March 20, 2006

It is nearly one month since Hao Wu was detained without charge.

Filed under: About Hao Wu, News — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 12:00 pm

We appeal to the Chinese government for Hao Wu’s immediate release!

What happened to Hao?

Hao Wu (Chinese name: 吴皓), a Chinese documentary filmmaker who lived in the U.S. between 1992 and 2004, was detained by the Beijing division of China’s State Security Bureau on the afternoon of Wednesday, Febuary 22, 2006. On that afternoon, Hao had met in Beijing with a congregation of a Christian church not recognized by the Chinese government, as part of the filming of his next documentary.

Hao had also been in phone contact with Gao Zhisheng, a lawyer specializing in human rights cases. Gao confirmed to one of Hao’s friends that the two had been in phone contact and planned to meet on Feb. 22, but that their meeting never took place after Gao advised against it. On Friday, Feb. 24, Hao’s editing equipment and several videotapes were removed from the apartment where he had been staying. Hao has been in touch his family since Feb. 22, but judging from the tone of the conversations, he wasn’t able to speak freely. One of Hao’s friends has been interrogated twice since his detention. Beijing’s Public Security Bureau (the police) has confirmed that Hao has been detained, but have declined to specify the charges against him.

The reason for Hao’s detention is unknown. One of the possibilities is that the authorities who detained Hao want to use him and his video footage to prosecute members of China’s underground Churches. Hao is an extremely principled individual, who his friends and family believe will resist such a plan. Therefore, we are very concerned about his mental and physical well-being.

More about Hao: From Scientist to Computer Guy to Filmmaker.

Hao began his filmmaking career in 2004, when he gave up his job as a senior product manager at Atlanta-based Earthlink Inc. and returned to China to film Beijing or Bust, a collage of interviews with U.S.-born ethnic Chinese who now live in China’s capital city. Before working for Earthlink, Hao worked as a product manager for Internet portal Excite from 2000 to 2001 in Redwood City, CA Before that, Hao had also worked as a strategic planning and product development director for Merchant Internet Group, an intern for American Express Co. and a molecular biologist with UCB Research Inc.

Hao earned an MBA degree from University of Michigan Business School in May 2000 and a Master of Science in molecular and cell biology in July, 1995 from Brandeis University, where he was awarded a full merit-based scholarship. Before studying in the U.S., Hao earned a Bachelor of Science degree in biology from the China University of Science and Technology in Hefei, Anhui province in June, 1992.

Hao the Blogger.

Hao has also been an active blogger, writing as “Beijing Loafer” on his personal blog, Beijing or Bust, named after his film. Due to Chinese government internet blocking of his blog hosting service, he also has a mirror version of the site on MSN Spaces. In early February Hao began contributing as Northeast Asia Editor to Global Voices Online, an international bloggers’ network hosted at Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society. Writing under the pen name Tian Yi, Hao’s contributions aimed to bring citizens’ online voices from China and the rest of North East Asia to readers in the English-speaking world.

Why didn’t we speak out about his detention earlier?

Hao’s family and friends in China have deflected questions about his detention for the past month, as authorities in contact with people close to Hao have urged them not to publicize the case. There had been hope that his detention was only for a short period of time, in which case publicity would not have been helpful.

For more information…

Hao’s family and friends inside China do not want to be interviewed directly by the media at this time, and thus we will not provide journalists with their contact information. This website will be updated regularly with new information that emerges about Hao’s situation.

All further queries can be e-mailed to:


  1. Before I voice my deep appreciation of and respect for the people behind this site I would just like to state the obvious, that merely appealing to the CCP—given their (they being old toads and their ideologues) track record and the amount of self-”incriminating” evidence on his website—for his release won’t even come close to this goal, although I know it serves its purpose.

    Yes, I know where this argument goes and I hope someone takes me up on that.

    Comment by Feng 37 — March 20, 2006 @ 7:55 pm

  2. Que Pongan en Libertad a Hao Wu…

    Hace un mes mi colega, Hao Wu fue detenido en China. ¡Pedimos al gobierno de China que pongan en libertad a Hao Wu inmediatamente!

    ¿Que pasó a Hao?

