You know the phrase "the baby hasn't read the book"...?

[Thurlow]

I have a (very probably unreasonable) issue with this phrase.

Now, of course a baby hasn't read a book. They haven't ready any book. They don't go by any routine other than what their body decides it wants at any given moment - to be hungry, to want to sleep, to want a cuddle, to want to stay wide awake and play at 3am. Obviously no book is going to tell you exactly what your baby wants at any one moment in time, unless it's a book you've written after your baby has been born.

But, but, but...

One, if you have no experience of babies, and no one close to you who has recently had a baby, then a book is hardly a bad place to start to get a vague idea about what you should do with a baby. If you've got no experience of babies at all, not all parents are going to find things 'instinctive'. I had no bloody idea how much newborns were supposed to sleep, my newborn didn't want to sleep, it was only when I read in a book that they should sleep a lot more than my baby did that I was able to start trying to help the overstimulated, overtired mess that was my 2 week old.

Two, there seems to be an assumption that any book on parenting or babies is going to be a strict routine, GF style book. Which clearly isn't true.

And three, surely some of the non-routine parenting styles are also championed by books - like BLW, as one example? That's from a book. But people talk about it as if it isn't, as if it just some sort of instinctive form of parenting, when actually I get the impression that it was a book which started a change in weaning habits. (Though I can tell you, my baby certainly hadn't read the book on BLW and detested it )

So yes, the baby hasn't read the book, but that goes for any kind of book - so your baby hasn't read GF and might hate you trying to get their naps in a routine, but neither has it read the book on attachment parenting, and might hate you trying to carry them around in a sling all day.

I just find it a bit of an off-putting phrase, especially for new parents who might not have a clue where to start. Is it just me?

i think it's often used when people say "i;m trying to do this routine but my baby won't do x/y/z"

it's to try and point out that while using a book as a rough guide can be useful, your baby isn't necessarily going to fit into every single thing ANY book suggests

Thurlow

I agree. All this about instinct - I had none, first time round. Books helped me make sense of what was going on: "He's crying now, what's that likely to be about?", and also to help me to not prevent him from doing what he wanted to do. So giving him a bedtime routine helped him settle, and not picking him up at the first squeak but waiting a short while helped him self soothe.

I do get really angry when people quote Government guide lines at me Re cot death. But other than that there. Is nothing better than a good baby book & I've had 5 of them.

I think books can be incredibly useful, but that phrase was the only thing that stopped our book based children's centre breast feeding advocate going on and on and on about "nose to nipple" because my baby hadn't read that book and had absolutely no interested in opening her mouth no matter how many times I put my nipple to her nose!

Yes, sometimes it is clearly used to reassure someone that it's ok if their baby doesn't want to do what Jo Frost says they should, and that's the right thing. Personally I think the best approach is to read a variety of books and crab ideas from all of them that seem to suit you or your baby.

What does get me is when people say it to someone before their baby is even born. I don't think that's entirely fair, there's sometimes a sense of implying all books are bollocks, which is clearly not true.

Ironically it's fine to come online and ask for advice - just not, for some people, to look up advice in a book

I think I was lucky that my DD was just before certain books came out so I had good old Penelope Leach who makes it clear that there isn't a one size fits all answer but gave lots of helpful, calming advice.

YANBU, this phrase randomly gives me the rage.

"I'm hoping to have a home birth."
"Well your baby might be a breech, they haven't read the book lol"

Etc etc! It's quite often used to slap down people who don't have children yet or who are new parents by suggesting they are so thick they just read a book and think they know everything. Well, no. But if you are a first-timer, it isn't a bad place to start, as you say.

I also find it deeply ironic when MNers use this phrase, as everyone comes here to read about parenting advice. Just like, you know, in a book.......

Yes, books helped me first time round too, get a sense of perspective etc but I just think people are making money out of making us think we have to madly control this baby, and it not doing what we want at any time is very bad.

I just think too many books come at parenting and babies like they are a problem that needs to be solved.

