Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
Posted at 10:43 AM ET, 04/13/2006

Katie's 'Special' Delivery

By Liz Kelly

There's something so creepy and otherworldly about the upcoming birth of Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes' child, I just can't get enough of the details. But what exactly are the details? Something about a pacifier and an iPod? Who can keep track?

Holmes and Cruise fondle the belly in March. (AP)

With Holmes in Cruise compound lockdown and delivery imminent, I thought it valuable to gather some of the hype/rumors surrounding the event. It'll be a nice gift for Holmes to present to the kid some day, maybe when explaining why daddy lives in a different house.

- Silent birth. How is this even possible without sedation? According to an explainer now prominently linked on the Scientology Web site, screams are okay -- just certain words or phrases (like "Scientology is weird, man!") should be avoided. Fellow believer Kelly Preston wasn't able to hold her tongue during the birth of her daughter, Ella.

(much more after the jump)

- The iPod. Some report that Cruise gave Holmes an iPod loaded with 300 of her favorite songs (might we recommend Deep Purple's "Hush" or No Doubt's "Don't Speak"?) to help calm her and keep her quiet during labor.

- The pacifier. Star magazine reported that Cruise had an adult-sized pacifier specially made to help muffle any birth-related screaming, moaning and general mommy blather. Cruise denies the report.

- Signs. As if the iPod, pacifier and other cues to zip it aren't enough, signs plastered around the delivery room will remind Katie to "keep silent."

- Grandma not welcome. Fearing bad karma -- or some kind of disturbance in the Scientological force -- Holmes' mom is reportedly persona non grata in the delivery room.

- No baby talk. Katie mustn't talk to little TomKitten for seven days. If true, this seems like the most unnatural limit of all. How many studies are there about the importance of a mother's affection from the get-go?

- Baby's first days. According to the writings of L. Ron Hubbard, here courtesy of Slate, after birth the baby should "be wrapped somewhat tightly in a warm blanket, very soft, and then left alone for a day or so." Perhaps an iTod would help complete the isolation?

(Notice all of the above limits are on Katie and not Tom. Who knew Scientology was so sexist?)

I'm not worried about baby TomKitten, though. According to the Scientology explainer everything will be okay:

Most children raised in good Scientology homes are above average in ability and quickly begin to understand how and why people act as they do. Life thus becomes a lot happier and safer for them.

P.S. Tom Cruise will join Diane Sawyer for an exclusive interview on Friday night's edition of "Primetime." (ABC News)

P.S.S. GQ has posted a slideshow of exclusive arty pix featured in the mag's upcoming interview with Cruise. (GQ)

By Liz Kelly  | April 13, 2006; 10:43 AM ET
Categories:  Celebrities  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Morning Mix: Call Girl Details Alleged Sorkin Dalliances
Next: Morning Mix: J.Lo's House Not Good Enough for Cowell



Posted by: Max | April 13, 2006 11:30 AM | Report abuse

Isn't it P.P.S., as in post-postscript? Don't make me go ask Gene's grammar nazi, Pthep!

Posted by: halleck23 | April 13, 2006 11:55 AM | Report abuse

P.S. Love your blog.

Posted by: halleck23 | April 13, 2006 11:57 AM | Report abuse

This chick is really nuts if she's going to let someone stop her from talking to her brand new baby! This whole scientology thing sounds whackier by the minute ...

Posted by: maibaby | April 13, 2006 12:41 PM | Report abuse

What about that wierd "buzz" about Katie not REALLY being pregnant . . .

Posted by: Fairfax | April 13, 2006 12:47 PM | Report abuse

I think Katie already had the baby. And that super fake-looking prosthetic belly she has been wearing recently isnt doing her any favors. My theory is she was (a couple months) pregnant by Chris Klein when she started "dating" Tom Cruise. Remember how big she looked a little too early in her TomKat pregnancy? Was a little weird. Anyhow, the baby's been born but she's keeping up the facade of a pregnacy so the birth can coincide with the openings of Tom and Kate's new projects (MI:3 and Batman) for maximum publicity AND to make it look like it is Tom's baby since they havent been together long enough for a full gestation.

Posted by: bow | April 13, 2006 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"Maintain silence in the presence of birth to save the sanity of the mother and the child and safeguard the home to which they will go," church founder L. Ron Hubbard wrote in his best-selling "Dianetics."

WTF. Uhhh, that reads to me as though EVERYONE else in the room should be quiet but the mom and baby... "In the presence of" is a pretty big tip, isn't it??

