Doc's - Is this safe?

quote:

Originally posted by Rasher:
I am absolutely astonished that you haven't all sent the men in white coats around, but are actually backing me up here.
Thanks guys.

I'm not saying you aren't nuts , just in our line of work, this is nothing to the people who will shell out $300 per month for this weeks greatest "natural" remedy but baulk at paying $60 per 6 months for an anti-hypertensive that will prevent them having strokes, heart attacks and kidney failure. Like I said, your are not really mad, just quaint and harmless by our standards

Keith

quote:

I am absolutely astonished that you haven't all sent the men in white coats around, but are actually backing me up here.

Rasher,

If it were up to me....

Cheers,

JR

Just a harmless loony, eh?!
Over the weekend, this has been sort of getting a response.
I have stuck to two Brian Eno ambient albums that have no drums, but are just gentle piano and kind of floaty, if you know what I mean. We have put then on for one run through each day. Sunday, yesterday evening, we hadn't heard from her all day, but after a busy day (my little girls 7th Birhday party) and settling down and putting Brian on, immediately she woke up and started moving about. After the second CD she was asleep again.
This is further madness, but bear with me and remember that having started this I might as well go all the way. In order that this isn't just a one way thing going on here, I'm listening to these albums every day myself at work as part of my afternoon chill out, as these tend to be my most productive times. I thought it important to be listening to the same thing, so that there is some sort of connection & tuning-in going on with her. With this sort of music, it's quite easy to imagine the state that this little girl is in.
I am curious about the way the unborn baby quantifies and understands with the few senses that it has, and watching my kids grow, I am always amazed at the things they pick up and the language they use. When my little girl first used a computer mouse for instance, I noticed that she used it without looking at it, but looking at the screen. I would have guessed that anybody doing anything for the first time would look at whatever it is they are physically connected to, but again, my little 2 year old boy never looked at his feet when he first tried to walk.
I know a lot of this is what is written off as instinct, walking, talking, breathing, swallowing, chewing; but I would really like to understand it more.
To think that my 7 year old acts like a teenager, reads Famous Five books in bed on her own before she puts out the light, talks, acts and behaves like a mini adult; and all this is learnt in 7 years. That is one hell of a quantity of stuff to learn, and all at once, starting off as a baby. I doubt if an adult could gain so much knowledge in 7 years; so how is it done?
I want to understand more of what Bruce is talking about here. We like to pride ourselves that we are in charge and responsible for our childrens successes, but I'm not so sure that we are. I think they need to be respected as individuals even from babies.

That computer mouse thing reminds me of when I tried to teach my mother to use a computer, and she couldn't use a mouse without looking at it, yet my daughter didn't.
My guess is that this is usual.

quote:

I want to understand more of what Bruce is talking about here.

Last note and then I have some work to do.
My guess is that we shouldn't assume that the unborn baby uses its senses in the same way that we do, because they have no point of reference, but something of the learning process is going on already. There is another sense at work here that obviously diminishes through childhood and is eventually lost. There is a bond and a telepathic connection. There has to be. I can't see how it could work otherwise.

quote:

Originally posted by Rasher:
I want to understand more of what Bruce is talking about here. We like to pride ourselves that we are in charge and responsible for our childrens successes, but I'm not so sure that we are. I think they need to be respected as individuals even from babies.

Absolutely.

If we take an aspect such as the development of movement we can see that each child has its own way of developing. Some babies learn to crawl, others 'bum-shuffle', yet others shuffle sideways. Amazingly, they all emerge from this process walking upright.

However, look at the differences in posture and movement between any two adult individuals. You could take a cat in England and a cat in China and not be able to distinguish between the way they walk or move. However, of millions of humans you could probably recognize a friend from 100 yards away by his individual patterns of movement and posture. This can only be because of the huge differences in the way that any two children develop.

I suspect that one of the reasons for the individuality of both babies and adults is the incredible and varied apprenticeship that our species serves as a result of being bipedal.

Incidentally, telepathy is a fact of life. Different people have it to different degrees and it's no big deal. I wouldn't say that it's eventually lost. The same is true of 'healing' (ref. the prayer research post).

Just some thoughts. 'IMO' and usual disclaimers apply.

Regards
Steve M

I'm interested in your thoughts Steve, because I know that your views on certain things differ from mine. But I think that my approach to this little girl is different this time because of the very odd way that she came about.
Loving my children was never immediate, and I'm not worried about saying that. I think people who claim to love their child the minute it's born are either kidding themselves or have a different definition of Love. I don't think in this instance that that will change, but maybe I might just slightly have some connection earlier.

quote:

Originally posted by Bruce Woodhouse:
As a non-parent I don't, I just think you are utterly daft.

ANYONE considering having kids is daft (seriously, just kidding - each to their own - I couldn't eat a whole one!).

Anyway, back on topic... My sister-in-law's had four rugrats, and ALL of them responded to music in the womb (she's a music teacher, and my brother USED to play lots of CD/vinyl - neither of them have time now it seems). They listen to mainly mellower stuff (Simon and Garfunkel, Black, Alison Moyet etc) and all four kids are decent and well turned out (though the oldest, Chris, is slowly being corrupted via punk and metal, courtesy of his dodgy uncle - he he he...)

I'm CONVINCED I heard Cockney Rebel's "Come up and see me" in the womb, as it would have been out as radio promos etc the month/year I was born. The first time I heard it post-birth (and every time I hear it pretty much, even now) I get this amazing warm comforting rush on the instrumental bit - I can only assume therefore that I heard it in the womb.

Most of my early life (up to about 18 months) is blocked out, due to a pretty traumatic first few months (fostering, adoption, only being handled for changing nappies - this last probably explains why I'm fiercely independent, have a fierce temper, and hate phsyical contact), so I can rule out hearing it in that period (my foster mum only plays hymns...), and my parents were NEVER cool enough to own it (and their turntable was awful too - bad system for even worse music!).

I reckon low-level headphones-on-bump would be fine - if I ever change my stance on kids (it's a genetic disability thing) I'm going to find a really obscure track and test my theory out (by playing said obscure track when the "yoof" is a mid teenager) and see what happens...

Do you really think that your memories of your first 18 months is missing due to trauma?
You're one crazy MF sometimes Dom.
Go on then...suggest a track for me.

quote:

Originally posted by Rasher:

Go on then...suggest a track for me.

My wife has a (the?) Plastic Bertrand album on vinyl. I am sure that she would be quite happy to send it overseas for you to try...