Kate Moss has been known for a lot of things. In the eighties she was the face of the Calvin Klein fragrance Obsession. She was a supermodel. She was constantly embattled over her (lack of) weight. Then she had a child, and normalcy returned, until she was constantly in the spotlight for drugs and alleged partying ways.

In fact, rumor had it that Kate split from her most recent boyfriend, rocker Jamie Hince, because of her lifestyle. Not so, insists a source, who claims the real reason the couple split is that Moss was ready to become a mom again. According to the source the supermodel was keen to add to her family, which already consists of five-year-old daughter from a previous relationship.

So maybe Kate really is like the rest of us? She wanted a commitment, couldn't get one from the guy--he wanted to focus on his band--and perhaps she felt the clock ticking. Or not. I mean, this woman carries handbags that are worth more than my rent. But hey, you gotta feel for a woman who, if it's true, puts her family (and her biological needs) first. Good luck, Kate!

Kate's no stranger to the camera. Perhaps if she succeeds in becoming a mom again, she can join the ranks of these pregnant cover girls:

Source

(Click the photo to see the Top 10 Most Controversial Celebrity Dads)

Many of you probably know Jamie Oliver. He is, among other things, one of the many chefs whose work is showcased on The Food Network and who enjoys the title Naked Chef. I don't know much about him, so I am not sure where he gets that title, except hat he wrote the book of the same name, but it certainly makes me want to tune in to his programming.

Well, Oliver and wife Jools (Juliette Norton) are apparently in the family way again. Jamie and his wife Jools are allegedly expecting the third child together. The couple currently has two girls, Poppy Honey and Daisy Boo, and it is also alleged that Jamie is keen for the third child to be a boy. In fact, according to the source, he's so desperate for a boy he'd be wiling to adopt to get one.

As the parent of a boy, I highly recommend it. It's great. That said, I am also about to become mom to a little girl, and I think that's the most exciting thing ever. There is a fifty/fifty chance that a child will be a girl or a boy, so it's tough to try to rationalize the sex of your unborn child one way or the other. Perhaps it is also not so wise to get your hopes up--and make them public--in case you happen to be wrong about what's lurking in that womb. I'm sure Jamie will be thrilled regardless of what his new child turns out to be.

Congratulations and good luck!

Source

Whether or not you would is one thing. Whether or not you SHOULD is another. Many business owners, especially those with smaller businesses, tend to rely on and hire members of their family to help them out. Some of those stints are short term and some of them are all the way up to partner (or, as I like to think of it, co-conspirator). But, is it a good idea to mix the personal with the professional? After all, you can't get any more personal than family.

The positive aspects of bringing a family member into the work fold include the fact that most likely the family member already knows a lot about the business and would require less training. Additionally, some family members are more likely to work harder than someone who is not family out of loyalty.

The downside of hiring family is that some of them might expect kickbacks or special treatment solely because they're related. Others are less likely to work as hard as their non-related counterparts because they think they don't have to. Then there's the whole mixing personal and professional rule of thumb we've always been told to avoid. Those two things are said to never really mix. Yet, many of the world's most successful businesses have been family operated. When things are going well, isn't it family you want to share your successes with the most? Likewise, when things aren't going well, most likely it's your family you turn to in hard times for support.

What do you think? Is it ever a good idea to employ or work for your family, or is it a bad mix? Would you or do you work with your family?

Source

Move over "John & Kate Plus 8." You ain't got nothin' on the Duggar family. For those of you unfamiliar with the Duggars (as I was), they're a family of nineteen, seventeen of which are the children. And now, according to reports, they're being given their own television show.

Like it or not the world has yet to see the last of reality television. The Duggars are to get their own stint in the world of reality showing what it's like not only to have seventeen kids (do I need a reality show to imagine what that's like?) but also what it's like to travel the talk show circuit and bathe in the limelight of stardom through (constant) procreation.

