#childs cot

[ltwilliammowett]

Child’s cot in canvas, by Robert Milliken (1878-1952), a master in the Prince Line

The canvas has a blue thread running through it. The cot is hand-sewn - the seams oversewn, the edges of the cot turned over and secured with running stitch. The ends are spread by wooden battens and the cot is suspended from cords worked in  square sennit with steel eyes. The edges of the cot are decorated with a diamond-pattern fringe of half-knotted cord with ravelled ends.         

[fla-t-line]

I love this quote sm

[helenofblackthorns]

I knew this was going to happen. I knew it and it still doesn't hurt any less. i knew this scene was coming

[wouldyourfavepaychildsupport]

Would the caught-cot merger pay child support?

Image from Wikipedia

[coochiequeens]

Yes it's form a conservative source. But it's one of the few articles that doesn't focus on reproductive purchasers who felt entitled to a child.

by Emma Waters, @EMLWATERS

Olivia Maurel was 30 years old when an ancestry DNA test confirmed what she had known all along: she is the product of a costly commercial surrogacy contract. In Olivia’s case, the woman that her parents paid to gestate and birth Olivia is also her biological mother. 

In a recent article with Daily Mail, Olivia shared how “becoming a parent myself — entirely naturally, in my mid-20s — has only crystallized my view. The sacred bond between mother and baby is, I feel, something that should never be tampered with.” After going viral for her testimony before the parliament of the Czech Republic, Olivia now campaigns for the universal abolition of surrogacy. 

In the United States, only three states prohibit or do not enforce commercial surrogacy contracts. One of the states, Michigan, is poised to overturn their ban on surrogacy-for-pay through a nine-bill “Access to Fertility Healthcare Package.” Legislators are tying their efforts to the national conversation on in vitro fertilization in hopes of garnering additional support. I detail the concerns with this legislation in detail here, but suffice it to say it undermines motherhood by reducing the intimate relationship between a woman and the child she carries to a highly-lucrative rental agreement. 

Several well-respected researchers and pundits claim that surrogacy does not harm children. Yet we know very little about its long-term impact on a child’s psychological well-being. 

Most of those who assert that surrogacy is psychologically harmless rely on a longitudinal study by Susan Golombok, Professor Emerita of Family Research, and former Director of the Centre for Family Research at the University of Cambridge. She is the author of We Are Family (2020), a synthesis of 40 years of research on non-traditional family structures—same-sex, single parent by choice, and the use of all forms of assisted reproductive technology, including third-party conception. She concludes that such arrangements pose no additional harm and can benefit children.

Professor Golombok’s “Families Created Through Surrogacy” study began in 2003 and assessed parental and child psychological adjustment at ages 1, 2, 3, 7, 10, and 14. The impact of this single longitudinal study on both public opinion and policy cannot be overstated. To date, it is the only study that specifically examines the surrogate-born child’s psychological adjustment, as well as the only study to do so over an extended period. It is also the only research on child psychological well-being that policymakers in New York used to argue for the legalization of commercial surrogacy. 

Professor Golombok’s sample of surrogacy families comes from the General Register Office of the United Kingdom for National Statistics (ONS) and from the UK’s “Childlessness Overcome Through Surrogacy” (COTS) agency. The original sample included 42 surrogate-born children but declined to a mere 28 children by age 14. The study relied on a group of families formed through egg donation and children born of natural conception to serve as the comparison groups. 

With such a small sample size, and some families participating inconsistently year-to-year, the study itself runs the risk of selection bias and non-representative outcomes. The study lumps both children born through gestational surrogacy and traditional surrogacy together, too. This means some surrogates are both the genetic mother and the child's gestational mother. 

Additionally, only altruistic surrogacy is legal in the UK, so these arrangements do not involve surrogates who legally receive an additional sum of money, beyond generous reimbursements. For context, surrogacy-for-pay brings in an additional $25,000 to $70,000 in the United States, which may affect how a child views his or her conception, gestation, and birth. 

