A bit of background

While the name-calling has been pretty run-of-the-mill stuff so far, we don’t want it growing into something larger. Moreover, the kid in question apparently told our son that he’d “get him” during recess if he told a teacher. Given this, we’ve decided that it would best to nip it in the bud right now.

It seems that the protagonist is an equal opportunity bully, in that he’s been picking on and threatening a number of kids in the class, including a number of our son’s friend. From the sound of things, he’s a bit of a loner, and I suspect he’s lashing out because he feels left out.

Anyway, enough pop psychology…

Standing up to a bully

Rather than inserting ourselves into the situation, we’ve decided that it would be best for our son to try and work this out on his own, at least at first. To that end, we had a chat with him last night before bed and suggested some possible responses the next time this happens.

We certainly don’t want him to escalate things, so we’ve advised him to steer clear of this kid as much as possible. However, if confronted, we would like to see him stand up for himself, so…

First and foremost, we suggested that he respond to any further name-calling by simply making eye contact and telling the other kid (firmly and confidently) to:

“Stop calling me names.”

If asked what he’s going to do about it, we suggested that he respond matter-of-factly with:

“Tell the teacher.”

If he’s then greeted with a playground threat, we advised him to respond with:

“Stop threatening me. I’m not afraid of you.”

It doesn’t hurt that the kid is actually considerably smaller than our son, and he’s not actually afraid of him — he’s more annoyed than anything else. And to close with:

“If you don’t stop, I will tell the teacher.”

And then make good on his promise by telling the teacher.

The goal here is to be firm, confident, and non-provocative. In my experience, the vast majority of incidents like this happen because the protagonist enjoys getting a rise out of their mark, and they are further emboldened when their victim shies away from the confrontation, so… Say it like you mean it, and then act on it.

This is all new territory for use, so we’ll see how it goes.

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» School Pictures are a Scam
» Birthday Celebration for a Grownup
» The Boys of Summer Have Gone
» First Day of School Jitters? Yeah, Right
» Q&A: How to Deal With Bad Habits & Annoying Behaviors
» 2007 State Sales Tax Holidays for Back-to-School Shopping
» School Start Times: Later is Better for Teens
» Barfing Our Way Back to School

When I asked him about it, he was very forthright. Yes, he had searched for butts. But according to him, he actually had been searching for pictures of alligators, and then got the bright idea of trying to figure out where an alligator’s butt is located — he has a suspicion that it’s right up there under the base of the tail, but he wanted to be sure.

He went on to say that he forgot that he was doing a “picture search,” and accidentally wound up with a bunch of pictures of butts (thankfully he didn’t do a web search, as the results are actually worse).

He went on to say:

“But they all had clothes on. Well, except one, but that was an ancient Egyptian. And there was also a lady wearing a bookini.”

(And yes, he actually used the term “bookini.”)

When I did the fatherly thing and asked him if he had any questions or wanted to talk about anything, he got a disgusted look on his face and said:

“No. I’ve seen enough.”

And that, dear friends, is our first lesson in keeping an even tighter leash on the kids when it comes to internet access.

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» Parenting Quote – Erma Bombeck
» Check Out “Man vs. Wild”
» Privacy Policy
» The Best of October 2007
» Disney Raises Ticket Prices (Again)
» Birthday Party for a Nine Year Old
» Sick Kids and Creative Clothes
» Subscribe to Raising4Boys via RSS or E-mail (It’s Free!)

And yes, I know what you’re thinking…

If only they offered an RSS feed.

Well… They don’t, but we do!

Simply add the following url to your favorite feedreader and you’re good to go:

Toy Recall RSS Feed: http://www.raising4boys.com/toyrecalls/

Alternatively, you can sign up to receive recall updates via e-mail.

Note that this feed only gives you the titles of the recalls, but the titles are pretty descriptive, so that should be more than enough to decide if you want to click through for more information.