What's more, the show will follow the family as they grow--that's right, Mom Michelle is expecting another child! That will make enough for two baseball teams. What could we learn from the Duggars? I'm not really sure, but the Discovery Channel will give us the opportunity to find out. Will you watch the show, or are you too wrapped up in your own kids to try to watch someone else manage ALL of theirs?

I'm sorry, but dang--that is a LOT of kids!

Source

Being a twin always seemed really great to me. In a romantic notion, I pictured having a twin meant being able to share pretty much everything together. So it would seem to most people. For Lexus and Amber Conway, however, twins born one on each side of midnight, August 31st, they will be sharing everything except the same grade in school.

Timing is everything, as they say, and because the cute little gals were technically born two different days--albeit only 45 minutes apart--they will be in two different school years. Lexus will get to go to school when she is four, but sis Amber will have to wait until the ripe old age of five to hit the books. Their parents, of course, are dead set against this reasoning and plan on spending the next four years, if it takes that, to find a way for their daughters to attend school together.

If that doesn't happen, proud papa Ian Caldwell plans on homeschooling the tots or moving to Spain. (Hey--that's my answer for everything: When it doesn't go your way, move to Spain. Seriously, it's worth a thought--Spain is FABULOUS. ) Also on the twins' side is Keith Reed, who serves as chief executive at The Twins and Multiple Births Association, who agrees that this is a truly singular, unique situation where the rules ought to be bent.

Thoughts? Is it better for twins (or any multiples) to always be together, in class, especially? Or is there a silver lining in this case being missed by the parents who could spare their daughters some pressure, constant comparison and competition?

Source

OK, is it me or is a national convention no place for a baby? As was widely covered (yet not as much as the Democratic National Convention, interestingly), the Republican National Convention showcased many of Sarah Palin's children (and a would-be teenage groom). Among them, Palin's infant son, Trig. I thought it was a lot to take my newborn to the local diner when he was born!

Now, while the Republicans seemed a little more calm and collected than their boisterous Democratic opponents, they were still a relatively rowdy bunch. The whole point of a convention is to get people riled up for the cause, and there was a lot of that going on, especially from Palin herself. It was a loud, crowded, noisy place, which, to me, is no place for a baby. Babies need stimulation and interaction with the social world, I'm sure, but the RNC is a far cry from what good old Doctor Spock imagined. I am sure that kid was terrified. He seemed ok in the arms of family members as the rest of the RNC wailed on, but I couldn't help but think he should have been home with a nanny or a sitter.

Of course, the whole point of having her family there was to drive home the point that she's a mom and that she is a working mother, too. And, naturally, rather than focusing on real issues that truly matter to the election, the focus was all on her family. Trig has down syndrome. Bristol is pregnant. Levi will we her. Both Palin and the press have done their best to constantly remind us of these things--things which matter, sure, but they shouldn't be a part of the race for the White House. Should they? Palin and her people say keep the children out of it, yet there they were, even the littlest one, at the convention. Obama was no better--he trotted his kids out for the cute factor, no denying that.

Thoughts? Should we keep candidates' kids out of the political spotlight? If so, shouldn't they NOT be on television?

Source

A recent article regarding birth order and relationships on AOL's Personals site got me thinking of a conversation I'd recently had with my mother. We were talking about how many kids I wanted (I have one with another one on the way). I'd said ideally I'd love to have three someday, and then the topic of the middle child--and middle child syndrome--came up. Is it really true that middle children behave a certain way? They're neither the oldest, firstborn, nor are they the baby in the family. And, just perhaps, that birth order of being in the middle has an affect on their relationships when they get older.

According to the article, written by the folks at eHarmony Advice, firstborn children make good mates because they're reliable; of course, they can also make poor mates because they're not given to spontaneity and like to maintain control. Middle-born children are more likely to be laid back, which everyone enjoys, but they're also not inclined to deal well with conflict, avoiding it at all costs. This can be both good or bad for a relationship. And the youngest, the baby of the family, can be the most fun and exciting in a relationship, but that can also translate to not being accountable for actions and abuse of power.

