Birth Size and IQ - Page 3 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#61 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:31 AM
 
NightOwl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 482
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Silliness.

I was 6lbs1oz (and my mother smoked during pregnancy) and have a genius level IQ.

DH was 11lbs6oz (his mother had GD) and he has a genius level IQ.

We were both given IQ tests by professionals on many occasions.

My grandfather was a preemie, weighing about 4 lbs at birth. And he was the most brilliant person I've ever known. I also know a man who was 13lbs (yes...13!) and is as dumb as a brick.

It's in your genes.
NightOwl is offline  
#62 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 10:05 AM
 
UUMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ah, Blue, thaks for that little stab in the back. :

I do chuckle when mothers get into arguements over whose kid is smarter. Or gifted.

So sue me. I have heard enough of these playground conversations/arguments over the 16 yrs I've been parenting. I've paid my dues. I've earned my right to chuckle.
UUMom is offline  
#63 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 01:29 PM
 
Bleu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: small bleu planet
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by UUMom
Ah, Blue, thaks for that little stab in the back. :

I do chuckle when mothers get into arguements over whose kid is smarter. Or gifted.

So sue me. I have heard enough of these playground conversations/arguments over the 16 yrs I've been parenting. I've paid my dues. I've earned my right to chuckle.
Chuckle all you want, but that was no stab in the back.
Bleu is offline  
#64 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 01:47 PM
 
loraxc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: In the Truffula Trees
Posts: 4,480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The thing that's bugging me here is that many, many posters are making the same error I see from voluntary formula-feeders ALL the time.

"Formula-fed babies aren't as healthy? That's ridiculous. MY baby was formula-fed, and she's as healthy as a horse! Whatever. Those studies are wrong."

"Higher birthweight babies do better on IQ tests? That's ridiculous. MY baby was small, and she's as smart as the day is long. Whatever. Those studies are wrong."

I don't know anything about this birthweight study. It may be hogwash. I'm sure it's not as exhaustively documented as the connection between BF and better health. *My point is* that just because there is a correlation on a large scale, that does not mean that everyone is going to fit into that trend. The fact that you have a healthy formula-fed baby does not negate the larger statistical truth that formula-fed babies are not as healthy. The fact that you have a very bright child who was low birthweight does not negate the larger statistical truth that higher-birthweight babies test better (assuming the studies are accurate).

grateful mother to DD, 1/04, and DS, 2/08

loraxc is offline  
#65 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 02:11 PM
 
UUMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OK Bleu (sorry for mispelling, btw). I didn't think I was being 'dismissive' of concerns, but commenting on how questioning the intelligence of our children brings out the mother lioness in us all.

I do find it amusing. It's one of those topics, like politcs and religion, that riles nice folks to absolute distraction. (That's acutally an understatement ).
UUMom is offline  
#66 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 02:25 PM
Dar
 
Dar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 11,438
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loraxc
The thing that's bugging me here is that many, many posters are making the same error I see from voluntary formula-feeders ALL the time.
Yup. I think understanding how statistics work is really important to understanding what a lot of the research out there really means, and if you're out there thinking, "this research is hokey because my baby was 5 pounds at birth and she's really smart," then you're missing the point.

Dar

 
fambedsingle1.gifSingle mom to Rain (1/93) , grad student, and world traveler earth.gif


  

Dar is offline  
#67 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 02:30 PM
 
UUMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
That's true, Dar. Yet, this study leaves me with questions. Who were these mohers? Was the study well done? Has it been replicated? What's IQ?

I still find it amusing that we mothers get crazy if anyone suggests their child may not be intelligent.
UUMom is offline  
#68 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 03:12 PM
 
Bleu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: small bleu planet
Posts: 1,410
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yep -- the singular of data is not anecdote.

UUMom, I don't think there's anything wrong with calling someone on bragging about their kid's supposed "genius" or even poking a few holes in the criteria they're using to confer such exalted status. But I think it's just mean to laugh at someone who's insecure about intelligence. Kinda like how it's okay to laugh at rich people but not poor people.

Maybe you don't believe in IQ tests, but there's whole lot of people that do -- in fact, a whole societyful. There are all sorts of educational opprtunities available to people who have high scores, and then job opportunities, the potential to earn high incomes, status, blah blah blah. The reverse is true, too -- low scores yield another kind of educational experience, leading to dead-end jobs, lower status, lower (or no) personal income, and the hardships that often accompany being low-income. I don't think those consequences are a laughing matter, and I can ceetainly understand that it stings if your kid is the not-so-smart one.

