Weaning the Bear

I wanted to wait until we'd actually finished our weaning process, and then give it a little time to see how things went for the next few weeks as well...but I promised I'd report on how weaning went so here it is. ☺

I mentioned at the time that I did not make the decision to wean hastily. I had already been working on night-weaning (on and off) for several months, and I took the time to talk with other mothers who had weaned children of this age, as well as with mothers who had tandem nursed toddlers and newborns. It was around the first of May that I made the firm decision to wean.

Here is what we did:

PHASE ONE
We chose a date near the end of the month (the day we were leaving on the ferry) and started prepping him for it. "You are a very big boy, and I know you love nursing, but you don't need it." "When we drive the car onto the big boat and go away on the big boat then we won't have nanu anymore."
I cut out all nursing except naptime and bedtime. We had mostly done this previously, but for the times when he did ask, I worked on distracting him--offering him other food or drinks, finding a toy, etc.
Next, I cut the nap and bedtime nursing sessions to 5 minutes. Yes, I watched on my watch. I told him that we could just have a little bit of nanu, and I gave him a "one minute warning" as we were getting to the end. We did this for about a week. In the meantime I became a stickler about the night-weaning...as I said we'd worked on it before, but I started wearing a bra to bed again so he couldn't nurse without waking me--and it worked to help me wake up enough to remember that I'd rather hold a sad baby for a little while than have him keep nursing...
It was in the first couple of days of this phase that I did have some engorgement (ie, being full of milk because he wasn't nursing it out) but that was one day of discomfort and then my body adjusted to the lowered production.
As we cut back on the nursing, we made sure that other things were part of the bedtime routine--brushing teeth, saying prayers, a story, a song, some snuggles...I'd been doing this somewhat before, but I was more diligent about it as I started really focusing on cutting out the nursing.
This all lasted for about a week.

PHASE TWO
I cut the bed/naptime nursing to 2 minutes (again, by my watch) and did that for about another week...maybe 4-5 days.
We also concluded night-weaning in this phase.
I did notice at this point that as I nursed him less, I became less tolerant of it as well. Tender breasts has always been a pregnancy symptom of mine and I had feared that it might affect him nursing, but in the early months I rarely noticed tenderness when he nursed. As my body got less familiar with the sensation though, it got more sensitive to it I guess. So as I shortened the nursing times I told him--very honestly--that the nurns hurt and we could only nurse for a very short time. He was not excited about this, but was concerned about my pain (he kissed the nurns a few times) and didn't really complain about the changes.
I did notice this week that his appetite really increased. I'd noticed it a little before, but especially with the night-weaning finalized he started eating really big breakfasts (I guess he'd been nursing more in the night than I'd realized!)

PHASE THREE
I stopped the naptime nursings--I cheated a lot by putting him to bed with movies this week, but hey, it worked. I also cut the bedtime nursing to 1 minute by the clock. He often would tell me that he wanted some more, or that he "needed da nanu." I told him that the nanu hurt, and that I knew he loved it, but he didn't need it. Then I'd cuddle him and sing to him all the more.
Again, 4-5 days for this phase.

By the time we reached Weaning Day, he was not nursing anytime except bedtime, and then only for (literally) a minute. He usually needed snuggles for quite a while to get to sleep, but he was not nursing, which was the goal. He had gone to sleep for several naps (and even a couple of bedtimes) without nursing and even without mommy--usually thanks to movies but sometimes with daddy cuddles instead.
The ferry departed Pelican around 4pm, and it arrived in Juneau late, so I wanted to be sure that Bear had a good nap. Knowing that we would not have night-nursing that night, I did nurse him down for that nap. Being the last time, I let him nurse as long as he wanted (he only nursed about 10 minutes before he conked out).

AFTERWARDS
For the first couple of weeks he frequently asked to "just hold dem," which I allowed if we were cuddled in the bed, and he periodically tried to sneak little sucks when he thought I wasn't looking, which I did not allow. Ironically it was 4 days after W-Day that he woke up in the middle of the night barfing, and so I allowed him to nurse again a bit that night because I know that nothing is as good for a sick tummy as some good mama milk. By morning though he was ok and we resumed our weaned status.
After about a month I started discouraging the "holding dem" thing even in bed. He became quite the master of sneaking a hand into my shirt to hold them anyway, and expressed annoyance and frustration when I pulled his hand back out. I started taking preventative measures (mostly just putting my hand in the way) to ensure that he wouldn't reach in for them anymore.

