to have never owned a baby monitor nor a thermometer?

[TheLogLadyMBE]

monitor - don't get it. either a baby is close enough for you to hear or you'd rather not hear at all.

thermometer - if a baby/child has a temperature it's fairly obvious.

AIBU?

Normal body temp is 36.7C. 37. something is a bit warm and I wouldn't worry about that as children naturally have fluctuating temperatures. Over 38 I would call a bit feverish, a bit worried if it was over 39 and really worried if it is over 40.

I'll second struggling to judge a child's temperature when you have a raised temp yourself or if your hands are particularly cold.

I wouldn't say not having one is a bad mother but it can actually be reassuring. I have had patients really panicked that their child has a raging temp and it only something like 37.2. Knowing that was reassuring for them. On the other hand seeing a temp of 39.9 is quite scary.

Lol at "competitive relaxed parenting" - couldn't have put it better myself.

I can understand why some have been a bit put out by the OP and other coments on this thread. The comment: "either a baby is close enough for you to hear or you'd rather not hear at all" is clearly complete bollocks. DS2 has this awful habit of going from slight wimpering to full on crying to puking in about 5 mins. We can't hear him from the living room if the tv is on without a monitor. And we need to get to him fast so letting him scream for half an hour until we eventually hear him is not an option.

It is the smugness of "oh look at me, I haven't fallen for all that marketing nonsense like these other saps have" that grates so much.

In our last house the boys' bedroom was right above the lounge and we didn't need a monitor. Clearly we were far superior parents then .

aha SingingNun I can see now where we've got our wires crossed. My original post was for the OP but you assumed it was for you then when you replied I thought it was the OP replying so responded in kind.

So no I don't think you are sneering but I do think the OP is.