    Hao Wu (nombre chino: 吴皓), un director de documentales chino que vivió en los Estados Unidos e…

    Trackback by El Oso, El Moreno, and El Abogado — March 20, 2006 @ 11:27 pm

  3. I pray that Hao Wu will be released immediately. Detained without charge? Why, that sounds like…like a dictatorship.


    Comment by Charlie Eklund — March 21, 2006 @ 4:39 am

  4. maybe feng could be right, but how about translate this site in chinese and spread the link, provided with a little explanation, all over chinese forums like tianya, sina, sohu? they got millions of chinese readers..
    after all, his website is in english and he never revealed any “state secrets” or preached the use of violence to overthrow the government..the CCP could release him understanding that the fuss about him will be a greater danger than Hao Wu himself.

    Comment by matteo — March 21, 2006 @ 10:18 am

  5. I translated this post into Traditional Chinese.


    三月22號就是影片製作人與Global Voices 東北亞編輯吳皓毫無理由被中共拘留滿一個月的日子。我們訴請中國政府立刻釋放吳皓!






    吳皓從2004年開始拍攝影片,當時他放棄了在亞特蘭大Earthlink公司的資深產品部經理的職位,而回到中國拍攝Beijing or Bust,這是一部有關居住在北京的美籍華裔的訪談集錦。在進Earthlink工作之前,吳皓曾經於2000年至2001年在加州的Redwood城擔任網路入口網站Excite的產品部經理。而在這之前,吳皓也當過Merchant Internet Group的策略規劃與產品發展部主任,美國運通公司的實習員工,以及UCB研究機構的分子生物學家。



    吳皓是一位極為活躍的部落客,以Beijing Loafer為化名,在以他拍攝的電影為名的個人部落格Beijing or Bust寫作。由於中國政府封鎖了他使用的部落格服務,他也在MSN Spaces成立了一個鏡像站。二月初,吳皓加入了Global Voices Online,成為東北亞區的編輯。Global Voices Online是一個國際部落客網絡,設立在哈佛法學院的伯克曼網路與社會中心。他透過筆名Tian Yi,將中國以及東北亞的公民聲音傳達給英語世界。




    Comment by Portnoy — March 21, 2006 @ 12:57 pm

  6. Liberate Hao Wu (e gli altri come lui). E’ un mese che il documentarista e blogger cinese Hao Wu è detenuto dalle autorità senza che nessuna accusa sia stata formulata nei suoi confronti. E’ pratica comune nella più grande dittat…

    Trackback by 1972 — March 21, 2006 @ 1:17 pm

  7. Liberen a Hao Wu…

    Hao Wu es un director de documentales chino, que además de ser científico y tener un gran curriculum en muchas áreas, es un blogger activo y reciente editor para Asia en Global Voices, bajo el seudónimo Tian Yi. El pasado miércoles 22 de febrero …

    Trackback by Cristian/Ocampo — March 21, 2006 @ 6:30 pm

  8. While money continues to flow from the EU into Hamas’ pockets, israeli police foil a terroristic attack in central Israel In Malaysia: Jail threatened over Islam insults L’inquisizione continua.In Malesia, carcere o multa per chi oserà critica…

    Trackback by Free Thoughts — March 22, 2006 @ 12:27 am

  9. I just checked on US Supreme Court ruling to see if journalists have the right to keep their sources confidental. It turns out that in 1972, the US Supreme court had ruled that journalist MUST cooperate with grand juries investigate crimes.

    The name of the case is Branzburg v. Hayes (1972).

    In the ruling: “The Court found that requiring reporters to disclose confidential information to grand juries served a “compelling” and “paramount” state interest and did not violate the First Amendment.”

    “Justice Byron White declared that the petitioners were asking the Court “to grant newsmen a testimonial privilege that other citizens do not enjoy. This we decline to do.”

    It appears therefore that Wu Hao must cooperate with Beijing officials to disclose information and evidence to Beijing officials based on the precedence of law that has been set by the US Supreme Court. If Wu Hao does not cooperate with Beijing, it appears that Beijing have the legal right and accepted international law and practice to prosecute Wu Hao.


