to feel a bit patronised by the "Talk to your Child" campaign to get me to buy a rear facing buggy

[witchandchips]

Don't get me wrong, I have wasted many hours searching for such a thing that is affordable and non wanky + the premise of the campaign makes sense. But it is the judgy judgy judgy notes of the articles and the complete apparrent dismissal of issues like needing to get on the bus or having to wheel two under two into shops that get my goat, It seems just another stick for the daily mail to beat us by.

It is a personal attack when somebody starts a campaign about it.

I don't like the idea that when I'm struggling to get a mclaren on a bus because I can't drive, and there is physically no way you can get any of the rear facing buggies on a bus on your own - some absolute knob (probably my mother) will feel the need to tell me I am permanently damaging my child. That's what articles like this do - they give randomers with a little badly researched knowledge 'the right' to lecture other people on their choices.

Why the hell is that a good thing? Anybody that dares try it will be thoroughly yelled at by me. I'm cross because I would seriously appreciate it if newspapers checked their facts before they put stories like this on the front page of their papers, and save a lot of people a lot of grief and worry. (Times, Friday)

personal attack?for the millionith time dont exagerate.

I explained why IMO, when campaigns like this start those whom it is directed against DO feel like it's a personal attack - and get irate. You don't have to agree, but I'm not inclined to think I'm exaggerating.

It is a campaign directed against all persons who do not use rear-facing buggies. Therefore it is a personal attack on those people. Or is there some other definition of the phrase?

campaign is a sustained and high profile consistent message delivered by many eg BF

one academic report, available on internet.not endorsed by DoH,GP,medics,nurses,NHS does not constitute a campaign

it constitues an evidence based opinion, which may well be challenged by other evidence based opinion

it is not received orthodoxy

It was in the Times on Friday (on the front page no less), and the Guardian at the weekend, it's not just an online thing that hardly anyone will see.

It can't be anything other than a good thing to talk and interact with your baby IMO. I don't drive so it was very important for me to have a forward facing buggy as DD often spends hours in a buggy if we go out for the day.

I have a Stokke and my best friend has a Quinny, both of which we manage to manouvre around on public transport without any problems and alone. VictorianSqualor linked to a buggy that faces both ways and costs less than most Maclarens.

To be honest, I don't see what you're all getting so het up about. It is a recommendation not law. Things change, new research happens and you can choose to ignore it or take it on board depending on how valid you think it is. I don't think it can be bad thing encouraging people to chat and interact with babies! They aren't suggesting anything awful here, I think it may help to have a bit of perspective.

really i cant understand the emotive language this has generated.a recommendation only

noone will frog march the maclaren mamas to the bugaboo store

if this report touches a nerve so severely one feels attacked got at than that is your subjective issue.

and imo a bit of an over reaction

btw i dont follow all received orthodoxy, and dont lose sleep about it or feel got at either

I live in the countryside - when I say a bus, I mean one with no disabled access five steps and a rail to get on board.

VS buggy is perfectly nice but only suitable from 6 months plus.

when our children grow up i doubt they will berate us for not having a rear facing pram

love and secure attachment and affirmation make good parenting - not your flipping buggy

Although TBH, you are toatlly right am an adult will obviously make my own decisions and if other people don't like it then tough, I'm just home sick today and feeling foul and bad tempered so v annoyed. (That's slightly reveal by stealth isn't it - I apologise whole heartedly!)

Plus, I just find it frustrating when anything comes up like this saying - ah it's so much better for your baby to do X, Y or Z and the only way to achieve those things seems to involve things I can't currently do - I would not be bothered about rear facing buggies if I could drive, because I could just shove it in the back of the car and not think about how it folds and how I'll carry it etc...

You forget though you are judging others by your standards.
I see babies in buggy's every day not being spoken to, being pushed around for hours without a single interaction, for some babies and toddlers that is their lives. Not that facing the other way would make a jot of difference to them, but they might catch the odd smile.

Has anyone actually read the report?

Talk to your baby report

A lot of the report is about the design of buggies and it does point out that buggy design and choice is largely down to cultural demands - such as having a collapsable buggy you can put in the car or take on the bus. It doesn't say anywhere that if you have a forward facing buggy that you are a bad parent or you don't know what is best for your child. And their conclusions are merely recommendations.

