Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Unflip

1 2

AIBU?

To think babies aren't 'happy with anyone in the early months'

28 replies

FrogInABog · 09/05/2013 15:23

I constantly hear/see people saying 'Oh all babies are fine being left with anyone as long as they're warm and fed until about 6 months' etc. I have never found this.

Even as a premature baby in nicu , EDs heart monitor would raise when someone else held her, once home she would cry if put down or handed to someone else from day 1. After about 2 months home, she would go for cuddles for a few minutes, then become inconsolable, and now at 9 months, she will go down for longer periods, and sit by other people, but if anyone she doesn't know well picks her up she will scream.
I just don't understand the assumption that babies are clueless about their parents until they're older. And I especially don't understand the 'You're being PFB if you don't leave DC to be babysat as they will be fine' type comments.

OP posts:

Report

thecakeisalie · 09/05/2013 22:43

I never really got that comment either but having said that I've not been one to leave my babies young partly due to bf'ing and just because it was too hard to leave them until they were nearer 6 months.

Ds1 was great with dh and would sleep on his chest for hours also would be happy to have cuddles with other people. Ds2 despite being parented the same way, having skin to skin contact with dh after the birth is just a difficult little chap who would barely settle for me and would scream the house down with anyone else including his dad. Some babies are just higher needs than others ds2 has gone on to be a breath holder who has gone as far as having reflex seizures because he holds his breath so long when he gets upset. Like I say he has been a highly strung little chap since the day he was born.

No sweeping statement is ever going to cut it when it comes to babies and lets face it the people who say these kind of things are either naive or they've forgotten what having a small baby is really like.

everlong · 09/05/2013 20:43

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

PrincessScrumpy · 09/05/2013 20:41

Dd1 was generally unhappy for 4 months with whoever, dds 2 and 3 happy with anyone - every child is different.

10storeylovesong · 09/05/2013 20:27

My ds is also a SCBU baby. He was in the unit for 9 weeks and is now quite happy being held by anyone, as long as he is being held. He hates being put down. He settles slightly more with DH and I but will happily be left for an hour or so with grandparents.

NotYoMomma · 09/05/2013 19:49

DD was/ is happy with anyone.

Why generalise though?

Smartieaddict · 09/05/2013 19:24

YABU. Mine did nothing but sleep for the first couple of months. He literally woke up long enough to feed and have his nappy changed, then was off to sleep again. As long as he was clean, warm, and food appeared when he woke up for it, I really don't think he was bothered who was providing it! As several people have said, babies are not all the same.

choceyes · 09/05/2013 19:19

DC1 - bottle fed ebm. Happy to go to anyone. But was happiest with me. Has been a total mummies boy, but very confident and friendly with others since day 1. But mummy is the special one . Could be left over night with family from about 18 months, but didn't until 2yrs.
Dc1 - breastfed, no bottles at all. Was practicality glued to me for the first 6 months. Could not be put down ever. Howled if anyone else held her and also every time I left the room. She is now 2.8yrs, still bf, much more confident around others (family), although would not tolerate strangers. Very happy at nursery though bizarrely.
I would leave her overnight with family but not a random babysitter.

exoticfruits · 09/05/2013 19:14

Saying 'all babies' is as silly as saying 'all women'. They are all different. Some will be fine with anyone and some won't. Some women are happy to hand their baby to others and some are not.

MiaowTheCat · 09/05/2013 19:00

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

SpottyTeacakes · 09/05/2013 16:44

Actually agree with thurlow as dd was also in SCBU but ff and went to anyone. Ds cries even with me

notso · 09/05/2013 16:43

Babies are all different.

Sometimes DS2 would settle for anyone but me, I think it's was because I smelled of milk so he wanted to feed but he was full and needed to sleep, as soon as someone else picked him up he fell asleep.

Thurlow · 09/05/2013 16:26

I think it really does depend on the baby, that's too sweeping a statement.

We also had a NICU baby, but I think she went the other way and was happy with anyone because of it. She was also ff equally by me and DP. When she was very young she really didn't care who held her, as long as they were warm and had a heartbeat she could snuggle up to!

