To think that our expectations of babies behaviour in this country are too high?

[Tryharder]

There seems to have been a lot of threads around at the moment along the lines of "my baby is 5 weeks old and still won't sleep through the night" and "my baby won't go 4 hours between feeds, is she just greedy" or "my baby wants to be picked up a lot - is she just manipulative?" You get the picture....

Have just read a post about someone who left a very young baby to cry it out (don't ask me to link) and they are all smug about it because "it worked".

It makes me so cross and sad for the babies concerned who are subject to draconian regimes. Why are we so negative about babies in this country and so determined from Day one to impose on them a routine that makes our lives convenient, not theirs.

I know I will be flamed .

Ignore me, replying on wrong topic.

I am really, really shocked at the idea that a baby of one month would be 'manipulative'.

'The damage crying does was when left completely alone if I remember rightly, from the fear of abandonment. Not from crying while bring held, colic or whathaveyou.'

I agree with this; as far as I can discern from studies I have come across, this is the negative about leaving your baby to cry, and also controlled crying.

what studies are these

A baby with colic can cry almost all the time, it is not always humanly possible for the parents to never put them down and tend to other children, clean prepare food, or shower.

Load of tosh,plenty of babies don't get tended to immediately. There would be an epidemic of damaged babies if your spurious theory was true and there isn't.

" evidence" "damage" I've seen neither.

You're far more likely to see damaged babies if a mother was forced to parent in a way that didn't suit her or her baby.

Now run away with your hysterical scare mongering and let mothers mother in the way that suits them and their babies not the way you like to parent.

I agree with Bubbleymummy. I have a 6 month old DD who many of you would conclude does not need feeding at night. At some point in the night, she will probably wake up, be a bit grizzly and still half asleep. I could do a sleep training technique, employ a battle of wills, let her cry etc etc and I suppose eventually she will "learn" to go back to sleep by herself. She will be upset, so will I, the crying will disturb the other 4 members of my household...

Or I could just shove a boob in her mouth and she's back to sleep in half a minute and so am I. For me, it's a no brainer.

Carolina- why do you think that? Before 6 months my ebf baby still feeds at night but a couple of weeks later after a few spoonfuls of carrot they all of a sudden don't need milk at night anymore? I'd love to see some evidence to support that theory!

Post sleep training, older babies tend to cry an awful lot less, so by the "reasoning" of many on this thread, not doing controlled crying will harm them even more than doing it. Parents who are having a hard time can't win.

I don't mind smugness, or judgementalism, that's human nature. But this spiteful scaremongering, that babies' crying will cause problems in later life, really upsets me. Everyone is well aware that vulnerable new mothers are reading this thread.

If people have chosen to believe this guff, despite the lack of real evidence, you have to wonder why. Why would you want something like that to be true? Do you just lack the imagination to grasp that other parents have different circumstances, different babies. Some six month olds wake 10 times a night, every night. There are plenty of lone parents, parents who need to care for other family members, parents who can't cope so well with endless sleep deprivation.

For many parents, sleep training is not some trivial lifestyle choice, it is a last resort.

Each to their own, yes.
I do think there is a fair amount of competitive parenting that goes on in our society though and if you are a new, first time mum it can be really hard to know whether you are doing the right thing. I have a nine month old ds and I am doing my best to just follow my natural instincts with him and not listen to all the 'theories' but the amount of guilt and anxiety that I feel when people suggest in various ways that what I'm doing might be wrong (I co-sleep and still BF at night for example) is pretty sad. I wish I didn't have this reaction because I really believe that I'm doing the best thing for DS and me and our relationship together.
It's very hard when you feel like you need the reassurance of your peers and you don't get it.

I do wonder where our obsession with independent babies stems from. The notion that by giving a tiny baby comfort and closeness you are 'spoiling' him is a real cultural oddity. Stiff upper lip maybe?

I've recently returned from Japan where they think it is very cruel that we would consider it normal to place a tiny baby in a separate room, completely alone, to go to sleep.

Maybe it is to do with the fact that many women are expected, need or would choose to return to work in the first year. I guess it does kind of create a need for an 'independent baby' - but that's pretty sad and I'm not entirely sure that it's a byproduct of feminism, maybe a sad economic neccessity.

ok, far too tired and rambling on, sorry!

happy debating people!

Exactly tryharder! :) Maybe that is why we aren't sleep deprived!

Well it does depend on the baby, of course, but actually when I did it (and I dreaded doing sleep training) it wasn't that gruesome.
Maybe half an hour or so the first few nights of waiting a little while before picking him up, then putting him down again etc.

It only took a few nights and after that he was pretty contented through the night.

I think often people who are really anti sleep training imagine it to be really traumatic, but as I said, it really is to do with readiness of the baby, age etc, and them knowing that really you are there for them, you are just gently nudging them to the next stage.

Th whole idea of being totally baby led and following their cues is a nice one, but not always as easy as some make out, and in the end all babies and children need some amount of teaching: To sleep, to eat solids, to go to the toilet and so on.

If that is ok for you to keep bf ing to get your dc back to sleep that is great, but for many its not ok indefinitely, and I think it is totally ok to shape your baby's behavior in a calm and considered way.

or maybe you have easy babies

lucky you

x posts, obviously

agree, Northernrock

x posted martha may.
Please dont blame feminism-we could be here all night!
For me it was just that I was a single parent, knackered, working and needed some structure.
I slept with my baby til four months and in the same room for a year. He is now four and we are really close, he is really loving and I often climb into his bed to cuddle him when he has a bad dream or is poorly.
I just dont think this should be such a polarised issue.

Please do whatever you feel comfortable with with your baby-that is what I am saying-You have to be the one to decide for your own family.

