With multiple players, varying levels and thematic design, Monopoly is a game that can be enjoyed by the whole family, even young children.

I doubt any parent thinks of a product called "Sugar Smacks" as nutritious. We reserve that kind of labeling for cereals that have no taste or taste like compacted sawdust. Still, would it surprise you to find out that many cereals, especially those designed for kids, are essentially candy? Move over Butterfinger, moms and dads could be handing out samples of cereal to the sweet seeking trick-or-treaters hitting their doorsteps this October!

Sugar Smacks were renamed Honey Smacks some time well after I stopped eating cereals (and being a kid--I guess those two things are linked) but a consumer group still found they were half sugar by weight. So, too did they find as such for Golden Crisp. Never heard of that one. If you'd told me that Cocoa Puffs were half sugar I would believe you, but the consumer group didn't test those.

As you might expect, Cheerios (champion cereal of small children everywhere) and Honey Nut Cheerios were found to be the healthiest. Cheerios ranked first with only one gram of sugar and three grams of fiber per serving. The study of cereals also found that kids serve themselves at least twice as much per serving as recommended. Who doesn't--especially if it's delicious and full of sugar??? Kellogg, who make Honey Smacks, noted they've made strides to increase the nutritional content of several cereals, including Fruit Loops, and that a serving of yogurt contains more sugar than a serving of Honey Smacks. What they didn't point out is the size of a serving of each--I'd wager you get a lot more yogurt than you do cereal per recommended serving. It also depends on what kind of yogurt you're discussing, as some brands add sugar a lot more liberally than others.

Some folks claim they don't dream at all, others that they do every night, and quite vividly. Some of us lurk somewhere in the middle, but become very avid dreamers when we're pregnant. Weird pregnancy dreams are nothing new to the mother-to-be community, and should certainly not be something that puts fear into a new or soon-to-be mom. Still, some of the things we dream about when we're pregnant shock us, or at the very least give us pause.

Some of us feel that much about our soon-to-be children are revealed in dreams. What they'll be like, how they'll look, even what they should be named have all come up in conversations I've had with other moms who had memorable pregnancy dreams. When I was pregnant with my son I had a dream that God wrote his name in the sky. It was Avery. I didn't end up naming my son that, but it was a good name I worked with for a long time before moving on to something else. I felt like this otherwordly force was trying to tell me something. My friend actually ended up naming her daughter Avery, so I think we're all squared away--it's a great name.

Some women dream more about the birth than anything. It's not uncommon to dream of birthing an animal. I guess there's something Freudian to all that, but to me it just says you're nervous about the impending arrival of something very important and that you want it to go the way you hope it will. You know, like having a baby instead of, say, a chicken. It's not uncommon for gals to dream they birth dogs and cats and all manner of things. It's also not uncommon to dream of weird occurrences during labor. I keep dreaming, for example, that my water won't break, and that my labor will start and then stop just as the doctors attend me. Those dreams seem pretty self-explanatory, but I'm not so sure about the birthing a chicken thing.

What about you? Did you have any memorable dreams during your pregnancy? Anything truly weird and seemingly without explanation you'd like to share?

Presidential nominee John McCain allegedly had a date set with actress Jenny McCarthy. The topic of their discussion? Not love but, rather autism, and specifically the link between the condition and the use of thimerosal in the vaccines McCarthy believes cause autism.

McCarthy was eager to meet with McCain after learning he believes there may be a link as well, and apparently flew herself out for a meeting with the Republican senator to try to make autism a major part of the presidential campaign.

According to reports, however, McCain backed out after his flack decided the subject matter was too controversial. Right, like presidential nominees should avoid discussing anything controversial! If they did all they'd end up doing at debates was drinking Yoohoos! Although not attributed anywhere, the post on IMDB claims McCain also bailed after learning there is no hard evidence linking vaccines with thimerosal and autism. Either way, McCain declined to meet with the former Playboy centerfold (huge mistake, dude!) and McCarthy has now set her sites on meeting with Senator Obama.

I remember being a kid and struggling with my mother every Sunday about what I was going to wear to church. Church was a reason to get dressed up, but all my nicer clothes were uncomfortable and I didn't like the thought of being trapped in them every week for even a few hours. While I liked the concept of the frilly dresses and whatnot, the shoes and tights were uncomfortable. I couldn't wait to get home to get all that off of me, to the point where I am not so sure I was paying much attention!

Holidays are one thing--kids get stuffed into nice dresses, tights and miniature suits for a few hours at a time, tops. Once they hit their own homes, half that stuff usually comes off and they are free to run around in more comfortable attire. Depending on where you live, the clothes can get more or less formal. IN New York City, for example, our kids are nothing if not fashion plates. No one seems to bat an eyelash at spending $100 on an outfit her kid is going to wear exactly one time for one special occasion. The good news is the mom usually knows at least one other family to pass the garments on to, so the item does get Miltie-wear.

