To think that we should be more honest about babies' sleep?

[star1401]

Inspired by a few threads on here I've read recently.

When I was pregnant, I had visions of rocking my baby to sleep and putting them gently down in their Moses basket where they settled for a few hours. I was under no illusion that I'd be up a few times feeding in the night, but thought I'd be able to put baby down again and go back to sleep. Aside from the nights where they were teething or poorly, this is how I thought it would be.

The reality was that neither of my babies would be put down to sleep for at least the first few weeks. Or at least if they did, they woke after 10 minutes. It wasn't because of the temperature, or the noise, or their clothing, or reflux. It was because they wanted to be close to me. I've read so many threads lately with new mums feeling so stressed because their babies won't sleep unless on them or being constantly rocked/moved.

AIBU to think that it would be far better to be honest with pregnant/new Mum friends about the realities of babies and sleeping? Yes, there will always be some babies who sleep like angels from day 1. But the vast majority of people that I know have all had babies who won't be put down to sleep.m in the early days. I'm not implying terrifying pregnant woman and telling them they'll "never sleep again." But saying "don't be surprised if your baby won't be put down to sleep, they will probably prefer sleeping on you for the first few weeks/months at least."

I remember feeling like crap because I thought my baby was the only one who wouldn't be put down. No one told me that babies often wake as soon as they are put down and that the fourth trimester is a thing. I wish someone had because I'd have spent less time over trying to get my baby down and more time just accepting that they will only sleep on me and that's that!

@star1401 I don't know, out of my NCT group of 7 of us, only one had a baby who had to be held in arms all the time when newborn, so I'd see it as a little less usual? Though when I was in hospital with him one of the women on our ward did have one of those too - she'd try to put her down every 45 min and the baby would bawl - but then again I think there were about 6 beds in there, and the rest of the newborns would wake and cry every couple of hours, but from the cots.

My own DS prettymuch did what the typical baby books said was age appropriate and I think this classes him as a 'good' sleeper. Out of the 7 of us in the NCT group, 4 of us had good sleepers who have gone through the night at the usually prescribed time, and 3 have had ones who have much more disturbed sleep even now at nearly 2 and a half.

So I'm not sure it's about being 'honest' so much as telling people 'there is a possibility your baby may be like this and this is also within the realms of normal'.

[quote MrsJBaptiste]@Wondermule I think I've nodded and agreed with every one of your posts on this thread 👍[/quote]
Thanks! It’s taboo as the ‘correct’ way to parent on MN is to ‘meet your child’s needs’ by cosleeping and breastfeeding, but really it doesn’t meet anybody’s - everyone just ends up cranky and exhausted. The babies that sleep consistently in a cot and are night weaned are always so much more content and less fractious.

The baby years are so short, it’s a shame they get overshadowed by this type of martyrdom.

My first baby was a terrible sleeper, woke at least every 2 hours for almost 2 years. I tried everything by the book but she had a narrow window to get to sleep before she would go hyperactive, and woke at the slightest noise. I was on my knees with tiredness by 7 months old and starred co sleeping. She still woke but it was more manageable and I got more sleep.

Number 2 lasted 1 night in a cot before I made the decision to do sleep. Not a good sleeper but way better than baby no 1 and again I had much more sleep that way.

I knew it would be hard. What I needed was practical help from family and DH and chance to rest sleep. I didn't get it. If I was to go back in time I would insist DH took the baby out for a morning each weekend and also did a weekend night. Even 1 night a month would have stopped the culmlative exhaustion. It all feels a distant memory but I remember the shock of trying to function on minimal sleep - particularly going back to work. It was awful.

The babies that sleep consistently in a cot and are night weaned are always so much more content and less fractious.

Yes, the babies that sleep contentedly and non-fractiously in a cot probably do sleep pretty well. I think most parents of non-sleepers would also like their babies to sleep well in cots. I know I would have done.

