Hasselbeck made the reveal on The View: "I didn't even know for two months. I was walking around. I thought I had, I kept saying, 'Electionitis, electionitis.'" The Hasselbecks were "thoroughly happy with the surprise of it."

"I was tired, I was nauseous, I thought I was worn out from the whole procedure. No! I was knocked up and didn't realize it."

The new tot, whose sex is unknown, will join siblings Grace Elisabeth, three, and Taylor Thomas, 15 months. Once the new babe joins the clan, Hasselbeck will have three children under the age of five! How she'll handle that and being a working mom I'll never know.

Feisty Hasselbeck is known for her strong Republican views, and many a viewer tunes in to see her spar with her talk show co-hosts. I wonder if any of those pregnancy hormones will affect her views or her feistiness! Former co-host Rosie O'Donnell left the show after a very heated argument with a very pregnant Hasselbeck in 2007.

Elisabeth is due in August. Congratulations!

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

What the heck is going on with Joaquin Phoenix? I love a man who follows his own heart, but the Oscar-nominated star of Walk the Line has "retired" from acting to start a career as a hip-hop artist. Yes, hip-hop. Or so he would have us believe. While I am hoping all of this is some sort of hoax, as many have recently speculated, or practice for an upcoming role, it would seem that mid-life, the younger Phoenix brother has decided to switch careers.

And, why not? After all, he has all the money he'd ever need. Plus, he's not married, nor does he have any children (that we know about) so what is to stop Joaquin from living out his dream? After all, whether he succeeds or fails, he will at least have tried.

I've often thought to myself how great it would be to just pack up and run off to New Orleans for a few years, try to make it as a writer and live out my personal dream. When I was younger, that seemed like a real possibility. Now, though, I'm married with two kids and I have a mortgage to pay. In other words, I have responsibilities. I can't just drop everything and do whatever I want, whenever I want.

Ah, such is the life of a celebrity. I would caution Mr. Phoenix, however; Michael Jordan may have been one of the greatest athletes of all time, but he was no baseball player. And while Joaquin may be one of the finest living actors I am not sure he will fare as well in the music world.

We regular folk will have to settle for fantasy -- dreams cost time and money that we mostly don't have. Plus, what if we aren't triumphant in our new career? Still, many people are willing to take the risk in case it pays off. Sometimes a little risk is what it takes to ensure success. After all, if we're happy in our work, won't our families be happy too?

Would you be inclined to start over mid-life, or at any time, if you had a family? Have you taken such a risk, and, if so, was the risk worth it?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Anderson is thankful her work as an actress allows her to afford a nanny for her three children, Piper, 14, Oscar, 2, and baby Felix. In a recent post at her website, Anderson wrote, "You know, one of the things I am the most amazed at in life is women who raise children without help. Yes some people are more built for it than others, higher levels of the patience hormone, but hell it is HARD! And how the hell do you clean the house and make the dinner and do the shopping? I know I am sounding like a complete idiot here but I'm telling you, every last one of you from the beginning of time should be given a medal, and free health insurance, and food coupons, and a government subsidized housekeeper that comes in one day a week per child."

While I doubt we'll see anything like that from the U.S. or British governments, it is nice to know that even famous moms like Anderson face the same struggles as the rest of us. Of course, not everyone can afford a nanny or other childcare, but Gillian seems genuinely thankful she can afford such help.

What about you -- do you have help with the kids or the housework?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

I think President and Michelle Obama would mind if, say he gave them front row seats to his latest theatrical endeavor, Equus, in which he can be seen bum and all. But the Harry Potter film set? Not so much. The girls have already been issued invitations of entertainment from the Jonas Brothers and Miley Cyrus.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Is eating dirt good for you? Perhaps so. I've heard that in the course of a lifetime we consume and inordinate amount of dirt, and other things too, but is that something that perhaps we're supposed to be doing? Mud pies aside, it may be instinctive for small children to eat dirt, and good for them too. It's a trait humans have exhibited as long as they've been around. Little kids naturally tend to put things in their mouths. We've been told they do this in order to learn more about the world. That may be true, but what about using their senses other than taste for that? One would think that sight, touch and sound -- heck, even smell -- might give a child more of a clue about something than putting it in her mouth.

