Vegas, babies, Vegas!

We just got back from a quick trip to Vegas, with the kids in tow. I realize immediately that you may read that and raise an eyebrow in judgement. "Vegas, huh? What a great place for kids!" Yes, yes, I know. I know, okay? But we really needed a couple of days to relax and play and just let down our guard a little, but I still don't feel comfortable leaving the kids with other people overnight, much less for a few days. So to Vegas we went, and we brought a good friend of ours who is single and loves the kids and is totally great with them. And it worked out well - we all hung out during the day and saw all the cool, kid-friendly things there are to see in Vegas, (and yes, there are such things), and then we took turns going out at night while one of the adults stayed back and took care of the kids.

So see? It's not like we were the ones hauling exhausted, falling-asleep kids through the casinos at 11:00 at night. Our kids were asleep in the non-casino hotel by 7:30pm every night. Just like usual.

But yes, we were the ones hauling kids through the casinos during the day to get to the indoor shopping forums and the animals. You can't help it - you absolutely can't NOT go through the casinos to get anywhere in that town. I realize it's on purpose, and I realize a lot of people would say that for that very reason, we should have left the kids at home.

So you tell me - which is worse? Do I leave the kids with someone else for a few days, knowing that they would miss us, especially me, terribly and Nathan is still in the throes of separation anxiety anyway? Or do we take them with us and do the best we can just so we can have a few hours over a few evenings to play and have fun and be actual adults for awhile?

It's a toss-up, and not one I expect a consensus on. I don't like that they inhaled secondhand smoke in the casinos, of course not. Did I try to physically block Sabrina's view of those moving billboards of mostly-naked women you see everywhere on the Strip? Yup, I did, and when she noticed at least one ad of scantily clad girls, I laughed and said "Silly girls! Look at them in their undies! They should get dressed, don't you think?" (She agreed, just for the record.)

Sigh. I guess it's just one of those parenting things. When do your needs finally outweigh those of your children? Do they ever, really, entirely? Or do you just compromise like hell and hope that it all turns out okay?

By the way, you know my last post? The one where I glibly said that I had almost completely weaned Nathan and sure, yeah, my hormones were changing, but that I wasn't going to get my period or anything. Um, yeah. Wanna bet?

Woo baby - what a lovely surprise to have that good ol' visit from Aunt Flo, and what an unexpected visitor, seeing as how we haven't seen (or missed) her for over two years. She's gone now, after a miserable week of me saying "After all this, I'm SO going on that pill where you only have like four periods a year!" I know, I know, most women have this to deal with once a month and yes, I was one of them until I turned into a baby-making-and-nursing-machine.

So what am I whining about? Well, just that I didn't expect it. And we were on vacation when it happened.

Here's what I think - I think life's crazy enough with two little ones and nursing and weaning and feeding and dealing with colds and falls and heat waves and babies who stick Tinkertoys in their mouth when you aren't looking and manage to gag themselves and throw up all over the living room carpet. I think God could grant mothers a break and let US choose when we have to deal with a period on top of it all. That's what I think.