Also note that, while the above url redirects to a FeedBurner feed that I’ve created, you should subscribe via the link listed above in case I have to make any changes to keep this feed alive in the future.

Finally, I thought I’d take this opportunity to plug our regular RSS feed, which provides you with the full text of everything we write. We also offer an e-mail version.

(Special thanks to The Consumerist for pointing out the CPSC list.)

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» The Best of October 2007
» Subscribe to Raising4Boys via RSS or E-mail (It’s Free!)
» Subscribe via RSS or E-mail (It’s Free!)
» Recalls, Recalls Everywhere – Toys and Bibs
» Privacy Policy
» One Year Ago This Week – In the Beginning
» Switched to Full-Text RSS Feed
» Online Christmas Fun

Over the weekend, my wife and I were lamenting that we haven’t been able to find our preferred bread – Earthgrains Honey Wheat Berry – anywhere in town. We’ve checked Kroger, Publix, Sam’s Club, and Super Wal-Mart and have come up empty. We can find generic versions, but they’re just not the same.

Well, tonight I decided to investigate, and guess what? Sara Lee has issued a “precautionary recall” (pdf) of 27 types of wheat bread.

According to their press release:

Sara Lee Food & Beverage is issuing a voluntarily and precautionary recall of selected whole wheat bread products produced at the company’s Meridian, Miss. bakery and sold at grocery retailers in the following areas of the country: the entire states of Mississippi and Alabama, most of Arkansas, far southeastern Missouri, western Georgia, southwestern Tennessee, southeastern Louisiana and the panhandle of Florida. The affected products may contain small pieces of metal.

Yikes! Small pieces of metal in your bread?!?!?

The affected products have “Best if Purchased By” dates ranging from July 25, 2007 and August 7, 2007 and include the code “222” on the front of the bag. Better check your bread supply (don’t forget to look in the freezer!) before making sandwiches for your young’uns.

Here’s a full list of the product names and UPC codes included in the recall:

Colonial Wheat Sandwich, 20 oz., 5040023502
Earthgrains Honey Wheat Berry, 5040072709
EarthGrains 100% Natural Wheat Berry, 5040072748
EarthGrains 100% Natural 7-Grain, 5040072747
EarthGrains 100% Natural Whole Wheat, 5040072746
Flavorite Wheat Sand., 20 oz., 4113002364
Foodland Wheat Bread, 20 oz., 4130320964
Golden Bake Wheat Bread, 20 oz., 5040008505
Great Value Split Top Bread 20 oz., 7874206274
Great Value 24 oz. Wheat Sand., 7874228543
Grissom’s Wheat Bread, 20 oz., 5193370220
Grissoms Wheat Sand., 24oz., 5193370300
IGA 20oz. Wheat, 4127003695
Piggly Wiggly Wheat Bread 20 oz., 5040000118
Publix Honey Wheat, 4141539095
Publix 100% Stoneground, 4141539190
Publix Wheat 20 oz., 4141539290
Publix Stone Ground Wheat 20 oz., 4141539390
Sara Lee Deli Style 100% Whole Wheat, 7294561001
Sara Lee Delightful Wheat, 7294571706
Sara Lee Delightful 100% Whole Wheat, 7294571589
Sara Lee Delightful 100% Multi-Grain, 7294571588
Sara Lee Hearty & Delicious 100% Whole Wheat with Honey, 7294560152
Sara Lee Hearty & Delicious 100% Whole Wheat, 7294560157
Sara Lee Hearty & Delicious 100% Multi-Grain, 7294560158
Schnucks Wheat Sandwich, 24 oz., 2412601044
Shurfresh Split Top Wheat 20 oz., 1116144835

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» Recalls, Recalls Everywhere – Toys and Bibs
» One Year Ago This Week (April 15th – April 21st)
» The Best of R4B – Selections from 04/06
» A Father is Born
» One Year Ago This Week (April 8th – April 14th)
» Dealing With a Finicky Four Year Old Eater
» One Lovable Dude
» Ten Things That I’ve Learned in Life

The risks associated with coating children’s toys with lead paint are self-evident. As for the magnets, they can come loose. Thus, they pose the same risks as the defective Magnetix building kits that were the focus of a recall awhile back — namely, potential intestinal perforation or blockage following ingestion.

