to be annoyed that people on MN are so against routines?

[Maria2007]

Well, I might be flamed for writing this, but recently I've gotten more & more annoyed by all the anti-routine opinions found on MN. So- am I being unreasonable to be slightly pissed off when I read (again and again) advice to 'co-sleep / wear in sling / bf on demand' when people ask particular questions about their babies (e.g. about sleeping / feeding patterns)? Am I being unreasonable to think that this style of parenting doesn't suit all parents (or doesn't suit all babies for that matter)? Am I being unreasonable to feel that GF (and other advocates of routines) have been unfairly treated here on MN, however much one may disagree on various points in their books (and anyway who said we have to agree with every single thing they write)?

Some background. My DS is 6 months old. He's still breastfeeding (and I plan to continue for as long as I can / he wants). He is also still sleeping with us in our bed (from 11 pm onwards). He's a happy, healthy baby. Until 4 & a half months he was breastfed on demand (with various problems, which I won't go into). Until that point we were getting little or no sleep. I was so exhausted that I decided to work on a routine & in desperation bought the GF books (which until then I had been completely dismissive of). Surprise surprise. Putting DS on a routine (I did it gently & gradually, before anyone shouts at me!) worked beautifully. His sleep has improved dramatically, his breastfeeding has also improved. My milk supply has ALSO improved, making me wonder about the usual advice to feed completely on demand after a certain age. DP & I never felt we pushed our son in any way when putting him on this routine, in fact, it felt completely natural, we just tweaked things here & there & gradually things became better & better.

I simply don't believe anymore that 'all babies fall into a pattern in their own time'. I also don't believe anymore that 'it's normal' for babies to not sleep for months & months, that 'it's normal' for babies to feed all through the night (the thing people say about 'babies having tiny stomachs' also doesn't convince me anymore, not after a certain age, not when they're- for instance- 7 months). We still feed DS at 3-4 am, and we think that's normal for breastfed babies at 6 months, but I simply cannot imagine staying at the place where I was, feeding him all through the night, every 1-2 hours.

Anyway. Just really, honestly, I'd like a discussion on this, because it's something that baffles me. I truly believe I'm a much better parent, more rested, more calm, less irritable, now that we have some predictability and a pattern to our day. I also think that if I had a second child I'd keep an eye on the pattern of their day from earlier. Can't really think why all the anger & disapproval towards GF & other routine-advocates. You may not agree with all their points, fine. You may not like their style of writing, fine again. After all, it's only common sense that each parent creates their own version of a routine for their child, you wouldn't follow any style of parenting blindly would you. But to be so against routines in general is a bit baffling to me, and I've heard it so many times here on MN in recent months, that I honestly would like to discuss it a bit more...

routines worked for loads of us mumsnetters, definitely worked for me

Message withdrawn

To the OP, GF worked very well for me with DD. DS was a different story though, so I had to just learn to go with the flow a bit more. He got there in the end though.

Looking back, and I NEVER thought I'd say this, I am a bit ashamed of how religiously I stuck to the GF routine with DD. Not that I ever felt she was badly treat, but because yes, I think there were times my instinct said go and cuddle her, and the rules said "don't go in for x minutes". I know no one had a gun to my head, but I was an insecure new mum who just wanted to get things right. I also rarely picked up DD when she cried at night - just stroked and patted (ENDLESSLY).

With DS, I just picked him up. I did, and do you know what, he's 17 months now and sleeps like a dream and the picking him up for a cuddle in the night has not remotely caused "negative sleep associations"...so yes, I feel bad that I didn't do that for DD so that's what makes me less of an out and out advocate of time tabled routines now. BUT, at the time, I was evangelical about it with DD.

I think the baby whisperer and even AK have suggestions for a rough pattern to the day which I do believe children eventually find for themselves, but when they are ready (not normally before 9 months imo/e).

Anyway, I do see where you are coming from, I just think it's possible to change your mind - even though I could have written your OP 3 years ago....

I think I have missed the threads where people have been completely anti-routine.

What I have seen is people saying not to worry if your baby doesn't fit the GF mould, or if Baby Whisperer doesn't work for you and that you haven't failed if the routine doesn't suit you.

