Do any of you get any of the mainstream parenting magazines? A lot of times they come for free, for no explicable reason. 
. (They can probably afford it, since they seem to consist of about 75% advertising). I get Parenting, and I don't know why I torture myself by reading it.
My biggest beef is that its articles often pose highly controversial statements as facts...yet they assume no accountability for it.
It all started with an issue that featured an article on vaccinations that promised to "put parents' fears to rest." The author's only source was Paul Offit, a patent-holder on the Rotavirus vax, and the message was that they're safe, so please stop questioning them. The odd thing was that for an article that promised to "put fears to rest," it sure relied on a lot of fear-mongering about all of the horrible things that could happen to an unvaccinated child.
Well, I was eager to read the letters to the editor in the following issue. Surely this article would garner some feedback for critics, right? Conveniently, however, the editors decided to permanently nix the letters-to-ed feature right after this article was printed.
Since then, I've read some other absurdities that readers can no longer call them out on:
* "Study after study" shows that sleep sharing is dangerous. Really? Was it by innocent accident that the omitted the research from the University of Notre Dame sleep lab? Do they think that parents can't read between the lines and tell that these "studies" don't control for dangerous confounders like alcohol use and water beds?
* Another issue twice made mockery of natural child birthers. In the following issue, the editor mentioned getting mail from upset readers about it (again, they no longer print actual letters), but stated that they just didn't want to make women "feel bad" about having an epidural. Never mind that we natural birthers continue to be stigmatized with remarks like, "You don't have to be a martyr."
*The most recent issue somebody wrote in about her son's botched circumcision. She wondered if he should be re-circumcised!
The pediatric "expert" responded with the cop-out "talk-to-your-doctor" line.
You may disagree with me on some of these issues, but the biggest deal is how they're presented. I think it's pitiful how such publications talk down to their readers, who are assumed to be incapable of weighing contradictory evidence and making their own decisions. It must explain why I read and love Mothering
whose articles not only provide citations, but also address you like you're a grown, thinking human being.
I'm curious what all you've read in some of these publications. (???) I can only hope that even the most "mainstream" of parents can think critically about what they are reading.
. (They can probably afford it, since they seem to consist of about 75% advertising). I get Parenting, and I don't know why I torture myself by reading it.My biggest beef is that its articles often pose highly controversial statements as facts...yet they assume no accountability for it.
It all started with an issue that featured an article on vaccinations that promised to "put parents' fears to rest." The author's only source was Paul Offit, a patent-holder on the Rotavirus vax, and the message was that they're safe, so please stop questioning them. The odd thing was that for an article that promised to "put fears to rest," it sure relied on a lot of fear-mongering about all of the horrible things that could happen to an unvaccinated child.
Well, I was eager to read the letters to the editor in the following issue. Surely this article would garner some feedback for critics, right? Conveniently, however, the editors decided to permanently nix the letters-to-ed feature right after this article was printed.
Since then, I've read some other absurdities that readers can no longer call them out on:
* "Study after study" shows that sleep sharing is dangerous. Really? Was it by innocent accident that the omitted the research from the University of Notre Dame sleep lab? Do they think that parents can't read between the lines and tell that these "studies" don't control for dangerous confounders like alcohol use and water beds?
* Another issue twice made mockery of natural child birthers. In the following issue, the editor mentioned getting mail from upset readers about it (again, they no longer print actual letters), but stated that they just didn't want to make women "feel bad" about having an epidural. Never mind that we natural birthers continue to be stigmatized with remarks like, "You don't have to be a martyr."
*The most recent issue somebody wrote in about her son's botched circumcision. She wondered if he should be re-circumcised!
The pediatric "expert" responded with the cop-out "talk-to-your-doctor" line.You may disagree with me on some of these issues, but the biggest deal is how they're presented. I think it's pitiful how such publications talk down to their readers, who are assumed to be incapable of weighing contradictory evidence and making their own decisions. It must explain why I read and love Mothering
whose articles not only provide citations, but also address you like you're a grown, thinking human being.I'm curious what all you've read in some of these publications. (???) I can only hope that even the most "mainstream" of parents can think critically about what they are reading.
.
I have no idea why there is a Parenting mag subscription being sent to me but every single issue just ticks me off! Every page is saturated with pushing some mainstream, junk food diet, consumable, disposable, plastic agenda. I don't want to get my baby out of my bed or put my vaccination fears to rest or know what all the freakin toys I need to get are. I should just throw them straight into the recycling. Every issue states this is my last issue and they keep coming. 
