to think you can hold a baby too much?

[MardyMarie]

I was just speaking to my sister. She's fallen out with her DH over their DC3, 4 month old DS. BIL has been on annual leave for the past ten days and has literally done nothing besides hold baby DS all day long. My sister has been running herself ragged doing food shopping, cleaning, buying and wrapping presents in anticipation of guests, as well as everything for their other DC and BIL as he's been incapacitated by holding the baby! Yesterday BIL went on his work Christmas jolly and DS has been impossible to put down since. DSIS was in tears because she had so been looking forward to spending some time with their other DC but baby DS has made it impossible.

Before BILs leave, she had begun to get into a bit of a routine where DS would nap in his cot with white noise playing at predictable times. She says that's gone completely out the window because now DS just wants to be held. She spoke to BIL on the first day of his leave about putting him down and was told that you can't hold a baby too much and that he wanted to bond.

She said she tried again on day 3 and that BIL pretty much said she's cold for not wanting to hold DS. She pointed out that she has the other DC to look after, meals to cook, cleaning to do and so on and that she can't hold DS all the time so it's best to get him used to being put down while he's happy to do so. BIL still refused to listen.

AIBU to think that he's being unfair, and effectively using the baby to get out of doing anything else? DSIS wanted DS in a nap routine ready for her routine to work, which she had been dressing but was happier knowing DS had been self settling a cot recently. Now she feels like she's back to square one and that he's going to be upset so much more than was necessary.

Can we then agree Romans that if your baby had been on your back for the whole two years it would have been "too much"?

But otherwise OP's sister needs to learn to expect the unexpected with a little one

Im Sure she does.ajd these routines are adapted as and when these changes occur.

Those not blaming the husband, well certainly been my experience both times round that it's very possible in a very short space of time to screw the routines up and ruin everything.

God knows I had plenty to "fix" when my MIL decided she knew better than my instructions and I had to soend due getting dd unused to being able to leave her dinner and get an alternative. And befire anyone makes any comment about childcare and doing me a favour she was paid and I provided everything.

Being held for days would have cocked up everything for my two and of course it's the mum who has to deal with the fall out when the husband gets bored or fucks off back to work

And if I had to guess I'd say it was done on purpose.

Routines make life easy. You can hand over to anyone and say "feed at 11 put down for a nap at 1" etc

It gets rid of he excuses as to why dads cabt look after their own baby and there are plenty of threads about dads who won't loom after their baby as they "don't know what to do" or haven't done it befire.

YABU. You really can't spoil a baby by holding them too much. Also, they go through phases of wanting to be held more frequently, especially in the early days. I have three kids too and I fully understand that it's very difficult to get anything done when you have a baby who constantly wants to be held. A good baby carrier or sling is what your sister needs. There are some great ergonomically designed ones out there.

I don't think anyone would disagree with the idea that holding a baby is good. Lots of evidence from sad babies in orphanages to back up Bowlby's theories on this. But when did 'holding baby good' morph into 'holding baby all the time better' than putting it down to sleep'?

If it's SIDS related, that's rubbish. There have been two recent cases of a babies who died because they were sleeping upright on their father's chest, one in a carrier, one on a sofa.

No one should feel guilty about putting their baby down in a crib. That's bonkers. And no one should feel superior about carrying it around all the time. Not so long ago, as pp pointed out, babies could be put down awake in their crib and drift off to sleep perfectly happily, able to stretch and shift position without waking. So we have babies who won't settle in their prams or car-seats or have to be held all evening till it's time for their parents to go to bed and co-sleep. That's not doing a baby any favours - let alone its mother.

Op's sister's baby won't sleep on her as he does on his dad, because mum means milk. And she has two older dcs to care for as well as a household to run. BIL is an arse.

I have a young grandson who loves his cuddles, before he was mobile DD & DSiL would take it in turns to hold him whilst the other got on with things

Why can't she wear the baby when she cooks etc

He doesn't like being in a sling in the house.

Sometimes I feel like the only person on Mumsnet who doesn't "pop" their baby in a sling all the time. On second baby, DS2 is 2 months, and have always just put them down on a mat, crib or bouncer if I want to do something. They definitely spend/spent more time being held than not held. Are my babies unusually placid? I have an Ergo carrier which has been used properly once with DS1. I bought the newborn insert and tried it out with DS2 round the house and he didn't look especially comfortable. Neither was I tbh and doing up all those straps was a massive faff. Genuinely feeling like a total weirdo for not liking slings or wanting (or being able to) hold my babies 24/7.

*That should be spend LESS time being held than not held.

Oh and OP sorry for derailing, your sister is definitely not BU in my opinion.