In each study, the scholars rely on the mother’s own assessment of the child’s well-being. It is not until age 14 when scholars begin to directly ask children questions to assess their self-esteem.

Overall, Professor Golombok concludes that children born from surrogacy agreements of any sort do as well, if not better, psychologically than their natural-born peers. 

For ages 1, 2, and 3, Professor Golombok finds that parents in surrogacy families showed “greater warmth and attachment-related behavior” than natural-conception parents. One explanation for this, as Professor Golombok’s notes, is that “parents of children born in this way [may] make a greater attempt than parents of naturally conceived children to present their families in the best possible light.” Such a bias seems likely, given that parents may feel the subconscious desire to justify their uncommon path to parenthood. 

By age 7, both surrogate-born children and donor-conceived children in the control group were doing noticeably worse than their natural-born counterparts. This is the point when many children learned of their biological or gestational origins. The scholars note that this corresponds with adoption literature as the period in a child’s life when they begin to comprehend the loss of one or both biological parents. What goes unnoted, however, is that unlike adoption, surrogacy is the intentional creation of a child for the express purpose of removing the child from his or her gestational and/or biological parent(s). 

Beginning at age 10, scholars report that the child’s psychological adjustment returns to a relatively normal state compared to the natural-born children, but the study itself reports little data compared to previous papers. By age 14, when the study concludes, the remaining 28 children seem to fare about the same as natural-born children, despite slightly more psychological problems reported. 

Despite these methodological limitations, Professor Golombok’s data from this longitudinal study remains the basis of child psychological adjustment research on surrogacy. Examples of this may be found in prominent pieces such as Vanessa Brown Calder's review of surrogacy at the Cato Institute or Cremieux Recueil's widely shared Substack with Aporia Magazine. Their conclusions that surrogacy confers “no harm” to the psychological well-being of the child are premature, to say the least.

In Calder’s article, she cites three studies in her discussion on the psychological well-being of surrogate-born children. A quick review of each study shows that these authors rely solely on Professor Golombok’s longitudinal study data to draw their conclusions. 

In Recueil’s Substack, "Surrogacy: Looking for Harm," he primarily relies on Golombok’s work to claim that “psychological harm appears to be minimal.” Again, this statement is premature and formed on limited data primarily from her longitudinal study. The other five citations in the “Psychological Outcomes for Kids” section tell us little about the psychological well-being of surrogate-born children. 

Recueil twice cites “Are the Children Alright? A Systematic Review of Psychological Adjustment of Children Conceived by Assisted Reproductive Technologies,” from 2022. Of the 11 studies that examine the intersection between surrogacy and child psychological outcomes, they fall into three categories: 

the longitudinal study by Professor Golombok 

child outcomes compared with other children born from assisted reproductive technology, not compared with natural-born children 

studies that examine the impact of non-traditional parenting types, such as lesbian mothers or gay fathers, on the well-being of the child. The impact of surrogacy is not directly assessed; it is simply mentioned as a requirement for male-to-male family formation. Of these three categories, the only studies that directly address the claims that Recueil makes are the research of Professor Golombok, which he already cited before these additional studies. 

Hence, the widespread claim that surrogacy does not harm the psychological well-being of children primarily relies on a single longitudinal study of 42-to-28 surrogate-born children by the intended mother’s own assessment. That’s it. 

This isn’t to say we should discard Professor Golombok’s study. But honest scholars and lawmakers should be far more modest in claiming that surrogacy does not harm the psychological well-being of children. 

The most accurate conclusion regarding the psychological adjustment of surrogate-born children is that we do not have enough data to draw a conclusion either way, especially not in favor of surrogacy itself. When the well-being of children is at stake, lawmakers and researchers should employ the utmost scrutiny before advocating for any form of childbearing. 

Children rightly desire to please their parents, and there are few conversations more complicated than questioning the method one’s parents chose to bring one into the world. There is reason to believe that many surrogate-born children will not have the emotional or mental maturity to understand their conception and gestation until they are much older.