Now maybe you're a homeschooler and the educational opportunity thing isn't an issue for you and your kid(s). Maybe you and / or your SO have opted out of some or most of the rat-race, cash economy so this job thing isn't an issue for you, too - maybe I am actually making the critique you'd make as to why you're against the testing, IQ comparison. Maybe you're saying you condemn the whole shebang and want to see more radical change in society and how we test, label and box human commodities. That is an argument I can get behind. But in the meantime, there are a lot of people who are getting the crap stomped out of them by the current system, and I'm not cool with laughing at them. (But laugh at the system, and laugh at the braggarts -- that's all good!)

Am I making any sense here?
Bleu is offline  
#69 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 03:26 PM
 
captain optimism's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Good Ship Lollipop
Posts: 7,451
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleu
There are all sorts of educational opprtunities available to people who have high scores, and then job opportunities, the potential to earn high incomes, status, blah blah blah. The reverse is true, too -- low scores yield another kind of educational experience, leading to dead-end jobs, lower status, lower (or no) personal income, and the hardships that often accompany being low-income. I don't think those consequences are a laughing matter, and I can ceetainly understand that it stings if your kid is the not-so-smart one.

Am I making any sense here?
I think it's possible that it's the other way around. You get the opportunity for education and enrichment and the positive feedback for being smart, and then you get high scores on your IQ test. Low expectations lead to a poor educational experience, no matter how smart a person might potentially be.

Divorced mom of one awesome boy born 2-3-2003.
captain optimism is offline  
#70 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:15 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZachZ
Equating birthweight to IQ is like equating height to IQ. Could you imagine if someone proposed that tall people are smarter. egad!
But, just to pull your forwarded idea... I could see where taller people *on average* could score higher on an IQ test. One of the largest components of adult height is childhood nutrition. Chances are those children who had ample food would score higher on an IQ test. (you would have to, of course, figure seperately between races and sexes). I know presidents are not always the smartest (current case in point, lol) but *generally* they have been taller than the general population and also: richer, better educated & percieved as more intelligent.

It is ALLLLLLL about statistics.

 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
#71 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:24 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loraxc
The thing that's bugging me here is that many, many posters are making the same error I see from voluntary formula-feeders ALL the time.

"Formula-fed babies aren't as healthy? That's ridiculous. MY baby was formula-fed, and she's as healthy as a horse! Whatever. Those studies are wrong."

"Higher birthweight babies do better on IQ tests? That's ridiculous. MY baby was small, and she's as smart as the day is long. Whatever. Those studies are wrong."

I don't know anything about this birthweight study. It may be hogwash. I'm sure it's not as exhaustively documented as the connection between BF and better health. *My point is* that just because there is a correlation on a large scale, that does not mean that everyone is going to fit into that trend. The fact that you have a healthy formula-fed baby does not negate the larger statistical truth that formula-fed babies are not as healthy. The fact that you have a very bright child who was low birthweight does not negate the larger statistical truth that higher-birthweight babies test better (assuming the studies are accurate).


Thank you.

Consider me to have just said the above as well.

 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
#72 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:26 PM
 
UUMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Heck, i have no strong feelings about this at all. :LOL I have no idea why i even got involved with this.

IQ tests don't measure everything, and yet they measure something. My oldest took one and scored *high* etc. (Someone in this thread was offended by the word genuis, so i won't use it. lol He'll prob get close to a near perfect score on his SATs if his past scores are any indication. But again, I really don't have any strong feelings about it. He thinks tests are fun, which is a handy thing in our test-crazy culture.


Like I said, I don't have strong feelings about this study or IQ tests, period. I really do not. I am not for or against anything in this thread.
UUMom is offline  
#73 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:26 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by captain optimism
I think it's possible that it's the other way around. You get the opportunity for education and enrichment and the positive feedback for being smart, and then you get high scores on your IQ test. Low expectations lead to a poor educational experience, no matter how smart a person might potentially be.


So true, so true. I can really understand why parents push their non-gifted children into some of the gifted programs I have witnessed: they are self-fulfilling prophecies. They have more interesting things to do, better teacher/student ratios, etc...