    The ruling was very close, 5-4. So it is possible still that Wu Hao may be able to bring his specific case to the Supreme people’s court, and China’s supreme people’s court may rule otherwise. But the odds are not good because a precedence have been set.

    Again, for those so inclined, the name of the landmark case that set the precedence is Branzburg_v._Hayes (1972). This case is very similar to the case that Wu Hao is currently facing.

    Comment by mahathir_fan — March 22, 2006 @ 2:28 am

  10. Can this really help Wu Hao?

    Comment by Anonymous — March 22, 2006 @ 3:55 am

  11. Short shout 2: Free Hao Wu…

    Global Voices stalwarts Rebecca MacKinnon and Ethan Zuckerman have launched a blog (blocked in China……

    Trackback by Imagethief — March 22, 2006 @ 5:08 am

  12. For what it’s worth, I put up a post about Hao here. Peking Duck has a post up here.

    Comment by Other Lisa — March 22, 2006 @ 6:22 am

  13. Hao was on a BBC World Service pannel about free speech in China with me on Feb 14th 2006. The program was “Have Your Say.” That was a week before his arrest.

    He directly said that he was talking to dissidents for his documentary.

    I have sent the transcript of the show to Ethan already. I just want to put the news up here. May help people understand the “sudden” arrest.


    Comment by Yan — March 22, 2006 @ 7:26 am

  14. Free Hao Wu!…

    Jon tells us about the Free How Wu campaign.
    Beijing or Bust blogger and documentary filmmaker, was detained by the Beijing division of China’s State Security Bureau on the afternoon of Wednesday, Febuary 22, 2006. Unfortunately the causes of the arr…

    Trackback by Total Tactics — March 22, 2006 @ 11:11 pm

  15. Although the Branzberg vs Hayes is an interesting case, there is absolutely no reason to treat it as a precendent. Beijing is not bound by US, or for that matter, ‘international’ law. If it was, Hao Wu would not be being held without charge on issues of freedom of speech.

    I have interviewed Hao Wu myself and he is fascinating, articulate and above all, extremely moderate and balanced in his opinions. If he’s considered to be a threat then things here in China are bleaker than I thought.

    Good luck, Hao.

    Comment by Dear me — March 23, 2006 @ 1:43 am

  16. the domain name is not accessible from Beijing/China. I believe it has been banned by the freaken communist. I managed to navagate here through a proxy.
    I pray with all my heart for the release of Wu, Hao.

    Comment by Eugene Lin — March 23, 2006 @ 8:38 am

  17. Thanks for everyon’e warm-hearted comments. I know Hao quite well. I am not sure thie public campaign can help Hao or not. To certain extent, it may hur his chance of safe release. But like all of you, I am furious at what the Beijing government is doing….

    Comment by His friend — March 23, 2006 @ 11:31 am

  18. Free Hao Wu

    Religious Freedom for China

    Comment by Davide Bacarella — March 23, 2006 @ 12:01 pm

  19. People who get bitten by a snake unexpectedly are unfortunate and deserving of our pity. People who provoke a snake and then get bitten are just stupid. “But there shouldn’t be snakes. It’s not fair!” you might say. Then you…are just childish…

    Comment by juka — March 24, 2006 @ 6:54 am

  20. […] A number of journalists are working on articles about Hao Wu’s detention - over one month now without charge. We’re expecting to see a lot more stories coming out over the next 24 hours. As the coverage comes out on the internet we will link to it on this site as much as possible. If you find stuff we may not know about, please e-mail it to Meanwhile, we’d like your help in broadcasting the world’s support for Hao’s case. Here’s what you can do: […]

    Pingback by Free Hao Wu » Help us collect and spread the news — March 24, 2006 @ 3:06 pm

  21. […] When I read this story initially, I hesitated. Bloggers vs. China doesn’t sound like I war I want to fight. It sounds inherently unwinnable. And our American perceptions of freedom - to worship, assemble and speak, are not universally accepted around the world. I sometimes think us a bully trying to foist our values on others. But Ethan makes a compelling case and tells the story of Hao Wu well, so I’m going to at least share the basics with you via cut, paste, link and tag. My small support effort. It is nearly one month since Hao Wu was detained without charge. Filed under: About Hao Wu, News — Rebecca MacKinnon @ 12:00 pm […]

    Pingback by Digital Common Sense » On Freeing Hao Wu — March 25, 2006 @ 1:34 am

  22. I went to church in China and nobody arrested me, what gives? Could it be that I, as a guest to their country, show the curtisey of not breaking their laws?