There is a huge difference between no harm and no known harm. Regardless of one’s stance on surrogacy, we should be able to agree that we need more data and reporting requirements to enable researchers to assess the impact of surrogacy contracts on the well-being of children. In my view, a single six-part longitudinal study does not justify this practice. 

Emma Waters is a Senior Research Associate for the Richard and Helen DeVos Center for Life, Religion and Family at The Heritage Foundation.

[seldnei]

I just got told “Mom, I am not going to argue about this with you” from the 17 year old, and damn but I didn’t do that to my parents until I was in my 20s.

[direwombat]

wip last line tag

tagged by @adelaidedrubman and @socially-awkward-skeleton

tagging @detectivelokis, @aceghosts, @trench-rot, @deputyash, @river-ward, @inafieldofdaisies, @vampireninjabunnies-blog, @schoute, @voidika, @harmonyowl, @purplehairsecretlair, @cassietrn, @madparadoxum, @gaeadene, @g0dspeeed, @ivymarquis, and anyone else wanting to share!

here are the closing lines of the penultimate scene for the jakesyb abo fic.

“Oh, I promise. I’ll ruin you, sweetheart,” [Jacob] answers, his arms tightening around her. “I’ll make you mine. You ain’t gonna want anyone else when I’m done with you.”

The words should scare [Sybille]. Such violent possessiveness reminds her of her father. But instead of being afraid, she’s comforted. Here, in the arms of a cultist and killer, she sleeps sounder than she ever has in her life. 

[teartra]

Grace and Hunter going to be the bestest friend

Comparison below the cut, major spoilers for both

Blonde

Blonde

Both are 16

“Adopted” from young age by a horrible parental figure

Living a sheltered life with no friend

Introduced as the antagonist “weapon”

Acted as the antagonist at first

Actually a huge nerd

Socially awkward

Finally broke free from their abuser but still being chased by them (literally)

MAJOR SPOILERS: losing their first real friend and both of them were killed by their evil parental figure

[objectshowshipper]

Child Of Terror au jon thingies,,

• jon is nothing like canon . this man has never faced consequences a day in his life he has absolutely no social anxiety whatsoever

•^related, jon was the favourite sibling in the fucked up eldrich found family (the dad + the cat he said he didnt want dynamic)

• jon has a bunch of avatar friends and an equal amount of avatars who want him dead a million times over . hes just so Fear that any avatar sees him and either immediately decides this is The Guy Ever<3, or wants to punch him for existing

• hes closest w/ The Extinction,, they like to be Creepy Twins™ to scare people

[fideidefenswhore]

so where would anne, george and mary fall in the "five kids in five years" time line if he's the eldest?

hm, well, we don't know what years henry and thomas boleyn died, since the 'c.1520' seems like it was the date their brasses were made, not, obviously, the date of their deaths (both tiny tombs suggest cot deaths). "the exact date of elizabeth's marriage to thomas boleyn is unknown but her jointure was settled on her in 1501 suggesting a recent marriage some time after 1498 [...]"

so, i would think george was maybe born 1499, 1500, or 1501, mary born 1500, 1501, or 1502, and my personal theory is that anne was born either 1503 or 1504 (possibly 1505...)

*also going back to this quote ('general line rather than heirs male'), why would hunsdon have only said 'eldest daughter/sister', not 'eldest child'? the latter would arguably have given him a stronger claim, i'd assume because he knew the first was true but not the second:

"Lord Hunsdon's rather complicated account of the Boleyn titles shows that he had a good grasp of family history. Although his daughter, in her tomb memorial, stated that Mary Boleyn was the second daughter, it seems more likely that Lord Hunsdon was correct. Where the queen was his co-heir to the Boleyn title, he would have wanted to be very sure of his facts." Anne Boleyn: Henry VIII's Obsession, Elizabeth Norton

[nerdie-faerie]

Was tryna say goodbye to my siblings before going back to uni but I couldn't find my littlest brother - who has a tendency to put himself in weird places then fall asleep - turns out this time he'd folded himself into the futon and fallen asleep

[maaaxx]

why do you talk about hating ihiap so much 😭😭 its not even bad

if my fics are my kids ihiap is the problematic oldest child.