So where are we now? He's not nursing, my milk finally dried up (it took a month or so), and he only tries to reach into my shirt occasionally. He doesn't talk to me about the act of nursing, although he does talk about "da nurns" in reference to the anatomical parts. In the tub he pointed out his own nurns and was thoroughly amused by them. Since little brother will be coming in only about 3 months, I'm going to start occasionally mentioning that babies nurse...we continue to celebrate how big Bear is, so I don't think he'll confuse himself with the baby in that regard, and I hope he won't be jealous, but who knows. I guess we shall just have to see!

Monday Answers--Dealing with Direct Disobedience

You know the kind...where you say "Johnny come here" and he gives you an evil look, shouts "no" and runs the other way. I'm not talking about when they forget to follow through, or didn't understand the request or were not capable of doing the thing properly...we're talking about wilful, intentional, disobedience.

My question: how do you handle direct disobedience? My 2-year-old sometimes completely ignores me, and then I don't know what to do, and i find myself raising my voice. Sometimes the situation is urgent as I have my hands full with my newborn at that moment, and I really need my toddler to do something, and at that moment she choses not to do it ! Normally she does her best to cooperate, but there are these moments when she wants to see what happens when she won't do what's asked of her...

This is a really hard question, and I don't know if I have a satisfactory answer. (I would love to hear comments from others who have ideas about this too!)
When I was a kid we got spanked for this, and considering that "obedience is the first law of heaven" I never felt like that was inappropriate. A hefty punishment for a hefty crime, right? But as I've written here, I no longer believe in spanking, so that means I need some other solution.

My current approach has several parts, and is different for children who are at different ages.

First of all (for kids of any age) I try to avoid the problem in the first place.

• I try not ask them to do things that are not important. If it's merely annoying to me rather than an actual danger to them, then I try to get over myself and let it go.
• I try to avoid problems in the first place by child-proofing my house and that sort of thing. When kids do get into things that they shouldn't, I try to use distraction to re-direct them into more appropriate activities.
• If possible, I try to make requests rather than give commands--simply asking nicely "will you set the table" or "please get ready for your bath" not only gives a good example to our children of how to treat people, but it also tends to make them more willing to comply. After all, don't you find it easier to do something when you're asked nicely?!
• If they don't respond the first time, I ask nicely again, but add their name to make sure they have heard me and to give it a little urgency: "Wolf! would you please set the table now, we are eating in 5 minutes and it needs to be done."

When I do need to give a command (which happens in cases where there is imminent danger, or where asking nicely didn't work), and when they don't heed my command, then my response varies depending on the age of the child.

• With a toddler, I basically help them comply. "Bear, please come here" is followed by "Bear, come to mommy now" and then I go to him, take him by the hand or arm, and bring him to where I had been. As I do so I explain that when mommy asks you to do something, you need to do it, and that I will help him learn how. Obviously when they get older (old enough to run away fast enough to avoid capture for example) then this doesn't work anymore...but thus far it seems helpful for helping him learn the concept in the first place. Is it really inconvenient for me sometimes? Sure. I've wakened the sleeping baby in my lap or had to step away from conversations in order to go help my child do what I had asked of them, but I think obedience is an important thing so I think it's worth it.
• With an older child it gets harder. In cases where I can still help them comply, I often do, but obviously physical force becomes an impossibility (and not a very respectful practice anyway) so mostly I end up trying to help them develop their own motivation for obedience. I try to help them understand why it's important to obey. I remind them that I try very hard to only ask things that are important, and then ask them to try very hard to obey when I do ask something. I empathise with how frustrating it can be to do something you don't want to have to do. I explain how I feel when they disrespect me by ignoring something I've asked of them. I remind them about what the scriptures and prophets teach about the importance of obedience. Depending on the age and personality of the child, we may discuss what the scriptures say about punishments for disobedience (Wolf is in an age of wanting to know exactly what God says he'll do if you don't follow this rule or that one). I remind myself that my goal is not to raise a bunch of little automatons, but to raise thinking people who will do the right things because they want to, not because they fear punishment. So the truth is that sometimes when my 9yo stomps off to the other room there is not a darn thing I can do about it at the time...so I let it lie for the moment and make a point to talk to him later in the day and address the topics mentioned above.
• When it gets to teenagers, well, I don't have any of those yet. I have no idea what I will do at that point. ☺
  

So there it is, my current take on dealing with direct disobedience. Like I said, I would love to hear your thoughts on it. This is an issue where I don't always feel like my methods are effective, but I'm just not sure what else to do (without breaking the basic rule of respect that I believe in so strongly).