What about the only child? According to the article they act much like the oldest child, and make great communicators who've been around adult relationships their whole lives. Expectations are the downfall for the only child, as is moving too slowly. Is this a load of hogwash, or is eHarmony on to something here? Does birth order really affect how an adult treats his or her mates in a relationship? Or is it more a matter of nature AND nurture--how the parents treat a child regardless of birth order? I'm going with the latter on this one, as it seems to easy to pigeon-hole someone into a type of behavior based on his/her birth order. Still, some say it's as real as anything else psychology has to throw our way. What do you think?

Pic by dsearls.

Source

We've often had the conversation here at ParentDish about how many children is enough. The answer? Well, it depends on the family. Desire, money, space, time and energy requirements all make their case in the debate, and it ultimately comes down to how much kid a parent can handle. Several people have said to me, for example, how they really wanted three children until they had two. Some, like me, who came from a small family--I was an only child--want as big a family as possible. Others think one is the magical number.

For Brad Pitt, apparently that magic number hovers somewhere near what it would take to have your own baseball team. The actor, heartthrob and life partner (or whatever you want to call him) of Angelina Jolie, who already has six children, recently admitted he'd like two more. To take matters further, he is quoted (probably WAY out of context) as saying they'll arrive within the next year. That statement, true or not (probably the latter) will do two things:

1. It will give the media, tabloids and gossip hounds even more ammunition that the twins were conceived using fertility treatments, which has been denied by the pretty pair and that they'll use such methods again to get two more children in such a short span of time (unless they adopt, and you know how long that can take, even for a celebrity: just ask Madonna); and

2. It will, indeed, give them almost enough kids for a baseball team. I mean, if Ange and Brad joined in the fun then there'd be ten of them, so you know, you could have reserves and pinch hitters and whatnot.

Safety in numbers, right? And, really, once you have six kids, what's two more? I mean, other than the baseball team thing. Good luck to the happy couple, if indeed what Brad says is true in any way, shape or form whatsoever.

Source

It may seem like something of a bore by now, but actress Jennifer Garner has finally come clean about her pregnancy. the Alias star, married to fellow actor Ben Affleck, has caused much speculation over recent months after being photographed wearing comfortable clothing and posing her daughter, Violet, and some pretty expensive handbags in front of her swelling belly.

Not too long ago, former Alias co-star Victor Garber seemingly confirmed the news that Garner was pregnant again. He later recanted, saying his comments were taken out of context. Then her mother-in-law had a similar slip of the lip. Both Jenn and Ben refused to comment on her state of impending mommyhood until just recently, when she confirmed the news.

Now the watch is on to see how big she'll get, whether the baby will be a girl or boy, and what the name will be. These are the things the media is sure we care about and will take every opportunity to tell us. As or the Garner-Afflecks, I can appreciate wanting to keep some of the joy to yourself--they told when they were good and ready, and not a moment before that.

Congrats to Violet's mom and dad! She'll be a big sister soon!

Source

It's hard not to do. For some, it's inevitable: Playing favorites. Parents try not to do it, grandparents too. Still, the idea persists--siblings talk about it amongst themselves and make the decisions when the grandparents don't. But what about when the grandparents do?

I can think of several instances when it's been pretty obvious that the grandparents had a favorite child. It's also been pretty obvious when the grandchild was not the favorite. To be frank, in both instances it really stunk for the kids. Sometimes, perhaps, it was because the grandparents had access to or spent more time with a particular grandchild. Sometimes, it was the direct result of having a favorite child.

In any event, having favorites is one thing--making it obvious is quite another. And, it's never fair to let it be known if you have a preference of one child over another. Yet some grandparents still exercise that option (parents too). Good Morning America online is taking a poll of how parents handle the situation when the grandparents play favorites. What are your thoughts on the subject? How do you handle it when grandma and grandpa play favorites? Or, is it something we can even help doing?

Pic by itchys on flickr.

