to be mad with dh(99 Posts)
Last night ds had an accident. It involved me taking ds to hospital. Dh couldn't do it as he had to stay in. So he looked after 4 month ok dd. She was unsettled. He tried all the usual stuff to calm her. Nothing worked so he put her in cot and lef her to cry whilst he sat watching tv. She eventually went to sleep. I know he may not have been able to calm her. (Probably needed breast for comfort) but leaving her crying in the cot so he could watch tv. Surely he could have done more.(Think she cried for half an hour)
Surely he could have done more
I know he may not have been able to calm her.
Probably needed breast for comfort
Well I suppose he could have grown a pair of breasts and started lactating on demand
I've done that.
Is he generally shite at dealing with the kids?
YANBU if he's just put her there and gone off to do his own thing. YABU if he's tried everything like comforting, nappy changing, feed...list could go on. Could it be that she was just over-tired? Maybe she wouldn't settle because she could sense you weren't there?
I mean I have left my baby in the cot to cry.
After trying everything...and feeling like I was going to implode.
Holly, that made me laugh! I just spluttered tea everywhere
She went to sleep, so what's the problem? You need to give up the control a bit, let DH do things his way.
Does no harm to let a baby cry it out.
You can tell the difference between a hungry cry, a tired cry, a hurt cry etc
She's fine, she went to sleep
He doesn't have breasts so had no other recourse.
Putting her down rather than continuing to over stimulate her was probably a sensible solution
And there is no way he was just watching tv, he was listening to her from another room
So, you came home to a sleeping baby.
And you are mad with your dh.
Why did he have to stay in?
Was it really more important than taking his son to hospital so that you could stay with bfed baby?
I think it depends how long she cried. 30 minutes is a long time to ignore a crying baby.
Why did he have to stay in? Why couldn't he take DS to the hospital?
OP, your DH must have been the one to tell you he'd left her there to cry to sleep - did he also tell you he'd tried everything or did he just put her there at the first oppurtunity?
TBH, I doubt she's affected by just being left - leaving a baby cry sometimes when you've tried everything is sometimes the only thing you can do.
He said that she wouldn't take dummy or bottle and claimed he tried to comfort her but he is not the most patient person so I guess his prescence wouldn't be calming. He also admitted that he put her in cot upstairs and went downstairs to watch tv. Sorry drip feeding but didn't want to make post too long as on phone. Incidently i was having a shower this am. I left her happy in cot in next room. She started crying and dh didn't bother to check on her. It is as if he thinks its my job!
That would have upset me too.
But he just has a different way of dealing with her than you do.
Why did he have to stay in? (nosy)
I immediately assumed he was unable to drive so you had to go to hospital.
Hope ds is ok.
Sorry. He had a telephone interview. Fortunately dd wasn't crying at that point.
Well she went to sleep so there obviously wasnt that much wrong with her care. I dont see anything wrong with it as long as she wasnt doing half an hours hernia inducing full pitch screaming whilst he did his own thing.
Did you ask him why he didn't go to her this morning?
Is he a lazy type bloke?
I would have been pissed off if my dh had done this. He should at least have been cuddling her. Holding her isn't "over-stimulating", it's basic care of a tiny infant. I think leaving a 4mo baby in a room alone to "cry it out" is cruel.
How is your DS now?
I think men are wired differently to women when it comes to babies crying. They find it much more easy to switch off whereas we don't. If DD had been inconsolable at that age I would have just put her to the breast. If your DD is only comforted by breastfeeding there isn't much else your husband could have done.
I know it's not a popular view but men are different from women
That's not to say they're all the same of course but we mothers have different responses to a crying baby that are in part related to our hormones.
It is possible he does see it as your job to see to your ds. Maybe it's worth a chat so you don't end up falling out over it.
Sorry about the assumption.
I don't think you can say this is an inherent male-female difference. My DH is not any slower to respond when DS cries than I am.
I think men are more likely to believe it's not their job but there's nothing biological or natural about that. They're just choosing to be lazy.
I don't think it's a "men are different" thing. It's just lazy. My dh wouldn't have left a crying baby alone upstairs and sat watching the telly. It's a bit insulting to fathers to imply that neglecting a distressed baby is a man thing
mountain out of a molehill. has the baby been harmed by being left to go to sleep? did he adequately look after her? did she go to sleep? think you need to get over it and realise he will do things differently to you from time to time. your way isnt necessarily the right way.