Additional questions always accepted...I'll answer them when I get settled into my new place and have internet again!)

Friday Feel-Up

I know I completely neglected this last month. Naughty me!!!
But I remembered this month!
There's no time like the present to do your breast self-exam. ☺

26 Weeks

Ahh, week 26--that means we're entering the third trimester now! Less than 100 days to go till we get to meet this kiddo (give or take!)
We are on the road (in the midst of getting settled into our new place in Alaska, so there's not much of a post...more coming when we are settled. ☺

An Observation

I need to stop being such an efficient packer.
About three months into our marriage we decided to go on a camping trip. Hubby collected the gear we needed and started putting it into the car...he got most of it in but then I pointed out that he had not left space for the cooler (which of course needed to go in last) or for Wolf. Hubby suggested that I try...so we pulled everything out of the car and piled it on the driveway. We fetched several more items that he had forgotten, and I proceeded to pack it all into the car...leaving space for the cooler AND for the son.
Ever since then I do all the packing, be it boxes or vehicles or anything else, we both just know that I can fit a lot more than he can (a LOT more, like, at least 50% more).
Unfortunately, this has led to the not-infrequent recurrence of what happened today: we collect a large pile of stuff that needs to be packed, and then Hubby turns serenely to me and says "you can get that all in, right?" and goes on his way...
And somehow I always seem to get it all in.
It reminds me of a moment in Star Trek where the captain asks Scotty how long it's going to take to have the engine fixed, and Scotty says it will be at least a week. "That's no good, we need it done in 4 days," Kirk announces. "Yes sir," answers Scotty with a twinkle in his eye. In that moment realization spreads across the captain's face as he says "Do you always double your estimates?"
"Why of course sir," responds the engineer "otherwise how could I keep making miracles?!"

Monday Answers--Health Care

Today I'll be posting the first of my answers as explained here. I don't know that I will always do this weekly, but if you ever leave a question in my comments, I do read them all, and I do try to answer them!

Today's topic is universal health care, aka single-payer health care, aka socialized medicine.

Well, here's a doozie: What's your take on the potential for universal
healthcare? It's been on my mind a lot. Always interested in hearing more
thoughts and opinions.

There is a bill currently facing our congress which has lots of people screaming about socialized medicine and loss of patient rights and all kinds of other things...I will start off by saying that I have not read the bill. I would like to actually (in spite of it being over 1000 pages)--I'd like to see what is really in it--but I have not read it yet. So, the best I can do today is answer with my thoughts about the concept in general, and then my feelings on what I do know of the bill.

Point #1--I think that socialized medicine is a whopping lot better than the capitalistic system we have right now. If you didn't read it when I linked it last fall, I would encourage you to read the post my husband made here. He lived in Norway for two years, and has some personal experience with socialised medicine. Or maybe go read the post my cousin wrote here. He lived in Switzerland for several years as a child and then in Germany for two more as an adult. Both of them heartily favor socialised medicine because they have seen how well it works. The WHO statistics seem to point quite clearly to socialized systems as the best if you look at their chart of the world's healthiest countries. Yes, it is true that the system will run into problems if it is underfunded (as it is in Canada, Ireland or the UK--the places where most of the horror stories come from), but, if it's properly funded, then you'll probably end up with something like France (#1) or the Scandinavian countries...
Yes, I did say 'probably'...this is because I realize that we have a very big country, and there is a lot of diversity in terms of proximity to care providers, health education, and other things which might affect the fair rationing of care. A socialized system--one which provides free care to everyone--will have to insist on a certain amount of taking turns, and it's true that sometimes people will have to wait for things like surgeries that (in fairness) shouldn't wait. So I think that a dual system makes sense: have a public option available to everyone--for free of course, but still have a few private options available. The private sector--as with education--would cost more, but if you had the money you could get things faster and/or get things which were not deemed 'necessary' but which you wanted (say, for example, an extra ultrasound, a vasectomy, or most cosmetic procedures). Honestly, I think some sort of combination like that probably makes the most sense.

Point #2--My understanding of the current bill is that it's not socialized medicine at all. It is actually an attempt to reform a capitalistic system. I don't know that I think it's ideal, but reform definitely seems in order, and I think this sortof plan is likely to go over with the American people much better than a truly social one.