    Let’s for the moment put aside the argument weither China’s laws are right or wrong according to our senstivity. The fact remains their laws exist according to their sensitivity, and they have effects in their land.

    Rule of law dictates laws are to be observed - else it’s anarchy. Unjust law should be changed within the existing reality and current states - else pay the price of civil disobidience (or revolution.)

    I’m sure by now you are bored of these obvious principles of our proud western tradition, which many neglects while indicting China.

    Let’s talk about weither the law that’s involved is just.

    The reason churches go underground IMHO isn’t because they are “unauthorized” Catholics or Protestants. The Church I attended in Zhengzhou was a Protestant church.

    My understanding of the reason chruches go “underground” is because they refuse to observe China’s law protecting children’s right to religious freedom that bars adults from indoctrinating children until the age of 16 (with flexibility).

    Reailty is there ain’t enough GongAn to kick down the doors and arrest every parent that reads the Bible to their kids, or grandmothers who BaiBai the Kitchen God with little MeiMei.

    But when pastors encouraged by foreign missionaries to break China’s laws and hold bible school, advertise to the whole village, invite the policeman’s kid to come every sunday for the brainswashing session - what do you think happens?

    Comment by bobby fletcher — March 25, 2006 @ 4:38 am

  23. I’d like to bring everyone’s attention to a piece Hao wrote in his blog on January 16, 2006. What was depicted in this piece explains, to certain degree, his arrest.

    The Good Shots

    I fell asleep while waiting for the cops to come. I had planned to visit a family church in Hebei province over the weekend. On Thursday, however, I heard that on the previous Sunday, several cops harassed the family church in Beijing that I’ve been following. They visited the church after most of the congregation were gone, and copied down the ID card information of the person in charge. Nobody could be sure whether the cops were targeting the church itself or they were simply following a couple of the prominent dissidents who went to the church. Nobody could be sure either whether they would be back the following weekend, because they didn’t leave any clear warning.

    I decided to wait and see, in that underground church set in a two bedroom apartment 20 floors above ground.

    After the opening prayers and hymn singing, the preacher addressed the congregation of about 20 crammed in the small living room. He asked everyone to help look for a new apartment for the church, as the current landlord refused to renew the lease, perhaps under police pressure. He stressed that the church would continue to welcome everyone, including those attracting undesirable government attention. Then he went on to read and explain the Bible. After listening to it for 10 minutes, I went to the next room and fell asleep on the sofa.

    I woke up 20 minutes later, after dreaming myself heroically going to jail for doing the documentary. I grabbed my camera and headed towards the living room. Just as I was wondering how long the preaching would continue, a loud knock hit the door from the outside.

    Everyone turned to look at the door. Usually when a believer comes, a buzz from the security intercom downstairs would precede the door knock. The air froze. I turned on my camera.

    The door was opened. In came two cops in uniforms and two men in plainclothes. The cop in the front started in a mild manner, “one of your neighbor complained to the local police station that you are causing disturbance here.”

    Everyone considered that a lame excuse. A couple of believers volunteered to call the Environmental Agency. “They can come and measure the noise level of our singing and praying. In no way could we be disturbing our neighbors. Plus,” they exclaimed, “all of our neighbors know we are having a church service here. Why would they call the cops instead of directly talking to us?”

    The cop didn’t know how to respond. The man in the brown coat stepped forward, “don’t you know that having a church gathering is illegal?” That statement immediately draw heated response from the believers. In the audiences sat a prominent human rights lawyer and a Ph.D. student in law at the famous Peking University. China’s constitution guarantees religion rights, they said.

    “I know you guys would be saying that, so I brought this.” The man in brown coat waved a booklet with the national insignia on the cover. “This is the regulations on religious activities in China. What you cited is just one line in the Constitution. This regulation fully explains what’s allowed by that line. Did you guys register with the local police as a religious group?”

