Mercifully, my own baby daughter does not suffer from pacifier separation anxiety. But many babies do. And before they develop the motor skills to locate, retrieve, and insert the pacifier, a crysis arises whenever the thing falls out of the baby's mouth.

We're told that using a cord of some type presents a strangulation hazard, so that eliminates the most obvious solution.

Now, I'm not sure why the world is made this way, but if I'm to believe the evidence of numerous video clips on those "<Somebody's> Funniest Videos" shows, it seems that small frogs have a peculiar affinity for babies' foreheads. Of course, the videos are aired because the baby makes a funny face when the frog jumps onto its forehead, but I want to know what makes a baby's forehead so attractive to small frogs.

Anyway, given this evident perversion among frogs, I suppose one could fit a small frog with a harness that would hold a semi-rigid yet bendable and soft extension with the pacifier affixed at the end opposite the frog harness. The rod would be shaped to keep the pacifier either in or dangling in front of the baby's mouth as long as the frog cooperates.

Side benefits:
1) It might help keep flies away from the baby's head.
2)The stories you've heard about frogs and warts are mere rumors.
-- beauxeault, Jan 07 2003

I'll give you a croissant purely for saying "the baby", and not just "baby" when referring to one - that really freaks me out. My mother's just started saying it about my brother's newborn. "Baby did this". "Baby did that". Honestly, you think you know someone....

Amusing idea too. Just don't use one of those lovely-looking tiny coloured frogs that you find hanging out on leaves in the rainforest.
-- sild, Jan 07 2003


So the frog end doesn't actually go in the mouth... Wait, everything goes in a baby's mouth...

That gave me a thought: perhaps a baby's mouth is the universal business adapter IBM is searching for.
-- RayfordSteele, Jan 07 2003


I'm concerned about babies 'impressing' on the frogs and running away to the swamps in early childhood.

(Hi, beauxeault. Hey, the EggZooka company won't honour their warranty; do you know what's supposed to constitute 'normal use' for those things?)
-- Monkfish, Jan 07 2003


After losing a couple in the street, we used to tie a ribbon to our son's pacifier, which did the trick without endangering any livestock.
-- DrCurry, Jan 07 2003


A couple of what, kids?
-- RayfordSteele, Jan 07 2003


//crysis// Funny.
-- half, Jan 07 2003


Croissant for the image and for the annotations.
-- Isis, Jan 07 2003


Monkfish, regarding your warranty: I wonder if your EggZooka still has that little tag on it that reads, "DO NOT REMOVE UNDER PENALTY OF LAW"?
-- beauxeault, Jan 08 2003


// don't use one of those lovely-looking tiny coloured frogs that you find hanging out on leaves in the rainforest //

Why not ? Just because one amazonian treefrog contains enough poison to kill the entire adult population of Barnsley ?

Sounds good. Child cries. Give child frog to suck. Child goes quiet and stays quiet. Job done.
-- 8th of 7, Jan 08 2003


I think the tiny frogs [slid]'s referring to are the ones that secrete a substance that has psychedelic, rather than poisonous, properties.
-- snarfyguy, Jan 08 2003


(Nothing like the tag was recovered, beauxeault, but then it was bound to have had a melting point below 5000C. The real problem is that their legal department has demonstrated that no use of such a device could be considered in any sense "normal" and that any warranty claims are consequently void. Rather a cunning argument, actually.)
-- Monkfish, Jan 08 2003


I'm just curious about what 8th said, the whole adult population of...who?
-- barnzenen, Jan 08 2003


Licking cane toads.
-- Gulherme, Jan 09 2003


I did mean poison arrow frogs [snarfyguy] btw.
-- sild, Jan 09 2003


Yeah, we wouldn't want anybody to croak.
-- FarmerJohn, Jan 09 2003


Oh hop it.
-- sild, Jan 09 2003



random, halfbakery