A modern lifestyle brand redefining motherhood

Although diaper rash is never something you want to deal with, odds are you've probably fought the good fight with this red, irritating and super common baby + toddler skin ailment more than once during your time as a mama.


Almost every baby suffers through diaper rash at some point during their first few years of life. Prolonged wetness, friction and sensitive baby skin combine into a recipe for disaster when it comes to baby bums and, although generally harmless, diaper rash can be pretty painful and irritating for those little tushes.

Enter diaper cream: A mama's best friend for treatment and prevention of diaper rash, and a staple on the changing table + in every diaper bag.

But with so many to choose from, you need to know which diaper creams actually get the job done. (Because let's be real, you're already spending enough time trying to wrangle your little one for a diaper change in the first place!)

All diaper creams are not created equal. Here are our 11 picks for the best diaper rash creams that soothe, heal and ultimately prevent diaper rash.

1. Triple Paste


A longstanding favorite among moms, Triple Paste medicated ointment delivers the double whammy of not only healing diaper rash quickly (seriously, mamas, this stuff is magic) but preventing it, as well. It's fragrance-free and hypoallergenic. Plus, a little goes a long way, which means one tub will last for quite a while.

Triple Paste Medicated Ointment
$29.99, Amazon

BUY

2. Aquaphor Baby



Aquaphor is the stuff of dreams—from chapped lips to minor cuts + scrapes, there's hardly anything that this magical ointment can't help with. And diaper rash is no exception!

Aquaphor protects baby's skin from wetness, acidity and chafing, and unlike petroleum jelly, creates a barrier over the skin which heals while still enabling the flow of water and air. Added bonus—it also works great on mama's dry hands!

Aquaphor Baby Healing Ointment
$14.29, Amazon

BUY

3. Boudreaux's Butt Paste


How can we not love a diaper rash cream with the slogan “let's kick some rash?" Developed by a pharmacist with four kids who wasn't satisfied with any of the diaper rash creams on the market, Boudreaux's is effective and is made without any harsh chemicals, which is a major win in our book.

It's also available in three varieties: original, maximum and natural.

Boudreaux's Butt Paste, Maximum Strength
$6.29, Amazon

BUY

4. Desitin


Desitin takes a spot on our best-of list because it contains the maximum level of zinc oxide available without a prescription, making it a top choice for serious diaper rash. It's thick + rich, creating a strong protective barrier between your baby's diaper and her sensitive skin. It also acts as an anti-inflammatory, reducing the redness and pain that goes along with diaper rash.

Desitin Baby Diaper Rash Maximum Strength Original Paste
$5.38, Amazon

BUY

5. Earth Mama Angel Bottom Balm



This calming salve uses calendula—a flower used to treat inflammation + pain—to soothe baby bottoms and treat + prevent diaper rash. Infused with other herbs like tea tree oil and shea butter, we love it as one of the more natural diaper rash creams on the market.

Earth Mama Angel Bottom Balm
$12.99, Target

BUY

6. Cetaphil Baby



Cetaphil is one of our faves for our own skin, so using it on our little ones' sensitive bottoms is a no-brainer. The soothing cream is filled with vitamins and other organic ingredients, and the fresh scent isn't overpowering.

Cetaphil Baby Diaper Cream
$4.39, Target

BUY

7. Honest Company Rapid Relief



Honest Company is about more than just adorable diapers. Made without phthalates, parabens, fragrances, dyes and other potentially harmful ingredients, this quick-acting diaper rash cream uses zinc oxide and other organic ingredients to relieve even the most stubborn of rashes. It also helps moisturize those tiny bottoms + is easy to apply.

Honest Company Rapid Relief Diaper Rash Cream
$9.49, Target

BUY

8. Weleda



Like a few of our other picks, this European brand also features calendula, along with other natural extracts and oils, to combat diaper rash. Because of its natural makeup, we've found this diaper rash cream to be especially effective for babies with super sensitive skin.

Weleda Calendula Diaper Rash Cream
$14.00, Target

BUY

9. A+D



A+D stands the test of time as one of the best diaper rash creams around. The soothing ointment easily glides onto skin, so it's great to apply on-the-regular for continuous protection against a diaper rash.

A+D Original Diaper Rash Ointment
$10.99, Target

BUY

10. California Baby



Maker of some of our favorite baby skin care products around, California Baby has been known for over 20 years as a go-to for safe, natural, and effective products for babies + kids with sensitive skin. This preservative-free, fragrance-free and super concentrated cream uses zinc oxide and other natural ingredients to treat and prevent diaper rash. It's also safe to use with cloth diapers.

California Baby Super Sensitive Diaper Rash Cream
$15.24, Amazon

BUY

11. Babo Botanicals



Rounding out our list is another diaper rash cream that's perfect for sensitive skin. With one of the higher levels of zinc oxide available, this cream protects even the most delicate baby bottoms. It won't stain, making it cloth diaper safe, and it's all natural and chemical-free.