The TTYB report calls on manufacturers and retailers to create more affordable two-way facing buggies.

Would you dismiss a rear facing buggy if it was collapsable, lightweight and affordable? - I know I wouldn't. I hate my bugaboo sometimes because its so bulky and doesn't collapse but IMO it is very important to me and my child that we can see each other and talk to each other, it certainly makes my journey more interesting.

On a purely personal basis, I would have loved to be able to buy a rear-facing MacLaren, and was sorry that there didn't seem to be more choice with regards to light, rear-facing buggies.

I changed my Bugaboo for a MacLaren as the Maclaren was light enough for me to be able to collapse and drag down scarey spiral steps to dark and spidery nursery basement cupboard, and not so expensive that I wasn't going to worry about it getting trashed down there. I resolutely natter away at 10 month old DD for the 15 minute journey to and from nursery every day, and get down to talk to her at traffic lights etc, but still regret that we don't get to have more eye contact / conversation in the limited time each week that we get to spend together.

16 years ago a few reports/studies concluded it was better for a baby to sleep on it's back...it's better practise

10 (ish?) years ago reports/studies concluded it was better not to wean on to solids before 6 months... it's better practise

So this report concludes facing pusher is better than facing away from pusher and there is bizarre anger and dismissal

Better practise comes from studies/report, it doesn't say we have all done terrible damage, just that it is better to be face to face

Sadly, more and more children are arriving at school with poor language skills, this may be a way of addressing some of the problems (not all, just some)

Many of these studies are going back to the way it used to be, weaning was later pre 1960's, babies slept on their sides never fronts and prams were higher and pusher facing. Calm down people

I think some of us are railing against the Guardian article rather than the research itself, scaredoflove.

I don't have a problem with the research. It seems pretty obvious to me that it is nice for small babies to see a human more. Last year, I wanted to buy a rear-facing pushchair and the only ones on the market seemed to be Pilko Pramettes or Bugaboos. My choice was:

1. a MacLaren

which I can a) afford and b) fold to get on buses and c) which is sufficiently lightweight for me to put against my hip to walk up/ down small flights of stairs

2. a big rearfacing affair which means I

-miss the bus because it is so packed I can't get on it because I can't fold my buggy easily

• cannot use my local tube or rail station because I can't use the stairs and there is no-one around to help
• cannot get into my childminders house as the hallway is too small
• fark everyone off in shops, lifts etc. and get nasty articles about me in the Guardian- I'm talking here about the comment section in the main paper on Saturday bashing mothers with big pushchairs. The man obviously has noooo idea what he is on about.
• oh yes, Bugaboos start at hoooow much?

I found the Guardian article patronising in the extreme, and like others went around in a big stomp for the whole of Saturday after reading it. It seems to me as though people do not recognise at all what it means to be a mother with a child in a public place (especially on the move), and they really would rather that we weren't there at all. I took particular umbrage at the snide complaints about how we buy buggies which have cosy sleeping bags (er, so we can go out in the cold), lockable swivel wheels (er, so the buggy doesn't roll sideways on the bus) and multi-position handles (er, so that we don't get backache bending over to push them). And don't get me started on the complaints about air-filled tyres or storage areas which appeared in the comment section of the main paper. These are not stupid luxuries journalists, they are bloody sensible design features!!!! And show me a buggy which "collapses to the size of a handbag" FFS.

If I had known this research when by ds was little I would have certainly listened to it. The fact that the baby's heart rate is significantly higher in an outward facing buggy indicates that this is more stressful. It certainly doesn't prove it- it may mean something else but it indicates it. Why would I not then go with the research and get something that is backed up by the latest research to suggest a better outcome for my child? Does that mean I'm going to lose sleep because my poor ds faced forwards- obviously not. Do I think he is detrimentally harmed- no he spoke very early but this research isn't a personal attack nor is it saying that it is conclusive proof. It is a study that has evidence that I see no reason not to take note of.

ra29 - look at the research and see if you find it convincing - I don't

I bought a pram on Ebay, which cost about £50. I bought a front facing buggy for my first child as it did not occur to me not to and prams and rear facing buggies were not as fashionable or easy to find as they are now. As soon as ds was born I absolutley hated not being able to see him and talk to him. It made me anxious, let alone him. It just felt wrong.