MilaMae

why love matters by Sue Gerhardt is a really helpful read if you are unsure of the link between leaving babies to cry and psychological damage. It clearly explains how leaving a baby to cry can cause abnormal cortisol levels that continue throughout life, affecting how a person responds to stress and their ability to form relationships throughout life. Another good read is how not to f* them up by Oliver James. Both these books are well referenced and cite many studies showing that leaving babies to cry causes damage.

"There would be an epidemic of damaged babies if your spurious theory was true and there isn't."
Actually I disagree. There are an awful lot of fucked up, chaotic people throughout our damaged, selfish, consumerist society. An epidemic I would say.

"You're far more likely to see damaged babies if a mother was forced to parent in a way that didn't suit her or her baby."
Yes you are absolutely right! Sadly this is exactly the result of the massively routine-led, rather than baby-led, parenting books that have cornered the market. I have seen so many mums unnecessarily distance themselves from their babies, and start to see them as manipulative or malevolent, just because they think that they "ought" to be getting their babies into a routine that just doesn't fit.

Lol at the idea of my boys being easy! :) I'd rather just call myself lazy tbh. I will always opt for doing whatever is the easiest option in the middle of the night. It doesn't last forever - they gradually learn to sleep through by themselves. I don't bother stressing about what they 'should' be doing or whether or not I am 'making a rod for my own back'. If they go back to sleep quickly I get more sleep. Win win in my book! :)

I've not read Sue Gerhardt's book, but since you think Oliver James is a good read, I'll take that reccomendation with a pinch of salt.

Oliver James is notorious for cherrypicking and even misrepresenting research to fit his own agenda. See here for some examples.

There was a mumsnet webchat with him recently, he did not exactly do himself any favours.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_live_events/991921-Live-webchat-with-Oliver-James-Wed-30-June-1-2pm/AllOnOnePage

Unwind I'm really not trying to make anyone feel guilty, scaremonger or be judgemental. (I know you weren't aiming your comment at me as I've only just posted, but I have tried to say that there is evidence that leaving to cry can cause damage).

I know that many people turn to controlled crying because they are desperate. I just find it really, really sad that so many people who do this just don't know that there are alternatives. Personally co-sleeping has bought me many, many hours of sleep that I wouldn't otherwise have had (most useful when I was working full time!)

People just don't see co-sleeping as an option, partly because of the fear they will "spoil" their baby and also because of safety advice (there is plenty advice about how to cosleep safely but you wouldn't think so from common parenting books and most HVs). It makes me sad that people don't realise they could have so much more sleep and less crying without resorting to leaving a baby to cry.

Unwind seeing as you point me towards a website called "liberal conspiracy", I'll take that with a pinch of salt!

Co-sleeping simply doesn't work for everyone.

The thing is that you think there is evidence because you have read Oliver James and similar. If you check the original research yourself, you will see that he misrepresents his sources. He also cherrypicks - he ignores anything that doesn't fit his agenda.

And he can't spell misogyny.

If you read the blog post I linked to, it simply discusses James' writing, and links to the original sources.

Can you point us towards any research that shows that leaving babies to cry can cause damage? Pop-science books don't count. But if they are any good, they will provide you with a list of references that back up their claims. So they shouldn't be hard to find.

You can get the bibliography for why love matters if you click on "look inside" on amazon and then click back from the index (sorry can't get a proper link to it)

And I know cosleeping doesn't work for everyone. It's just I've met the grand total of 2 other people who do it. Most people don't even see it as an option, but go straight to leaving to cry not realising there may be a gentler, and easier, way to get more sleep. I don't tell anyone irl that I cosleep any more because they look at me like I'm mad and make it clear they think I'll suffocate my baby. So I just evangelise on mumsnet instead

But there you go again... 'gentler and easier'- thats very judgemental. Many people don't want to co- sleep- and for them, it wouldn't be gentler and easier. For them, soothing their baby back to sleep in their own cot may well be gentler

Violet, I think she means gentler for the baby, rather than the mother.

if you want sources on babies and sleep I highly recommend Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child. The guy who wrote it is a doctor specializing in sleep problems and sleep in babies/children. for the record after 20 years of research he now advocates putting babies on a "sleep schedule" from 4 months onwards. We have used his methods with DS (although not strictly) and he is a happy well developed, well rested child. DD doesn't take enough solids yet and is EBF (7 months)so still wakes up at least once a night for a feed, and I don't leave her to cry. On the nights she wakes frequently and is immediately comforted/fed she is certainly not happier and more secure, but tired and grumpy.

Thing is that when your children are older and you then get to know and talk to their friends parents whether or not they were parented according to attachment theory or routine seems fairly random compared with their current temperaments.

My ds came with his own routine, and did feed four hourly and slept pretty consistently too. We did controlled crying with him after a few months (he's 11 now so I really can't remember when) and it worked very well, he screamed very briefly and then fell into a good deep sleep and was generally a happy and contented baby. He then became a very temperamental toddler and is a interesting (although wonderful) boy.

My dd came with no routine and frequently screamed for hours regardless of what we did. It was quite awful to be honest, the way she cried bore no resemblance to ds's going to sleep bellow and controlled crying didn't work at all. I would suspect that her cortisol levels were probably pretty high for several months - I know mine were. But she grew out of it and has subsequently been a very happy, very devoted little girl, although she still is something of a drama queen.

I suspect that their characters, interacting with mine were probably showing even as babies. ds and I are both introverts, we like our own space and to do things our own way. dd is very extrovert and likes to be with people - I sometimes wonder if she'd been born to a baby wearing type of mum whether she would have been a more content baby (I don't think ds would have enjoyed it much though). But I am the person I am and they are the people the are, and we all seem to have turned out OK really, no better or worse than most of the other parents and children I know.