Hope both of your dc are ok now. I would have been pissed off for a small baby to cry unchecked for half hour.
I'd have taken a breastfed baby with me.
Maybe dh was BU, but I think once I'd tried everything I'd be either calling mum and her accompanying comforting breasts back, taking the child to her or if those really weren't options I'd have done what he did lest I get overly frustrated and cross. The potential is there when they Just Won't Shut Up to think the unthinkable, and even if you have no intention of carrying it out the separation would definitely help.
How is ds now?
at the posters saying it must have been OK because she went to sleep
a child will eventually cry herself to sleep from exhaustion if not attended to. This does not mean it is OK to ignore your baby until she cries herself to sleep.
YANBU to be pissed off, even cry it out advocates admit it is harmful to leave babies under 6 months so it isn't like he was following a 'philosophy'.
And 'hear hear' to what Greensleeves said.
Ther are pages and pages of reputable scientific studies showing babies crying do not trigger the same hormones and instinct women have.
Same at ther are pages and pages of study showing leaving a baby to cry is actually beneficial to the entire family. Breast feeding back to sleep is damaging (apparently)
And there will be pages and pages of studies showing the opposite.
Most of the babies that woke during the night were boys. These babies -- considered transitional sleepers -- were also assessed as being more irritable or difficult. They were also more likely to be breast-fed. The mothers of these transitional sleepers were more likely to be depressed and have greater maternal sensitivity, the study authors found.
The authors concluded that genetic factors could play a role in difficult temperaments. "Families who are seeing sleep problems persist past 18 months should seek advice," Weinraub advised.
Babies should learn how to fall asleep without help, the researchers added. "When mothers tune in to these nighttime awakenings and/or if a baby is in the habit of falling asleep during breast-feeding, then he or she may not be learning how to self-soothe, something that is critical for regular sleep," Weinraub said.
More research is needed to explore the link between mothers' depression and infant awakenings, the researchers suggested in the news release.
"Because the mothers in our study described infants with many awakenings per week as creating problems for themselves and other family members, parents might be encouraged to establish more nuanced and carefully targeted routines to help babies with self-soothing and to seek occasional respite," Weinraub noted. "The best advice is to put infants to bed at a regular time every night, allow them to fall asleep on their own and resist the urge to respond right away to awakenings."
The study was recently published in Developmental Psychology.
-- Mary Elizabeth Dallas
'hear hear' to what JJ Sprat said
It has just occured to me that we see a baby crying as being in distress, when actually they could be just over tired, hungry, uncomfortable and this is the only form of communication they have. I wonder if they feel as distressed as we do when we, as adults, cry or if it is different? If the former is true it would be very wrong to leave a baby to cry but if, as i suspect the latter is true then its ok. I don't have the answer, it just occured to me.
Would have taken her but knew it would be a long night. Hospital dealing with it was 30 miles away. Dd will take a bottle fine so didn't think there would be a problem. Will also self settle although I Guess i normally stay in room. Ds is fine now thank you. Although he will need further treatment. Haven't had a chance to discuss shower incident as dh has taken ds out.
I think YANBU. He may not have been able to comfort your baby, but he could have tried rather than deciding his own leisure time is more important than her distress. I would be pretty angry, and I think half an hour is a long time to leave a little baby to cry.
I'm also interested to know what is so important he needed to stay in rather than taking his son to hospital meaning you could stay with the breastfed baby.
Also an agree to what Jacksprat said.
Greensleeves thanks for the dismissive face pulling at my mothering skills. yes that's right l am a mother - albeit of a different generation to most of you and certainly to the OP.
I stand by what l said and l do know believe it or not the difference between a real screaming cry of pain or hunger or other 'one that wont go away' type of very distressed crying which as l said in my post is not ok to ignore for half an hour or much time at all really. We have no reason to think this was the case in the OP.
I have brought up two DCs ( from babies obviously) who were both happy confident loving well balanced toddlers and have grown up into equally so adults despite my methods.
Yes there were times when having tried absolutely everything else and made sure they werent hungry ,thirsty , too hot, too cold or had wind and they werent any signs of them being in pain (knees up, red faced screaming etc) then yes shock horror l did on occasion leave them to cry for a while to see if they just went to sleep.
Besides as Hollyberrys post clearly demonstrates the jury is still out even today on which is right or wrong.
Sorry, what is the shower incident?