Posted by: deva | April 13, 2006 1:47 PM | Report abuse

free katie

Posted by: jdinhouston | April 13, 2006 1:47 PM | Report abuse

'nuff said, this little tom fella is a freaking whacko, he finally found a chick he can manipulate at will.

Posted by: Jimbo | April 13, 2006 2:41 PM | Report abuse

In psychology class I studied the effects of neglect on a child in its infancy. I think leaving the baby alone for just one day and not talking to it for that day is wrong. I think while TomKat's trying so hard not to have a messed up child from the Scientology stand point, they will have a messed up child to the rest of us. I hope TomKitten isn't a serial killer in the making.

Posted by: Cankim | April 13, 2006 3:01 PM | Report abuse

Once again, I'm reminded of that comment: You've gotta pass a test and get a license to drive a car, but they'll let any fool be a parent.

Feeling sorry for the kid already....

Posted by: swissmiss | April 13, 2006 3:12 PM | Report abuse

I think bow is onto something.... Very interesting theory.

Betcha TomKat will be splitsville as soon as Tom no longer needs the 'happy' PR for MI:3.

Also telling is that Katie hasn't 'converted' to Scientology yet.

Posted by: jlr | April 13, 2006 3:35 PM | Report abuse

for those who listen to etim, i agree with elliot why do people feel the need to theorize and play the conspiracy card. if it is a publicity stunt then by theorizing you're just buying into the publicitly of the whole ridiculous issue by actually caring. The whole thing that got me commenting is the amount of accusations being thrown around as if its people's right to speculate about someones characters as if they knew the person him/herself. Hey yeah sure everyone's got opinions, but theres a line between forming an opinion based on truth and one based on rumors and gossip.

Posted by: iagreewithelliot | April 13, 2006 3:50 PM | Report abuse

Feel so sorry for Katie's family. what a nightmare this relationship must be for them. Katie acts like a lost little girl who is so needy for attention - especially the rich man with the fame and fortune to make her feel special! Most bizarre couple! I can't wait for the break-up! that will be the highlight of this relationship!

Posted by: Ash | April 13, 2006 3:59 PM | Report abuse

Cruise is a serious whack job and Holmes is a gold-digger for putting up with him

Posted by: dcrolg | April 13, 2006 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Why no reference to questions surrounding Mr. Cruise's sexuality? Guess too sensitive of an issue.

Posted by: MikeP | April 13, 2006 5:39 PM | Report abuse

MikeP, I have thought of that. I guess I'll bring it up. Okay, I had a thought that Tom Cruise got Katie Holmes pregnant before they got married so he could have a child and then dump her and get some guy. It's like an alien abduction where Katie Holmes's body was used strictly to produce offspring.

Posted by: Cankim | April 13, 2006 5:48 PM | Report abuse

Did anyone else read the article in this past Sunday's Parade magazine where the writer (Dotson Rader?) basically said that Katie was drugged out of her mind? I can't believe the Cruise Camp is happy about that sort of thing reaching millions of happy homes.

Posted by: UConn | April 13, 2006 6:33 PM | Report abuse

I appreciate and judge that you are quite cynical about Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes, and Scientology practices.

However, I personally did not like what I judge as the cynical tone of your email. In my opinion, cynicism is easy, it appeals to passive-agressive instincts and says to me that you are either too scared, hurt, pissed off, burnt-out, lazy, or whatever -- to simply state what your truly feel.

Moreover, if my judgments run true to you, I would encourage you to actually attack the practices you seem so cynical about, in a direct, penetrating, authentic way, rather than take what I judge as a mocking, ridiculing tone which to me simply reveals your own confusion.

What I own about this is that I can be cynical and passive-agressive, and that I am surely projecting some of my own experience on you. However, I suspect some of my comments fit. Do they? Only you can answer? I own that.

In blessing to you, Tom, Katie, and all -- and in encouragement of authentic expression,
Dean Thompson

Posted by: Dean | April 13, 2006 6:51 PM | Report abuse


What are you smoking??

Posted by: MikeP | April 13, 2006 10:32 PM | Report abuse


What cult are you in? Just don't get so authentic that you jump on the couch.


Posted by: ChrisM | April 13, 2006 11:04 PM | Report abuse

Mike and Chris:

I stand by my comments, though I do own that I also can be passive-agressive or cynical. I also can easily say to someone who writes something from his/her feelings:

[Fill in name], what are you smoking?

