To think that responsive/attachment parenting doesn't give a flying fuck about maternal wellbeing?

[Santaslittlehelper83]

....or the family unit. I recently joined the fb group 'Beyond Sleep Training' as was interested in some different ideas for managing our babies frequent night awakenings. CIO/CC is not for me but I'm not adverse to more gentler methods of ST. I was really disturbed by some posts by quite clearly desperate mums, and the advice in a nutshell seemed to boil down to....'that's normal baby behaviour, deal with it!' There was to be fair some advice re tweaking routines etc, and messages of solidarity but nothing else. A lot of posters were referencing their toddlers/preschoolers who hadn't slept more than 2 hours consecutively since birth...on what planet is that helpful to a sleep deprived mum at the end of her rope!? I think it was almost competetive, like a token of honour with generally a lot of sneering towards families who chose a different approach. I also didn't see the logic of lumping all sleep training methods together....someone sensibly suggested removing nipple gently when baby finished night feed to avoid this becoming a sleep association....this was shot down by a very heavy handed post by the admin.

Of course babies needs are paramount, but Mums (and Dads) matter too.

I agree with you OP. This has resulted in me feeling like shit sometimes after I had DS, for not wanting to be a martyr. The truth is DS was extremely attached to the point I couldn't do anything at all all day for months, he was on my chest sleeping or BF non stop. DH was lost and confused, I have no local family to support and it's my first living child. I went into motherhood with anxiety from previous pregnancy losses and in the pandemic. My starting point was shit. And then you hear about this attachment shit - not in a healthy sense, but obsessive. Some mothers IRL and on SM definitely promote it and it's harmful. The truth is we all need personal space, some freedom and good sleep and these things need to be achieved in our own, individual ways because the level of our own individual needs varies and so does our support network and of course our children's needs.

I ended up being a stickler for DS sleeping separately and moved him to his room in line with all safe sleep recommendations. He's never once slept in my bed and he's 19mo. He's still exhaustingly attached during the day but shifted his focus on to DH now and I can see DH is struggling with the intensity too after a while. Luckily he's now well into his toddlership and his independence starts to shine through. If we brought him up differently, he would be a total velcro day snd night and we'd be unable to function. I cannot imagine having him next to me 24/7, I know I would go insane. I can't stand it when some are promoting this kind of martyrdom instead of healthy balance. It's not good for the kids either, IMO healthy independence and emotional resilience should be encouraged, age appropriate. I know how hard it is to raise a young child whilst battling MH issues and IMO vulnerable mothers should be protected from additional pressures.

@PurplePansy05 I think the pressure can go both ways though. Lots of women feel an enormous amount of pressure to sleep train despite really wanting to co sleep. They then feel like they aren't ever allowed to have a moan about having a rough night as they'll be accused of being a matyr and just told to sleep train baby use controlled crying.

It doesn’t really work in reverse. Generally women ‘feel under pressure to sleep train’ because they’re moaning about being exhausted, and what else is there to suggest? I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone suggest breaking a routine where a baby sleeps really well, wherever that is.

This is really interesting but I can't easily find anything explaining more. Do you have any links about how specifically she misunderstands risk or the differences between the meaning of risk in an economics vs medical sense?

My question about the distinction in results between cry it out (which is abuse) and gentle sleep training (which is what is being promoted here when needs be)? If you pretend you ‘don’t understand why we need to make the distinction’ you’re being very disingenuous.

I did this with all of mine, I missed the closeness when they were ready to stop.

@Moonicorn

You need to consult the methodology section of the paper(s) concerned

I can’t as I have no right of access to ‘Science Direct’. Can you summarise please?

@3WildOnes what concerns did you have about Oster's interpretation of the sleep studies, specifically? Which studies do you believe she should have included in the analysis, but didn't?

I was a mum in the 70s and coslept with mine. They weren't clingy in the day though, quite the opposite really. Maybe they got enough of me bf and cosleeping through the night. The big thing was I got plenty of sleep so managed to care about how I looked and how the house looked.

YY Paris!!

If it's the group I'm thinking of, they also have this batshit insane fear of purees - I remember when BLW was really new and people were very anxious about choking, and somebody came up with a reassuring one-line explanation that BLW teaches babies to learn to chew before they swallow, whereas purees rely on the fact that the baby knows how to swallow (from drinking milk) before they can chew.