Four months is too young to cry it out - even the advocates of CC don't advise it before six months.
If he really couldn't take DS to hospital, and you really couldn't take baby with you, the better option would have been for him to let her cry herself to sleep on his bare chest. But I'm not surprised he didn't think of that. I expect he was at the end of his tether.
How are the DCs today?
You're very welcome. You can have another one for your latest post
Leaving a 4mo baby to cry upstairs alone while you watch the tv is slovenly and inadequate. It was inadequate 30 years ago and it's inadequate now. So you managed to justify it yourself - that doesn't make it good parenting.
I don't think it is a man thing, but hormones do funny things to mothers and esp mothers who are currently bf, like the OP. I think we get a chemically different response.
Just in response to the article posted by Holly, in the interest of balance.
Could he really not have rescheduled the call?
I'm pretty sure that my husband would have taken our son himself tbh, call or not.
I agree with greensleeves. It's not good to leave such a young baby to cry.
I once left DC1 to cry it out at under four months. Granted I was in the grip of PND and was simultaneously crying it out,but in the grand scheme of things it didn't do any harm. It was a mistake,something to learn from,as will the OPs dh. Lacking breasts is not a shortcoming.
The only time it's the right choice is when you are so rattled/strung out/depressed that you feel you might actually lose control and harm the baby.
Not because you'd rather watch the telly.
Well maybe he was feeling frustrated and at a loss and tried cc without really understanding what it is.
I wasn't afraid I was going to harm my baby,I was afraid I was going to kill myself. Nice generalisation though.
Sorry. This morning i left dd happy in cot whilst I had a shower. Dh was downstairs. She than started crying bu dh either didn't hear or just ignored it. O and dd initially didn't take bottle but did later on. Sorry previous post misleading. (does regularly drink expressed milk from bottle)
greensleeves I think maybe he was at the end of his tether. Not the most patient person sadly. Although it really came across to me as i wanted to watch the telly so i left her to cry it out.
I think it's fine to leave a crying baby to self settle provided of course it's been fed, watered and cuddled. I've done this with all of mine; they are happy and stable ..
So Op YABU
AreYouADurtBird I have no criticism whatsoever to make of you - of course having PND and feeling like you might harm yourself is just as much of a reason as feeling you might harm the baby. It must have been terrible.
My point is that leaving a 4mo to cry it out isn't appropriate unless you really have no other choice - and IMO the op's dh should not have done it. It sounded to me as though he did it because he thought it was OK and didn't want to spend any more time trying to soothe a crying baby.
I'd be beyond cross with dh if he did this, particularly in one so young. But then I'm not an advocate of CIO, CC or anything similar. I have 4 children aged 23 to 12months and was co-sleeping and bf'ing when it was quite uncommon, especially for an 18year old. But I figure a baby cries because it needs something...
Luckily for me, I know dh wouldn't leave ours to cry. In fact I've come home to both of them crashed on the sofa in front of the tv before!
If, and I hope not, put in a similar situation then take the baby with you too. The hospital will understand I'm sure.
Thank you Zookeeper
Greensleeves l do not have to justify myself to you or anyone else on here. .Do not dare to think that gives you the right to infer that l or anyone else who disagrees with you and people in your camp was a bad mother to my children.
As l have already said the fact both my DCs grew up at every stage, happy confident and loving right up to well balanced lovely adults today, exonorates me and others of my view far more than any PA little volleyball games and sarcasm ever will you.
No, your assertion that your children are "lovely adults" certainly doesn't "exonorate" any dubious parenting practices you may have used. The indomitable human spirit is a wonderful thing. And childrearing isn't an exact science, you don't add two drops of this and a pinch of that and guarantee perfect results.
Most parents make mistakes. Apart from you, I mean.
OP, if you can be arsed to skip over all this nonsense - I would probably sit down with my dh over tea and biscuits when I was no longer pissed off, and talk about what is and isn't acceptable parenting to both of you. New babies don't come with an instruction manual, but we all have lines we don't want crossed, and for me - maybe for you too - leaving such a young baby to cry alone isn't on.
I would be upset too.
especially as your DD is only 4 months old.
he should get a check on that patience of his.
I'm not a very patient person either, but I wouldn't leave anybody's 4 month old baby in a cot to cry herself to sleep
My DH doesn't really have a clue (and no sense of urgency), but whenever DD has been upset like that, he's paced the room with her for more than an hour whilst trying to calm her. He would never dream of putting a screaming baby down in a cot!
you were justified because you had PND and you have to find ways of coping without feeling you might hurt yourself or the baby
this man doesn't have PND.