A huge great big sprawling problem, that needs to be squashed right down into a tiny envelope and fit nicely where we want it to in our lives.

Most of them are bollocks though, most of them totally contradict each other, and it is self-defeating to pick one and assume it will work for you. People tend to get slavish to them and its not helpful.
Better to not get too attached to any philosophy, or book, in the first place.

Revolting, the problem is - that one books tends to espouse one view point, I think people coming here to seek knowledge is a very healthy thing to do because there are such broad view and advice.

A very intelligent lady shocked me the other day by saying with her first she followed the Baby Whisperer book, to, the, letter.

I don't see how anyone can follow any one book to the letter and impose that books law on the individual baby .

At least on here there is a healthy range of views and the reader can cherry pick what they want.

X post Peppi.

I agree OP. If folk want to read a book or two is it so awful? If they don't then don't!

Revolting

Oh, I definitely agree that it is rare that one book suits one baby. Though not impossible - DD absolutely thrived on the EASY routine, though it is in itself a very flexible routine, more of a pattern than anything else, and was a new baby overnight, and I did actually just follow it until she was about 1.

And yes, it is a tad self-defeating to just pick one book - but then you have to start somewhere, don't you? And not all books are advocating a philosophy, some are more basic.

MN is amazing and I've had more of my practical advice from MN than a book. But you only have to look at the 'give me one piece of advice' threads to see that if you take a look at too wide a range of advice, you're probably just as screwed as if you decide to read only one book. Posters contradict each other, because every baby is an individual and what works for one family won't work for another family.

I remember seeing a comment on a thread asking for book recommendations that basically said, "ffs, if you can't work out that you need to feed the baby every few hours and get it sleep every few hours than you're an absolute idiot". Sometimes comments like that go along with the suggestion that you should never, never read a book. It's just not helpful. Not everyone has a natural instinct. Personally I didn't feel that I could trust my instinct until DD was a few months old and my instinct had been proved right several times.

It's just this particular phrase that gets me, possibly because I tend to see if used far more as an argument against a style of parenting which is not entirely attachment, go with the flow, follow your baby .

I see it more as

"Your baby is crying, feed it, it hasn't read the book that says it shouldn't be hungry at 8pm".

Which I think is true.

I just wonder and not you op with your over stimulated baby or babies who are genuinely in need of more work in terms of advice, BUT I do wonder how many normal babies, whose routine would have settled down nicely without any interference or help or schedules are then thrown into dissaray simply because they naturally want to sleep at 7.30 NOT 7pm, or want to go back to sleep at 7am but are forced to be up at 7am etc etc and they are being forced, and forced and forced into going when the bloody BOOK says they should go.

OP I agree with every word!

I know what you mean, dark, and despite having a baby who loved a routine I'm with you, I'm at a loss to understand why anyone who feels they and their baby are happy with what's going on would want to impose a routine from a book. I only started because things were a disaster and I hated having no control.

Though on a side note, most people I know who have followed a routine certainly haven't quibbled over half an hour here or there, most of my friends seemed to just use it as a rough guidelines i.e. feed every 3 hours, but you just start the 3 hours from whatever time they decide to wake up that morning. But that's a whole different argument that gets my goat, what some people would call a "routine" is probably more of a rough guideline to a day, so I'll leave it Though I'm well aware some people do follow GF to the minute!

I think as a phrase it most pisses me off when it is used randomly and, as revolting says, before the baby is even born. It makes perfect sense as a reply to someone stressing that their baby won't take to a dreamfeed. It doesn't make sense when someone is trying to work out how they're going to start to learn to be a parent.

I found the phrase extremely reassuring as a new mum with a baby who 'hadn't read the book' (now a nearly 6 year old on a different page to the rest of the world). Having done a lot of my exams in my life I felt I was failing the new born baby paper big time. Baby Whisperer was extremely unhelpful and full of terrible advice (for us) on bf. Having said that both my babies responded well to a bed time routine from early on, naps always a running battle. Second time round I did the opposite of EASY and fed to sleep in the first few months to prevent DD2 from waking earlier due to hunger. She grew out of the habit soon enough.