What scientists are concerned with, though, is what goes into the mouth along with the dirt. So called the "hygiene hypothesis," researchers look at the bacteria, viruses and worms introduced into the system along with the dirt which may promote a healthy immune system. Further research indicates that worms in particular might "redirect" an errant immune system resulting in autoimmune disorders, allergies and asthma. According to Dr. Mary Ruebush, a microbiology and immunology instructor, eating dirt allows a child's immune system to practice its craft and also allow it to learn to ignore what should be ignored. Dr. David Elliott who practices gastroenterology and immunology at the University of Iowa furthers that notion by stating that worms are "likely to be the biggest player" in directing immune system response. In a study of mice with colleague Dr. Weinstock of Tufts Medical Center, used worms to both prevent and even reverse autoimmune disease,

It was noted in developing countries that a lot of the good organisms have been removed along with the bad ones. Children being raised in ultra-clean environments are not getting exposed to the good dirt and organisms. No one is suggesting throwing out the bathwater, but that using antibacterial products should be done in moderation and that cleanliness isn't necessarily next to godliness. According to Dr. Ruebush, author of "Why Dirt is Good," hands should be cleaned after changing diapers, when handling food, whenever they are visibly soiled and, of course, after using the bathroom. Dr.Weinstock also suggested giving kids two dogs and a cat to expose them to intestinal worms. Not sure that it would really take two dogs to have the intended effect, but I think you get the idea.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

We're constantly being told as parents not to yell at our kids, or each other. Even though we know we're not supposed to, most of us feel there is a time or place for yelling and using different tones and pitches to convey meaning to our children. It's an ability we take for granted. But, what if those vocal tools weren't available to us? What if all we were left with was whispering, or yelling? Would communication be rendered ineffective except in its most basic form?

Lydia Denworth struggles with that communication every day. Her son, Alex, lost a good portion of his hearing when he was eighteen months old. Although Alex still has hearing in one of his ears, when his hearing went so did a valuable communication tool. Sometimes the only way she can communicate with him is by yelling. Alex has a hearing device that works wonders for him, but takes it out before bed and at other appropriate times, when, as we know, kids seem to raise their most important questions. Things that are best communicated quietly and delicately become a shouting match. The information is imparted, sure, but the nuance is totally lost. When Lydia was trying to explain the events of September 11th to Alex on night before bed, she ended up screaming the end result as he'd already removed his equipment

Lydia laments that before Alex was diagnosed with hearing loss, "never heard me when I whispered "I love you" or sang him soft lullabies." She and Alex are embarking on a new journey of communication together in order to try to remedy the lack of tone and nuance -- sign language, which has a whole set of tones and nuances all its own. It may take them both a lifetime to learn this new language and its subtleties, but there is one thing Lydia has learned, which is that "drums can be played quietly too" and that she intends to take as much advantage in the quiet moments as a mother can.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

It's not unusual for parents to employ babysitters, nannies and other sorts of home care workers to assist them in raising their children, or at the very least watching them while they go out for dinner by themselves for a change. But, did you know that you're supposed to be paying taxes for the services those folks provide, and that they're suppose to pay them too? And, even if you did know that, are you doing it?

Most people don't know about the so-called "Nanny Tax," and those who do don't bother to pay it, even though it's technically illegal not to. Why not? Well, to put it bluntly, most people figure why should they if no one else is.

It is estimated that 80-90% of people cheat on the Nanny Tax. In 1997, over 310,000 tax returns were filed claiming the tax, a number that dropped to just over 225,000 in 2006. I doubt, and so does the IRS, that so few people are employing such help. If anything, with the number of families where both parents work out of the home increasing, it would seem reasonable that parents are using additional help more than ever.

Regardless of the state of the economy, paying for nannies and sitters is extremely expensive. Where I live to go out for two to three hours could cost $40-$60 on top of what we're already set to pay for dinner and a movie. If the tax were forced, employees would charge an even higher wage in order to make up for the losses, thereby making it impossible for many families to employ them in the first place.

I work and I pay taxes. Why shouldn't everyone else? It is fair that so much should have to come out of my paycheck and none out of someone else's? This is not to mention the difficulty of the forms. Immigration status, federal employee identification numbers (FEINs) and a host of other things are needed to complete the paperwork, things neither the employer nor employee may have or know about. All in all, the author of the New York Times article I read estimated it took a good twelve hours to get compliant, and would take another twelve each year to stay that way.

Do you think folks should have to pay taxes for nannies and other home care workers? What about the workers themselves?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

You've heard of "empty nest syndrome." While not an actual medical condition, empty nest occurs when one's children leave the home, mostly to go to college or to seek their fortune in the world.

Women are said to be particularly affected by empty nest syndrome. Increasingly, though, researchers are concluding that the empty nest can be a good thing.

Once the children leave the house, for example, spouses have more time for each other, They also get to focus on themselves, as well as assume less responsibility. Enter greater relaxation.

Some research, posted in the journal Psychological Science, suggests that couples enjoy more marital satisfaction after the kids move out.

Additionally, a study of 185 men and women published in the Journal of Advanced Nursing concluded that marital satisfaction starts to decline with pregnancy, and increases once the baby arrives. Other studies have noted that couples with more than one child scored seven points lower in terms of marital satisfaction than those with only one child -- despite the fact that babies do bring couples happiness.