Stilll with you Sudaname
I am curious now. At what point would those who think it's terrible leave a crying baby, if at all? If it's not OK at four months when do you think it is ok? Or is it never ok?
Well for me, never
which is why I'm up eleventy times a night still but advocates of CC systems including the health visitors agree you can start at six months.
i think advocates say 6 months, but I think I wouldn't do it at less than 10 months (based on my own DD)
but even now, she wouldn't settle if I did it on her - she just gets more and more worked up.
it's strange though isn't it? Why is it ok at six but not at five or four?
If the baby is not hungry and safe and warm then I really don't see an issue in leaving it to settle.
In some ways it is strange, yes, because it is horrible to leave even adults to cry alone IMO. But the argument that 6months is ok is to do with cognitive development. Although there is considerable evidence it is still not ok at 6 months, or 12 months, or older. So basically, those in favour say not before 6 months and those against say not at all. No-one says its ok at 4 months, except anecdotally.
For me, certainly not before the child is old enough to tell me what's wrong.
Leaving a child the way OP's dh did is not leaving her to settle, it is leaving her to cry herself to sleep. I can see no good reason for that other than the obviously extreme circumstances that have already been alluded to. Leaving the baby to cry it out while watching TV and thinking "oh well, she's safe/warm, let her get on with it" is never acceptable in my opinion.
I'm confused by the responses here.
If anyone comes along and says they let their young baby cry it out they get absolutely flamed (rightly so). But a dh has done that here and that's fine???
He could have and should have been comforting her, at the very least patting and cuddling or walking around with her.
Shutting her in a room and ignoring her isn't good parenting.
Most people haven't said it's fine though Fairylea. It looks that way because those who have have been strident and rude about it.
My dh can't settle out baby (8 months) 9 times out of 10. He is too used to being bf to help him settle. But what dh would not do is leave the baby alone to cry. He would sit in the bedroom, or bring the baby down to watch tv. That way at least the baby knows they haven't been abandoned, even if they still cry.
Blimey to think I've been blissfully unaware of my unacceptable parenting all these years..
I think leaving the baby safe, fed and warm to settle in its cot whilst pottering around downstairs -or upstairs - is fine. I an only talk of my own experience but my three seemed to thrive on it and are happy and well-adjusted now. I put that down to their knowing they were loved rather than their "indomitable human spirit"
I know I would have been a far worse parent had I too not got rest after their bedtime.
Each to their own; no need for the nastiness on this thread.
But you went for a shower and left your child to cry... why is he in the wrong for that one? Maybe he didnt hear the child cry?
In our house, if one adult is in the bath, the other is automatically on duty. The OP is surely allowed a shower and expect the child's father to respond to his own child? Or is she supposed to cut her shower short just because he can't be arsed to see what's up?
YaNbu I'd be seriously p'd off if mine did that
And childrearing isn't an exact science, you don't add two drops of this and a pinch of that and guarantee perfect results
Exactly Greensleeves so as l have already stated you therefore have no right to decide that l was a bad parent along with everybody else in my camp and you are a good parent along with everyone in the camp that agrees with you.
As far as the sarcastic comments about me thinking l can never make mistakes as a parent, anyone who cares to read my previous posts can see that l have never said or implied that. Only that my DCs have suffered no ill effects from occasionally been left to cry and as l took great care to stress, unless they are screaming or appear in pain or may be hungry thirsty etc - iows when all else fails. I am speaking out at being called a bad parent by you - which you seem determined to make stick by now implying l am a know it all, because l do not buy in to the letter what you believe.
You dont decide whether l 'made a mistake' or not and certainly not whether l was a bad parent. In 20 years from now the child psychologists etc might have gone full circle and decide it is perfectly ok to leave a baby to self settle even if crying, if you have tried everything many times and eliminated all the obvious factors. Would you and others who agree with your theory be then fair game to be told you were actually practising bad parenting - you did it all wrong.
No of course not and imo it will never be resolved 100% - how can it be - babies cant tell us and by the time theyre old enough to do so they'll have forgotten how they felt. So if your DCs turn out fine and mine turn out fine - then with mine it justs pure luck and the indominitable human spirit that has prevailed despite my bad parenting practice. With yours though it will of course be down to your good parenting practises .
