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.

Tiddler39
Alternatively every baby is different and has different temperaments.

Mine did 3-4 hour stretches and I breastfed and did night feeds. No sleep associations, no only sleeping upright or held, just a baby who was being responded to in a way they needed. Other friends have had much more fussy babies, some slept through the night sooner than others. They're all different. Some did various forms of sleep training, some were similar to me. Some breastfed, some combi fed, some bottle fed.
Some people I know said that if they had number 2 as their first born they'd probably not have had a second because their temperament was so different to their first, and they found sleep more of a challenge with number 2 than their first. Some were the other way round. Many said they did things differently with their different DC.

My baby wouldn't sleep and during a stint in hospital when a few months old the night nurses on one evening saw his red wide eyes that just wouldn't shut and they took it into their own hands. I was on my knees after months of 30 minute naps. They wrapped him, sung him a song, patted his bottom and put him down, turned down the lights and shut the door. He cried for 10 minutes, the next night 10 minutes, the next night 5 - within a week he'd be asleep in minutes. I can't say every night was easy but the nurses gave me the confidence to be a little more routine about it. They said well if you had another child you were attending to your baby would have to wait so there's not really any difference. They were right. They taught me how to settle a baby and it worked a treat. He's a very affectionate. confident child and a very happy sleeper, has been for 13 years. I'd do the same again.

Believe me plenty of us weren't doing sleep training 50 years ago, I was one of them. We didn't admit it as HVs seemed to have more time back then so you saw more of them, well you did where I lived, and they were very keen on routines and sleep training so you just agreed and did what you wanted when they left.

I don't think gentle parenting is going to make children clingy/nervous/anxious, if you look at lots of cultures cosleeping, feeding on demand and carrying the baby with you all the time in a sling is perfectly normal and I don't think they have more issues as the baby grows to an adult.

You're right. I can't go back in time and ask my mother, but I have a clear memory of her saying how distressing it was for her to hear me screaming in the pram, and to force herself to ignore me!

I think Truby King wrote the book where mother's were recommended to leave their children crying in a pram in the garden. Maybe your mother misremembered whose advice it was?

Mothers, not mother's.

Stupid autocorrect.

I read a good many books in pregnancy, but always suspect I'd likely throw out the whole of what I thought I knew once the baby had arrived. This proved true.

I find the idea of meticulous adherence to particular parenting theories or models quite odd. Instinctive parenting has worked very well for generations. All that's really necessary is to make individual decisions about feeding, sleeping and giving love: what else do babies really need?

Current safety advice about safe sleeping - for instance baby placed on back, not using dangerous equipment like cot bumpers - is obviously the exception as this is essential, as is advice about weaning etc. All else is really up to you. And some of those decisions could easily waver if you, your baby or your circumstances don't prove a good fit. I was using some attachment methods without really realizing it: breastfed and baby-wore, for example, but we didn't co-sleep beyond the recommended 6 months. I've never been a stickler for routines and as for BF, this has to be done on demand or it doesn't work. I'd never use CIO, but can't be smug about not having to implement sleep training because my baby slept through from a year old. Had I been on my knees from lack of sleep, as I was during the first year, I'd have done something differently. And if I'd had any subsequent children (we didn't, but wanted to), what worked for Baby #1 might have been useless when it came to #2, especially with the added demands of a toddler to contend with.

My advice is to throw the books away. You know what's best for your child, but you also have to look after you. You can't pour from an empty cup.

To be honest, this is pretty much what I did with all of mine: they were fed, changed, swaddled, cuddled and sung to (and two of them had a dummy) and then put down in their own bed with the lights out.

Yeah, they might cry for 5-10 mins but then they just went to sleep. Often they didn’t even cry at all, just made a few little noises.

The point I’m making is that because that was the routine for sleep from the beginning (including daytime naps), that was their ‘sleep cue’ and we never had to let them ‘cry it out’ or do controlled crying because it never got to that stage.

Obviously we went through the odd difficult patch where it didn’t work and I’d have to keep going back in, but the routine was the same - feed if necessary, cuddle, sing, put down in their own bed in the dark and repeat.

It worked for all of them and they all slept through fairly reliably from around 3 months. And they weren’t just ‘easy babies’ - two of them had reflux.

Unless there are other issues I really can’t see why this shouldn’t work for all babies.