I have seen threads where people are worried that their days or weeks old baby wants feeding more than 2 hourly, or is waking lots at night and I have seen other posters reassuring them that it is all perfectly normal and that there is plenty of time for routine later.

Yes there are people who dislike GF or who believe that it is best for babies to find their own routine, but this is not the same as being completely anti routine. For the most part posters seem to be against the idea of a one size fits all method which is what most routines advocate. They are not saying don't use any routine, but rather find a routine that suits you and your baby.

And I do have to disagree with you on one point, there are plenty of people out there who would just blindly follow a routine, plenty that wouldn't adapt it to better suit them, plenty that get very stressed when they think they have failed because their baby isn't doing what the book says.

The advice people are giving is simply that, advice. I haven't seen anyone saying you must wear your baby in a sling, I've seen people suggesting that a mum tries it to see if it helps settle a cranky baby or so that they can feed on the go or have their hands free for another child...I haven't seen anyone say that you must co-sleep, I've seen people saying that it can help you be more rested. Granted I have seen people saying that routined feeding isn't ideal, but that is more to do with establishing a milk supply than anything else.

I like routines, but I am a bit of a control freak and I love knowing that I will have 1.5-2 hours to myself in the middle of the day while the baby sleeps!

Bloody hell there weren't any replies when I started typing!

Maria: It is very easy to say "I did X at 4 months and now at 6 months my baby is much happier!"

Because frankly, you could have taken up golf lessons at 4 months and he would have been much happier at 6 months. Babies just get NICER and EASIER.

Anyway, I would say that in general, most parents follow routines after the first 6 months or so - but there's very little point trying to IMPOSE them beforehand. So if you'd tried to IMPOSE them on a 2 week old, you'd have just tortured the child. But yes, introducing them gradually at 6 months or so tends to be how most people probably work - mainly because by six months you have worked out how to get up and have a shower AND manage the baby and so your life starts resembling something more like normality...

i've just been rereading GF and actually a LOT of what is said about her here is NOT what she says in the book! sh doesn't say any baby will sleep through the night... she doesn't say to leave them to cry... etc etc

Her advice has mellowed over the years so when lots of us first had babies, she was more hardcore

I do agree definitely that all babies are different. My baby seemed to thrive when we structured his day more (e.g. worked on regular nap-times, kind-of regular feed times etc). I know many babies who wouldn't necessarily respond to this particular kind of routine. And I take Georgimama's point about blind obedience being a huge problem. I think ANY thing that someone follows blindly can become a huge problem, be it attachment parenting, routines or whatever else. What I think is, if someone tries a routine (and gives it some time) & it doesn't work, and then feels a failure because it hasn't work, maybe the routine is not for them in the first place (it doesn't suit all people).

I suppose my main issue is that I myself was very prejudiced & actually misinformed about what having a routine actually involved... and I feel that opinions I read on MN contributed to that, so I'm wondering is many people have a slightly polarized or misinformed idea of what a routine actually involves? Anyway. I certainly didn't want to seem angry, sorry if I did...

Or maybe it's what Morningpaper says, that WHEN you impose a routine has a part in it? Although I suspect that's perhaps not true in the case of my boy, because actually my boy started out a relatively ok sleeper, & he got worse & worse and WORSE as the growth spurts came one after the other. I suspect that there are babies that never fall into a natural pattern or learn to sleep on their own & may need some help. And I also suspect that many parents who resort to controlled crying or other methods of sleep training do so (e.g. at 7-8 months etc) in part because they didn't create a sleeping routine beforehand, which actually might prevent sleeping problems. Anyway, those are the things I've discovered from my own experience, & my own (selective, as it should be) reading of GF. I take the point that not all babies are the same, and not all parents are the same. But I still would like to (politely) insist that it's true that very often on MN certain opinions are not....errrm, popular, for want of a better word. But it's ok, to each their own, as you all have said, it's just interesting, I find to have this discussion.

