Husband left baby 'trying to nap' for 2.5 hours?

Sounds fine for the first hour when baby was 'rolling around and not upset. I'd be annoyed that he checked on them and then left them crying on and off for over an hour though. I agree with others he either couldn't be arsed or is hoping you won't ask him to cover naps again.

Yes indeed. The amount of wanker men around is shocking really. It's great that this forum exists so that women get the support they need. 💪

Have you asked your husband why he did it, rather than internet strangers?

I don't have fertility issues, I'm pregnant, you said you hope I don't have children, what does my fertility have to do with you in the slightest and why are you using it to force your opinion on me? I stated nothing about dad having a few hours to himself by way of justifying the situation, so your point to me is utterly irrelevant.

I will bring my child up as I see fit, preferably without all the unnecessary hysteria.

This!! Some of the comments on this thread are nuts.

If the babe would normally have napped for that time and wasn’t unhappy, what’s the harm in him chilling out in his cot? Maybe he did doze on and off? As long as he was keeping a close eye.

This.

If baby is largely happy i leave them upstairs in their cot. You never know when they'll finally drift off to sleep.

I completely agree, this forum is so hateful, it's beyond comprehension. You only need a brief delve into Mumsnet to understand why divorce rates are so high.

I'm sorry, why are we throwing around disgusting comments about my own fertility here? Are you used to using vile statements to enforce your opinion on others?

THIS 👆👆

Completely agree.

But that's not what happened. The DH went upstairs several times according to OP.
I've never left a baby to cry it out, but it doesn't sound like that's what's happened here at all.
How many times have mums complained that the dad/nan didn't get the baby down for their lunchtime nap, so now baby is sleeping at 4 o'clock, so won't sleep at bedtime? Plenty. I suspect that's been the dad's worry here.

Mum herself says she leaves the child awake to fall asleep after 5-10 minutes. It's a 1 year old not a 1 month old. If it was that unhappy, the whole street would have known about it, not exactly known for not making a fuss are they.

What's 'wild' to me is the notion that leaving a 12 month old baby alone and struggling to nap/distressed is okay in some people's eyes. It's not even bedtime, it's a nap! It's ridiculously cruel in my mind. Stay with baby until they are napping or give up and forget it. It's not alright to leave them staring at the ceiling for 2 plus hours.

Jesus christ the responses on here are wild. Have I missed something or is the child absolutely fine, was being checked on regularly by it's equal parent and grizzling rather than screaming the house down when mum returned?

You all go on about this weaponised incompetence and in the same breath refuse to let men have their own autonomy whatsoever.

The people here immediately jumping to your DH purposefully causing distress to his own child so he doesn’t have to do nap time again are honestly disgusting.

I’m guessing this is your first baby? He did what he thought was right. He tried to encourage baby to nap in different ways several times. The baby wasn’t screaming for 2.5 hours, he was babbling and grizzling on and off.

A simple “oh yeah when that happens I just pick him up after 1/2 hour as it’s obvious he just isn’t going to nap” and problem solved. People will say “well he should know”. It’s completely normal for the primary caregiver to know more about the ins and outs and techniques and routines for a baby because they are doing it the majority of the time. Out of choice. No one holds a gun to your head.

Immediately jumping to trying to upset baby on purpose is an abhorrent suggestion for strangers to make about a man they have never met based on one story from one perspective.

Nothing wrong with a baby awake in a cot at what should be nap time. If he was content enough for the first hour that's fine, but at the point he started crying I'd have got him up. Still, I don't think was massively out of line here.

It depends on whether the baby was actively crying / getting stressed and being ignored or if he was having a bit of a grumble on and off but largely content. I had my DC quite a while ago but didn't go to them immediately every time they cried out. If he is usually an active, capable and caring parent I'd give him the benefit of the doubt this time.

Honestly, I find this utterly disgusting parenting. Your poor baby crying and realising no one is coming for them.

2.5 hours!

I would hit the roof. Leaving a baby for all of that time to cry for that length of time is utterly shit parenting!!!!

I would be livid. So distressing for the baby.

Why was he so fucking useless today? Your baby is 12m old, surely the Dad has put him down for nap before? Did he not realise that's not the normal routine? What was he doing when you got in? As that might tell us his priority list. I hope not though. I really hope he was just having an incredibly stupid day and that your baby isn't distressed.

To be honest, if the baby wasn't crying and seemed content I'd happily leave them to it. I remember how exhausting it is with a baby and how you need a break sometimes! You say you cane back to the baby whinging. If it had only just started whinging then that's fine. If it was whinging for 2 hours, that's not fine.