Are mums more attached to their babies than dads?

Many congrats OP

I can only speak of my experience of becoming a mum. When the little bundle arrives, everything changes, inc my relationship with DH, not necessarily for the worst, but it evolves, as the baby becomes the priority. Things that were important to me before aren’t so much.

Enjoy every minute, they grow up fast, my DS’s are adults now and DH & I still put them first!

Thanks for the tip. I will try to keep that in mind.

@Onnabugeisha
What science are you reading?
Of course nurture matters, and the role dad’s play from birth onwards is crucial to the bond they develop with their babies.
But why on earth do you think babies are a blank slate at birth? What evidence do you have that human mothers and their babies have no instinctual attachment to each other? Why do you think nature doesn’t count for anything? Because it doesn’t suit your world view? Because it’s inconvenient?
You also totally exclude the role of nurture before birth. - well, almost. You say babies recognize the voices of whoever they heard in the womb. But I’m assuming you didn’t actually go and look up any studies or even think about it for more than 3 seconds. 3 minutes on google scholar will show you that babies prefer their mum’s voice at birth. Even in studies where the mother and father both read to the unborn baby before birth. It’s not that surprising - they hear every word their pregnant mother utters from the time their hearing develops, and the sound can pass through the mother’s body as well as through the air around her. They hear their father when he is close enough and when their hearing is powerful enough.

It had nothing to do with any patriarchal stuff, but I would have found it very hard to leave either of mine for any length of time. 2 hours shopping was about the limit, certainly when they were still BF. It was a very visceral thing, but I know not everybody feels the same.

I was once astonished when a friend (non Brit) told me she’d left her 4 week old first baby with her parents, to go on holiday with her dh for a month. No way could I ever have done that, but she evidently thought it nothing unusual.

Social conditioning and patriarchal values play a role too. A baby will be attached to whoever looks after then when they are born. If both parents do that, they will be comforted by and attached to both/either. I think women become more closely bonded than men partly because of the condemnation they get for taking any time away from their baby. Men are not subjected to that, so are less involved in care, so are less closely bonded. The Paris thread is a fantastic example of that. Objectively there's nothing wrong with the suggestion of going to Paris. And yet, the response!

I would research other cultures and customs relating to babies and parenting newborns.. Well since women are almost universally oppressed especially when they become mothers, this isnt going to have any answers other than other cultures also believe and expect mum to be with baby 24/7.

EMDR isn’t medication. It’s therapy I had for my PTSD. If a general discussion on baby care is triggering someone to say how they almost died in childbirth and telling a poster “fuck you” when the thread isn’t even about childbirth, then there is a high likelihood of undiagnosed PTSD. There is nothing wrong with my suggesting that poster seek help for her birth trauma.

^This is good advice.

Babies are more bonded to their mothers first few months of life. They won’t even recognise they are a separate person from you. They lived in you, know your smell, your voice; their heartbeat is likely synced with yours. If you sleep near each other (as you should when very young), you might even enter REM sleep at the same time. That is biological fact. So yes, babies are more bonded to their mothers. And mothers to their babies. It’s primal.

This board skews very traditional / conservative with traditional gender roles and pretty negative views on dads / men.

Do not take anything on this board as anything other than random people who may have entirely different beliefs and viewpoints and opinions and experiences than you. It isn't advice, it is just posts. Some people post to be contrary, some post pretending they are someone they aren't, some just like to stir up issues, some like to give posters a hard time and make them feel bad.

Have your baby and then do what is right for you. You and DH might feel perfectly ready to go away or you may not. Your DH is definitely more than able to bond just like you are and care for the baby just like you can. Do what is right for you and don't worry if other people think it is right or not.

Idk you did come off as very rude to pp. If you weren’t angry perhaps you could have mustered up an apology instead of recommending her some medication and abusing her of PTSD.

I would research other cultures and customs relating to babies and parenting newborns.

It may give you an insight into why so many generations of families flourish when baby doesn't leave the mum for sometimes 40 days.