• In my understanding, the bills calls for making efforts to cut waste by demanding that medical practice be evidence-based (rather than marketing-based). Well hallelujah! Unfortunately the research isn't always clear--sometimes one study directly contradicts another--so determining which evidence to use as basis for medical practice may be complicated...but I think that the bill is making a push in the right direction at least.
• The bill will determine the value of the doctors' time, which will probably cut the incomes of many of them (what's not to love about that?! I would like to see people enter medicine because they want to help others, not because they want to get rich). I recently heard the complaint that this is "putting a value on humans" but we've been doing that for years with minimum wage...I think it's a healthy change.
• The bill will offer an alternative to private insurance, so that everyone will be able to get some kind of insurance that they can afford, whether it's private insurance for the richer, public insurance for the middle class, or publicly-funded insurance (medicaid) for the impoverished. It would force insurance companies to change their policies so that they couldn't drop someone just because they got cancer and suddenly became expensive. In other words, it would provide insurance to everyone (but everyone would have their choice of insurances), as opposed to the social model of scrapping insurance and just giving everybody free care when they walk in the hospital doors.
• The government will push hard(er)--require?--people to get preventative medical care, including vaccines. (Um, they kinda 'require' vaccines already and if you don't believe in them it's pretty simple to get an exemption...) Although I expect more people would probably go in for routine check-ups, I don't see this making a difference in our right to make choices about our care, so again, I don't see a problem.
• One complaint I've heard is in regard to the rationing of care is that the elderly or those who have chronic/fatal conditions would likely be pushed to the end of the list for certain surgeries and treatments. It's a matter of doing the liver transplant for the guy who's 46 instead of for the guy who's 86, (regardless of how long they've been waiting or why they need it), because the former is likely to get more good out of it. On the one hand I can appreciate that that sounds a bit heartless, on the other hand I look at how many people are currently unable to get the treatments and surgeries that they need, and I think that if we're not going to be able to save everybody, it does make sense to try to save the ones who have the greatest life expectancy first.
  

A few other things that I think need to happen--and I don't know if they are in the bill or not (mostly I think not):

• It needs to be a whole lot harder to sue doctors for malpractice. Yes, it needs to be possible, but it needs to be harder. There should be more mediation and arbitration required before litigation is possible. With that in place, malpractice insurance prices should come down, and thus doctors fees should be able to come down.
• Costs should be the same for everybody. In other words, there should not be a pre-negotiated preferred rate for insurance companies but another (higher) one for people who pay out of pocket. There should not be preferred and non-preferred providers (with different rates of coverage). I suppose it's fine if one doctor wants to charge a little more than another, but I'd like to see it more like grocery stores...milk may cost more at one place than at another, but it's not much more, and the prices are public knowledge.
• It should be illegal to advertise for pharmaceuticals of any kind, or to anyone. In other words, when the drugs are released, doctors should receive information (brochures perhaps) detailing the contents, purpose, and side-effects of the drug. The doctors can then choose to add it to their repetoire or not. Meanwhile, there would be no drug lunches, no free palm-pilots given to doctors to encourage them to prescribe one thing over another, and none of those horrible ads which stealthily proclaim "this drug may change your life, (and it may kill you)...ask your doctor about it today!"
• The whole drug testing/approval process needs to be longer. In the rush to get new things on the market, the FDA has streamlined things so much that in my opinion most things are insufficiently tested before being released to the public (I think the frequency of drug-recalls for serious injuries and deaths validates this view). Anyway, I think a good option would be to do the testing as they currently do, and then release the drug as a "phase B testing" option, where patients (with their doctors) could choose it with the understanding that it had been through initial testing but was still considered experimental. It would be an informed consent sort of thing. New drugs would have to be in this phase for a minimum of 2 years (or x number of people trying it) before they could have final approval and be released for general usage. I think this would cut back on a lot of the lawsuits by helping protect and inform the population about things that have only had minimal testing, while still allowing them access to new formulas as soon as possible.

A final thought:
If you are scared about the idea of the government having control in our health care, I would ask you to think about the other things they control in this country: roads, the postal service, schools...I'm not saying that all those things are perfect, but would you really rather pay for private courier service when the post office provides free mail delivery (usually to your door) 6 days a week? Go ahead and complain about 40-something cent stamps, but remember what you'll pay to send the same thing via FedEx or UPS. Nationalizing a system can save costs and improve service (in my humble opinion), and I think that socialized medicine--or yes, that bill that's in the house right now--may have flaws, but it's a darn sight better than what we have right now.



(Feel free to leave more questions...I'll get to them in coming weeks!)

