ON FOSTERING A BABY-LOVING SOCIETY
From My News - Home
MY PAPER MONDAY JULY 14, 2008
ESTHER AU YONG
AS a newlywed, there is one question that keeps coming my way.
The ubiquitous “So, when are you having kids?”
Or this: “How many children are you planning to have?”
What I actually hear is this, really: “Are you willing to give up your career to have kids?”
This is the issue I’ve grappled with since my relationship with my husband (then boyfriend) became more serious about two years ago.
He has known since he was a teen that he wanted children of his own.
I, on the other hand, have always been sitting on the fence.
It’s not because of the fear of pregnancy – the pain involved during delivery and the nine months’ long “suffering” – or the realities and hardship of bringing up children.
I’m quite confident that somehow – with lots of help from my spouse and our parents – I’ll get through those stages. And I’ll very likely enjoy them too.
After all, despite my reservations, I do firmly believe that children are blessings from God.
It’s also not the cost of bringing up children, which I’m sure through perseverance and resourcefulness, we’ll manage.
I’m also grateful that the Government has recognised the financial strain placed on many families, who choose to have children, by offering timely relief, like the baby bonus and other subsidies.
Just last week, Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew hinted that even more may be done to foster a pro-family environment.
So, the truth of the matter is this: I’m afraid I will hate my children if they get in the way of me achieving my personal goals, especially those on my career path.
Let’s face it,
A female finance manager, 29, summed the situation up in a local newspaper last week: “With three months’ maternity leave, morning sickness and numerous medical certificates, a mum will be less productive than a peer who is free of the above.”
Besides, mothers are seen as traditional caregivers. No matter how willing their husbands are to stay at home, society still dictates that mothering is a woman’s responsibility.
That’s why the challenge for working mothers here is a cultural one.
Even in
I do think that the Government should take the initiative and help in educating local companies and bosses to be more open and receptive to high-flying working mums.
Still, society in general needs to change its values to a set that’s more balanced. I may be naive, but I’m sure with the right support, the career woman and the loving mummy can co-exist.
And I hope this co-existence can materialise before my fertile years run out.
myp@sph.com.sg
From My Say
MY PAPER FRIDAY JULY 11, 2008
RECENTLY, there has been a road safety campaign with advertisements featuring pedestrians of various age groups appealing to motorists to look out for them on the road.
I think the campaign is sending the wrong message to pedestrians.
While one of the major responsibilities of a motorist is to look out for pedestrians, the pedestrians should also be responsible for their own safety – they should look out for vehicles too.
I have seen many pedestrians crossing roads or walking in carparks while talking on their mobile phones without looking out for vehicles.
They take for granted that the cars will stop to let them cross. They do not consider the fact that their actions could force vehicles to brake suddenly.
Once, my brother was driving along a narrow side road when he spotted a mother pushing a stroller standing in the middle of the road, gesturing for her toddler, who was still on the pedestrian pavement, to join her in crossing the road.
My brother sounded the horn but was ignored. He had to stop his vehicle, thereby causing a minor traffic jam, before he could proceed.
I often see pedestrians who, despite seeing oncoming vehicles, still dash across the road. They might save a few minutes, but do so at the risk of injuring themselves and other road users.
Perhaps we could consider having a campaign featuring motorists appealing for pedestrians to look out for vehicles too.
Ms Yuen Mei Peng
From My Lifestyle
MY PAPER WEDNESDAY JULY 9, 2008
The study involving 1,685 middle-aged men and women over six months found those who kept such a diary just about every day lost about twice as much weight as those who did not.
The findings buttressed earlier research that endorsed the value of food diaries in helping people lose weight.
Companies including Weight Watchers International Inc use food diaries in their weight-loss programmes.
“For those who are working on weight loss, just writing down everything you eat is a pretty powerful technique,” Dr Victor Stevens of Kaiser Permanente’s Center for Health Research in
“It helps the participants see where the extra calories are coming from, and then develop more specific plans to deal with those situations,” said Dr Stevens, who helped lead the study published in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine.
The technique also helps hold dieters accountable for what they are eating, Dr Stevens said.
The study involved people from four
The average age of people in the study was 55.
– REUTERS
From Parent Resources, msn Encarta online
Raise your hand if you've heard that listening to Mozart can make kids smarter.
Okay, you can put your hand down now. You look a little silly waving it in the air like that. And while we're on the topic of silly things, let's talk about that "Mozart effect."
Much ado has been made about the magic of the boy-genius musician, so it's understandable that so many of us believe his brilliance can somehow buff our children's brains, centuries after his death.
Books have been written in support of this idea. A popular line of Baby Mozart videos for infants is now on many a baby-registry list. And former
The problem is, there is no Mozart effect.
Since it was first publicized over a decade ago, scientists have deflated claims that classical music boosts brainpower.
Despite that, belief in the Mozart effect is stronger than ever--or so concluded a pair of professors at
So what happened? And does music make kids smarter at all? Is it worth buying those Baby Mozart videos, just in case?
Here's where the Mozart madness began. In 1993, the journal Nature published an article by scientists at the University of California-Irvine. In their experiment, students listened to a Mozart sonata, a relaxation tape, or nothing at all for ten minutes, and then took a spatial reasoning test.
The students who listened to Mozart scored highest, an effect that lasted for 10 or 15 minutes. The researchers concluded that Mozart's music had helped. (Some later pointed out the possibility that Mozart's effect was neutral, but relaxation tapes and silence hurt the students' performance.)