You said upthread that you’ve never heard anyone say they started cosleeping because their baby was a nightmare sleeper. Now that you have heard multiple people say exactly that to you on this thread, has it made you reconsider your views at all? Or do you still feel we’re probably just martyrs who couldn’t deal with sleep deprivation for ‘a few weeks’?

@GoldenOmber

The babies that sleep consistently in a cot and are night weaned are always so much more content and less fractious.

Yes, the babies that sleep contentedly and non-fractiously in a cot probably do sleep pretty well. I think most parents of non-sleepers would also like their babies to sleep well in cots. I know I would have done.

You said upthread that you’ve never heard anyone say they started cosleeping because their baby was a nightmare sleeper. Now that you have heard multiple people say exactly that to you on this thread, has it made you reconsider your views at all? Or do you still feel we’re probably just martyrs who couldn’t deal with sleep deprivation for ‘a few weeks’?

I said I think they start co sleeping during a regression and then get trapped in it. That, or they choose to co sleep from the off.

I think you’re taking what I’m saying a bit personally.

I said I think they start co sleeping during a regression and then get trapped in it. That, or they choose to co sleep from the off.

You said that you’d never heard anyone say they started cosleeping because their baby was a bad sleeper. But now you have heard people say that. So I’m interested in whether or not it’s changed any of your views about why mothers might choose to cosleep?

@GoldenOmber

I said I think they start co sleeping during a regression and then get trapped in it. That, or they choose to co sleep from the off.

You said that you’d never heard anyone say they started cosleeping because their baby was a bad sleeper. But now you have heard people say that. So I’m interested in whether or not it’s changed any of your views about why mothers might choose to cosleep?

Badly phrased on my part. I meant I’ve never heard anyone say they started co sleeping exhaust baby was a nightmare who now isn’t a nightmare if you see what I mean.

@GoldenOmber

I said I think they start co sleeping during a regression and then get trapped in it. That, or they choose to co sleep from the off.

You said that you’d never heard anyone say they started cosleeping because their baby was a bad sleeper. But now you have heard people say that. So I’m interested in whether or not it’s changed any of your views about why mothers might choose to cosleep?

Hasn’t changed my view at all. I really believe co sleeping babies that aren’t night weaned are generally terrible sleepers (of course young babies need breastfeeding throughout the night), and as a result are crankier and more fractious.

My poor sleeper is now a 6 year who still struggles with self regulation in many aspects. I can see this was a huge reason why she struggled to get to sleep as a baby and toddler and stay asleep.

Her sister is a far more regulated child and can switch off to sleep much easier. I wish I could tell myself this as a new mum. At 6 yo she has to be prodded awake at 7.30am after years of waking at the god awful time of 4 30am.

I really believe co sleeping babies that aren’t night weaned are generally terrible sleepers

Often, yes - because cosleeping is a response to having a terrible sleeper. It doesn’t necessarily make the terrible sleeper into a brilliant sleeper, but it does lessen the impact of the terrible sleeping quite a lot.

My DC1 I was absolutely not going to cosleep, was determined to get that baby sleeping in a cot. Tried for months while I was so sleep deprived I was dangerous (falling asleep on sofa holding baby, nearly walking out into traffic sort of dangerous). Started cosleeping, baby still didn’t sleep through but we all got a lot more sleep.

Next baby, thought ‘well I’m not suffering through all THAT again, I’m cosleeping from birth with this one’. Ended up with a brilliant sleeper who could actually be put down drowsy but awake (they exist!).

I don’t think cosleeping made the second one sleep better, though. They’re just different people.

I said I think they start co sleeping during a regression and then get trapped in it. That, or they choose to co sleep from the off.

I can say this happened to us with DS (a 'natural' good sleeper). Think it was around 10 months? AWFUL time, multiple night wakings, up and down like a yoyo all night to his room, I was about to go back to work and ended up just bringing him in with us when he woke up as at least I could get some sleep. (what I should have done was buy a fold out mattress for the floor next to his cot and just go into his room rather than vice versa until it passed, but hindsight and all that....)