It's a gross oversimplification, but it makes the point in a handy soundbite. The thing is, if you look at that group today, what that soundbite has morphed into is this:

Purees encourage swallowing without chewing >
BLW relies on babies learning to chew before swallowing, that's what makes it safe >
Therefore, if a BLW baby has ever encountered a puree, they will be dangerously inclined to swallow more solid foods >
A combination of finger foods and purees may lead to a higher incidence of choking (I will add, that this is not borne out by research, it's someone's conclusion they have borne from the earlier exaggerated premise) >
Combining finger foods and purees is absolutely deadly dangerous and must never be done >
If you have given the baby any puree you must stop the weaning process for at least (amount of time) and start again.

Just - what??? This doesn't make any logical sense yet it's included as a "guide" in the group.

And you get this kind of insane fear mongering in all polarised groups. Like the ERF car seat groups would have you believe that a baby in a forward facing car seat (or certain brands of car seat) will definitely suffer instant death if you so much as emergency stop. And the no-sleep-train groups make you think that letting a baby cry for 5 minutes will traumatise and rupture their attachment and mess them up for life. The "safe sleep" groups like sharing scare stories that if you let a baby sleep in an adult bed once they will definitely suffocate. Some breastfeeding groups claim that formula damages a baby's gut irreparably. I could go on and on and on. If you follow the claims back to the root, there is normally some truth but it is so much less extreme and the fear that they cause is incredibly irresponsible and harmful in itself, I think.

I dont have time to go through all of the studies. I work in infant mental health and remember when I read the book there were numerous studies she didn't include. Or she would point out the constraints of studies that she liked but ignore those constraints in those that suited her narrative. She completely glossed over that there has been no long term research into the effects of sleep training. The longest study there was, was I think 5 years. So really we have no idea if there will be any long term effects good or bad. She also glossed over that all studies allowed (they obviously have to due to ethical standards) participants to move from the sleep training group to the control group or leave the study. So any parents who felt that their baby was becoming too distressed by the sleep training wouldn't be included, it is likely that if any babies were to suffer negatively from the sleep training it would be these babies.

That's your experience but not mine. Mine is that when a woman, who has chosen not to sleep train, has a moan about having a rubbish night she is told to use cc and made to feel like she is being martyr. What she usually wants is a bit of empathy.

If you know of any studies showing sleep training is harmful or ineffective, it would be helpful if you could share them.

I think you're misremembering Oster's book or perhaps confusing it with a different one, as she didn't gloss over any of those things. She explained very clearly the limitations of all the research and that, as always, we have to make our decisions in the context of imperfect and incomplete information.

In case anyone reading doesn't know much about sleep training, here's some info. Also second the recommendation to read Oster's Cribsheet. It's helpful to have the evidence so you can make your own parenting decisions.

No peer-reviewed research has reported detrimental effects from sleep training.

pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/130/4/643
pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2016/05/21/peds.2015-1486
pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/122/3/e621
pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/111/3/e203

Here's a look at the Middlemiss study, which is usually cited by people against sleep training or extinction (CIO):
expectingscience.com/2016/04/21/the-middlemiss-study-tells-us-nothing-about-sleep-training-cry-it-out-or-infant-stress/

And here are the authors of some of the studies on child abuse and neglect say that anti-sleep-training people are mis-citing their work:
ideas.time.com/2012/05/10/the-science-behind-dr-sears-does-it-stand-up/

A little information on the "cortisol" fear.
"In terms of their effects, the difference between short-term and chronic stress is one not of degree, but of kind. Short-term stress enhances memory; chronic stress impairs it. Short-term stress boosts the immune system; chronic stress weakens it. So where does that leave us? A little stress, even in infancy, is fine, if not beneficial, but too much for too long is very, very bad.