I'm split on this one. Babies obviously need lots of love and cuddles for them to feel loved and secure. But I think they do benefit from being put down too. My baby is very cuddly and loves being held, but I've found he sleeps better in his basket than in my arms and is more settled. Also, it's good if they can self settle to sleep as I find its better all round for the whole family when everyone is calm and relaxed and has a better quality sleep. As a mum of four and three of them are under 4, I do need to put him down after his feeds, but he doesnt miss out on cuddles either.

I haven't read all this thread but in the real world it just isn't possible to sit and hold a baby all day. In fact I think that is crazy (and it would drive me mad if I had to do that all day.) From a couple of weeks old my baby was put down in a Moses basket when she napped because I had other things to do.

She is a loved and cuddled baby but she is also happy to sit and play by herself and will self settle to sleep in her own room now at 7 months old. I haven't done any controlled crying or anything like that.

Hhmm I am a bit split in this one as babies need to be held a lot but the reality is there are other kids to consider, housework, school runs etc that need done. I think it’s finding a balance dh should have helped mum a bit more so she should could sit down too and cuddle her baby. Unfortunately mum now has a problem as the baby is going to want to be held a lot so she should invest in a carrier.

I have always had a carrier and sling as my youngest loved and needed held a lot. The oldest didn’t like it as much as he got to hot and screamed. I used the carrier a lot with my now 1 year old but did try put him down for naps too so he learned to sleep somewhere else except on me.

There only babies for such a short time just hold them a little longer even if it’s in a carrier.

The theory that it's best for them to be held at all times/as much as possible is based on the continuum concept and to an extent attachment parenting theory.

Other parenting styles - e.g. routine led like baby whisperer, contented little baby, happiest baby on the block etc, or RIE - Janet Lansbury, Magda Gerber, plus NHS advice (tummy time) advocate for the importance of letting the baby have some time when they are put down/not in arms.

Different theories suggest different lengths of time and some are more prescriptive than others but the point is, we're not talking about aggressively harmful Victorian style parenting, so there's really no place to make value judgements about which we think are right or wrong, and what will work for different families is going to depend hugely on personality of parent and infant as well as how busy they are and how much they need to get done!

But you respond to what the child needs. Right now the child doesn't want to be put down, which is very normal at 4 months.

She had already developed a routine that suited her (the primary carer) and the baby until her husband cocked it all up for her

Babies change from day to day. Which is why routines don't end to work with kids this young.

Both of my kids preferred to be in a bouncer or crib. They loved to wave their arms about and kick their legs all the time. They hardly spent any time in my arms once they grew a bit. They even preferred to fall asleep by themselves, not being held.

Thanks Bertie. But surely neither of these are standard HV advice? These are the extremes.

Spartaca We all learn by repetition. This baby has had 3 and a half months of mother's routine and then 2 weeks of being held all day by Dad. What 'baby wants right now' is to go to sleep on Dad. He's a v confused baby and what he needs is to get back into his old routine.

Sure, as baby grows, you adjust the routine, and not stick to it rigidly because a book tells you to, but learning to sleep in a crib from the beginning is a very useful skill, for baby and its mother. Back in the day, when mothers weren't discharged so early and babies slept in nurseries overnight, they learned how to do this from day one. I honestly can't remember any mothers who sat around for hours holding a sleeping baby.

I mentioned lots of different styles really - I think the only two which could be counted as extreme opposites are Gina Ford and Continuum Concept, and even Gina Ford has time for cuddles, it's not like it's just leaving the baby to it!

I don't know that there is such a thing as standard HV advice, because there is no one right way to raise a baby and other than Tummy Time and Safe Sleep guidelines, health visitors will really be going on their own personal experience and opinions.

It is actually against current safe sleep guidelines for babies to be in a nursery from day one so I'm not sure what relevance this has really.

Babies learning to sleep in a crib being useful is subjective - not everyone will find this useful, I didn't. However, this mother clearly did find it useful, so the dad is being unhelpful by undoing it, and they should be communicating more. I've said it about three times now but the thing which stands out for me here is that Dad seems to have absolutely no clue about what Mum has set up with baby and her reasons for doing that! Which seems completely wrong to me, and I would want to know why he is so uninvolved with the baby's daily life yet feels entitled to barge in and involve himself so much in such an unhelpful way simply because he is off work for Christmas. It seems totally selfish and all about him - no consideration of the mum's needs or the baby's needs or the other child's needs.

Sorry - I was referring to the time when babies slept in hospital nurseries, not by their mothers' beds. So many mothers, even first-timers, are only in hospital for 24 hrs round here. No time for babies to get used to anything. Both domiciliary midwives and HVs were more present during early weeks and I'm sure both would have assumed that babies would be put down to sleep. The alternative really didn't exist.