Co-sleeping was marginally better than the up and down all night, but it was still bad - he stirred when I stirred and vice versa, DH ended up in the spare room as not enough space with the starfishing... Was a PITA trying to get him back in the cot, but it did work in the end around 11 months/ a year as far as I recall and it was so much better when we weren't waking each other up all the time.

but yes, I would a million times recommend the temp mattress on the floor in their room approach if they're an older baby and aware enough to be looking for you over bringing them into your bed.

As a very reluctant co sleeper in my bed I think there's room to have factual neutral discussion of what sleeping is actually like.

I have to co sleep because my baby hates being but down at any time. I fucking hate it if I'm honest. I'd kill to be able to get her to sleep in her Moses basket and next to me crib. I'm green with envy at the pictures from my NCT group of their babies sleeping like that. My baby woke at 3.30 and is just going back to sleep after nursing for 2 hours. Usually I side feed her and doze until we both fall asleep but she has started rejecting my boob in that position and just grunts and squirms then eventually eventually starts crying.

My DH says helpful things like " if you formula fed her shed sleep through" then gets irritates because I'm not doing the thing that would solve the problem.

The only thing drowsy but awake is me.

However the only things people said to me were dismissive/dickish things like "you'll never sleep again!" And "sleep now you'll neeeeeeeeeeeeed it."

I don't blame other people or hold them responsible, but often this is what is said to people.

I must be an extreme outlier. My babies slept very well practically from birth and I get plenty of sleep unless they are ill. We do co-sleep, though.

Also, I sleep like I’m dead myself, so could be genetic.

I actually expected to get a lot less sleep with all the parent types joking with me, telling me I’ll never be able to sleep again.

Jokes still on me, though. Because I think I’ll never sleep alone again 🤦‍♀️

@wigglerose

As a very reluctant co sleeper in my bed I think there's room to have factual neutral discussion of what sleeping is actually like.

I have to co sleep because my baby hates being but down at any time. I fucking hate it if I'm honest. I'd kill to be able to get her to sleep in her Moses basket and next to me crib. I'm green with envy at the pictures from my NCT group of their babies sleeping like that. My baby woke at 3.30 and is just going back to sleep after nursing for 2 hours. Usually I side feed her and doze until we both fall asleep but she has started rejecting my boob in that position and just grunts and squirms then eventually eventually starts crying.

My DH says helpful things like " if you formula fed her shed sleep through" then gets irritates because I'm not doing the thing that would solve the problem.

The only thing drowsy but awake is me.

However the only things people said to me were dismissive/dickish things like "you'll never sleep again!" And "sleep now you'll neeeeeeeeeeeeed it."

I don't blame other people or hold them responsible, but often this is what is said to people.

How old is your baby? When was the last time you tried the cot (say for a few days consistently)?

We intended to separate surface cosleep the twins in a sidecar cot from the start. That first night we realised it was too much of a faff when I’d ended up having to combo feed and they feed wanted feeding every three hrs and I was starting each feed on the breast 🤦‍♀️😵

We had them downstairs in side by side mini cribs till 12 weeks. We took shifts being “on duty” on the sofa or upstairs in bed getting 90mins of proper rest 😂 We had to set alarms and sometimes they didn’t sleep so we’d both catch ten mins here and there on the sofa.

We now get infinitely more sleep and better quality by cosleeping. They’re effectively in their own beds, just within easy reach so you can stay half asleep and toasty while you give them a little pick up to resettle 👍👍👍

I've always questioned whether or not it's a good idea to post on Internet forums these days. There always seem to be a few people gunning for an online rage-fest with people they don't even know
The problem is that some topics bring out the banner waving evangelicals about particular views.
Sleeping and feeding seem to be two hot topics.