In other parts of the country jeans are seen as acceptable. Throw a nice sweater on top of it and some decent shoes (which for a child can be unbelievably pricey) and the kids are good to go. They're probably more comfortable, too. Not sure if jeans are considered acceptable, at say, church, but they do fly at brunches and holiday gatherings in general.' Given the current economy, I wonder if kids' clothes will continue to become less formal as folks turn towards wardrobes they've already amassed.

What do your kids wear when the go out? My kid? Well, he wears whatever I mine from the gloriously wonderful clothes my friends lend me from when their sons were that age. We have a little network of lending going so the clothes we do buy get maximum wear.

Given the spate of media bs floating around the Internet these days part of me finds it hard to believe a rumor that anyone would want to botox their kid's feet. Then, part of me realizes the drama is surrounding Sharon Stone and thinks there could be a kernel of truth to the rumor. After all, the actress and one-time sexpot has basically gone off the wall in recent years, making crazy statements and acting crazy in general--and it no longer seems like a publicity stunt to draw attention and viewers to Basic Instinct 2.

Stone is mom to eight-year-old Roan, and her custody of him is currently under question. Allegedly she has lost custody of her son after overreacting to his foot odor by thinking he should get botox in his feet. According to reports (rumors!) the judge agreed that Stone was overreacting and causing pain to her child, and has granted primary custody to the actress' ex, Phil Bronstein. Sharon will get to see him one weekend a month.

That seems so terrible for a mother to lose custody of her child and to only be able to see him on a monthly basis. I would be crushed if that happened to me. Of course, as crazy and hormonal as I am in the last stages of pregnancy, I still wouldn't think it was a good idea to botox my son's feet. Poor Sharon--she really must be suffering from some sort of emotional disorder or complications from her brain surgery to make those sorts of decision (if they're true, and they appear to be).

My father, who's birthday is on Halloween (lucky guy!) would tell you that you're really never too old to celebrate Halloween. His love for the holiday is probably the reason Halloween is my favorite day of the year. That said, we've all opened our doors to hand out candy to someone who was, in our opinion, a little too old to be hitting up the neighbors for candy. Costumes are one thing--having seen the magic and creativity of many a Halloween parade (including the likes of the famous ones in New Orleans and New York City), I can attest that you're never too old to wear a costume, parade around and have a general good time. Once you hit a certain age, the candy is generally replaced by cocktails at such functions, but what about that in between time?

I've heard people say they've turned away kids who they thought were too old for trick or treating. I've also heard people say that it's the parents' responsibility to not only take the kids trick or treating but to tell them at what age to stop. I remember dressing up and hitting the neighborhood myself when I was in middle school and getting the hairy eyeball from a parent or too. My friend, who went as a baby, actually got on her knees after pushing the doorbell and wore pigtails to appear younger. I realized at that point, once you spend any period of time thinking about how to appear younger, you need to be on the other side of the candy bowl.

What do you think? Is it more important for the parents to tell the kid when to stop trick or treating, or should it be a decision the child makes on her own? Isn't Halloween really all about rebellion, anyway? If so, then telling a child he can't go trick or treating might just get him more inclined to do so without your blessing!

Here's a newsflash--a celebrity who will have her child, or in this case, children, early! Most celebrities never make it through the ninth month or pregnancy, opting for c-sections at the eighth month in order to avoid getting ginormous during the final weeks of pregnancy. Too late, Rebecca!

Those carrying twins--celebrity or not--are more likely to give birth earlier anyway. Rebecca Romijn is both a celebrity and carrying twins, so she is expected to pop--or have her babies--sooner rather than later. She is allegedly being placed on bed rest starting in October in hopes of getting the twins she's expecting with super-lucky husband Jerry O'Connell in January through some time in December.

Romijn joins countless celebrities in recent months who've either gotten pregnant with or given birth to twins. Her husband Jerry recently commented that she was "huge" and then later apologized. Perhaps the baby hormones are affecting him too! Good luck, Rebecca! Here's to hoping you make it to the new year! I can't imagine a woman on the go like her having to deal with bed rest!!! That'll be harder than surgery!

Soccer superstar David Beckham is set to launch a series of books aimed at getting kids to read through soccer. These days, Beckham is known as much for his celebrity lifestyle and products that carry his name as he is for his Euro football moves. In addition to fashion plate wife Posh and three sons, David lays claim to cologne among his other endeavors.

Beckham is not planning on writing the books, however, and will hire a ghostwriter to pen them. The books will be set in both London and his new home of Los Angeles and will focus on his soccer academies. My main question is whether or not there will be a character based on Posh!

Cooking with kids can be fun, easy and nutritious! Start with mini-pizzas.

Hard to believe but it's already flu season again. Or, to be more accurate, it's really (hopefully) flu PREVENTION season. This week the Center for Disease Control whipped out a new, stronger than ever campaign to get pregnant women and young children vaccinated. This campaign, of course, is not without its controversy. Not so long ago, one of our commenters seemed to think the topic of vaccinations was my high horse, as I write about it frequently, but I can assure you that's not the case. I'm a parent, too, with the same concerns as many of you regarding vaccines and children's health--I'm just interested in getting as much information as possible and seeing how the whole thing turns out.

