for thinking that: "because it always been done like that"

[3LoveHeartsAndNoMore]

just doesn't cut it as an argument?
It's funny we live in a society where new things are lapped up...but when it comes to parenting the whole ole...but our parents did or it;s always been done like that...suddenly becomes a valid argument...just because it fits the bill...I mean...wtf...lets just ignore all the new research then right...saying that though, we might aswell scrab it all, because it wold safe money...just lets plod on wihtout knowing any better then, yeah....thumping my head agaisnt a brick wall for sure, sigh....

[kittywaitsfornumber6]

No Dizzy. In my experience of 'guidelines' they change every other day.
Heaven knows who dreams them up. How can you set store by feeding guidlines for examples. In the 8 years since I've been a mother the've changed so many times, often completely contradicting themselves. That kinda renders them meaningless to me.
There are some like putting baby on its back that makes sense, but I have no doubt that at some point in the future they will find a reason why this is infact not a good thing to do because of x, y, and z. This is why I don't trust guidlines.

[welliemum]

yeah me too Mrs Badger

I'll just go and lie on the beach instead.

[harpsichordcarrier]

the advice to put a baby to sleep on its back has saved many many lives.
it wasn't "dreamt up", it was advised after careful consideration and analysis.
I think it is helpful to be sceptical about media reports of guidelines etc but wilful ignorance is just silly

[dejags]

Sorry Kitty - it's called progress.

I agree that there has to be an element of common sense applied to guidelines but the facts sometimes just speak for themselves (despite the fact that they may have changed).

[percypig]

Oh no kitty - you're going to reignite the whole debate again! I'll just quietly say that WHO guidlines have been the same for a number of years and that changes are evidence based. I guess if you don't follow guidelines you'll follow tradition or instinct, which I, and many others on this thread think is at best foolish.

[dejags]

I know Harpsi. Unfortunately the "old" advice was so ingrained with DH's family that they just cannot see past this.

I did not allow the DS's to spend anytime with their Godmother until they were over a year old for fear that she would put them to sleep on their tummy and bundled up for the arctic.

[WeaselMum]

Agree with you 3

What I don't get is why people believe the research on some things but not others - so in pregnancy will take folic acid, always put their babies to sleep on their backs, but then dismiss recent research on weaning.

[welliemum]

All those people round the world, sweating over research to try and answer questions and extend knowledge and improve children's lives......

It must be lovely to just effortlessly know better than all those experts.

[harpsichordcarrier]

anyway, to suggest that babies have "always" been put to sleep on their fronts in their cots is just fallacious nonsense.
babies have always, for millennia, slept with their parents.
the business of sticking them on their own in a cot is a tiny blip of recent history.

[dejags]

WeaselMum - that's probably because there is such a lot of conflicting advice about weaning around (guidelines aside).

Most people that I know (excluding DS's Godmother) are happy to admit that putting a baby to sleep on their back is imperative as is folic acid because generally speaking advice is consistent in these areas.

[harpsichordcarrier]

and the weaning stuff isn;t made up by anyone in an office, it is based on LOTS of research, not just one study and it is very compelling.
argh to it all

[dejags]

Agreed Harpsi - but that's a whole different conversation. I love the look on their faces when I wind them up by telling them that I am not too phased that the nursery isn't ready yet because the new DD will sleep with us.

[MrsBadger]

I'm off to the beach with you, Wellie, or I'll say something I regret in a minute.

[harpsichordcarrier]

I know dejags I am just feeling cross about it this morning

[kittywaitsfornumber6]

And what will you all say to your children when they ignore your well meaning advice based on your experiences and understanding of the best parenting techniques??

What will you feel when your children slag off your parenting ideas and dismiss them as as antiquated and dangerous?

I think you should think about this because it will happen. By the time you are grandparents so many of the things considered to be safe now will have been shown to be dangerous in a few years time.

I say this not becasue I am a scientist but but due to empirical evidence. Or could it be that for the first time in history all the parenting techniques shown to us in guidlines and advice is actually completely correct and will never be changed??? I think not.

Much advice is sound but no one here knows how this will be viewed in x years time.

[ScottishThistle]

Ha, this has struck a chord as I visited a New Mum at the weekend & both Grandmothers plus Great Grandmother (91yrs old) were there...I must say it was rather nice to hear all three say "We did it different in our day but things change don't they!"

If things hadn't progressed we'd still be putting a baby to sleep wrapped with enough blankets to heat a polar bear on an ice cap lying on their tummies after having a bottle with a measure of whisky & a dummy dipped in jam!

Now I know that the dummy dipped in jam is the reason I have a very sweet tooth & won't be persuaded otherwise!

[percypig]

I understand your point Kitty but where do you draw the line? To reject something because it's based on evidence that may or may not be added to in a few years time makes no sense to me. If you ignore guidelines then what do you follow? Tradition? Surely you realise that a huge number of traditions are now recognised to be dangerous.

[dejags]

I am not sure how to answer you kitty or that I understand your response, so apologies if I have got it wrong.

I think what you are saying is, is that I should I accept the following (on the basis that it's well meant advice).

1: Put the baby to sleep on his/her tummy because sleeping on their back is likely to result in them choking to death
2: Wean at 3 months or, even worse, add something to their bottle to bulk out the milk, in the hope that they will sleep better
3: Smoke around the children - because we all survived
4: Not bother with carseats - well, just because they are a pain in the backside.

I would hope that if I giving bad advice to my children/family (20 years down the line and based on what I do today), that they would have the strength of character to gently tell me that times have changed, that research indicates otherwise, or failing that, that I am an interfering old bag (that's a joke).

[Pruni]

Message withdrawn

[MrsBadger]

Kitty, I hope we'll say to our children
'Good on you for having the best and most up-to-date information - I wish we'd known about eating rhubarb in pregnancy (or whatever) when you were a baby.'

And if they say 'Mum, how come you took folic acid / put us to sleep on our backs?' we'll say 'Because we were following the best and most up-to-date information we had at the time.'

What could possibly be fairer or more reasonable?

[hunkermunker]

I'm doing the best I can on the current evidence-based research.

That's all anyone can do. But it's not what people who wean at less than 3m onto rusks are doing. Can you see the difference, Kitty?

[hunkermunker]

Crossed posts, MrsB - heavens you talk sense

[harpsichordcarrier]

that's rubbish btw kitty, my parenting isn't that different from my mum's. and I hope that I would be senisble and open minded enough to accept that parenting choices are about the best intersts of the child and not the potential hurt feelings of the grandparents.

[Caligula]

With regard to "it's always been done like that" the best argument is always that human beings have been around for x million years and actually, it's only been done like that for the last 30/ 50/ 100/ 1000/ 2500. (Any further back and I can't think of anything that anyone has claimed as "always" )

[fortyplus]

I am very very old but always open to new advice!

However - I think what kitty was getting at is that some research can throw up misleading results.

Are you old enough to remember that in the 70s and 80s the official advice following extensive research was to put babies to sleep on their front to avoid the risk of choking on inhaled vomit.

Then people became aware that unexplained deaths of babies under a year old were rising dramatically.

The 'official' advice caused the needless deaths of many babies.

So - although I wouldn't for one moment say ignore any new guideline on any subject - I do think that it's worth remembering that research can be flawed and those conducting it can sometimes reach incorrect conclusions.

What's the latest on the MMR vaccine, for example? I think the link with autism has been disproved? Don't shoot me down in flames if I'm wrong, though - it may have been resurrected without me hearing about it.