On sleep you'll tend to get two quite extreme positions, both arguing that their view is the only way:

1. Sleep training (with different methods) evangelicals, who think it's important to drop night feeds quickly, get baby in their own room as soon as they're 6 months. People who strongly feel this is best will tend to view people who co-sleep as weaker, who have given in when it got a bit rough, co-sleeping mums are martyrs and make a rod for their own backs. They'll tend to argue that anything positive comes from their chosen method of sleep training, and ignore the drawbacks. There's an overall view in this camp that babies are just trying it on, that if parents were a bit tougher and sucked up a week or two's terrible sleep then the baby will learn to self settle and then everyone sleeps better.

1. Co-sleeping evangelicals, who think that the best and most nurturing option is to not just co-sleep, but to bed share and that baby should have unlimited access to nursing. They will tend to view anything other than totally responding each time to be cruel and say that mums who use any form of sleep training are ignoring their baby's needs. These people will tend to argue that anything positive they've experienced comes from how amazingly nurturing they are, and downplay the drawbacks.

People in both evangelical camps tend to consider their approach superior and view any sleep disturbances or rough patches as a problem caused by parents who don't do it their way. Neither approaches are terribly helpful to new parents, who would probably benefit from realising that all babies are different, some settle brilliantly because they happen to be chilled babies, others are really fussy because that's what they're like.
Most people will try a range of things at different times based on circumstances and fall somewhere in the middle of the two shouty camps.

I have a toddler who has been a pretty good sleeper since about 6-7 months. But, when a newborn, he was of the ‘do not put me down ever’ variety for the first 6-8 weeks. My husband and I took it in turns to hold him through the night until he was about 6 weeks old. It completely blindsided me and I wish I had known it was firmly on the spectrum of normal for baby behaviour. That and cluster feeding. 4-5 hours of non-stop feeding every evening

So I do agree with you.

@LolaSmiles

I've always questioned whether or not it's a good idea to post on Internet forums these days. There always seem to be a few people gunning for an online rage-fest with people they don't even know The problem is that some topics bring out the banner waving evangelicals about particular views. Sleeping and feeding seem to be two hot topics.

On sleep you'll tend to get two quite extreme positions, both arguing that their view is the only way:

1. Sleep training (with different methods) evangelicals, who think it's important to drop night feeds quickly, get baby in their own room as soon as they're 6 months. People who strongly feel this is best will tend to view people who co-sleep as weaker, who have given in when it got a bit rough, co-sleeping mums are martyrs and make a rod for their own backs. They'll tend to argue that anything positive comes from their chosen method of sleep training, and ignore the drawbacks. There's an overall view in this camp that babies are just trying it on, that if parents were a bit tougher and sucked up a week or two's terrible sleep then the baby will learn to self settle and then everyone sleeps better.

1. Co-sleeping evangelicals, who think that the best and most nurturing option is to not just co-sleep, but to bed share and that baby should have unlimited access to nursing. They will tend to view anything other than totally responding each time to be cruel and say that mums who use any form of sleep training are ignoring their baby's needs. These people will tend to argue that anything positive they've experienced comes from how amazingly nurturing they are, and downplay the drawbacks.

People in both evangelical camps tend to consider their approach superior and view any sleep disturbances or rough patches as a problem caused by parents who don't do it their way. Neither approaches are terribly helpful to new parents, who would probably benefit from realising that all babies are different, some settle brilliantly because they happen to be chilled babies, others are really fussy because that's what they're like.
Most people will try a range of things at different times based on circumstances and fall somewhere in the middle of the two shouty camps.

I didn’t drop night feeds quickly. Baby just started sleeping through at about 4mo and no longer wanted them.

I think there are a lot of mums on here who are very personally attached to the idea that they are a cosleeping breastfeeding baby wearing type, who then become really defensive when it doesn’t really ‘work’ and someone suggests an alternative like using a cot or giving a bottle at night etc. They will doggedly stick to their parenting ‘style’ even if they are demented through lack of sleep.

I’m not trying to be goady, and of course in some situations babies will co sleep better than in a cot (in the way that we are all different), but I do think if you’re not willing to at least try something different then you’re making a rod for your own back.