    The law student’s agitation went up a notch. We are getting petitions for the national congress to review the constitutionality of these laws, he said with his fist held tight. Another chimed in that the congregation were not a religious organization, but rather a casual gathering, thus not subject to the government regulation.

    I kept my camera rolling the whole time, about 2 meters away from the center of actions, in a state of surreal daze. Various thoughts bubbled up in my heads like those in the VH1 Pop-up Videos:

    -Oh my god, I can’t believe I’m filming the cops suppressing the family church, in real time!
    -Oh shit, the cops seem way too reasonable and articulate. And calmer than the believers! I need more viciousness. Please!
    -What should I do now shot-wise? I have zoomed in and out, panned left and right. What else can I do to make the final viewing more dramatic???
    -Why are they letting me continue filming? Why? This is unreal!!!

    I stood there as if watching myself filming a legal debate in front of a Supreme Court that China doesn’t have. I felt almost sorry for the brown-coat man who’s not equipped to argue with the legal scholars. “I’m not here to expel the group. I just want to warn you about the illegality of gathering here,” he proclaimed with an aloofness which could be interpreted as a threat or mere bureaucratic perfunctoriness. No, the group countered – it’s you who’d barged into a private premise illegally with no warrant or permit.

    He then asked to see everyone’s ID. The group responded no again – China’s law stipulates that the citizens be required to show their IDs only to those with court warrant.

    The brown-coat man’s cool peeled off, layer by layer, with each argument he lost. He checked around for a target. Then he saw me.

    “What are you filming?” he yelled, “you are invading my image rights.”

    “Hey, I’m doing a private video on this church. You came into this picture yourself.” I answered half-heartedly. As a huge fan of the rule of law and the courtroom dramas in the US Supreme Court, I wondered if indeed I was invading on his image rights.

    “Turn it off, damn it.” With that he took hold of my camera, “I want you to erase the part with me in it.”

    I hold on to my camera. Is that a reasonable request? But those are my good shots! The group showered him again with more legal enlightenment – as a public employee working for the government, cops don’t have image rights.

    I could see the frustration boiling in the brown-coat man. He found his outlet on me, the only legal weakness in this unfortunate expedition of his. He dragged me and my camera into the room next door, where I had been napping 10 minutes earlier. “Give me the damn tape!” He screamed.

    I fought to keep my hands on my camera. Is this really happening? What is this? Am I heroically fighting with a vicious cop? Or should I observe the law to give him the tape which he may truly have rights to? Would it be ethical to show footage of him even if I ended up keeping the footage? Why didn’t any of the books on indie filmmaking discuss the ethical issues around dealing with cops? What does the law say? Oh how I wish China could have a real Supreme Court to clarify issues like the proper ethical ways of dealing with a cop. Oh my god, I’m going to lose my good shots! How can I keep it?! How can I?!

    Garbage thoughts kept on popping up in my brain, making me dumb and confused. I kept saying no to him, without even knowing no to what.

    The brown-coat man finally yanked the camera out of my hands. “Give me the tape!” He fumbled with the camera but couldn’t figure out how to open up the tape deck, thanks to Sony’s ingenious design. He swung the camera around in utter frustration. My expensive shot-gun mic was dangling below the camera, still attached via a cable. He kept on twisting and banging the camera to get out the tape. “Damn it!” He stared at me with a piercing anger, “I warn you. Don’t cross us!”

    My out-of-body legal rumination suddenly evaporated. At that brief moment, I stopped seeing the complexity of modern China, and quit playing with the Constitutionality issue of religion rights. I could no longer sympathize with him because he’s merely a puppet in this insecure system of political and cultural ideologues. I looked into his eyes and saw a trace of evil glinting over his rage. Not the evil of the communists, of the oppressors, or of Satan; but a hatred, out of deep frustrations, and a desire to destroy, both of which seem to have deep root in our culture, and in the current political system with no reliable legal recourse, are unhindered by anything except for a consciousness that nevertheless could be easily crossed to reveal the evil in all of us.