This makes sense -- once you have a child you have less time for each other. Multiply that by the number of kids you have and you could have one of those relationships where you feel more like ships passing in the night than a married couple.

On this cusp of the Valentine's Day season, here's a suggestion. Take the time, even if there's only a little of it to go around, to spend with each other. Take that romantic vacation for two you've been dreaming of. Eat dinner out with just the two of you for a change -- even if it means hiring a sitter or calling in the grandparents to help out.

Do things as a couple, as you did before children, as often as possible. The happier the marriage, the better for the family. In other words, what's good for the goose is good for the gander and the goslings, too.

When your kids are gone, even if it's for a sleep-over, do you try to reestablish yoruselves as a couple? Do you feel, "Ahh, now there's finally a little time for just the two of us?"

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Would you name your dog after a person? In the not too distant past, I met someone whose children had the same names as my dogs. We have a dog named Max and we used to have a dog named Thomas (he passed away), which were the same name as the sons of a man who used to live in my neighborhood. That may seem unusual, but naming pets the same names that we'd name our children is a lot more popular than it might seem. In fact, according to Veterinary Pet Insurance, the top name for both dogs and cats this year is indeed "Max." My dog's name is actually Maxine, the name of my grandmother's twin sister! And, my cat's name is Daisy, which was the same grandma's aunt. Human-sounding names Molly, Buddy, Bella and Lucy took the second through fifth places.

Interestingly enough, those names are also very popular among those of us who walk on two legs. I know two Molly's, two Lucy's and am related to a Buddy. If you check the Social Security register you'll note a lot of the popular people names are also popular dog names. While pet names haven't seemed to appropriate the top ten girl's and boy's names, it's safe to say the lines between who is man and who is beast are blurring -- at least where the name is concerned. Want to try something fun? The SS Administration site allows you to look up a name's popularity (with people) over the last ten years through 2007. Put in your pet's name and see how popular it was with people over time. Max ranked at 141 in 2007 -- not too bad for the top pet name!

The trend doesn't seem to go the other way too, thankfully -- I have not noted any person named "Rover" or "Spot" but I'm sure if we give it enough time some celebrity will name her baby as such. I doubt we'll see any person named "Muffin" or "Whiskers" either. Then, of course, there is Harrison Ford's lead character from the Indiana Jones franchise. We learn in the third installment that he got the name Indiana from his dog! Go figure.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Shelley Price doesn't love her own daughter, and fears she never will. This tearful mother of two is telling her story because she believes that she isn't the only mother to ever tackle such a taboo subject, and hopes she may help others come to terms with this unspeakable truth. How can this be?

(Update: The story that originally ran on dailymail.co.uk on January 22, 2009 was pulled off the site the following day. Read on and you'll see why.)

That is just awful. Particulary when there is another child in the house now, Poppy, 2, a daughter who she calls "the love of my life" by her current partner.

Continue reading Mother Admits She Doesn't Love Her Daughter

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Well, Cindy -- good luck. In a world where they make onesies that ask "Does this onesie make me look fat?" Crawford, and all parents, have a serious challenge ahead of them. We're largely responsible for shaping our children's body image and eating style.

All said, though, don't you think it has to be a little hard on a young girl to have the gorgeous Cindy Crawford as her mom?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

When things don't work out between parents, it can be rough. The road to separation and divorce is rarely a pretty one. Normally, the kids get to stay with one parent the majority of the time, and the other ends up supporting them financially. So it was with Pasqualino Cornelio who paid a good amount of child support for his twins with ex-wife. In fact, Cornelio paid support for the kids up until they were sixteen. At one point the ex allegedly demanded more money and restricted his visits with the children, at which point a DNA test was submitted. The result was sad on a number of different levels -- the kids weren't his, at least not biologically.

Well, at some point Cornelio decided he should no longer have to pay support for the children. He also hired a lawyer to help him get back all the money he'd paid in child support. A judge thought otherwise and ordered the Cornelio to continue paying. Justice Katherine van Rensburg pf the Ontario Superior Court felt Cornelio was the only father the twins had ever known, and that DNA means little with regard to the bonds between parents and children. I couldn't agree more. Some in the province, however, including Brian Jenkins of the Fathers Are Capable Too group, say that the ex-wife committed fraud (by having an affair and then claiming the kids were Cornelio's) and should be held accountable.