It’s like the breastfeeding evangelicals who refuse to give their newborn a bottle (even if it’s expressed) then write a thread months later about how their child won’t take a bottle, they can’t go out for the night, etc etc

@LolaSmiles

I've always questioned whether or not it's a good idea to post on Internet forums these days. There always seem to be a few people gunning for an online rage-fest with people they don't even know The problem is that some topics bring out the banner waving evangelicals about particular views. Sleeping and feeding seem to be two hot topics.

On sleep you'll tend to get two quite extreme positions, both arguing that their view is the only way:

1. Sleep training (with different methods) evangelicals, who think it's important to drop night feeds quickly, get baby in their own room as soon as they're 6 months. People who strongly feel this is best will tend to view people who co-sleep as weaker, who have given in when it got a bit rough, co-sleeping mums are martyrs and make a rod for their own backs. They'll tend to argue that anything positive comes from their chosen method of sleep training, and ignore the drawbacks. There's an overall view in this camp that babies are just trying it on, that if parents were a bit tougher and sucked up a week or two's terrible sleep then the baby will learn to self settle and then everyone sleeps better.

1. Co-sleeping evangelicals, who think that the best and most nurturing option is to not just co-sleep, but to bed share and that baby should have unlimited access to nursing. They will tend to view anything other than totally responding each time to be cruel and say that mums who use any form of sleep training are ignoring their baby's needs. These people will tend to argue that anything positive they've experienced comes from how amazingly nurturing they are, and downplay the drawbacks.

People in both evangelical camps tend to consider their approach superior and view any sleep disturbances or rough patches as a problem caused by parents who don't do it their way. Neither approaches are terribly helpful to new parents, who would probably benefit from realising that all babies are different, some settle brilliantly because they happen to be chilled babies, others are really fussy because that's what they're like.
Most people will try a range of things at different times based on circumstances and fall somewhere in the middle of the two shouty camps.

I think this is a brilliant post and couldn't agree more. It's such a shame people line up in camps like this - it doesn't reflect the reality of parenting at all, but is so off-putting and frightening for new parents. People sometimes act like it's an all or nothing package, and I wish they wouldn't - for instance, I think La Leche League do some great work (by far the best practical support for breastfeeding issues in my area) but I wish they didn't take such strong pro co-sleeping and attachment parenting stances, as it really reinforces the idea that breastfeeding is only 'for' certain types of people and parents.

@GoldenOmber

I really believe co sleeping babies that aren’t night weaned are generally terrible sleepers

Often, yes - because cosleeping is a response to having a terrible sleeper. It doesn’t necessarily make the terrible sleeper into a brilliant sleeper, but it does lessen the impact of the terrible sleeping quite a lot.

My DC1 I was absolutely not going to cosleep, was determined to get that baby sleeping in a cot. Tried for months while I was so sleep deprived I was dangerous (falling asleep on sofa holding baby, nearly walking out into traffic sort of dangerous). Started cosleeping, baby still didn’t sleep through but we all got a lot more sleep.

Next baby, thought ‘well I’m not suffering through all THAT again, I’m cosleeping from birth with this one’. Ended up with a brilliant sleeper who could actually be put down drowsy but awake (they exist!).

I don’t think cosleeping made the second one sleep better, though. They’re just different people.

I would agree there is a certain amount of chicken and egg, but it's not just that.

I found with all my kids, bar one, that it was a bit of a struggle to night-wean, they were not at all keen, waking up several times a night and unable to go back to sleep.

But once I did - and I absolutely had to force it, and it took about a week or two - they all almost immediately slept through the night eight nights out of ten which was a huge improvement. There was a huge change in their sleeping pattens more generally, with more predictable naps and bedtimes.

My children aren't the most regular kids by any means, which makes sense because neither I nor their father are either. This is different from my friends kids who I also took care of for several years who were naturally more regular. But my own kids were very much helped by trying to create a greater amount of sleep regularity for them and I eventually realised it was better to start this younger than I have previously believed.

But Wonder - if your baby slept through without you doing anything then surely that's just luck/the kind of baby that they are? And therefore it follows that other babies might be different.