Thank you Zookeeper once again. You are right there is no need whatsoever for these nasty remarks.
Poor op, surely she's allowed a shower and expect that DP would see to baby.
I think it's erroneous to suggest that because a baby's physical needs are taken care of then there's no need to attend to crying. I would be seriously
Ossed off with my dh if he did that, but it's probably just seething that you bth need to talk about and resolve.
Fwiw, my parents smoked furiously throughout my childhood (long, long time ago) We grew up in a cloud of the grey stuff. I've heard them say that they didn't know the health risks (bollocks). Was it potential harmful? Yes. Am I ok? I think so, although I had multiple ear infections as a child which have been attributed to everything except the obvious environmental cause. Do I hate them for it?no. But it was still not the right thing to do.
The smoking is a good analogy emily. A specific child (or even two or three) showing no signs of harm is not evidence that a practice is harmless. But most people know that I think.
Of course I "have the right" to post that your choice was the wrong one. This is a discussion forum. You think leaving a little baby alone to cry it out is fine. I think it's appalling. We both have the right to post. If you find it uncomfortable reading, that's really just tough. I don't have the right, as you say, to call you a bad parent. But since I did no such thing, there's n problem there either.
OMG my spelling. Blame iPad.
Op, he needs to pull his weight with your dd, and ensure she is tended to when needed. Speak to him.
I am an advocate of teaching to self soothe but I don't agree it is done by leaving a 4mo to cry to sleep
I would be livid. There is no reason to leave a four month old crying in their cot.
But you went for a shower and left your child to cry... why is he in the wrong for that one? Maybe he didnt hear the child cry?
Baby wasn't crying when i went into shower. She was happy and safe. I ended up tending to baby as soon as i came out of shower . She was crying for maybe 5 minutes if that.
Still waiting to find out if he heard as still not home.
Yes you can say what you like within MN boundaries obviously. Doesnt mean to say it's up to you to decide who is right and who is wrong and then go on to slander anyone elses parenting skills as 'slovenly' or 'poor' who doesnt agree with your view.
Especialy as the jury is still out on this issue and possibly will be for generations to come. The smoking analogy is different as there is concrete proof that secondary smoking is detrimental to the incidental 'smoker' and therefore very obviously more so a baby.
You then make it personal to me with your nasty little sarcasm that l must think l could never make a mistake.
I genuinely never said or implied any such thing'
Some of your posts were very much personal swipes at me, l think you will find you do not have 'the right' to do that.
The thing is, though, I DO have the right to say that leaving a 4mo to cry alone is slovenly and lazy parenting. And you have to put up with it. That's the internet for you.
If you choose to personalise it, then maybe you should be thinking about why my general comments rankle with you so much. Meanwhile, I will continue to assert that "cry it out" is cruel and stupid, and crueller and stupider the younger the baby it is inflicted on.
I have read the whole thread.
I think maybe he was at the end of his tether. Not the most patient person sadly
The advice to any parent in that senario, is to put the baby somewhere safe and walk out of the room.
He couldn't have comforted her, she wanted to be put on the breast. She would have been under similar stress being left as not having the response she needed, whilst being held.
You do need to discuss how you both feel and reach a comprimise that won't impact of your relationship, or put DD at any risk.
You cannot force him to parent in a way that he isn't capable of,i know Mums, who tell me that "they don't do clingy baby's" and leave them to cry it out.
Via my work that is, i see lots of different parenting styles and have to be up to date on the research/statistics.
I would have stay at home with the baby and DH would have taken the older child.
McNewpants, the DH had a telephone interview that meant he wanted to stay at home.
So you decide that a huge percentage of parents out there, on here or whatever are or were 'bad' 'slovenly' 'lazy' and now you've added 'cruel' and 'stupid' parents.
All based on what , scientific evidence - no, any form of concrete evidence - no. Maybe there's such a thing as a baby whisperer that l'm unaware of - who claims to have settled this once and for all.
You're arrogance is breathtaking.
Yet you cant see why l am affronted for myself and other parents (and you so have made it personal to me - nice try to blame me for the personalisation btw).
You even claim to know why your remarks upset me (as if being unjustly categorised as a bad parent isnt affrontry enough for anyone) - it's apparently some deep down psychological reason that no doubt means deep down l know l deserve these comments.