Only read OP. The ridiculous onslaught of parenting guides and stooopid programmes like Supernanny has to be counter balanced with the views of parents who have tried routines at a ridiculously early age and found them to be bollarks. I've nowt against routines per se - my 4 yr old DS has a routine of sorts - but all this 'getting a 12 week old to sleep through if you follow x, y and z' is a lot of absolute shite and only serves to make new parents feel bad about themselves if (when?0 it fails.

I think 'routines' and GF in particular do get a hard time on here. Having said that I strongly believe in routines and think as a parent, teaching my babies healthy sleep habits is very important.

My 4 babies have all been very different and still have very different personalities - but all of them were sleeping through from 12 weeks (the earliest sleep was 3-4 weeks). We don't have any issues with sleep or nap times and never have and I out this down to instilling routines and healthy sleep habits early on.

That being said - other people having different ways of doing things doesnt bother me at all.....I'm not the one up all night with screaming baby and not the one who has to contemplate CIO when the child is 2 because I'm so exhausted.

"I also suspect that many parents who resort to controlled crying or other methods of sleep training do so (e.g. at 7-8 months etc) in part because they didn't create a sleeping routine beforehand, which actually might prevent sleeping problems."

I do see your point but the problem is there is no way of knowing whether that would have been the case or not. My concern, as you can see from my previous posts, is not so much routines (everyone has a routine by a certain age, even if what that routine consists of is that baby is demand fed and carried in a sling - it's what happens. Having no rountine would be attachment parenting one day, GF the next, total neglect on the third day, Baby Whisperer the fourth etc!) but parenting books. If they work, great, but if they don't, please understand that the book is wrong, not you and your baby.

As my mum said about BW when DS was 2 weeks old, "he hasn't read the book."

As condescending as ever, Conniedescending.

and your point is?

yabu

and defensive

"I also suspect that many parents who resort to controlled crying or other methods of sleep training do so (e.g. at 7-8 months etc) in part because they didn't create a sleeping routine beforehand, which actually might prevent sleeping problems."

absolutely agree with this

I think it's completely wrong to look at your baby as a problem that needs solving.

Babies are individuals that have unique needs that their parents are supposed to meet. Sleeping through the night or when it is convenient for the parents are not on this list of needs.

Having your baby sleep for long periods is not the holy grail of parenting.

I have said this before but babies are little for such a short time - just look after them as they need to be looked after not as some impersonal baby book tells you to.

You and your baby will be much happier if you do.

What works for one baby and one parent does not necessarily work for another baby or another child. Simple as that really. Every person (whether parent or baby) is different and requires slightly different things.

If you find what works best for you at any given time - fab, great.

But just because it is right for you/your baby doesn't mean the same should eb the case for everyone.

GF gets negative press on MN for very specific reasons IMO.

Georgimama, agreed, if a particular style / book / parenting expert doesn't work for a particular parent, of course they should ditch it & try something else (or their own common sense). I'm against religions of all kind .

Do I need a point? You're being condescending. And superior. You have no idea whether your children's good habits are due to your efforts or natural inclination. Your smug tone is exactly what annoys me about parenting books.

My mother had three babies, she treated them all the same. One was textbook, one was horrific and one slept through from birth. She accepts neither credit nor blame for any of it - it was natural temprament.

mmy two slept through from 9 weeks and 7 weeks respectively

no routine just common sense,( ie letting them settle themselves as often as possible)

didn't last consitantly (illness etc) but they settled back in easy enough on most occasions.

I found strict routines too restrictive, I hate thinking 'oh I must be home between 11-1pm so baby can have his nap' instead he can have a nap a bit later or earlier if we happen to be out/have friends round.

"I also suspect that many parents who resort to controlled crying or other methods of sleep training do so (e.g. at 7-8 months etc) in part because they didn't create a sleeping routine beforehand, which actually might prevent sleeping problems."

I disagree with this.

"I have said this before but babies are little for such a short time - just look after them as they need to be looked after"

also agree with this - getting enough sleep (both parents and baby) is going to make all feel happier and healthier. A baby that has cried all night and slept all day is getting a rough deal.

meant to add; I don't think sleeping through is that important. what is important it that your baby is loved and happy and you enjoy being a parent.

For some that would mean strict routines, for others not.