Maybe it isn't what all mothers want to do. To me sleeping with my babies was the natural thing to do.

And that’s absolutely fine, as long as everyone’s getting enough sleep. I think that in many situations that’s not the case, though.

I’m also illustrating that babies who are not so-called ‘attachment parented’ can also be very content, well-adjusted and secure.

Here’s another 🤷🏼‍♀️

www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/4760519-1-year-old-wont-sleep-and-im-losing-it

Doesn't alter the fact that not everyone will choose to leave a baby to cry themselves to sleep.

Yes ancient gran because that’s exactly what we have been recommending on this thread 🙄 but don’t let that stand in the way of your dramatic response

What's dramatic? That putting a baby in a cot to cry for ten minutes is leaving them to cry themselves to sleep? Well they are crying until they sleep so what else is it? If you're happy to do it then that's up to you but not everyone wants to do that, shocking isn't it that people can have different opinions.

Whats dramatic is you making out this thread is all about leaving babies to cry themselves to sleep, like that’s the only alternative to shoving a boob in their mouth or keeping them lying on you at all times. The majority of posts are about gentle sleep training such as shush pat.

I think you’ve just perfectly illustrated the point OP is making in this thread in less than 20 words.

It’s phrases like ‘cry themselves to sleep’ that are so damaging and judgemental.

My babies didn’t ‘cry themselves to sleep’. They fussed and cried a bit, then stopped, then fell asleep.

That’s a world away from leaving a baby - especially an older one - from crying for so long that it exhausts itself and falls asleep, which is what you’re insinuating.

Why would you do this?

I haven’t read that whole thread but I read the OP and this paragraph left me cold:

she will not go to sleep..she is always in some kind of state of awareness, ready to wake at the slightest sound or touch.

How on earth is getting your baby in this state any less cruel than letting it cry for a few minutes before it settles itself to sleep? It sounds like torture for the poor baby, never mind the parents.

I’m actually horrified that some families get to this.

So they fussed and cried a bit and then magically they were asleep and it was nothing to do with crying themself to sleep. People have been referencing leaving a baby to cry for 10 minutes, that is long enough for a tired baby (presumably if it is time for bed they will be tired) to fall asleep exhausted.

I’m not sure about ‘gentle parenting’ or ‘cry it out’ because as labels they are divisive and unhelpful.
Co-sleeping worked for me as a bf Mum and hearing my baby cry was more stressful and draining than putting them on the boob and letting them fall asleep next to me. For me. I think each family does what works for them.
I do have a problem though with ‘sleep coaches’ and the like monetising perfectly normal baby nighttime behaviour and playing on the insecurities of new parents in terms of insisting a schedule and scheduled naps are super important.
I read an awful book with my first baby- the HV recommended it- something about picking your baby up and putting them down and a routine based on an acronym of some kind. It was awful! I felt I should give it a go as the HV insisted he should be sleeping more. Once I fucked it off we were both much happier.

Unless there are other issues I really can’t see why this shouldn’t work for all babies.

Because all babies are different maybe? From the beginning I tried this routine for all sleep. Yet the instant my child was put down they would scream, not just cry a bit for 5-10 mins (if it was just that I'd have left them and hope they'd settle) but this was proper full on hysterical screaming, until someone picked them up.

Suggesting it's something that the parents have done wrong to make their child a rubbish sleeper is counter-productive.

I don’t understand why a well, contented baby would scream hysterically the instant you put it down?

Is that really true?

I think by the time people are paying for sleep coaches it’s because they’re at the end of their tether, not just feeling a bit insecure.

Yes it's absolutely true. I don't know why she was like this - probably just because she wanted to be held and didn't like being put down I expect! She was super happy all the time apart from when trying to get her to sleep, no health issues whatsoever, yet the minute you'd put her down she would get distressed. This was day in, day out, with no good days ever, and didn't help that she would only sleep for 45 minutes at a time.

Is it? Or have they been made to feel like their baby isn’t doing as it should. I used to run a baby development class and tbh, most of the parents who used these people felt they were getting it all wrong because their baby didn’t sleep through the night or woke frequently to feed- both totally normal behaviours.
I think part of the problem is the lack of wisdom and advice from the ‘village’ as well as lack of support. Most new parents need reassurance and support, not to pay someone to tell them what to do, or buy another book written for a generic baby.