Both mine were in a routine of 3 meals a day, bed at 7.00 by between 6-8 months old despite giving up on books in the early days.

There's so many variables. You might invest a lot of time and effort in a certain way of doing things (e.g. GF), and it doesn't work making you feel crap and in adequate. You might go with the flow and have a baby that feeds every 3-4 hours and sleeps through the night of their own accord.

Research needed I think. Babies randomised to GF/BW/attachment parenting/flying by the seat of the pants.

But this is what I mean! I am not saying Babies don't love routine, mine has a routine but its one she wanted - not one I imposed on her!

This is where the confusion lies....that a baby wont fall into its own routine that is perfectly normal and fine and will be pretty much what you want to impose on it bar slightly different timings unless you impose routine on it.

I have a fabulous snap of my then two year old "reading" a copy of Toddler Taming.

I can see where you are coming from. I suspect some people follow books more rigidly, and use them as a protocol rather than a guideline.

I agree with what you are saying, in that I was that mum who had no friends with babies, indeed who hadn't held a baby more than once in ten years and had no clue what to do, and my instincts were hopeless because I didn't even understand basic childcare in any sense. So, after two chaotic and very stressful weeks, my lovely husband suggested I get a routine going, not for the baby's sake, but for my own! For me GF books were great, and once I'd got some type of routine going (mind you, we stuck at the 6 week on for the whole of their babyhood!) I did it with the second, even having them nap together for a couple of hours every day (so getting myself a small amount of sleep).

For clueless parents like myself, having a book was a godsend, although I can also see how, if a book becomes too important or it's a bad fit with your baby then it could pile on the pressure, but for me it was a good solution to my lack of knowledge.

That's true, though part of me does err towards the EASY-type/3-hour routines working for some babies because a lot of babies naturally like to feed every x number of hours, so they are less imposing a routine and more anticipating a rather common routine, iyswim.

Allegro, those are really good points. While I'm personally an advocate of rough routines because they worked for us (just as anyone whose life was transformed by a sling would be an advocate for a sling) I can see that it would be very easy for someone to get upset and feel they were failing somehow.

But I don't want to derail with routines. Though it does show that most people seem to assume that book = routine. Sears wrote a big selling book on attachment parenting too!

I think the problem is that we are sold this idea that parenting (and when did that become a verb? I am sure my parents just "were parents" they didn't do "parenting" ) is like learning a language or a technical process that you have to get a manual for. A number of my friends got very upset because the "book said x and DD is doing y" and assumed that they must be doing something wrong. The books (and becoming a mum) seem to make very intelligent, sensible people completely lose all confidence in themselves to figure stuff out and use common sense. It does haven't to be a maternal instinct. The most unintelligent, inexperienced adult would know that a baby needs food, a dry nappy and sleep - you can just work through the options til you hit the right one but it gets talked up as the most complicated minefield of choices and methods and styles of parenting. I wish to God the NCT and midwives and any other pre-natal care just focused on telling mums and dads HOW to make a up a safe bottle feed, hold a baby for a BF, how to strap a baby in car seat and bathe it and check its temp and leave it at that.

But it may have been that I didn't feel too attached to the timings of the book- I was very flexible, extra feeds, some days everyone went to bed later and so on. I didn't feel hemmed in, I felt glad someone else had worked out what lots of babies needed and shared it with me and because they were a lot happier once in that pattern, I had no reason to mess with it!

The most unintelligent, inexperienced adult would know that a baby needs food, a dry nappy and sleep - you can just work through the options til you hit the right one

I was a bit thick and sleep-deprived, but I don't think it was obvious at all! I simply didn't know babies needed so much sleep, or how to feed til the hind milk came in (i.e. for a longish time rather than letting a baby snack on the watery milk) or that overstimulating babies before bed is a really bad idea. It was much easier for someone to tell me- lots of babies need X hours sleep, this much feeding and in this manner, and adapt it after that.

Agree. A book, however eminent the author, is just another persons opinion.

Sometimes you need another persons opinion.