And not giving a bottle vs giving one early doesn't actually seem to have much effect on whether or not they'll refuse one later (unless you solely bottle feed of course). The difference between a baby under 4 months vs a baby older than that is the younger baby has a sucking reflex - if you put something nipple/teat shaped in their mouth they will automatically suck and swallow. An older baby doesn't have this reflex any more so unless they have a very strong association with bottles as the way they get food, they may well have an opinion and say no thanks!

The only way to be totally sure your baby will continue to take a bottle is to fully or mostly bottle feed - and that goes against the point of breastfeeding in the first place for a lot of people. Just giving an occasional bottle doesn't really make much difference so there is no moral superiority in doing that (or in refusing to either, but it doesn't cause the baby to reject it in any case.)

I spent a lot of time trying to placate my crying son at night as I'd read all that fourth trimester stuff and assumed he needed to be held by me constantly etc. Anyway, one night I needed the loo so put him down in his cot while I went. Out like a light. Poor little sod just wanted to be left alone to sleep.

@BertieBotts

But Wonder - if your baby slept through without you doing anything then surely that's just luck/the kind of baby that they are? And therefore it follows that other babies might be different.

And not giving a bottle vs giving one early doesn't actually seem to have much effect on whether or not they'll refuse one later (unless you solely bottle feed of course). The difference between a baby under 4 months vs a baby older than that is the younger baby has a sucking reflex - if you put something nipple/teat shaped in their mouth they will automatically suck and swallow. An older baby doesn't have this reflex any more so unless they have a very strong association with bottles as the way they get food, they may well have an opinion and say no thanks!

The only way to be totally sure your baby will continue to take a bottle is to fully or mostly bottle feed - and that goes against the point of breastfeeding in the first place for a lot of people. Just giving an occasional bottle doesn't really make much difference so there is no moral superiority in doing that (or in refusing to either, but it doesn't cause the baby to reject it in any case.)

I did do something - I had to work really hard to push through the exhaustion and be consistent with the cot. There was on night that they didn’t sleep at all. It was gruelling but worth it, whereas I think co sleeping prolongs the agony only to make things ever so slightly better.

As for the bottles, nope - I started off breastfeeding and giving a bottle of expressed milk as soon as we got back from hospital. Absolutely worked, she could do both with no objection, we were very consistent about it. In Sweden (which has really good breastfeeding rates) they’re very relaxed about giving a bottle a night so mum can get some sleep. Hasn’t done them any harm.

I think this puritanical attitude to exclusively breastfeeding makes the rates lower actually.

But I do agree that the narrative that it's completely cruel/terrible parenting to actually want children to sleep earlier than their third birthday and not breastfeed through the night continually is unhelpful.

And it's so hard to wade through so much shit advice as well. There is a lot of utter crap talked about baby sleep from both sides.

I did eventually find some useful tips which I used with DS2 when he was about 2.5 and they worked within a month. I never at any point felt I was abandoning him or being cruel and the methods worked well. I might well try them out a bit younger next time. But I've had two babies, the eldest is 12, it took me 12 years (!!) to find that info which was actually strong enough to be useful yet gentle enough to feel comfortable. And maybe part of it was just what works with one child won't work with another - I remember doing some kind of separate BF from falling asleep move with DS1 which worked fine when he was about 9 months old. Didn't work with DS2.

Yes, but I never gave a bottle before my baby was about 8 months old and he took one fine (the first baby)

The point is bottle refusal (or not) is not related to whether you give them bottles early or not. Some babies refuse, some don't. It's not correlated with anything.

It is correct that all or nothing attitudes to breastfeeding seem to reduce BF rates (which makes sense) but mostly the support for BF in the UK is shit anyway so mums aren't routinely offered any support until things are really bad and then it isn't enough so they end up stopping anyway.

On the sleep topic I was responding to this: "I didn’t drop night feeds quickly. Baby just started sleeping through at about 4mo and no longer wanted them."