
Thursday, December 30, 2004
An Early Christmas Gift
Well, gentle readers, a lot has happened since last I posted. Christmas is over, all of my family has departed, and I finally have some time to update my blog. The big news is that I gave birth to our son Preston Roy Hahn on December 14th, 2004. He weighed in at 8 lbs. 8.6 oz and measured 22 inches in length. He’s a tall and lanky child, just like his parents.
The delivery was no picnic, I tell you. My due date was Saturday, December 11th, but it came and went with nary a labor pain. My OB didn’t want me going more than a week past my due date, so she scheduled me for an induction on Tuesday, December 14th. In retrospect, I’m thankful for that, because Preston would have been even larger a week later! My mom had flown down from Utah for the birth, so she went with us to the hospital that morning. We got there at 6:30 a.m. and about an hour later, I started having labor contractions on my own, but I was still given a small dose of pitocin to speed things along. The early labor contractions were surprising mild. I didn’t feel much unless I laid on my back. I thought, “No problem. This isn’t going to be so bad.” WRONG!
I had planned with my OB to have an epidural, but it turned out that the anesthesiologist on duty that day wouldn’t touch me with a ten-foot pole because I had had a spinal fusion five years earlier at the L4/5 level (which is where the epidural is typically inserted). I had been assured by my OB and the nurse in my childbirth class that it wouldn’t be a problem to insert the epidural at one level higher, L3/4. I was a little nervous about getting an epidural because I don’t like needles being stuck into my back. My spine had been poked and prodded with needles for several years while the docs tried to treat my back problems with little success. Anyway, the anesthesiologist heard the phrase “back surgery” and decided he didn’t want to be sued if my back started acting up after the procedure. So I was forced to give birth without any pain relief and I had not prepared at all for a natural birth. What fun!
The OB broke my water at 1 p.m. and about two hours later at 3:08 p.m., Preston emerged into the blinding lights of this world. It was the most painful experience of my life, but mercifully the labor was very short. My OB didn’t expect me to progress so quickly and had gone back to her clinic in a neighboring building. She literally had to run from her clinic to my delivery room to be there in time for the delivery. While we were waiting for her, the nurse kept saying, “Don’t push!” and I was yelling, “I can’t help it!” It was beyond my control at that point as my involuntary uterus muscles just took over. My husband said he and the nurse were getting awfully nervous waiting for the OB, and thought that they might be the ones delivering Preston.
Anyway, Preston was delivered very quickly and I got to hold him briefly before he was whisked away by the nurses for tests. We didn’t get to see him again for several hours, and then I got to breastfeed him for the first time. Breastfeeding seemed alien to me at first—my own body providing food for another human being--but once I got the hang of it, it seemed totally natural.
My husband was a real help to me throughout the delivery. He comforted me and appeared calm and cool the whole time, even though I know inside he was thinking “Oh my heck! What do I do now?!” He was very angry at the anesthesiologist, and kept muttering something about punching his lights out if he ever ran into him. It’s so cute when your significant other is so protective of you.
Preston is the most adorable baby boy ever (isn’t that what every parent thinks?), and he’s a relatively calm baby. It’s been exhausting learning how to care for him, but I’ve enjoyed every moment of it and I’ve never felt happier. I think graduate school has helped prepare me for motherhood in several ways. It helped my organizational and multi-tasking skills considerably. A daily “To Do” list is indispensable, and I set up a regular feeding schedule so I feed him every 3 hours during the day and 4 hours at night. I feel pretty tired most days, but I’m having a blast finally being able to be “domestic” instead of analytical all day long. I must admit, though, that sometimes I read articles from Science magazine to Preston at bedtime. They put him right to sleep every time, and I get to keep up on the latest scientific discoveries. Now this is the life!
The delivery was no picnic, I tell you. My due date was Saturday, December 11th, but it came and went with nary a labor pain. My OB didn’t want me going more than a week past my due date, so she scheduled me for an induction on Tuesday, December 14th. In retrospect, I’m thankful for that, because Preston would have been even larger a week later! My mom had flown down from Utah for the birth, so she went with us to the hospital that morning. We got there at 6:30 a.m. and about an hour later, I started having labor contractions on my own, but I was still given a small dose of pitocin to speed things along. The early labor contractions were surprising mild. I didn’t feel much unless I laid on my back. I thought, “No problem. This isn’t going to be so bad.” WRONG!
I had planned with my OB to have an epidural, but it turned out that the anesthesiologist on duty that day wouldn’t touch me with a ten-foot pole because I had had a spinal fusion five years earlier at the L4/5 level (which is where the epidural is typically inserted). I had been assured by my OB and the nurse in my childbirth class that it wouldn’t be a problem to insert the epidural at one level higher, L3/4. I was a little nervous about getting an epidural because I don’t like needles being stuck into my back. My spine had been poked and prodded with needles for several years while the docs tried to treat my back problems with little success. Anyway, the anesthesiologist heard the phrase “back surgery” and decided he didn’t want to be sued if my back started acting up after the procedure. So I was forced to give birth without any pain relief and I had not prepared at all for a natural birth. What fun!
The OB broke my water at 1 p.m. and about two hours later at 3:08 p.m., Preston emerged into the blinding lights of this world. It was the most painful experience of my life, but mercifully the labor was very short. My OB didn’t expect me to progress so quickly and had gone back to her clinic in a neighboring building. She literally had to run from her clinic to my delivery room to be there in time for the delivery. While we were waiting for her, the nurse kept saying, “Don’t push!” and I was yelling, “I can’t help it!” It was beyond my control at that point as my involuntary uterus muscles just took over. My husband said he and the nurse were getting awfully nervous waiting for the OB, and thought that they might be the ones delivering Preston.
Anyway, Preston was delivered very quickly and I got to hold him briefly before he was whisked away by the nurses for tests. We didn’t get to see him again for several hours, and then I got to breastfeed him for the first time. Breastfeeding seemed alien to me at first—my own body providing food for another human being--but once I got the hang of it, it seemed totally natural.
My husband was a real help to me throughout the delivery. He comforted me and appeared calm and cool the whole time, even though I know inside he was thinking “Oh my heck! What do I do now?!” He was very angry at the anesthesiologist, and kept muttering something about punching his lights out if he ever ran into him. It’s so cute when your significant other is so protective of you.
Preston is the most adorable baby boy ever (isn’t that what every parent thinks?), and he’s a relatively calm baby. It’s been exhausting learning how to care for him, but I’ve enjoyed every moment of it and I’ve never felt happier. I think graduate school has helped prepare me for motherhood in several ways. It helped my organizational and multi-tasking skills considerably. A daily “To Do” list is indispensable, and I set up a regular feeding schedule so I feed him every 3 hours during the day and 4 hours at night. I feel pretty tired most days, but I’m having a blast finally being able to be “domestic” instead of analytical all day long. I must admit, though, that sometimes I read articles from Science magazine to Preston at bedtime. They put him right to sleep every time, and I get to keep up on the latest scientific discoveries. Now this is the life!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