What do you think? Should he have to keep paying? Should he get any of his money back? I think the latter question is ludicrous. Perhaps there could be some compromise, but I don't think the children should have to suffer for the deeds of the parents.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

It also means keeping kids and family life out of the spotlight. Both Winslet and her husband, director Sam Mendes, do everything in their power to keep their kids from knowing how famous their mother is (she's a lot more visible than Sam and I'd wager few folks would be able to spot him walking down the street), including turning off the TV when Kate's going to be on, not keeping magazines in the house and avoiding movie posters with Kate's face on them. Kate doesn't like that her profession, which is the family business, makes her so much more "publicly available" and does her best to keep her kids feeling normal -- whatever that is.

Kate's family's life is a far cry from that of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt. I can't think of a more famous couple whose personal life is so well on display. In fact, I'm on such Brangelina overload it seems they could have their own television channel devoted to every step they take. And the Jolie-Pitts don't seem to do much to avoid the spotlight they're kids are so very much apart of. Says Winslet, Angelina and Brad's lives are "like a walking soap opera, and the public wants to know what's going to happen next." Some would say that Ange and Brad don't want their kids to be a part of that either, but they don't stop the press from photographing them, etc. I don't even know what Kate Winslet's kids look like, but I could pick any of Brangie's six kids out of a line up. Well, maybe not the twins -- not yet.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

What about you? Have you ever left your wedding ring at home? If so, why?

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

When I was pregnant with my son we had a little pool of names going, with one or two top choices. We didn't share these names with anyone, and, in fact, told people that there was a pool but that we didn't really have a name picked out. The reason for this? We knew what we wanted to name our son and were very confident about the name we had picked out, but we didn't want anyone's opinion to sway our decision. Turned out most folks liked the name we went with -- Mercer -- but if one of our parents hadn't liked it we might have considered otherwise.

With our daughter, however, we played a different game. We were considering the name Zoe for a long time, and anytime anyone asked us what names we were considering we tossed out Zoe (which, by the way, was very well-received, in case you need a girl's name). To be honest, though, we pretty much knew after a while that we'd name her Everly and just kept it under wraps since -- again -- we didn't want criticism. Now here Carnie Wilson is sharing her baby's name with the whole country and isn't the least bit worried what anyone else thinks. Wish I could be more like that!

What about you? Did you share your unborn baby's name? Even if you didn't know the sex, my guess is you probably had some idea what you wanted to name your child once he/she was born. Folks say they don't have baby names picked out but I intuit otherwise, based on my own experience as an expecting mom.

View Poll

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

UNICEF has found that worldwide, 70,000 teenage mothers between the ages of 15 and 19 die each year from pregnancy or childbirth complications. Additionally, if a mother is younger than nineteen, her infant's chances of dying in the first year are 60% greater than if the mother is older. Basic maternal and prenatal care are often not available to many women in the developing world -- things we often take for granted. It is estimated that in Africa, women face a one-in-26 chance of dying during childbirth and from pregnancy complications; that number is the highest in the world, and is 300 times higher than for a woman in an industrialized country like the US. Africa remains the most difficult place to make it through childhood -- half of the 9.2 million children who died before their fifth birthdays in 2007 were in Africa.

Why are so many young women in developing nations becoming mothers? Most child marriages occur in South Asia or Africa, which puts young girls at risk. The report notes younger mothers in those nations are also more likely to be the victims of violence and exploitation. Teenage brides have to drop out of school and are unable to work, which limits their personal options.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

My husband and I actually considered the named "Bear" (spelled differently) for a little while when we were expecting our second child. There's something really cute about that name, but seeing as how we're not celebrities, we opted out. Well, I will say this: Huckleberry Finn was an adventurer, and perhaps this little Huck will be one as well, just like his daddy, who, by the way, has a black belt and climbed Mount Everest.

Congrats to Bear and Shara on their beautiful new little adventurer!

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

I am not sure how much weight Ms. Watts gained with her second spawn, but let's do that math: the average baby weighs about 7.5 pounds. The placenta and water and "whatnot" as I like to call it can weigh approximately eight to 12 more pounds (although that sounds like a LOT to me, don't you agree?). Thus, a pregnant woman could feasibly drop anywhere from 15 to 19 pounds upon delivery depending on the size of her baby. For a woman gaining the average recommended weight of about 25 to 35 pounds, that would leave her with about 10 or 15 pounds to lose post-baby.

If any of this is true, Watts could be well on her way toward losing that a month post-baby, between nursing and running around after her other son, eighteen-month-old Alexander. Either way, she looks healthy and great. I wish the media would stop focusing so much attention on celebrity moms' weight -- we all know they're going to lose it eventually, because they get paid to be skinny, but it seems like some sort of sick contest to see who can get the skinniest the fastest. Naomi seems pretty grounded in her motherhood and her health, though, so hopefully she's not succumbing to the pressure to be super-thin ten minutes after she gave birth!

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments