Baby care in the 60's and 70's

[Zofloraqueen27]

I am a regular lurker on MN and really enjoy reading about how different life is today from when my babies were born. I am a devoted grandma (and to be a great (!) grandma in August).

Having a baby today seems so much more involved now. I am amazed when I read "the baby will only sleep on me", "cluster feeding" and having your baby constantly attached to you with slings.. and what is this "co sleeping"? You brought your baby home from hospital (where most were born) after a four/five restful day stay where babies were taken to a nursery after last 10pm feed to give new mums a nights sleep.

Once home you immediately carried on the feeding regime started in hospital of feeds at 6am, 10am, 2pm, 6pm, 10pm. Babies were settled for the night and you hoped they would sleep through to 6am feed. Obviously feeding during the night if the baby woke up, otherwise it was back to the 6am onwards regime. Most babies were bottle fed then.

After feeding, changing and a cuddle babies were put back into their cot to await next feed. Obviously as they grew older and became more awake and interesting they were put into bouncy chairs but otherwise mums would put babies back to sleep. This way babies learned cot means rest/sleep.Cluster feeding was an unknown concept then and generally babies followed four hourly feeds. My health visitor advised me to start giving baby rice or a Farley's Rusk along with bottle feed when the baby got to 10lbs...my sons were all 9.5lbs born so weaning started around six weeks then.

Baby gros were a revelation by the time my second son was born and babies stayed in them day and night until about six months old -easy to wash and no unnecessary dressing babies up (much less laundry) as today. I see tiny babies dressed as mini adults now. It seems mums today have a much harder time of it - never putting a baby down to rest and be quiet, always having to be comforted by carrying around.

We managed with far less baby equipment too - though we did not have the luxury (or expense!) of disposable nappies. The way we raise our children varies from generation to generation following trends and fashions but I have to say it seemed a lot easier when I had mine. I wonder what the trends will be when babies of today become parents and today's mum watch in wonder.

There were disposable nappies about in the late 60s - Paddy Pads
I think they were or something very similar. They balled up in the baby’s
plastic pants so in the mornings it was just a heavy ball of pissy cotton
wool dragging the plastic pants down. Later they did make some plastic pants specially for the Paddy pad nappies to slot in to but it didn’t make much difference.
I did find them a boon all the same though.

minifingerz Women in Hungary are probably more eager to breastfeed and continue for as long as possible because of the cost of raising children. It seems many have no children at all because they just can't afford them. Sadly it seems that the declining birth rate in Hungary is simply down to cost and the lack of a benefit system like the UK has so really not a great comparison.

sounds sad and cruel to me OP

DF told me that the disposable nappies they had for me when I was a baby had a starch filling derived from potatoes (similar to modern day Smash). I remember disposable nappies were plasticky on the outside, not like the soft ones we have now. When my brother was born they had a wooden board with a leather covered seat pad on it that went across the foot of the pram carrycot. I sat on the board facing DM with my feet dangling and held onto the handlebar of the pram. When he got a bit older and she started using a Maclaren pushchair instead I would stand on the folding mechanism at the back (the bars behind the shopping basket) and hold onto the handles, same sort of position as a child on a buggyboard.

Frizzy your attitude sucks.

I love hearing about the generational differences. What I love more is when older women approach me and reminisce about when their kids were young. A lovely older lady was chatting to our baby in the supermarket and she started telling me how hard she found the leap from 2-3 kids and somehow it totally validated all the feelings I have. She still remembered her experience so clearly.

Wow - 4-5 nights in hospital whilst the nursing staff got your baby into a routine for you! I was kicked out with my first born at 3 hours with one feed under my belt!!!

What an interesting thread. My babies were born in the early 80s and were breastfed on demand, two for six months, the third for twelve months. They'd often end up in bed with us after a night feed, and I don't remember this being frowned on. My childcare guru was Hugh Jolly, and his advice always seemed to be easygoing and sensible, no rigid routines or one size fits all. I had a baby sling and used to massage my little ones with oil - it was all about parents and children being close to each other. Lots of cuddling, lots of talking to your babies. We had a few disposable nappies, for trips out, but they were pretty bad - fitted where they touched and leaked. I was lucky in that I had a cellar to do the nappy soak and wash in - the smell was hideous. There was something satisfying about a lineful of white nappies flapping in the breeze, but the process to get them there was foul!

The care I got in hospital was great - we could choose to have up to 5 days in after the birth and I went for that every time. With the first baby we were supervised giving the first change and bath, feeding advice was on tap, we had pelvic floor exercise classes, we all had to have an afternoon nap, and we were given stout to improve our milk supply (apparently!). We could choose whether to have the baby next to us at night or in the nursery - if we chose the nursery a nurse would wheel your baby in for a feed if they woke up, then take them back again afterwards. You certainly felt looked after, and safe.

I've talked to my MIL about this, she had 3 sons in the 70s and trained as a nutritionist when they were older. She feels the advice she was given (feeding every 4 hours) stopped breast feeding being established (she was unable to continue for very long as her milk wasn't enough). From her nutritionist point of view when possible, breast feeding is best.

Yeah, things are much better now.

Don't get too jealous londonmummy. My mum still gets tearful when she talks about the week she spent with me in the maternity hospital. They destroyed every shred of confidence she had, prevented the establishment of breastfeeding by insisting she only fed four hourly and topped me up with a bottle and she had to steal clean nappies from the store if I needed changing when it wasnt "time". This was 1971.

If your baby is of a normal weight, no health or feeding issues, there is absolutely no reason for your baby not to be able to go three hours between feeds

Ds1 and 2 were bottle (formula) fed. Ds3 is 5 weeks and breastfed.

I always (secretly) thought the 'cluster feeding' thing was a bit...I don't know...bogus? And breastfeeding mums saying the baby would feed hourly/constantly...I'd think seriously? Just feed the child well and put them down fgs. No need to have them on your nipple for hours.

That was of course based on my experience of two bottle fed babies that would happily go 3/4 hours between feeds 24/7.

Ds3 has been an eye opener. At 5 weeks we're into a decent routine. He wakes at 6, feeds. Pretty much feeds every 3 hours all through the day. Content, naps well, gaining weight brilliantly.

Come 6pm it starts. Cluster/constant feeding. Sometimes hourly. I might get an hour and a half if I'm lucky. Sometimes near constant. Until 11.30pm. Then he'll go to sleep happily until 6am (he cannot be woken for a night feed, I've tried and failed miserably for a fortnight).

So no, not every baby can go 3 hours between a feed. If I leave him more than 5 minutes in the evening he's manically rooting and clearly hungry...no misinterpretation there.

Hi op- fellow zoflora lover here

I was born in 78, my mum often speaks of the times with such happiness, things were much simpler even though we didn't have as much, I was not breastfed but my brother was, he was born in 79, 18 month gap.

My mum said she potty trained me really young as it was hard work with two in cloth nappies, I was fully trained at 18/19 months.

My brother had a big silver cross pram and I had a seat which went across the top of it ( this is actually my earliest memory )

Babies were put on fresh milk a lot earlier and everything was sterilised in cold water with Milton, I still love that smell now.

My sister gave birth to my nephew in 1972, she was the only mother in the entire maternity hospital at that time who breast fed.! My exh's SIL gave birth round about the same time so I used to compare babies.
My nephew was soley breastfed until he was 4 months old when baby rice was introduced, cows milk was introduced at 6 months.
I remember watching in horror as my exSIL spoonfed Heinz chocolate pudding to her baby daughter aged 2 weeks!

I am a devoted grandma (and to be a great (!) grandma in August).

If you want them to visit/keep visiting, you might want to tone down the "gosh, aren't you all silly - just leave the baby to self settle like we did. Never did us any harm" routine. It will get old very quickly.

"If you want them to visit/keep visiting, you might want to tone down the "gosh, aren't you all silly - just leave the baby to self settle like we did. Never did us any harm" routine. It will get old very quickly."
Eternalopt-where the OP say she thinks parents now are silly? It doesn't. She's merely pointing out the differences between the generations and saying how things have changed. Perhaps you were a bit tired and tetchy when you wrote your post because there was no need for it.

Science wins the day for me.
Today's recommendations around baby care are based on solid scientific research and not pleasing mothers so they would be ready to be 'good' wives asap at the cost of the baby. In fact I think that old style "care" created a very disconnected angry society of people imho.

The feeding every 3/4 hours thing is total nonsense btw. It was based on studies of sheep and cows ffs. Humans eat and drink far more irregularly than that. I don't know where you get that from. Lambs suckle their mothers as and when necessary. I see it with my own eyes every day. Anyway I think it's the opposite. We seem to distance ourselves from the fact that we are mammals. This schedule business for tiny babies is biologically unsound.

there have been so many advances mother and baby welfare over the years. In my opinion the best of all is MN. The help and support of other women is amazing. I found it so lonely raising my children in the the 70s. When my prem son was discharged from hospital the Health visitors and doctors had no interest at all. My family were not bothered and DH was as clueless as I was.

I would have loved to have been able to ask questions of other mums. At the time my Dad, who I worshipped was dying of cancer and I was struggling to look after the baby as well as visit and support him. I weighed just over 6 stone. My hair was falling out and not one person noticed or ever asked me if I was coping.

This is an interesting read (yes it's from a pro breastfeeding website, but it's written by a uk university researcher in child health) kellymom.com/ages/newborn/bf-basics/importance-responsive-feeding/

As for longer stays in hospital, I was in for 4 nights after my son was born recently and it was horrific. I was in tears every day and this was seen by the midwives but only one on my last day asked me how I was. I was hallucinating from not sleeping but couldn't rest, and it wasn't because of my baby it was because of all the noise. I was ready to discharge myself against medical advice if I wasn't discharged. Sadly maternity wards don't have the staff to make it a supportive environment. The help I got with breastfeeding was great though, and I'm glad to still be breastfeeding 5 months on.

As for baby wearing / carrying being a new fad, the pictures already posted say it all!

If your baby is of a normal weight, no health or feeding issues, there is absolutely no reason for your baby not to be able to go three hours between feeds

Although born at normal weight friends baby screamed for food every hour. When friend saw the doctor because she was so exhausted he told her to let her DD scream and only feed her an 8oz bottle every 4 hours. The baby lost weight dramatically. Friend was then accused of starving her child.
It was only when dh went to the doctors with her. (6ft 2" and weighing in at 7.5stone) did anybody realise there was a problem. DD even as an adult can only go 2 hours between full blown meals. She is 5ft 4" and weighs 5stone 4lbs

So yes going 3-4 hours between feeds would have killed her but the doctors didn't investigate further they initially just dismissed her mum

I think it is easier now as there's more contact between mothers and it's acceptable to put the child in childcare and go back to work. I look back at previous generations of my family raising children (my Mum in 70s, my Gran in 40s and my Gran 100 years ago) and they had a fairly miserable existence. My GGran was highly intelligent and would probably have thrived in stimulating job now but instead was at home churning out babies. She would have breastfed, co-slept and all the rest of it because there wasn't anything else and it was a two bedroom house. She was utterly miserable and took it out on the children, and the repercussions of that are still felt 100 yrs later.
My Mum had no idea about toddler groups (there were very few) and was isolated and trying to look after her mother as well as a baby and toddler. It sounds like it was hell.

I felt under huge pressure to attachment parent - in a kind of 'you'll damage her for life if you don't do it' sort of way. I did all the skin to skin, demand feeding, sling wearing and she slept in a co-sleeper crib next to me for 25 weeks. I hated all that - it made me feel under pressure and claustrophobic. What I actually wanted was a break. Breastfeeding was hell, not at all as it was described during pregnancy - still BF my 18mo, I no longer loathe it but probably because I only spend ten mins a day doing it.

The trouble with the parenting fads is that they undermine what would work for individual parents and babies. I have also seen a lot of people struggle with the switch from doing everything on demand to setting effective boundaries for toddlers.
I am so glad that in this age it was fine for me to go back to work after a year's maternity leave. I counted down the weeks for that year until I could go back at the same time feeling immensely guilty for wishing her life away. But at least I had that option unlike the women in previous generations of my family.

I think things were right for that era back then.

But I think things are also right for today's living and lifestyle - women generally do what they want to do rather than what they are told to do or think they should have been doing because everybody else was doing the same.

There is so much more choice now for everyone. I like the fact that things seemed so much more straightforward back in the 60s and 70s in terms of bringing up a baby, people just seemed to get on with it. But choice and access to a variety of things now has changed that.

MIL constantly, constantly, constantly says in every conversation 'we used to do it like this', 'we didn't do that', 'we just used to leave the baby in the garage for an hour to give them air, never did them any harm'. To name a few, always complaining about the way we are bringing up our children. There are MILs etc across the land who constantly say we are all doing it wrong which is soooo frustrating!

That was 50+ years ago - times have completely changed so I think the two are just very different eras and times in life. Everyone thinks they are doing it the right way, no such thing imo.

I am not knocking OP btw, I think its a good thread.

Bearfrills Great pics, but don't we move on as a society? That was the only way of doing it before pushchairs, mothers in the third world do it out of necessity and because they don't always have access to technology. Baby wearing is a fashion in this country, and it can be very dangerous, unlike putting your baby to sleep on its back in a flat pushchair.

Derxa but we shouldn't be eating that regularly, isn't that why we have such a huge problem with obesity? Five hours between meals is recommended (not for babies, obviously ). Three hours is fine or thereabouts. Every hour or constant 'sipping' just makes life harder for everyone.

Frizzy I'm talking about tiny babies. Although I'm being misunderstood on MN all over the shop. I'm thinking of going off on a flouncy huff