Every baby has their own personality, so I think YABU to say that all babies are like yours.

Rowanred · 09/05/2013 16:18

I think it depends. If they're bf they will be happiest with mum in the early days as will probably want to feed/ comfort suck 1-2 times an hour. That was the only thing that settled my dd so I would end up feeding her on and off all day.

If you are ff it probably doesn't matter so much as anyone can give them a bottle and they will find other ways to comfort themselves.

redskyatnight · 09/05/2013 16:15

Ds was mostly happy with anyone who wasn't me when he was very young.

UniqueAndAmazing · 09/05/2013 16:10

I totally agree.
DD was happiest with me (because i provided the milk) and with DH (because he provided the sleep and clean bum)

Birdsgottafly · 09/05/2013 16:09

I think that it is better for the New Mum to have on-going contact with her baby, than it is for the baby, in terms of bonding. It is important to make any New Mum feel as though she is essential to her baby, having as much contact as possible. However studies show that from the baby's POV bonding happens later and as long as Mum is happy, then the baby will have no ill effects from being given to trusted care givers, to give her a break. Studies have been done with baby's who are in Foster Care and as long as they are in a permanent home by 12 months, ideally a little sooner, there is no attachment issues, some children up to around 2 1/2 show no issues.

cory · 09/05/2013 15:43

I think it depends to a great extent on who the baby bonds with in those early weeks. Dh and I were equally hands on, so our babies seemed happy with either of us. But I have known families where the baby is snatched back to mum from dad the moment it so much as grizzles, yet when it grizzles with mum it still stays with mum- no cries of "aw, he wants his daddy".

Sparhawk · 09/05/2013 15:39

My DD is 13 weeks and she'll go to anyone, though she'll sit there and look at me.

dreamingbohemian · 09/05/2013 15:37

I think it depends on the child maybe?

We had family babysit DS when he was a month old, he honestly was not bothered.

I don't think that means you can leave a baby with anyone, but a doting grandparent who will give lots of cuddles and fuss over them constantly seemed to work pretty well

He was indeed more bothered by us leaving when he was older.

So I think YANBU in that it doesn't apply to everyone, but that doesn't mean the people saying it are necessarily wrong, because it is true for some.

thebody · 09/05/2013 15:36

Not sure really. But never wanted to leave my 4 because I didn't want to. They weren't passed around or babysat much.

I assume though they would have survived if I had needed/wanted to.

sillyoldfool · 09/05/2013 15:36

DD1 was under phototherapy lights for jaundice when she was 2 days old, surrounded by bits of plastic that she kept bashing into, and was so so unhappy unless I spoke to her. when she heard my voice she calmed down, no one elses, just mine.
She had been a part of my body a few hours before, of course she needed me near her.

VinegarTits · 09/05/2013 15:36

i dont think babies are 'happy with anyone'

but i do think they benefit from spending short periods of time away from mum to bond with other relatives

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Email address

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

BedHanger · 09/05/2013 15:33

Based on my sample of two :o, I completely agree. I don't think they're like parcels that can be passed around, I believe they're deeply complex little creatures and there's a whole world of stuff going on with them that we just can't see.

ballinacup · 09/05/2013 15:33

I guess it depends. DS was FF as my milk didn't come in, so he never got used to snuggling up to me for feeds etc, and he was quite happy to be pushed from pillar to post. This was great in one respect as I had crippling PND and would have given him to passing gypsies if I hadn't been able to take regular breaks from him.

I don't think there's a one size fits all when it comes to baby psychology. For the record, DS at 16 months is a complete and total mama's boy.

MrsKoala · 09/05/2013 15:31

i've not really heard this, most who've said something have said the opposite, 'dc just want their mum' type comments.

we did have a couple of friends, with no kids, who were genuinely surprised we couldn't travel to the other end of the country and leave 3mo bf'd ds with a babysitter for 2 nights to attend their child free wedding

Unflip

1 2

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.