DH and I are genuinely equal parents - TBH he is probably the primary caregiver now - but that didn't properly start until the babies were 6 months plus because yes biology and hormones make things different in the early days.

Imo a mother baby bond is different to that of a father baby bond- and that’s different to love. But actually the issue of going away is the physically toll of having pretty much just given birth and carried a baby for 9 months.

I am also very rational and logical, and not a victim of my hormones @Animallover87, but having a baby does have a bigger impact than you can anticipate.

Usually when I read on MN that a poster says she is feeling "hormonal" I tend to sigh at the way women are stereotyping themselves, but yes, a baby does change things.

I am one of the least maternal people I know but once DD had arrived I became a fiercely protective tiger mum.

There is a difference between what is observed on average and any 1 individual situation - all babies vary and are individuals - even at birth. Some babies don’t sleep well, others sleep right through (even siblings with the same parents and environment). There is also a difference between the age of the baby, breastfeeding vs bottle, and how long each caregiver spends with baby. Leaving baby with grandparent is different from leaving baby with other parent - though might be less different if the grandparent lives full time with the family.

right after birth I would guess most babies are likely to feel more bonded and familiar to mother - due to 9 months in womb and hormone changes at birth. After birth - over time baby will bond more with others dependent on who looks after them - and I’d expect the bond to grow stronger over time. See how you feel after baby comes.

Have to be honest and say I thought DH and I would be equal. We very much weren’t. He’s a lot better now that DS is two, but he was no real help when he was a baby. Sometimes, what you think will happen and what does happen are very different.

I’m not angry in the slightest. After all I’m not the one swearing at posters making wild accusations.

There is no mystic mother baby bond. All bonds are created after birth…so yes they exist but only after you make them. Baby isn’t born bonded to you. Many parents with babies that spend months after birth in the NICU know this first hand. They have to go and visit and talk and touch their baby to develop the bond. Adopted babies have no bond with their birth mum, that’s why older adoptees miss the bond…

But old patriarchal beliefs die hard imho. We complain about the gender pay gap and then act like maternity leave of at least a year is inevitable. It’s not. It’s how society has set things up, based on the belief that a woman’s place is at home with the baby.

If you want to be home with baby, that’s ok. But it’s incorrect to tell women that it is biology and instinct and all this stuff that makes women think they are unnatural if that isn’t what they want to do. Then adding in the mum guilt by saying baby biologically is wired to need mum…that’s also not correct….baby doesn’t really care who is the primary caregiver so long as they have one.

I’m not angry, I’m pointing out that what you call biology and instinct and so on is really societal expectations and beliefs that prop up gender roles.

I was an absolute animal, full of raw emotions for a few weeks!! Couldn’t stop crying with pure wonder and had a klaxon going on in my head KEEP ALIVE KEEP ALIVE AT ALL COSTS. By comparison I was very ambivalent throughout my pregnancy

This
My baby seems to have bonded similarly to both me and OH, who was very involved from day 1.

I can’t speak about parenthood without including the fact that I made that person inside of me, which makes me think what we feel can’t be the same (I’m still flabbergasted I get to make my own people) but they can bond and love deeply and just as much, and are equally capable of caring (BF aside) for their babies

Sorry but this is the old patriarchal trope of mothers place is with her baby recycled & rebranded for the modern age as a “fourth trimester”.

I disagree completely.
It's biological. In my case DD was EBF, so I didn't feel comfortable leaving her for more than a couple of hours.

It was also hard wired in me that I would wake up during the night when she started stirring and getting ready to yell for a feed, whereas DH would still be asleep.

This has absolutely nothing to do with feminism or anti feminism.

How do you know OP won't want to leave her baby for months?🤔

Definitely this. It's animal instinct and feels very strange. My DH is the best father but it doesn't physically affect him when the baby is screaming in the car in the same way, we co-sleep and it's me that has the natural curl round the baby etc. I don't think everything can be written off as the patriarchy- with very small babies they are on mission survival and mothers are on mission protection.

Once my older kids were 6months to a year, they were much more bonded to DH but it wasn't the same before.