Babo Botanicals Soothing Diaper Cream
$7.13, Amazon

BUY



You might also like:

Motherly is your daily #momlife manual; we are here to help you easily find the best, most beautiful products for your life that actually work. We share what we love—and we may receive a commission if you choose to buy. You've got this.

Who said motherhood doesn't come with a manual?

Subscribe to get inspiration and super helpful ideas to rock your #momlife. Motherhood looks amazing on you.

Already a subscriber? Log in here.

Going back to work after having a baby is hard. Regaining your footing in a world where working mothers are so often penalized is tough, and (just like most things during the postpartum period) it takes time.

The challenges we face as working women returning from a maternity leave can be so different from those we faced before, it can feel like we're starting over from scratch. But mothers will not be deterred, even if our return to the working world doesn't go exactly as planned.

We are resilient, as Serena Williams proved at Wimbledon this weekend.

She lost to Angelique Kerber in the final, just 10 months after welcoming daughter Alexis Olympia and recovering from a physically and emotionally traumatic birth experience.

Williams didn't get her eighth Wimbledon title this weekend, but when we consider all the challenges she (and all new moms) faced in resuming her career, her presence was still a huge achievement.

"It was such an amazing tournament for me, I was really happy to get this far!" Williams explained in an emotional post-match interview.

"For all the moms out there, I was playing for you today. And I tried. I look forward to continuing to be back out here and doing what I do best."

The loss at Wimbledon isn't what she wanted, of course, but Williams says it does not mean there won't be wins in her near future.

"These two weeks have showed me I can really compete and be a contender to win grand slams. This is literally just the beginning. I took a giant step at Wimbledon but my journey has just began."

When asked what she hopes other new moms take away from her journey, Williams noted her postpartum recovery was really difficult, and hopes that other moms who face challenges early in motherhood know that they don't have to give up on whatever dreams they have for themselves, whether it involves working or not.

"Honestly, I feel like if I can do it, they can do it. I'm just that person, that vessel that's saying, 'You can be whatever you want to be.' If you want to go back to workand to me, after becoming a mom, I feel like there's no pressure to do that because having a child is a completely full-time job," she said.

"But to those that do want to go back, you can do it, you can really do it."

Thank you, Serena. You may not have won, but this was still a victory.

You might also like:

Since baby Crew became the newest member of Chip and Joanna Gaines' family three weeks ago, his proud parents have been keeping the world updated, sharing sweet snaps of their youngest and even giving us a glimpse into his nursery.

Now, Chip Gaines is showing off a pic that proves there is nothing cuter than a floppy, sleepy baby.

"My heart is full..." the proud father of five captioned the photo he posted on his Instagram and Twitter accounts.

Earlier this week Crew's mama shared how she gets him so sleepy in the first place, posting an Instagram Story showing how she walks around the family's gardens on their Waco, Texas farm to lull her newborn boy to sleep.



The couple are clearly enjoying every single moment of Crew's babyhood. As recently as 7 days ago Chip was still sporting his hospital bracelet. Joanna says with each child he's worn his maternity ward ID until it finally wears off. We can't blame Chip for wanting to make the newborn phase last as long as possible.

You might also like:

It was a changing table must-have a generation ago, but these days, many parents are forgoing baby powder, and now, the leading manufacturer of the sweet smelling powder was dealt a big financial blow.

Johnson & Johnson was just ordered to pay almost $4.7 billion to 22 women who sued, alleging baby powder caused their ovarian cancer.

A St. Louis jury says the women are right, but what does The American Academy of Pediatrics say about baby powder?

It was classified "a hazard" before many of today's parents were even born

The organization has actually been recommending against baby powder for years, but not due to cancer risks, but inhalation risks.

Way back in 1981 the AAP declared baby powder "a hazard," issuing a report pointing out the frequency of babies aspirating the powder, which can be dangerous and even fatal in the most severe cases.

That warning didn't stop all parents from using the powder though, as its continued presence on store shelves to this day indicates.

In 1998 Dr. Hugh MacDonald, then the director of neonatology at Santa Monica Hospital and a member of the American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Fetus and Newborn, told the Los Angeles Times "Most pediatricians recommend that it not be used," adding that the consensus at the time was that "anybody using talcum powder be aware that it could cause inhalation of the talc, resulting in a pneumonic reaction."

Recent updates

A 2015 update to the AAP's Healthy Children website suggests the organization was even very recently still more concerned about the risk of aspiration than cancer risks like those alleged in the lawsuit. It suggests that parents who choose to use baby powder "pour it out carefully and keep the powder away from baby's face [as] published reports indicate that talc or cornstarch in baby powder can injure a baby's lungs."

