Just because you read it, doesn't mean you need to believe it: Getting beyond the recent guilt inducing headlines.

Extra! Extra read all about it! It's front page news just for moms! If you buy into what is being sensationalized and reported in the headlines these days about motherhood you too can feel instantly guilty about your past, present and future parenting decisions. Oh how wonderful! Yay you! Pick up your phone and tell all your friends to panic right along with you! Call your own mother, make her feel it too!

I think the media gambles on the idea that very few people will take the time to dig deeper into a headline and research the stories that are blasted on the pages as "news." We are all stretched for time and even if we aren't, time just whizzes by at warp speed, so news one second is history the next. 15 minutes of fame is now 15 seconds.

As a matter of fact, recent chatter on the blogosphere has focused on how quickly misinformation is now spread. While some of what we get from the media is pertinent information much of it these days is crap. It is always up to us to use our filters and figure out what is worthwhile to us in our lives. This means sometimes we've got to go beyond the headline and ask of ourselves "Does this matter to us?" and then "Why?" Because if we take the information at face value, often we can be left feeling judged by the masses or second guessing our ourselves and those around us. And that self-doubt. Those judgements. They fill up the guilt-o-meter at record speed!

You see, there was once a time when news was actually news worthy. It informed us, and often educated us, and a front page placement of a story meant there was going to be a reporting of events deserving of our attention. And now? Forget it! There is a line blurred between that which is "news" and that which is not, and everyone covering this stuff seems to be fighting for our attention like a 4 year old when the telephone rings. Flashy headlines have the power to turn a 1% difference in behavior into a 100% guilt inducing situation.

But here is another kicker, that the media is aware of: Research requires time, energy and desire. All very admirable qualities which vie for our attention - and attention these days is a highly valuable commodity as well as difficult to get a hold of for very long. So that being the case, I prefer to apply them to what is significant to me.

Time: My favorite quote is from John Lennon,"Life is what happens when we are busy making other plans." I would expand that to say, "Statistics are what change while we spend time analyzing them." I'd rather spend my time doing what I need to do and let other people fret about what they want to fret about. Their fretting doesn't need to be my fretting. It's great to be fret free when you can be!

Energy: Mine is expelled on 1 husband, 2 dogs, 3 kids in 3 schools with 3 different interests running in 10 different directions and, last but most definitely not least, ME. And those interests aren't always in the order I listed either! That's right baby, sometimes I am Numero Uno!

Desire: Please refer to the 1 husband listed above.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with being a research loving Alpha Mom. I'm just saying I prefer Beta or even Gamma, and on some days I can even be described as Zeta.

I admit it, my "research" consists of what I read in the paper and what I can find on- line when I get a few minutes. But when I read in my local paper, which covered that Daycare issue, and see their own spin, which stated that the research defined child care as "10 or more hours a day with a care giver other than the mother." I am rocketed into remembering that Dads usually aren't lumped in with daycare providers. Hmm, what about a father? That headline made me consider the following:

If the parents work opposite shifts so one of them is always home or if Mom works while Dad is the at-home parent, is the article now claiming the time with Dad is considered "day care"? !

I also read something else buried in the article. There is a 1% difference in disruptive behavior between kids in 6th grade who had spent time in child care and those 6th graders who did not.

Let me spell it out. ONE PERCENT!

Does anyone really think I need to take that seriously (or for that matter that anyone needs to take it seriously)? I despised statistics in high school but I do recall that 1% is more akin to margin of error than a statistically significant deviation or determination. As for us spending 38% more time on caregiving activities than mothers of past generations... let's just say I have LOTS of questions about a statement that is about as clear as mud. Or if we are going to be academic about it, we'll label it "ambiguous."

These are the kind of "societal influences" that can contribute to Mommy Guilt when we get roped into thinking the researchers and media play a more important role in raising our kids than we do. Did generations of mothers feel guilty before us? Absolutely. But my mother's guilt wasn't based upon the front page headline of the New York Times. Just ask her, she'll tell you!