V interesting article about the research:

www.nhs.uk/news/2008/11November/Pages/Babybuggy.aspx

if the research is recommending that manufacturers consider front and back facing options more often and make them affordable then that can only be a good thing. I was surprised at the limited selection of backward facing transport options that weren't big heavy prams when I was looking.

btw bugaboo bees can face both ways and are pretty light, compact and foldable tho not as economical as mclarens

Gingerwench, you are right. However, I have yet to see someone with a bugaboo bee nip with it up a flight of stairs on their own, or fold it quickly and stow it in the luggage compartment of a London bus. I would be pleased to be proven wrong.

(because that would mean that I would recommend one to all my friends!)

I also find that the wheels catch in a really annoying way when one tries to get off a Tube onto the platform.

I think it is pretty much common sense that a baby in a rear facing buggy will interact more with its mother!

Please no one hound me I am currently 36 weeks pregnant and have purchased a forward facing pushchair for my newborn- as it is more practical for public transport, less expensive, and smaller for getting in/out of shops etc.

I had a rear facing buggy for my first daughter, and bought a forward facing one when she was 3 months as I was fed up with my (v.expensive) rear- facing combination pushchair.

Perhaps this is because I don't drive... a lot of people have recommended bugaboos and the like to me, but they drive everywhere and only use their prams for sunday morning strolls to the park (ok I am exaggerating slightly).

Yes I feel guilty that when my newborn is in the pushchair he wont be able to see me, I agree with the research, but I also actually have to use my pushchair for everyday use- the school run,shopping (oh yes forward facing buggies do have better handles), and bumping up and down stairs at the tube station.

I dont think this research is intended to make me feel guilty, but it does... however I still am not going to buy a rear facing pushchair.

I haven't read every thread on here but I get the feeling people are generally disagreeing with the report.

I've actually just got a 2nd hand zooper (weirdly heavy off road rear/forward facing buggy) because I have struggled to bond with DD. I thought it might just be one way of improving things between us. I sold my beloved jane slalom and pliko pramette (she's too big to be rear facing in it now) and plumped for the big b*stard zooper thing. It is so big it has influenced the car we bought so anyone hoping to use puiblic trnasport with it would be disappointed.

Anyway, I think it has helped us. I walk the dog with DD in it for about an hour each day. Previoulsy I'd stick her in the buggy and put my iPod on, but now I really do interact with her, and if others are walking with me she's a bit more involved. I'm not sure we'll have it forever, but it was one action I could take to engage with her more.

All the arguments here for using what the hell buggy works for you and your lo are right, but
don't you think that the research/guilt trip is problematic because its totally distracting from the real problem about communicating with young children and babies, which is a pity as the Talk campaign is a pretty good one. The issues don't really apply to the gobby articulate and opinionated Guardian reading mums posting here, all of whom are chatting up a storm with their dcs, whatever type of buggy they have . There is, however an underlying/unsaid problem about educationally, socially disadvantaged mums whose own communications skills may not be what they could be, many of whom do appear to use buggies and baby kit for status reasons, but maybe they are just trying to show/feel like they are providing the best for their children. God, I sound like a Daily Mail reader, what I am trying to say is there are parents who don't talk to their children and park them in buggies or drag them round in them all day and its not great for the kids, but wittering about which way the buggy faces is ridiculous. Actually, the worst example of this I ever saw was a group of nannies in Hampstead who used to meet up by the ponds for a chat and a fag with all the children facing any which way (rarely towards each other or the wildlife). Have I offended enough people yet? I think I'll stop.

I haven't read this whole thread but thought I'd add my bit anyway.... It's quite weak research, it's badly designed and it seems to me that they decided what they wanted to find (evidence in favour of rear facing pushchairs) and set out to find it.

That said, I do think it would be great if there was more choice on the market, particularly a lightweight stroller that could be forward or rear facing. The problem gets even worse when you start looking for a double pushchair....