Kiddo Moments

Just a few moments from the last couple of weeks...

~~~~~

This last Sunday as we neared the end of our church meetings I could see that Wolf was tired and hungry and ready to go. We just needed to get through the closing hymn, so I encouraged him to open the hymnal and read along (he still struggles a little with reading fast enough to sing along with most of them). So he was sitting there with the book, following along, and as we got to the end he snapped the book shut...only he snapped it in that millisecond of silence after everyone has stopped singing and before the closing prayer has begun... The *pop* of the book closing resounded through the entire chapel. Wolf looked at me with what I can only describe as a hamster face: huge eyes and a tiny mouth.
I managed to not giggle.

~~~~~

Bear is in that beloved toddler stage wherein he is fascinated with the goodies he finds in his nose. (We call them "snuggerts.") The other day his nose was quite runny and at one point I told him I was going to wipe it (for the umpteenth time), and he said "no mommy, don't wipe my nuggerts, I'm gonna eat them!" and he licked his upper lip for emphasis.
A few days before that I was awakened by him standing over the edge of my bed, peering into my face at close range. "Mommy," he explained, "you have a nuggert, I'm gonna get it for you," and without further ado he stuck his finger into my nose and started digging around. Of all the ways to be wakened up, this is definitely not in my top ten!

~~~~~

I'm trying to help prepare Bear for the changes ahead with the impending birth of Eagle. I talked to him about how there was a little brother growing in my tummy, and that in a little while the brother would come out.
Bear shook his head "he not come out."
"Well he has to come out sometime honey, he can't stay in there forever."
"Baby come out right now?"
So I explained that the baby has to stay in for a while longer so he can get bigger, but that after the snow comes, then that is when the little brother will come.
Bear pointed knowingly to my belly button and said "he wiww [will] come out dere."
"Nope, he will come out the birth canal." (Both older brothers will be present for the birth, so I didn't feel the need to explain further at this point.)

Both boys like to hug and kiss my tummy and try to feel the baby kick. At bedtime we sing three songs--one for each boy. They enjoy helping pick which song to sing for little brother. A few nights ago I was laying on the bed next to Bear giving him some bedtime cuddles and he started wiggling his fingers around on my belly. I asked what he was doing.
"I'm tickling the baby."
Oh, ok, so I started giggling and wiggling a little for him in response. He thought that was great, so he tickled with renewed vigor...the problem is that my belly actually is ticklish, so for all of his amateur technique, it started to legitimately tickle, and I don't tolerate tickles very well on an already sensitive belly.
Let's just say it got a little bit crazy, involved much giggling from all parties, and probably delayed bedtime a good deal more than it should have. ☺

When did "Lay" start to mean "Lazy"?

This morning Bear was not feeling well, and Hubby and I concluded that he should not go to church. We talked for a few minutes about which of us would stay home with him and which of us would go to church with our older son. I had not been able to attend any sunday school classes last week because Bear was feeling clingy and I had ended up staying with him in the nursery, so I said I'd like to go. Hubby said ok he'd stay home, and then he hesitated and said "you know, I kinda don't mind staying home, because lately I've been bored in church a lot."
For the last two years in Pelican we had a much-shortened version of church due to calling-in by phone rather than being able to attend in person, and perhaps we are out of the habit of sitting and listening for the 3 hours of our typical church service...but all the same, I have to admit that Hubby makes a good point. Each of us has attended a few services with other faiths--services wherein the sermons are delivered by a professional preacher; someone who spends his whole week studying his topic and preparing his sermon. Those sermons tend to be very good: they are thought-provoking, interesting, and sometimes even entertaining. Our meetings, on the other hand, often feature speakers who begin their remarks with "last night as I was writing my talk..." and, as Hubby said, they are often boring. It's no wonder that the kids wiggle and the seniors fall asleep.
Now I realize that professional ministers probably have a certain amount of training in sermon delivery. I realize that we have a lay ministry and that the people who speak to us in our sacrament meetings and who teach our sunday school lessons do so as volunteers. I don't expect them to be entertaining or even particularly polished. BUT is it at all unreasonable to ask that they take time to study and prepare a good talk or lesson?

When I am asked to speak in sacrament meeting, I spend the whole week thinking about my topic. I pray for guidance. I often make notes for myself, or open a file on the computer and start typing up pieces of paragraphs as I organize my thoughts. I typically spend at least 2-3 days typing up the actual talk. I prefer to have a fully-written talk to work from, and while I may paraphrase a bit as I deliver it, if my nerves get to me I know I can just read it and I won't forget anything or word things in confusing ways.