Do we know exactly where sleep training fits in this spectrum? Just how much stress does a baby experience during cry-it-out? The short answer is that we don’t know for certain. Everything we do know, however, suggests that this amount of stress, in the context of a warm, loving family, is just fine.
Sleep training is not only not harmful, it is beneficial. Successful sleep training can decrease depression and chronic stress in the parents, and this benefits parents and their babies. Unlike sleep training, having a depressed mother during early childhood has been shown, repeatedly, to be linked with worse long-term outcomes for children."

expectingscience.com/2016/04/12/critics-of-cry-it-out-fundamentally-misunderstand-how-stress-affects-the-brain/
To measure the effects on the babies, the researchers did something interesting: they measured the level of cortisol, a stress hormone, in the babies’ saliva. They also asked the mothers about their levels of stress. Twelve months later, they looked for any emotional or behavioral problems in the babies, and they also did testing to see how attached the babies were to their mothers.
Here’s what they found. The babies in the graduated extinction group and the bedtime fading group both fell asleep faster and had less stress than the control group — and not only that, their mothers were less stressed than the control group mothers. Of the three groups, the extinction group babies were less likely to wake up again during the night. And when it came to emotional or behavioral problems, or attachment, all three groups were the same.

This means that it’s okay to let your baby cry a little. It’s not only okay, it may lead to more sleep all around. Which makes everyone happier.

www.health.harvard.edu/blog/new-study-says-okay-let-babies-cry-night-201605319774

What is it about Emily Ostler? She's an economist. She may well be a fantastic economist. She's not medical however.

Why do people trust her so much?

They’re not ‘moaning’ as such though, they’re saying they’re ‘at breaking point’ and ‘can’t cope’. These aren’t general complaints, they’re worrying statements when made about the care of small children.

Excellent post Downtown. Really excellent.

And hello, Bertie, glad to see you! Fab no nonsense comments, as always! I need to dig out our thread, it's fallen off my watch list!

Because people like to hear from somebody without a strong ideological motivation, and they don’t necessarily want to trawl through studies themselves and would rather have somebody with some interpretive skill do it for them?

The babies in the graduated extinction group and the bedtime fading group both fell asleep faster and had less stress than the control group — and not only that, their mothers were less stressed than the control group mothers. Of the three groups, the extinction group babies were less likely to wake up again during the night. And when it came to emotional or behavioral problems, or attachment, all three groups were the same

I wasn’t expecting that, I’m very against controlled crying but a huge fan of gentle sleep training. Due to give birth next week so let’s see how this one goes! I did gentle sleep training with DD at 7 months old, I was planning on doing the same if needed this time with DS.

Thinking about it, I thought I'm over the martyrdom by now but even recently it's made me feel shit.

DS was ill recently and we really struggled with his sleep. Every time, nap, nighttime , he was uncomfortable and fighting it terribly. Screaming blue murder, desperately. I never before left him to it, I'd go in, calmly speak to him, leave him with a dummy, comforter and leave. Sometimes once. Sometimes 25 times. Sometimes more, but I wouldn't give up, if he needs sleep, he needs sleep and I need rest. Obviously made sure he isn't actually unwell and needs medical attention. And I gave up, we were too tired and left him to CIO. It made me feel like shit during and after. Felt guilt that he'd have longlasting emotional harm.

He cried for 12 mins, settled himself and slept for 10 hours straight.

Two days later I think I was borderline insane out of exhaustion to be thinking he'd suffer any bloody harm!

Not many parents necessarily have the skills to critically evaluate multiple research studies and make their own mind up. So it's helpful to have the evidence laid out for your perusal. People appreciate Oster's books because she doesn't try and tell you what to do (unlike most parenting books). She explains what evidence their is and lets you make your own mind up.

I was surprised at her findings around alcohol use and that there's no evidence any harm will come to a baby if the mother drinks a unit or two per day. I still chose to be teetotal during pregnancy but knowledge is power.

The biggest learning curve for me was around feeding. I had no idea the 'breast is best' movement was built mostly on myth and misinformation. It has empowered a lot of parents to make evidence based decisions in their parenting.

I've noticed that the parents most against sleep training are the ones who've never been in a position where they've really had very little choice but to do it, frankly. There are worse things in the world than helping a baby learn how to fall asleep independently (such as your mental or physical health being destroyed by sleep deprivation, falling asleep at the wheel and killing someone, losing your job because you can't function, killing someone at work due to exhaustion, etc.). Sleep deprivation is no joke and I don't think everyone really understands how bad it can get until they've been there.

No. Sometimes women just complain about having a shitty night and are told to sleep train.

Yet to see it like that but okay…