[Fill in name] What cult are you in? Just don't get so authentic that you jump on the couch?

or even more (shadowy smile)...

[Fill in the blank], you are as cultish freak..

..and so forth....

The thing is, one again, in my judgment, it is so, so, so easy to ridicule with such lazy criticism that actually evades truly tackling an issue, and in my judgment, shows lack of true courage (am I pissing you off yet? or just projecting that I would be?).

Thus, Mark and Chris, I ask: what is it about my post that you actually disagree with; get into it with me; tell me your judgments, ideas, etc. THAT I would respect. Simply saying: "what are you smoking?" doesn't really face this issue, does it? Worse, in my judgement, it is a way to simply hide!

Frankly, I AM BIG TIME PISSED OFF at you for what I judge is a slight mockery of my expression (and underneath I feel hurt). Of course, you could easily take this anger/hurt, and mock it more, like:

Dean, you cultish freak?


Dean, Dean, ohh, poor Dean, am I hurting your little cultish feelings?

etc. etc. etc.

But, again, easy, easy, easy-peasey. I have this shadow too. I can be a massively cynical guy myself, and ridicule someone into the ground. I could even mock you. But, knowing this, I CHOOSE not to, because -- quite frankly, I do not think it is truly anthentic with how I feel (it feels passive agressive; I would rather just say I am angry and hurt, which I did) With this shadow out there, I once again invite you to actually ARGUE my statements from authenticity and reason, not (I judge) shallow and easy dismissal.

Posted by: Dean | April 14, 2006 12:01 AM | Report abuse

Scientology, the issue of concern here, is a money-making organization that preys on the rich and famous. They find disillusioned people, and encourage them to face their past and make a new start. Sounds nice, huh? But to do it, they must do a "life audit" on paper, that takes hours, even days to complete. They are told they must answer the questions with brutal honesty if they are to make a break with their past. What this amounts to is a courtroom quality confession which the Scientology heirarchy uses to blackmail them for the rest of their lives.
This explains why John Travolta would do a movie like "Battleship Earth" (L.Ron Hubbard's version of how life got to earth), or why Tomkitten would behave so completely out of character (oops, a pun). They pretty much have to cooperate or dirty little secrets will appear in the press, or worse, if they try to renounce Scientology, this creepy little group has a whole wing devoted to media smear campaigns and assassination! This is no joke.
All interested parties beware.

Posted by: Anonymous for my protection | April 14, 2006 9:39 AM | Report abuse

How to give birth the Scientology way

The Guardian, UK

Mar. 29, 2006


"Scientology is evil; its techniques are evil; its practice is a serious threat to the community, medically, morally, and socially; and its adherents are sadly deluded and often mentally ill... (Scientology is) the world's largest organization of unqualified persons engaged in the practice of dangerous techniques which masquerade as mental therapy."

-          Justice Anderson, Supreme Court of Victoria, Australia

Posted by: anonymous for my protection | April 14, 2006 10:07 AM | Report abuse

i doubt tom knows katie well enough to figure out what her 300 favorite songs are.

Posted by: will | April 14, 2006 11:36 AM | Report abuse

Scientology = Branch Davidians

Tom Cruise = David Koresh

Run Katie, Run!

Posted by: Jack | April 14, 2006 1:38 PM | Report abuse

Dean, most people here comment about Scientology, how this cult is so damaging for those who follow it. Basically, the situation for any cult or pseudo-religion is: US vs. the others, where the leaders and selected followers strongly believe they are superior and the chose ones.
Please, just because a guy called Hubbard founded a sect (by the way, he said that the best way to make money was to create your own cult).

Finally Dean, lose that meliflous tone, true intelligence doesn't need to be showed off, it is well known some people pretend to exude gravitas and play the part to, sometimes, mask deficiencies, if you are part of any cult (Landmark, scientology, wican or whatever you wanna call it), say it so.

Seriously, you sound phony because you are not even to take a stand on anything. If I hurt your feelings I am very sorry but that's life, you take what it comes at you, buckle up and carry on, bleeding hearts no need to apply.

Posted by: jimbo | April 14, 2006 2:14 PM | Report abuse

I don't see how keeping grandparents out of the delivery room is weird. I have two kids and no grandparents were in the room during either delivery. It helps keep things orderly and less busy.

Now, on the other hand, I made no efforts to control my wife's speech during the process. "GET IT OUT OF ME!!!!" (Natural childbirth is a wild ride).

Posted by: In-Laws Out | April 14, 2006 3:10 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company