    “Give me the fucking tape, or there goes your expensive camera.” He held the camera high. I was transfixed by the sight of a man sent on a mission to hinder and possibly destroy, holding my camera with all my good shots in it. He was determined to accomplished something before calling it quits, and there’d be no legal recourse or appeal to whatever ended up happening.

    Between losing my good shots and losing my camera plus the good shots, I chose the former.

    I gave him the tape. They left. I stood in the room kicking myself – I should’ve been more strategic! I should’ve switched tapes every 5 minutes! I shouldn’t have acted so greedily as I’m investing in the stock market! The rule does apply everywhere – what sounded too good to be true probably is!

    When I went back to the living room with my camera and a new tape, the cops were gone. The preacher was leading another prayer. He expressed great joy that none of the congregation ran away for fear of the cops. He told the group that they would continue to gather even though the cops would surely come back to harass them again.

    They prayed.

    I kept filming.

    They prayed for God’s guidance on overcoming the obstacles. They prayed for the many persecuted in the countryside for their beliefs. They prayed for the cops. Many cried.

    I kept filming.

    Still a devout atheist, I felt my nose itchy to sniffle. I didn’t know whether it was from mere exhaustion or from witnessing the real human drama right in front of my eyes, in real time.

    I held back the urge to sniffle and kept filming.

    Comment by His dear friend — March 25, 2006 @ 5:37 am

  24. And read the comments to that post. They are chilling, in retrospect.

    Comment by Other Lisa — March 25, 2006 @ 7:31 am

  25. On comment #15,

    I would argue that Brandzburg vs. Hanes (1972) is applicable to Chinese laws. The reason is that the US supreme court interpretation of the 1st amendment is very similar to China’s Article 35.

    Due to the similarity of rights enjoyed by both Chinese and Americans as accorded by both constitutions in Article 35 and the 1st Amendment, the precedence set by the US Supreme Court should be applicable.

    In many countries whose laws are inherited from the UK system, precedences set by UK courts are generally accepted by local courts.

    On comment #23,

    Whoa..I am very encouraged by the post. It appears that in China, as long as you are aware of your rights, the authorities cannot force you to do anything, not even to show your ID.

    In most countries, you MUST show your ID when requested. I never thought that you might need a court warrant.

    Only when one is unaware of their own rights, does one gets intimidated into compliance.

    So the question now is, did the authorities violate the due process law of detaining Hao? If they did, it appears that its time to press charges against them. This would help spark a warning to the rest of authorities to be careful and follow the proper due process laws when detaining suspects.

    Comment by mahathir_fan — March 27, 2006 @ 7:45 am

  26. On the bright side, Wu Hao is safe for now. He has been allowed to make at least three phone calls home. And, according to his family, he said he had been ok and didn’t want a lawyer. If the situation is really bad, would he refuse to hire a lawyer under any circumstances?

    It seems that Hao has written about his sensitive projects (e.g. unregistered churches, gay marriage, a dissident lawyer) and discussed other sensitive subjects (e.g. government censorship) with foreign media in a quite careless manner. He probably has provided enough materials in his blog for the authorities to become interested in him and build a case against him. These people may wonder: “What has he done and not written down?” On the other hand, the case against him is unlikely a serious one, just because of this same carelessness of his.

    I’m not saying that Wu Hao’s constitutional right is not violated. It just seems to me that chances are that he may be able to resolve the issue with the authorities himself. “No charge” is not necessarily a bad thing.

    Comment by Anonymous — March 27, 2006 @ 8:38 am

  27. […] AIDS activist Hu Jia and documentarian/Beijing or Bust blogger Wu Hao [] were both arrested in Beijing earlier this year on charges that have yet to be specified. While Hu—who went missing on February 16th—was released last week, Global Voices Online editor Wu nears his seventh week in detention. […]

    Pingback by Global Voices Online » Blog Archive » Wives and sisters against the Chinese Communist Party’s war on free speech — April 1, 2006 @ 7:38 am

  28. On comment #26,

    Anonymous friend, you seem to be familior with the case. Could you give us more details to Welcome any input.