In a 2017 interview with USA Today, Dr. David Soma, a pediatrician with the Mayo Clinic Children's Hospital, explained that baby powder use had decreased a lot over the previous five to eight years, but he didn't believe it was going to disappear from baby shower gift baskets any time soon.

"There are a lot of things that are used out of a matter of tradition, or the fact it seems to work for specific children," he said. "I'm not sure if it will get phased out or not, until we know more about the details of other powders and creams and what works best for skin conditions—I think it will stick around for a while."

Talc-based baby powder is the kind alleged to have caused ovarian cancer in the lawsuit (which Johnson & Johnson plans to appeal), but corn starch varieties of baby powder are also available and not linked to increased cancer risks as alleged in the case.


Bottom line: If you are going to use baby powder on your baby's bottom, make sure they're not getting a cloud of baby powder in their face, and if you're concerned, talk to your health care provider about alternative methods and products to use on your baby's delicate skin.

You might also like:

In the days since a The New York Times report revealed a resolution meant to encourage breastfeeding was blocked by U.S. delegates at the World Health Assembly, breastfeeding advocates, political pundits, parents, doctors—and just about everyone else—have been talking about breastfeeding, and whether or not America and other countries are doing enough to support it.

The presidents of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians say the controversy at the World Health Assembly reveals that mothers need more support when it comes to breastfeeding, while others, including The Council on Foreign Relations, suggest the national conversation needs more nuance, and less focus on the "breast is best" rhetoric.

The one thing everyone agrees on is that parents need more support when it comes to infant feeding, and in that respect, the controversy over the World Health Assembly resolution may be a good thing.

In their joint letter to the editor published in the New York Times this week, the presidents of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians, Dr. Colleen Kraft and Dr. Lisa Hollier urge "the United States and every country to protect, promote and support breast-feeding for the health of all women, children and families."

The doctors go on to describe how breastfeeding "provides protection against newborn, infant and child infections, allergies, asthma, inflammatory bowel disease and sudden infant death syndrome," and note the health benefits to mothers, including reduced risks for "breast cancer, ovarian cancer, diabetes, hypertension and heart disease.

"Helping mothers to breastfeed takes a multifaceted approach, including advancing public policies like paid family leave, access to quality child care, break time and a location other than a bathroom for expressing milk," say Kraft and Hollier.

Certainly such policies would support breastfeeding mothers (and all mothers) in America, but some critics say framing the discussion around domestic policy is a mistake, because the World Health Assembly resolution is a global matter and women and babies in other parts of the world face very different feeding challenges than we do here at home.

In an op-ed published by CNN, Gayle Tzemach Lemmon, an adjunct senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations suggests the laudable goal of breastfeeding promotion can backfire when mothers in conflict-riddled areas can't access formula due to well-meaning policy. Lemmon points to a 2017 statement by Doctors Without Borders calling for fewer barriers to formula distribution in war-torn areas.

"International organizations like UNICEF and the World Health Organization (WHO) promote breastfeeding ... and provide infant formula, but only by prescription. We believe that distributing infant formula in a conflict situation like Iraq is the only way to avoid children having to be hospitalized for malnutrition," Manuel Lannaud, the head of Doctors Without Borders Iraq mission wrote.

The various viewpoints presented this week prove that infant feeding is not a black and white issue, and policy debates should not be framed as formula versus breast milk—there is more nuance than that.

A recent study in the Journal of Pediatrics found opting to supplement with formula after first breastfeeding improves outcomes for infants and results in higher rates of breastfeeding afterward, and while the benefits of breastfeeding are numerous, they are sometimes overstated. Another recent study published in the journal PLOS Medicine found breastfeeding has no impact on a child's overall neurocognitive function by the time they are 16. Basically, parents should not be shamed for supplementing or choosing to use formula.

This, according to Department of Health and Human Services says national spokesperson Caitlin Oakley is why the HHS opposed the original draft of the breastfeeding resolution at the World Health Assembly (although critics and the initial NYT report suggest the United States delegation were acting in the interests of infant formula manufacturers).

"Many women are not able to breastfeed for a variety of reasons, these women should not be stigmatized; they should be equally supported with information and access to alternatives for the health of themselves and their babies," Oakley said in a statement.

That's true, but so is everything the presidents of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Obstetricians presented in their op-ed, and that's why the U.S. should support breastfeeding policy.

Here's another truth: This is an issue with many perspectives and many voices. And we need to hear them all, because all parents need support in feeding their babies, whether it's with a breast, a bottle or both—and we're not getting it yet.

You might also like:

Motherly provides information of a general nature and is designed for educational purposes only. This site does not provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.Your use of the site indicates your agreement to be bound by our  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Information on our advertising guidelines can be found here.