I've got 2 DCs and did all my share of changing, night feeds etc. The one thing I couldn't deal with was when they cried and cried and nothing could calm them, the noise became like knitting needles being forced into my brain through my ears. I had to leave them, at that point it was the only option.
If OPs DH doesn't help out, as in the shower incident, regularly then he is just being lazy and pathetic.
The best thing for my DCs was to be left. The alternative was unthinkable. Greensleeves you must have the patience of a saint. Cut those of us who don't some slack please.
There's a difference though between walking away from a crying baby because you just can't take anymore, and walking away because you can't think what else to try and anyway that programme you like is about to start. We don't really know which of these sums up the OP's DH on that night. Her other comments suggest to me that she thought he just couldn't be bothered.
I think 4 months is too young to be left to CIO.
Aman - there's a massive difference between constantly being put in the situation where the baby crying puts you at the end of your tether and to have to perform evasive action and letting a baby CIO because you don't have the patience to deal with it for one evening.
If my baby cried for no reason and with no let up for weeks on end, or even days, then yes, but the OP's DH left it to cry when it had only been a few hours! That's not the end of his tether, that's "i can't be arsed"
What would happen if he wasn't there when you were taking a shower? The baby would have to cope for twenty minutes. It isn't the end of the world. How do single parents manage?
I think a job interview comes massively higher up the importance scale than a crying baby- no way should he have tried to reschedule the interview. How wimpy does that sound- sorry can't talk as my baby is crying. Hardly very professional.
OP you sound very controlling and critical, give the man a break.
Astelia l agree, You can almost see the 'possible poor attendance' red flag flashing across the interviewers eyes.
Also it doesnt sound like the OP actually told her DH she was going in shower and could he listen out for the baby. She did say he might not have heard the baby so maybe he wasnt aware he was even 'on duty'. So l think OPs DH is getting treated a bit harshly tbh.
there is surely a difference between leaving a baby to cry as a one-off, and doing it regularly? I don't think any harm can come from one occasion.
If you've had time part to mull things over I would just sit down calmly with your DH and talk it through, together, as parents - don't make it about who's right or wrong - just how to move forward should the situation arise again. Maybe your DH thought it would be better for DD to stay in her room rather than move her about the house, overstimulating her? And that he really did feel there was nothing he could do for her and the noise was driving him to distraction - I know that my DD's cry when she was this age could nigh on push me over the edge, especially if I'd tried everything. Without knowing his side it's hard to say.
It sounds like it's a one-off series of events that are unlikely to happen again. Your DD will have come to no harm. Presumably as she is your second child you must know what DH is like as a parent - good enough to have a second child with it seems.
He wasn't being interviewed when the baby was crying. He was watching tv.
No I didn't tell him which I agree was a mistake. Although its not the shower incident which bothered me. It was probably only 5 minutes if that.
I do however, need to have a chat about dh pulling his weight with this baby. As soon as she starts crying he just brings her to me. I don't know whether it is the crying that gets to him, whether he feels helpless or just can't be bothered.
Not an easy subject to broach. He definately wasn't same with out 1st child.
You definitely need to talk to him about it OP, he needs to see his daughter as a joint responsibility, including her emotional needs.
Clearly a minority of posters feel that leaving a 4mo to cry is acceptable - but your OP and subsequent posts suggest that you don't. So I think you need to lay it on the table with your dh that this can't happen.
I would have been upset if my dh had let my 4 month old to cry for half an hour. YANBU. My dd had colic and was often inconsolable. I occasionally had to put her down in a safe place whilst she screamed for a couple of minutes so that I could regroup, but I never left her crying for longer than a minute or two whilst I gave myself a little pep talk (was one of my coping methods). I think the key here is that me and my hubby had an agreement on what we should do and cry it out was something we were both against. You and your hubby need to agree on a plan for the future. In your case your hubby could have put her in the pram and pushed her around the living room to have settled her, It would have been much better than leaving her upstairs alone whilst he sat downstairs watching TV. I do not buy the whole 'if he had tried everything else what else could he do?' argument. My DD cried from the moment she woke up in the morning until 7 at night. I couldn't ever put her down, and on some really bad days it didn't matter what I did. She would cry, attempt to feed, attempt to poop, sleep for 20 minutes and then wake up and start it all over again. It was really, really tough, but it wouldn't have felt right to have just left her to get on with it, even though it was tough for me. I really do not think you are being unreasonable for expecting your hubby to have held a crying baby.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.