 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
#74 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:29 PM
 
stafl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: standing in a doorway
Posts: 9,227
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
BUT - the articles about that "study" in Queensland that says bigger babies have higher IQ's? Well, it wasn't even a study. It was a paper, and it wasn't a very large sample, and there's nothing scientific about it and it hasn't been published in any respected medical journal. It's all a load of hogwash. So the authors of the paper had to push their agenda through mainstream media instead of through medical journals and other more reputable publications.


and yes, I'm going to get bent out of shape every time I hear someone tell me how much better big babies are. I hear it all day long every day. I hear it from my inlaws, who birth 10 pounders. I hear it from my pediatricians, every time they pull out that stupid growth chart to show me just how small my kids are, and then they say "it could be a sign of this that or the other problem" when there is absolutely nothing wrong with my children. I hear it from strangers on the street. There's a nasty stereotype that says small/thin babies are sickly and ill and not as intelligent, and it's just not true. Sure, some babies are small because they are sickly, and because they are sick all the time maybe they didn't get quite the same amount of quiet alert brain-building time as other babies, but that doesn't mean all small babies are sickly. It's ridiculous, and yes, it's offensive, and yes, I'm going to continue to get bent out of shape when those stereotypes are voiced, here and in real life, every time! laugh all you want, these are my feelings, and I have every right to feel this way.
stafl is offline  
#75 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:36 PM
 
liam's mom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: in utter disbelief
Posts: 1,578
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not true in my case. I was 6lbs 8oz, had my IQ tested and it's Mensa level.

Oooooh! :LOL

mostly WAHM, sometimes WOHM to my : two boys.
liam's mom is offline  
#76 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:37 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stafl
BUT - the articles about that "study" in Queensland that says bigger babies have higher IQ's? Well, it wasn't even a study. It was a paper, and it wasn't a very large sample, and there's nothing scientific about it and it hasn't been published in any respected medical journal. It's all a load of hogwash. So the authors of the paper had to push their agenda through mainstream media instead of through medical journals and other more reputable publications.


and yes, I'm going to get bent out of shape every time I hear someone tell me how much better big babies are. I hear it all day long every day. I hear it from my inlaws, who birth 10 pounders. I hear it from my pediatricians, every time they pull out that stupid growth chart to show me just how small my kids are, and then they say "it could be a sign of this that or the other problem" when there is absolutely nothing wrong with my children. I hear it from strangers on the street. There's a nasty stereotype that says small/thin babies are sickly and ill and not as intelligent, and it's just not true. Sure, some babies are small because they are sickly, and because they are sick all the time maybe they didn't get quite the same amount of quiet alert brain-building time as other babies, but that doesn't mean all small babies are sickly. It's ridiculous, and yes, it's offensive, and yes, I'm going to continue to get bent out of shape when those stereotypes are voiced, here and in real life, every time! laugh all you want, these are my feelings, and I have every right to feel this way.
Stafl----

Two things

#1 you have 5999 posts!!!!!! PARTYYYYYYYYYYYY!!!!!

#2 I think doctors just like to freak people out. I can guarantee you parents with big babies get the same thing--- it could be this problem, do you feed him a lot of candy, did you have diabetes...? Just like w/bfeeding... if you have a small baby its because of the milk (and you better give formula), if you have a big baby it's because of the milk (and you better give formula).

 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
#77 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:38 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by liam's mom
Not true in my case. I was 6lbs 8oz, had my IQ tested and it's Mensa level.

Oooooh! :LOL

:LOL

Considering the # of people who have reported genius level IQs on this thread, either MDC members are *really* smart of grades aren't the only thing showing artificial inflation.

 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
#78 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 04:52 PM
 
UUMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My little mensa boy was 5lb 11 oz I love my anecdotal boy.

lol

Am I back particpating in this thread???? Oy.

I need to get a job. :LOL

I love you all. i really do. It's so interesting here and I learn a lot.
UUMom is offline  
#79 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 06:29 PM
 
farmer mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: within my harvest
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't know how to determine if all the studies are legitimate, and I am leery of statistics. But if you look online, similar studies have been done in the UK, New Zealand, Denmark and the US, looking at children from the same families or similar environments, not comparing premies to term babies, and the children who had a larger birth weight supposedly score a tiny bit better on IQ and skills tests then children from smaller birthweights. But all the articles say that the difference is so small, it is insignificant for individuals, except for how it applies to the entire population. I could care less what my kids IQs are, but I do know women seem to be given a lot of grief for growing big babies, and if this study made the OP feel good about having large babies, what's the harm? It's not like she wrote it.
farmer mama is offline  
#80 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 08:28 PM
 
Greensleeves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 1,670
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiredX2
:LOL

Considering the # of people who have reported genius level IQs on this thread, either MDC members are *really* smart of grades aren't the only thing showing artificial inflation.
: All I could think of when I was reading this thread was "Wile E. Coyote--GEEEENIUS!"
Greensleeves is offline  
#81 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 09:19 PM
 
UUMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Exactadacle.

We're all fibbing.

I love the assumptions. But I still love ya all.

You figure there are a zillion people registered to post, but only those who actually have a relavent story to post on any given thread, do so. We must not know what we are talking about.