There are so many plot holes and things that were written impulsively and i dont like the chapter lengths and just stupid details and I hate how i wrote azula and its a mess.

[averagewatertypetrainer]

[elrondsscribe]

Oh my god, can it truly be? Do your eyes deceive you, or is that an update to the Star Wars AU??

[thebabygronckle]

hey so i Fully Believe that telemachus was not afraid of odysseus in Hold Them Down

people may have told him stories of Odysseus, King of Ithaca, Athena's chosen Champion, Hero of Troy

but mama's boy telemachus sat by her feet as she wove tapestry after tapestry; and penelope told her little wolf stories of his father

how they met, how he tripped over himself to woo her, how he cried his eyes out when penelope became pregnant, how telemachus wouldn't sleep in his cot as a baby because he was so used to being in his father's arms because odysseus would not put him down; and yes, how viciously he defended their family when the atrides came to retrieve him for the war

telemachus? the child of the Unhinged Power Couple? who knew very well how horrible those suitors were, how they treated him and spoke of his mother?

took one look at his dad viciously protecting their home, their family, and thought he was the coolest, strongest person ever (after mom ofc)

[p1astr81]

baby piastri - op81

in which: Oscar is learning to take care of his new baby girl.

pairing: dad!oscar piastri x mom!reader

warnings: none I don’t think?? fluff, super short blurb

‧‧₊˚ ⋅* ۶ৎ ‧₊ ‧₊˚ ⋅

You woke to the sound of yours and Oscar’s child crying. It’s been only three weeks since you brought her home, but it felt like ages, as you have hardly slept. Oscar usually slept through her cries. You never wanted to bother him, so you took care of it yourself despite his many protests.

Tonight was no different. You didn’t care about the time as the concept of it became irrelevant to you in the past weeks. But at some point late in the night, your little Isla started to fuss. You rubbed the sleep from your eyes, walking in zombie-like motions toward the baby cradle. You yawned as you reached into her cot, but your hands were met with nothing but air.

All of your senses immediately switched on high. You became more alert than that time you had three energy drinks in one day. You followed the sound of her cries, your feet moving faster than your brain could even process.

Your movements stopped when you saw Oscar pacing around the living room. He kept his usual calm demeanor, but you knew him so well that you could tell he was internally panicking. Little isla flailed in his arms as he softly bounced her around, hoping it would calm her. It didn’t. Her lungs worked overtime as she cried.

There was an open book on the coffee table. One of the books Oscar bought in preparation for the baby. A book all about parenting a new born. He leaned over to read something before turning to Isla, “You want your passy? Is that it?” He asked, offering the piece of plastic right in front of her mouth, but she swatted it away with her little hand. “No? Okay. Are you hungry then?” His voice was soft and low, overflowing with concern. “Mum isn’t awake but I’m sure there’s some food for you in the fridge.” He smiled lovingly down at your daughter.

“Oscar,” you called softly, just loud enough for him to hear you over isla’s screeching cries. His eyes met yours, an amount of remorse in them that you’d never seen before. He sighed. “I’m sorry, hon. I really didn’t want to wake you. I tried to get her to calm down.” He knew how much you’d been doing. How often you’d wake up and how little you slept. He always tried to help but you were so stubborn on being independent. His attention reverted back to the baby girl, tsk-ing out shushes as he tried to calm her.

You grabbed an unfinished bottle from the day before, and met Oscar in the middle of the room to hand it over. “I don’t know how you do it.” He chuckled and joined you on the couch. Luckily, isla clung to the bottle as soon as it was in her reach, solving the problem of her screaming. “You’ll learn,” you replied with a hum and rested your head on his shoulder. It didn’t take long for you to drift away from consciousness.