Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site decwrl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!decwrl!dec-rhea!dec-belker!kaiser
From: kaiser@belker.DEC (Pete Kaiser  HLO2-1/N10  225-5441)
Newsgroups: net.kids
Subject: Buying for newborns and other children
Message-ID: <32@decwrl.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 14-Nov-84 12:36:42 EST
Article-I.D.: decwrl.32
Posted: Wed Nov 14 12:36:42 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 16-Nov-84 01:47:34 EST
Sender: daemon@decwrl.UUCP
Organization: DEC Engineering Network
Lines: 25

We (parents) all want the best for our offspring.  A lot in our culture and
in merchandising encourages us to feel that this means buying the best (read
"most expensive") for them.  Think of all the ads that nearly accuse parents
of child abuse if they don't buy their kids a home computer.

It ain't so.

Mimi was given some embarrassingly expensive plush toys in her first year.
Guess which she likes best: the huge, expensive beagle or the ratty little
rag doll.  For Mimi, as for all the adults I know, it turns out to be best
to consider her tastes in buying for her, be it toys, clothes, food, or
anything else.

I know people who would feel positively criminal if they hadn't bought the
$250 high-tech super-stroller with more folding joints than a pop-up book.
For us it would have been nonsense; we actually ended up with Mimi in our
arms lots of the time anyway.  The cheap stroller we got (and the cheap um-
brella we fastened to it) took plenty of abuse; and it was lighter and folded
up smaller than the high-tech models.

For us, the key things seem to be appropriateness and Mimi's own tastes.  This
means that we sometimes DO buy something that seems expensive.  So far we've
never regretted it.  But it's nowhere near our "default algorithm".

---Pete