An interesting sidebar to all of this relates to the challenges associated with disposing of millions lead-tainted toys. Mass dumping of these toys into landfills could pose an environmental hazard. Lovely. Mattel managed to sell a bunch of toys that aren’t even fit for disposal because they’re so toxic.

As if these toy recalls weren’t enough, the Center for Environmental Health is reporting that certain vinyl baby bibs that were manufactured in China and are currently for sale at Toys’R'Us contain lead at 3-4 times the level that the EPA allows in paint. No word on a recall yet.

Related Resources:
Mattel’s Recall Information
The CPSC Toy Recall Page

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» Keeping Track of Toy Recalls via RSS and E-Mail
» Dude, Where’s Our Bread? Recalled!
» The Best of October 2007
» Hot Holiday Toys: “TMX Friends” Ernie and Cookie Monster Top the List
» Button Cell Batteries
» The World’s Most Practical Five Year Old
» Carnivals – Week of 02/26/07
» Ten Most Dangerous Toys of 2006

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» How to Install a Child Safety Seat That Won’t Budge
» From the Archives (October 28th – November 3rd)
» Carnivals – Week of 01/22/07
» Infant Car Seat Safety
» Consumer Reports Withdraws Infant Safety Seat Report
» How Safe are Cough and Cold Medicines for Kids?
» The Best of January 2007
» One Child Left Behind: The Life of a Fourth Child

Anyway, we finished our lunch and the boys and I went out front, near the rockers, to wait for my husband as he picked out the candy and paid the check. As the boys were rocking away and playing checkers, a young Amish couple (or perhaps they were Mennonites; she had the little white cap and they both had the typical plain clothes) approached son #2 and offered him four very large suckers to share with his brothers. This had never happened to one of my boys, so he was slightly taken aback and didn’t immediately reach for the candy. “It’s OK. You can take it,” said the young man.

I felt my Mama Bear bristle inside of me and I politely said, “No, thank you.” His response to this was to try to hand the suckers to me instead. The boys went crazy and began to beg for a sucker. I again said, “No thank you,” and added, “I’ve taught my boys never to take anything from somebody they don’t know. I need to abide by my own rules. In the grand scheme of things I’m sure it would be fine if I just took the candy, but the boys need to learn this lesson.”

(By the way, I really did use those words. Even under pressure, I kept my cool.)

He smiled and said, “That’s fine. I totally understand. I have three kids of my own. Can I give them to the guy inside?”

“You mean my husband?” I inquired.

“Yes.”

“No thank you. He’s not going to take them either.”

The couple intimated that all was fine and left “The Barrel” and us alone. The boys were very curious about what transpired, so I gave them my take on the whole situation. I explained that this was very likely a religious couple trying to perform a random act of kindness. However, our family has a steadfast rule that you never take something from somebody you don’t know. Anybody can dress up to look Amish and/or safe just like anybody can tell you they’re a doctor. You never really know the truth when you’re dealing with a stranger.

I didn’t delve any deeper than this with the boys. However, after much pondering, I felt very sorry that things had to go the way they did. The young man showed such exuberance, almost child-like, with his gift of candy. After I rejected their offer for the third time, I noticed a crimson shade of red on the cheeks of the young woman. Don’t get me wrong, I totally stand by my decision to refuse the candy, but it was almost done at the expense of their innocence. It seems that, in their sheltered world, the potential repercussions of accepting a treat from a stranger are almost unfathomable.

The valuable lessons learned will make everybody in the scenario less naive about this world we live in. Don’t take candy from strangers. Don’t approach random children and offer them candy. In any case, Mama Bear protected her cubs and will do so again. Granted, my adversaries weren’t much of a match. I hope I never need to protect my cubs from a worthier foe.

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» Easy Bake Recall
» Carnivals – Week of 08/14/06
» From the Archives (July 29th – August 4th)
» Check Out “Man vs. Wild”
» The Best of R4B – Selections from 08/06
» Thank God for the Child Tax Credit
» A Six Year Old Banshee
» Instilling Values in Your Child: Teach by Doing

Hasbro has issued a second recall of Easy-Bake Ovens sold since May 2006. Hasbro actually issued an initial recall back in February due to 29 reports of kids getting their fingers caught in the oven’s opening, resulting in five reported cases of burns. At the time, they offered free reato-fit kits to eliminate the danger. Unfortunately, it seems like the danger still exists, as they have received and additional 249 reports of kids getting their fingers caught, including 77 reports of burns, 16 of which were second or third degree, and one of which required a partial finger amputation in a five year old girl. This recall includes units with the retro-fit kit, so if you have one and responded to the initial recall, you still need to deal with this one.

For more information and to download the recall form, visit the Easy-Bake recall site. Alternatively, you can call (800) 601-8418 for details.

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» Peanut Butter Rudolph Christmas Cookies
» Recalls, Recalls Everywhere – Toys and Bibs
» Dude, Where’s Our Bread? Recalled!
» Magnetix Building Sets Recalled
» We’re a Two Pizza Family
» Keeping Track of Toy Recalls via RSS and E-Mail
» Mazes, Mazes, Mazes (And All for Free)
» And Now He’s Six – Bowling Birthday Revisited

In case you haven’t heard, the CDC has linked a salmonella outbreak to Peter Pan peanut butter as well as Wal-Mart’s Great Value peanut butter — both of which are produced by ConAgra Foods, Inc. Thus far, nearly 300 people nationwide. While ConAgra claims innocence, and states that all of their tests have been negative, they’ve issued a recall of the potentially tainted peanut butter and have started offering refunds.

Fortunately, we don’t have any of this stuff around the house, but… If you do, you need to check the product code on the lid. If it starts with 2111, then you should throw it out.

In order to get a refund, send the lid along with your name and address to:

ConAgra Foods
P.O. Box 57078
Irvine, CA 92619-7078

Correction… ConAgra has changed the address from the one originally reported by the AP:

ConAgra Foods
P.O. Box 3768
Omaha, NE 68103

For more information, call 866-344-6970.

[Source: Boston Globe]

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» Peanut Butter Rudolph Christmas Cookies
» Bananas ala Kid
» Dealing With a Finicky Four Year Old Eater
» The Best of December 2007
» Recalls, Recalls Everywhere – Toys and Bibs
» One Year Ago This Week (April 15th – April 21st)
» Carnivals – Week of 05/01/06
» One Year Ago This Week – In the Beginning

We withdrew the report immediately upon discovering a substantive issue that may have affected the original test results. The issue came to light based on new information received Tuesday night and Wednesday morning from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) concerning the speed at which our side-impact tests were conducted.

For their part, the NHTSA is “fairly certain that the crash speed [at which] Consumer Reports conducted the tests was really closer to 70 to 80-miles per hour.” If this is true, it means that the side-impact tests were carried out at roughly twice the intended speed.

Interestingly, Consumer Reports is still standing by its front-impact results, which it insists were performed at the intended speed. Given this, it seems that there are still some pretty severe problems with infant safety seats in this country, although they may not be as bad as originally believed. Consumer Reports intends to repeat the tests re-issue their report as soon as possible.

[Source: ABC News]

---
Related Articles at raising4boys.com:

» Infant Car Seat Safety
» How to Install a Child Safety Seat That Won’t Budge
» Carnivals – Week of 01/22/07
» From the Archives (July 15th – July 21st)
» How Safe are Cough and Cold Medicines for Kids?
» Keeping Track of Toy Recalls via RSS and E-Mail
» Easy Bake Recall
» Magnetix Building Sets Recalled