Source

It's unusual enough to be identical twins, but for a pair of such twins to meet another pair of identical twins and fall in love? That's gotta be pretty rare. But then, for one of those couples to give birth to identical twins, that's even more of a rarity. But even the rarest of events can still occur. And so we have the case of Diane and Darlene Nettemeier and Craig and Mark Sanders.

The two sets of identicals met at the Twin Day festival in -- where else? -- Twinsburg, Ohio back in 1998. They ended up going on a double date to Las Vegas where they won a whole mess of money playing poker. Sensing they were on a roll, they got engaged the same day. After getting married, they built a pair of homes right next door to each other.

As if all that weren't enough, Craig and Diane went on to have a pair of identical twins of their own, seven-year-old Colby and Brady. And now, ten years after their first meeting in Twinsburg, they're returning to show off their own set of double trouble. I have to say, that's pretty cool. Double cool, even.

Source

So far, this is turning out to be a retro summer! By foregoing the organized sport/activity route, my kids are busy making themselves busy.

Two weeks ago, my budding capitalists set up a lemonade stand in our driveway. They made signs, lemonade, and used their own piggy bank money to buy supplies. They were so excited to have "customers" and I found myself surprised by how seriously they took their job.

With all this free time, there's time for elaborate dress-up games. Most mornings they come down dressed as spies in black leggings, old trench coats and a back pack full of "spy things" which consist primarily of walkie-talkies and primitive telescopes. Today they divulged their secret hiding place in the ravine by the side of the house where they "spy on the cars" that drive by.

One of the hardest parts of transitioning from a one-child family to two children is realizing that you have utterly and completely rocked your first child's world. Though you understand everyone is going to be just fine in the end, it doesn't make that sometimes rocky transition period any easier.

At a recent visit to the community pool, I saw something that surprised many of the parents around me. A mom was sitting in the paddling end of the coolish pool with her three-year-old daughter and what appeared to be a very, very new baby. After splashing their feet for a while, the mom took her child (in a life jacket) and the baby to the deeper end of the pool, where the infant slept through being submerged to her chin and splashed by her little sister for a good half hour or more, with no shade from the hot sun.

Is Gwyneth Paltrow expecting again? Well, the rumor mill would have us think so. For a while now, speculation has been building that the Oscar-winner is either with child or planning to be that way a third time.

Now, it seems more likely than ever that the star, who is married to and has two children with Coldplay lead singer Chris Martin, is carrying a third proverbial bun in the oven. She was recently spotted with what is being called a fuller, more curvy figure. Now, that could mean she ate a sandwich or something--we all know how the media likes to jump all over any woman who bothers to consume anything other than iceburg lettuce.

Paltrow also recently commented to Harper's Bazaar Magazine that she is willing to go through a pregnancy a third time because the result is so amazing. She also commented that her father, the late Bruce Paltrow, regretted only having two children. Paltrow is already mom to Apple, who is four is you can believe it, and Moses, two. At least these sorts of rumors aren't as bad as the other kind that always circulate about Hollywood stars--that they're having a crisis in their marriages. You'll also recall not too long ago Paltrow commented she was interested in adopting, perhaps from Brooklyn.

Source

Although it is a decidedly less controversial issue, many people are talking about whether or not have more than one child, especially in this terrible economy. Here in New York City, having more than one child can be such an exorbitant expense it's seen as a luxury and a status symbol to have a child at all!

For actress Kate Beckinsale, however, who is probably not so concerned about money, having more than one child is not in her interest. Kate has a nine-year-old daughter, Lily, who is so well-behaved that Kate thinks she might stop at the magic number of one.

Kate also comments that she was an only child so having only one child would suit her just fine. As an only child myself, I was always lonely and looking for someone to play with, so I made every effort to make sure my son would have a sibling. If we're all lucky, he'll have one in October. Is it better to have one or two--or eight!--children? Who can say. I think it's up to the parents and their desires. According to Kate, her little family is "a merry little bunch," so it sounds like she's found the perfect number.

Source