When I taught the gospel doctrine sunday school class, I started preparing my lessons on the sunday before I would deliver them. I read the passages of scripture that we would be studying from, and marked ones that stood out to me. I read the entire lesson from the manual, and compared my impressions with the commentary in the book. As I read, I typically filled at least one full notebook page with notes about what things I wanted to bring up, how I wanted to address them, and what questions I wanted to pose to the class. I usually spent at least 2-3 hours preparing a lesson. I also would bring it up to God in prayer at least a few times in the week, asking Him to help me teach the things that my class members needed to hear that week.
A few times I have sung solos or duets in church as well. I prepare for those in much the same way--I make sure that I know my music, but I also spend some time praying about which music to choose, and asking the Lord to use me to touch those who need to feel His spirit.
I have almost always received comments and compliments about my talks, lessons, and musical numbers.
I do not tell these things to boast, or to suggest that I'm a superior singer, speaker or teacher when compared to others. I really don't think I am. I just think that my preparation (and my requests for God's spirit) pay off. Yes, I do/did this on top of being a mother/homemaker/student/full-time employee and so on. It's not a matter of devoting 40 hours a week to preparation...but I do think that if we aren't willing to put in a few hours then how lazy are we? It is rare to be asked to speak in sacrament meeting more than once every year or two--surely we can handle a few hours on a biannual basis. Even for those who teach weekly sunday school or primary lessons, surely we can give up an hour of television or game-playing in order to prepare a good lesson. We owe it to our classes I think--to respect them enough to bring them a good lesson that is not a waste of their time. A lesson that is not boring.
I think we'd all get a lot more out of church if we would.

On Winning Battles

Parents often find themselves engaged in power struggles with their children. Child wants A, parent insists on B, they argue about it...inevitably there is disobedience, punishment, resentment, or all of the above.

Here is some food for thought:
If you are having a battle with your child, and someone 'wins' then doesn't that mean that someone also 'loses'?
AND, if you as the parent are making sure to win (ie, making your kid be good/do right), then doesn't that mean that your kid is losing?
Are you ok with teaching your child to be a loser all the time?

Just one more reason why I believe in seeking cooperation instead of compliance, in working with my kids rather than pushing them around, and why I try really really hard to teach with gentleness, adaptability, and respect: because no kid should feel like a loser--especially not at home.

23 Weeks

At this point you’ve pretty much adjusted to the fact you’ve got a moving little gymnast inside of you, but now they’re going to kick up the party a notch because they can hear and react to sounds from the outside world. Sounds from your alarm clock, a thunder roll, or that darned car honking at you across the intersection can actually jar their little ears enough to elicit a kick or violent bout of squirming. Of course this also means that their little ears are picking up the sounds of your voice and those near you. So go ahead, sing a lullaby to your little angel—if they start kicking, it’s likely they just want you to stop… or maybe it was a kick of approval? You decide. Your baby's tiny taste buds are still growing and their bones are continuing to ossify (harden), their tiny veins are visible through their translucent yet wrinkly skin. (Think of it this way: they’ve been swimming in the equivalent of a long hot bath for the past 23 weeks, so you can’t blame them for being a little prune-like.)

They aren't kidding when they refer to the kiddo as a little gymnast. I've been feeling little flutters and bumps for weeks, but since the last update I've started being able to see them (yep, from the outside...little bulges pushing out of my belly, or something moving along under the surface in an eerily alien-like way). Daddy and big brothers have been able to feel the little brother's movements now too, which is always a nice stage to reach.
As for myself, I feel wiped out all the time (which I think is only partly due to the pregnancy, and partly due to the July heat in Utah and partly due to the 6000' altitude here compared to the sea level that I'm used to). I am eagerly looking forward to returning to Alaska with the cooler, moister air and more hospitable altitude.
I've also started needing to pee every couple of hours. While other women have told me that they had this need from the mid- or even early parts of pregnancy, my experience with Bear was that I had pretty normal bladder needs until the last month or so. That is not the case with this child! Bear was head-up until 30-something weeks, whereas the ultrasound said that this baby is already head-down, so I wonder if that may be part of it (heads are large and heavy and having one on my bladder seems a logical reason for needing extra potty trips!) Regardless of the reason, I'm making a midnight potty trip (or two) nearly every night, and lots more than I'm accustomed to during the day.

(By the way, I'll write this in small print because it's not set in stone quite yet...but I think that little brother will be called Eagle...oh if only it were that easy to choose his legal name!)