From this study arose the Myth of Mozart. And it grew from there. Even though the original test had nothing to do with babies or small children, the idea stuck in the craw of our collective consciousness.
The Stanford researchers noted the media latched on to that particular Nature report more than any others published around the same time. And as it swirled around the media, people started talking about the effect on babies' intelligence, even though no research made these links.
And even after a 1999 review showed that 12 subsequent studies had failed to verify the famous 1993 one, people still believed in the magic of Mozart.
It's understandable. We all want our kids to be smart--and if something as easy as popping in a CD makes a difference, well, super!
What's more, classical music isn't as palatable to many people of parenting age as, say, the Red Hot Chili Peppers or Cake. Like spinach, it has to be good for you, right? What's more, old people listen to it!
The moral of this story: Kids should listen to classical music if they like it. But it won't make them smarter. Unless ...
That's right. There's a catch. In a
So you don't have to turn your back on Mozart, after all. Kids just have to work hard to learn to play or sing his music for it to actually boost their little brains.
The students who listened to Mozart scored highest, an effect that lasted for 10 or 15 minutes. The researchers concluded that Mozart's music had helped. (Some later pointed out the possibility that Mozart's effect was neutral, but relaxation tapes and silence hurt the students' performance.)
From this study arose the Myth of Mozart. And it grew from there. Even though the original test had nothing to do with babies or small children, the idea stuck in the craw of our collective consciousness.
The Stanford researchers noted the media latched on to that particular Nature report more than any others published around the same time. And as it swirled around the media, people started talking about the effect on babies' intelligence, even though no research made these links.
And even after a 1999 review showed that 12 subsequent studies had failed to verify the famous 1993 one, people still believed in the magic of Mozart.
It's understandable. We all want our kids to be smart--and if something as easy as popping in a CD makes a difference, well, super!
What's more, classical music isn't as palatable to many people of parenting age as, say, the Red Hot Chili Peppers or Cake. Like spinach, it has to be good for you, right? What's more, old people listen to it!
The moral of this story: Kids should listen to classical music if they like it. But it won't make them smarter. Unless ...
That's right. There's a catch. In a
So you don't have to turn your back on Mozart, after all. Kids just have to work hard to learn to play or sing his music for it to actually boost their little brains.
Martha Brockenbrough lives, writes, and plays in
Learn More! Also from Martha:
MY PAPER WEDNESDAY JULY 9, 2008
DARYLL NANAYAKARA
IS IT an apple or a guava? The mystery behind a fruit being sold at a supermarket in the east has been solved.
Dr Eng Chon Boon, 32, a molecular biologist with the National University of Singapore (NUS), spotted the queer-looking fruit – which resembles an apple – at a Sheng Siong outlet in Haig Road on Monday morning.
He said the fruit was labelled “Sweet Thailand Guava”. Puzzled by the origins and possible health hazards of the fruit, Dr Eng snapped a few pictures of it and e-mailed them to citizen journalism website Stomp.
The fruit in question is actually preserved guava.
However, unlike preserved guava sold in packets, this one is peeled, sculpted and coloured to resemble an apple. It is being sold at $3 for a pack of two fruits.
Dr Eng, who is a cancer researcher at the university, had also seen the fruit last May when he was at a night market in Kuala Lumpur.
He said: “There they were being sold as ‘guava-apples’ and it was quite tasty.”
He and his wife sampled a few bites of the fruit, which were priced at RM6 (S$2.51) for a pair, before buying a pack.
However, upon reaching home, his wife discovered that the “guava- apples” were, in fact, normal guavas which had been shaped and coloured to look like apples.
Dr Eng added that the colouring washed off when his wife rinsed the fruits under the tap.
Dr Eng decided to write in to Stomp after he saw that it is also being sold in Singapore as he is worried about the safety of the dyes used.
A check with the Agri-Food & Veterinary Authority (AVA) showed that the product is safe for consumption.
It explained that the colourings used – Brilliant Blue and Tartrazine – are both permitted food dyes.
A spokesman for Sheng Siong said that the company which supplied them the product had obtained “clearance from AVA in writing” to sell the fruits in Singapore.
darylldj@sph.com.sg
From MyLifestyle
MY PAPER TUESDAY JULY 8, 2008
COUPLES trying to have a baby when the man is over 40 will have more difficulty conceiving than if he is younger, French researchers said on Sunday.
Doctors know a woman’s age plays a key role but the findings presented at the European Society Of Human Reproduction And Embryology Conference suggest the paternal impact is stronger than earlier thought, Dr Stephanie Belloc and colleagues said.
The data shows a strong paternal effect on intrauterine insemination (IUI) outcome on pregnancy rates and also on miscarriage rates, Dr Belloc and her team from the Eylau Centre For Assisted Reproduction in France said.
Other researchers have indicated an overall decline in sperm counts and quality as a man ages, but until now there has been little clinical proof that simply being an older man has such a big effect on fertility.
The French team found that the risk of miscarriage was about 35 per cent higher for couples in which the man was past 40. The risk from a man younger than 30 is about 10 to 15 per cent.
The researchers said the link between a man’s age and DNA decay in sperm that causes it to fragment could be a likely explanation for miscarriages and low pregnancy rates.
“Until now, gynaecologists only focused on maternal age,” Dr Belloc added.
“But now the gynaecologists must also focus on paternal age and give this information to the couple.”
– REUTERS