UUMom is offline  
#82 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 09:53 PM
 
farmer mama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: within my harvest
Posts: 1,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by stafl
and yes, I'm going to get bent out of shape every time I hear someone tell me how much better big babies are. I hear it all day long every day. I hear it from my inlaws, who birth 10 pounders. I hear it from my pediatricians, every time they pull out that stupid growth chart to show me just how small my kids are, and then they say "it could be a sign of this that or the other problem" when there is absolutely nothing wrong with my children. I hear it from strangers on the street. There's a nasty stereotype that says small/thin babies are sickly and ill and not as intelligent, and it's just not true. Sure, some babies are small because they are sickly, and because they are sick all the time maybe they didn't get quite the same amount of quiet alert brain-building time as other babies, but that doesn't mean all small babies are sickly. It's ridiculous, and yes, it's offensive, and yes, I'm going to continue to get bent out of shape when those stereotypes are voiced, here and in real life, every time! laugh all you want, these are my feelings, and I have every right to feel this way.
Oh I forgot to add that I am sorry you and other moms of smaller babies get your fair share of grief for it. Also, even though my dd was bigger when she was born, she slimmed down and from about 9 months on she was way low on those charts, and our care provider tried to freak us out. Her body type is just lean, but healthy, as I am sure your babies are as well. I just feel bad for the op for just asking the question and bringing up these studies, and getting such an heated response.
farmer mama is offline  
#83 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 10:43 PM
 
Viola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 23,401
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by loraxc
The thing that's bugging me here is that many, many posters are making the same error I see from voluntary formula-feeders ALL the time.

"Formula-fed babies aren't as healthy? That's ridiculous. MY baby was formula-fed, and she's as healthy as a horse! Whatever. Those studies are wrong."

Yes, I was thinking the same thing, but I was also noticing another thing which is that some of the moms whose babies are small are now feeling defensive and angry. I'm sure some formula feeding moms feel the same way when certain breastfeeding advocates say, "breastfed babies are smarter." They either feel defensive or they think the studies are not very important. This honestly comes up a lot in my LLL meetings and I cringe every time I hear it. It just doesn't seem like a good way to phrase it.
Viola is offline  
#84 of 91 Old 04-20-2005, 11:31 PM
 
Viola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nevada
Posts: 23,401
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by UUMom
I still find it amusing that we mothers get crazy if anyone suggests their child may not be intelligent.
I find it amusing that everyone has mentioned their genius level IQs or their brilliant genius children. Am I the only one worried that her child might be dumb as a post? OK, not really, but I am concerned she has some learning issues that might need to be addressed at some future point.
Viola is offline  
#85 of 91 Old 04-21-2005, 01:46 AM
 
witchbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: denvah
Posts: 2,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
the boy tested at a 156 iq. his brother came in at 152.
my boy was 7lb, 3 oz at birth, his brother was 9lb.
k was 7lb 2.8 oz and i have absolutely no intention of ever having her tested. my mother refused for me to be tested and has passed the hatred of iq tests onto me.
witchbaby is offline  
#86 of 91 Old 04-21-2005, 04:17 AM - Thread Starter
 
Treasuremapper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 3,708
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by farmer mama
I just feel bad for the op for just asking the question and bringing up these studies, and getting such an heated response.
Thank you, Farmer Mama. I appreciate the support. I really do.
Treasuremapper is offline  
#87 of 91 Old 04-21-2005, 12:20 PM
 
UUMom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 9,767
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Yes, sorry about that Inez. It's hard to know the turn the most innocent topics might take.
UUMom is offline  
#88 of 91 Old 04-21-2005, 12:32 PM
 
Itlbokay's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I find the "higher birth weight=higher intelligence" theory ridiculous.

That's just my opinion
Itlbokay is offline  
#89 of 91 Old 04-21-2005, 12:36 PM
 
aishy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: DFW Texas
Posts: 1,780
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My older brother & I weighed about the same 6'13 & he is WAY smarter than me (too bad he won't use it) and weaned earlier (19 months as opposed to my 3 and a half. my mom did child led weaning).

i'll go with my everyones different.
aisling
aishy is offline  
#90 of 91 Old 04-21-2005, 12:57 PM
 
TiredX2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: it appears to be a handbasket
Posts: 20,475
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by UUMom
Exactadacle.

We're all fibbing.

I love the assumptions. But I still love ya all.

You figure there are a zillion people registered to post, but only those who actually have a relavent story to post on any given thread, do so. We must not know what we are talking about.

I wasn't accusing anyone of fibbing.

I do find it odd for so many people to know their children's IQ scores, to refer to them as genius's (a term I keep for people like Einstein), etc... It is just an odd mentality to me. I don't question their veracity, I just don't understand the motivation.

 

 

TiredX2 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off