According to the CDC, children as young as six months of age should be getting flu vaccinations. It strongly recommended vaccinations for kids up to eighteen years old, pregnant women, healthcare workers and anyone over the age of fifty. Seems harmless enough, right? I mean, most of us have gotten at least one flu shot in our lives and for the most part we turned out OK. The problem with the flu vaccine, which contains thimerosal, is that thimerosal contains mercury. Yep, mercury. Rather DANGEROUS. Now, that said, we've all been assured that even if it did contain said mercury, the amount would be no more than that in a small can of tuna. Contrary to that, however, are the findings that the kind of mercury found in thimerosal differs from that found in tuna (methyl mercury) in that it stays in the system, namely the brain, for a lot longer period of time. This is not great news for a developing fetal brain.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists claim that pregnant women should be getting this vaccine and that there isn't any evidence of harmful effects to women or their unborn children. According to some that notion is quite misleading as it implies that tons of tests and research has been done on the subject, when, in fact, it has not. Still, what would my pediatrician say? Well, he'd tell me that the chances of something happening to my child as a result of the flu vaccine are a great deal smaller than what might happen if he remained unvaccinated. When one weighs the odds from that perspective the vaccination wins out.

Clearly, more research is needed and the results well-established before we make any uniform decisions with respect to vaccinating our children--unborn or not. The other side of the argument? Opt for what my pediatrician did--offer flu shots without thimerosal. Hopefully, pregnant women can get that option too.

Mr. Aiken, welcome to the wonderful world of parenting. Sure, it's one filled with joy and happiness, but it's also, more than occasionally, one filled with fear. Clay Aiken learned about this less seemly side of parenting just weeks after the birth of his son. Aiken's son Parker was diagnosed with pyloric stenosis, which affects the gastrointestinal tract, the symptoms of which had the American Idol star fearing for his young son's health.

Parker was throwing up everything he was eating and Aiken feared he would become dehydrated. Prior to that he'd been gassy for several weeks. Aiken was concerned about taking his son to the hospital, but then realized that, as the child's father, he would be given access to the hospital and that he had a responsibility to ask the questions his baby could not.

See, parenting brings out the best in us (at least most of the time). Aiken is well on his way to being a great dad. And, it's thanks to celebrities, much of the time, that the public becomes aware of certain health issues. Before yesterday I'd never heard of the pyloric stenosis condition, nor was I aware of its symptoms, which not might seem that bad to a new parent unaware of the hidden dangers of such symptoms in newborns. Luckily, Parker and family are doing well and the little tyke is well on the road to recovery.

Ah, the rumor mill. It was a'buzzin' with the notion that recent newlywed Mariah Carey is pregnant. Then it went on to buzz that Carey would announce her pregnancy on an upcoming stint with talk show guru Oprah Winfrey. Well, it looks like that ain't so, on any level.

According to Oprah's flack, the Butterfly singer has no plans spilling the beans on her show. The spokesperson did not make any statement as to verify if Carey is pregnant. The Glitter star's reps have been denying her pregnancy ever since she married Nick Cannon in a whirlwind.

Mimi certainly doesn't look pregnant. The singer has been quick to reveal her latest attempts at having the perfect body, which have been successful. Perhaps marriage--and maybe even pregnancy--have been good to her. Time, not the media, will tell.

Actor Denzel Washington has a few words for Americans hitting the voting booths this November. He is urging us to take into consideration the needs of our youth as we consider casting our ballots. He's also urging our leaders to take these matters into greater account.

Washington is a strong supporter of the Boys and girls Club of America, and has taken youth issues to heart. Says Washington, the nation's leaders need to focus on the needs of our youth, including the increases in obesity and the high school dropout rate. The Oscar winner also commented on the violent crime among young people, which increases in the hours right after school.

Washington made his opinion known via a commentary piece for CNN.com and feels that if we don't deal with these issues our children won't be prepared to deal with the "challenges posed by a complex world." Well said!

Say what you will about disposable diapers, especially with regard to their impact on the environment, but it's hard to deny that they do offer (for the most part) one very important positive--the disappearance of diaper rash. The latest models of diapers have so much moisture-wicking capacity and absorbency that diaper rash is more of an occasional nuisance than the norm.

Which leads me to a strange and interesting question. Do kids, in this modern world of diaper technology, need to ever let it "air out?" And by that I mean spend some quality time sans diapers, underpants or anything else. Some--and especially some men to whom I've spoken--say it's important for little guys to air it out once in a while. I've heard the same thing from moms about their little gals. How long is the appropriate amount of time is hard to pin down. Most agree to let the airing continue until there's an, uhm, accident on the bathroom floor.

I've always read or been told that even adults need to air it out, and that it's not necessary to say, wear underwear to bed. If that's true then why would it not be so for kids? If the child is wearing the more environmentally-friendly cloth diapers, which from what I understand are not as absorbent, etc., then might it be more important to get a little air time? Or have cloth diapers modernized right along with the disposable version?

Do you air out your kids, or is it not necessary? Also, I'll say I've heard that despite the diaper rash disappearance, many parents eschew disposables because they say it impedes kids from properly potty training, as they never feel wet!