    Comment by wuhaofamily — April 3, 2006 @ 4:05 am

  29. […] My colleague at Global Voices - Hao Wu, who blogs at Beijing or Bust, has been detained by the Beijing division of China’s State Security Bureau on the afternoon of Wednesday, Febuary 22, 2006. Hao Wu is the East Asia Regional Editor at Global Voices. A blog has been set up at to provide updates and appeal to the Chinese Government. Rebecca writes - Beijing’s Public Security Bureau (the police) has confirmed that Hao has been detained, but have declined to specify the charges against him. […]

    Pingback by Release Hao Wu at Within / Without — April 27, 2006 @ 8:22 am

  30. I teach at SFSU and am working on a masters degree in comparative politics and am familar with Hao Wu’s work. I am afronted by his imprisionate and call for his immediate release. Blake Respini

    Comment by Blake Respini — May 1, 2006 @ 4:41 am

  31. Your 12-month-old’s development…

    Taking his first steps
    That major rite of passage is almost here, if it hasn’t happened already — sometime this month your baby may take his first steps alone. (If he doesn’t, don’t worry — it takes some babies several more weeks …

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:35 am

  32. Your 10-month-old’s development…

    More Mobility
    By the time he’s 10 months old, your baby will probably be able to crawl well on his hands and knees, with his trunk parallel to the floor. (Many babies begin trying to crawl before 10 months, but master the skill only now.) He may …

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:37 am

  33. Your 8-month-old’s development…

    Sitting, crawling, and standing
    Now that he’s 8 months old, your baby is probably sitting well without support. He may also be crawling or moving about by bottom shuffling — scooting around on his posterior using a hand behind him and a foot in…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:38 am

  34. Your 7-month-old’s development…

    Bouncing baby
    Your baby can now support some of his weight on his legs, and he loves to bounce. What’s more, he’s probably able to sit unsupported (which frees his hands for exploring) and pivot to reach a desired object. He may even be abl…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:39 am

  35. Your 6-month-old’s development…

    Exploring with his hands
    By the time he’s about 6 months old (though sometimes it takes a little longer), your baby’s hand control is developed enough that he can rake an object toward him. Once he’s learned to grab a toy, he’ll…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:39 am

  36. Your 5-month-old’s development…

    Sitting pretty
    By now, your baby’s physical developments are coming fast and furiously. When lying on his back, he’ll lift his head and shoulders. If you place him on his stomach, he’ll extend his arms and legs and arch his back. This…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:39 am

  37. Your 4-month-old’s development…

    Eating less frequently
    Your baby has a bigger tummy now that he’s 4 months old, so he won’t need to refuel as often. Four or five times a day will often do it, in fact, unless he’s exclusively breastfed (in which case he’ll stil…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:44 am

  38. Your 3-month-old’s development…

    Steady now
    This month, your baby may be able to lift his head and hold it for several moments, or even longer, while lying on his back. If sitting with support, he should be able to hold his head steady and erect. When he’s on his stomach, you mi…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:44 am

  39. Your 2-month-old’s development…

    The first real smiles
    This month your baby will reward all your loving care with a beaming, toothless, just-for-you smile. This will probably disarm you, even if you’ve just had your worst night yet. For Ron Heckman, a new father in Piedmont, Cal…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:44 am

  40. Your 1-month-old’s development…

    Head’s up!
    Your baby’s neck muscles are getting stronger, which allows him to hold up his head for short periods. He can hold it up for a few moments while lying on his stomach, for example, and he may even be able to turn it from side to s…

    Trackback by Early Motherhood — May 16, 2006 @ 1:47 am

  41. free credit report score…

    stomaches curiously?flavors stirrup,drafty resurrector.Bloomfield credit

    Trackback by free credit report score — May 24, 2006 @ 1:28 am

  42. Free my colleague: Hao Wu detained without charge…

    On March 22nd it will be one month since filmmaker and Global Voices Northeast Asia Editor Hao Wu was detained without charge. We appeal to the Chinese government for Hao Wu’s immediate release!
    [By Rebecca MacKinnon]
    What happened to Hao?
    Hao Wu (Ch…

    Trackback by Sabbah's Blog — September 25, 2006 @ 6:47 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. | TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML ( You can use these tags): <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong> .