To be wary of 'baby led' or 'child led' as concepts?

[Chil1234]

It's been gathering ground, I've noticed The fashion to preface new trendy parenting practices with the words 'child led' or 'baby led'. Does it make anyone else feel uncomfortable?

If we're delegating leadership to our children rather than the adults setting the agenda what does that say about modern parenting? And should we be surprised if in future, all of these kids grow up expecting mum and dad to meekly trot along behind, obeying their every whim?

cory, i think the general gist is that it's not a good idea to 'stop battles' anyway. current thinking is that battles in the home (and crucially their resolution) are just another part of preparing kids for life in the real world. particularly hormone-fuelled teen battles that rage from nowhere, we are to comfort ourselves that our kids are making us teach them conflict resolution...

Attachment theory is supported by considerable evidence and suggests that children of parents who are responsive and sensitive to their needs as babies and young children are likely to have improved confidence and behaviour in later life.

Cory is absolutely right. It's about building trust and confidence. If your children have grown up knowing you will always communicate with them, respond to their needs and consider their feelings, they will hopefully trust and respect your parenting when they are older as they know you won't pull the rug out from under them and suddenly reveal some big decision you and your husband have come up with that changes their lives.

It's also a basic management technique - involve people in decision-making and they will invest personally in it. They will be more likely to work with you and work positively than if you foist something upon them.

As far as I can tell baby-led or child-led just mean paying attention and noticing the childs level of capability rather then plowing on or getting stressed by a particular time table.

It doesn't mean doing whatever the child want's. One of the things you need to be paying attention to is the child's ability to reason. My 2 1/3 year old sometimes wants to wear her shoes on the wrong feet - fair enough - if she gets uncomfortable we can change them round. She wanted ice cream for breakfast this morning - no.

OP, I can see where you're coming from but I don't think child-led = child in charge. To be honest without letting DS lead the way sometimes I would have had no idea of what to do with him! But that doesn't mean he is undisciplined or spoilt. I think some parents don't apply any common sense and equate child led concepts with letting children do whatever they want, which is, of course, insanity!

I did BLW with him (after starting with purees) and it was so much easier - I could eat my own dinner while it was hot!! He's 16 months and eats everything (and I do mean everything) and he's just started using a spoon, simply by copying me. I don't see any benefit to trying to enforce any other method upon him.

In terms of his routine, he's led it in the sense that we've discovered what works for him, but he also responds to predictability so it's been a compromise. At bedtime for example - I put him to bed when he's tired, not necessarily at a set time, although it does tend to be fairly consistent. But we have a set routine and he doesn't get pandered to if he fusses unless he's ill.

As long as children are taught right from wrong, manners, social skills etc. and parents take the lead in terms of discipline and safety, I can't see the problem in letting them show you when they're ready for things.

again, the fact that someone has fed puree (which we all did 10-15 years ago) does not mean that they have therefore kept up a strict schedule of breastfeeding their children to a 4 hour schedule and spanking them as toddlers and managing their every move through behaviour charts

it's a non sequitur

Puree is just a food. It doesn't have to be a philosophy. I fed dd baby rice and purees and she loved them. Also have photos of 8mo dd stuffing herself with bouef bourgignon at her christening. And for the record, I think pureed apricots are very nice.

Aitch, your child then is the one with greater knowledge, experience and intelligence? Actually, that seems about right.
I did mention the little factoid about 21st century but again, things might have not changed much under your particular rock.

Pip pip....

no, rollmops, you are missing the point, i don't subscribe to your theory at all re the one with the most intelligence being in charge.

i'm definitely in charge in my house, but i sincerely hope i'm not the most intelligent person here.

totally, cory. it shouldn't be one way or the highway, that would be ridiculous.

Bound babies up on boards?? eh? What the feck is that about??

CarmenSanDiego Fri 18-Jun-10 09:20:10

"Cory is absolutely right. It's about building trust and confidence. If your children have grown up knowing you will always communicate with them, respond to their needs and consider their feelings, they will hopefully trust and respect your parenting when they are older as they know you won't pull the rug out from under them and suddenly reveal some big decision you and your husband have come up with that changes their lives."

Sorry, I never said I was not prepared to take big decisions that affect their lives without letting them have an input? Do you really think my nervous and angry dd would have agreed to the operation that means she can now walk? No, she would not, at least not for several years. If I had waited until she was ready to take that decision, we would have missed the slot and it would have been too late. I told her that you will have this operation and you will be fine. It reassured her to know that she didn't actually have to make that decision.

My mother did not force me to go to the optician's when my lazy eye was discovered (this is the one time she did fail to assert reasoned authority- I do not know why). The result is that I have had endless trouble as an adult, and there are still important things I cannot do, because it is too late. This was not a decision in which I should have had any input whatsoever! My thinking was wholly decided by vanity (I thought I would look ugy in glassses). I had no concept of myself ever being middle aged and (say) needing to drive a car. No reasoning would have convinced me. I should have been taken by the hand and made to see that optician.

So, no I do not agree with never deciding over their heads.

What I do think is that this gets easier if you have established trust by being reasonable at other times. Not laissez-faire, just reasonable.

I think that children who are not shown respect or given some small control in their early lives will have difficulties in their later lives setting their own boundaries. Of course it is all about guiding them and supporting them not just standing by while they head-butt, but any small amount of research into this area would have told you that. 'It didn't do my children any harm' really isn't a convincing argument mumblechum, because lots of very messed up people say that (I'm not saying your children are by the way, just that it's not an argument).

Just because they lead you don't HAVE to follow, or let them go any further. But at least you know where they want to go.

Kids have different temperaments, so do parents. Each family does what suits it and its members.
The idea that one way is 'better' than the other, completely disregards the millions of variables involved.

You an't say it is 'better' for a child to be able to decide what he eats. Because that child might be very conservative and need more help. Or the parent might have particular anxiety around the subject. Or the family might be skint and its a case of get what your given.

Nor can you say, it's better for the parent to be in charge. Depends on the parent really,no?

Cory, yes, I'm sorry if I was unclear.

It's more the 'Your father and I have decided we're moving to Japan/you're going to boarding school' type of things I'm talking about. Things that have been decided without any sort of discussion or consultation. I think children deserve some warning and opportunity to give input before things become a fait accompli, even if it ultimately has to be done.

The parent has the benefit of long term perspective and experience. But there are ways and ways of doing things. There's a big difference between launching a decision on them out of the blue or as you say, saying "This NEEDS to happen, but it will be ok. How do you feel about it and what can we do to make it work?"

To sum up:-

Ideologies are for cunts.

"...I think children deserve some warning and opportunity to give input before things become a fait accompli, even if it ultimately has to be done..." - surely this is the norm in any loving family and has absolutely nothing to do with BL-anything?!

so nobody, not even the OP read my link then.

no, BLW is not cutting edge science. it is wot my mum did with me 40 yrs ago in the the bbackwaters of Empire. BabyGurus and jars of purees never reached our shores.

Actually I think the whole child led thing is a reaction to the persistent and harsh criticisms of mothers, implicit and explicit over the last forty years. Working mothers! Shock horror! No wonder their children aren't reaching their age appropriate goals let's SHAME 'EM!

What's the result, some mothers will reject the authoritarian approach and say 'you know, actually my child is doing things at his own speed, all kids are different and we are focusing on who's important - my child'.

Which makes all the mums who followed accepted wisdom feel a bit daft (esp. if it works) and so they howl their approbation.

Or in other words - I agree with thecoalitionneedsme.

"Child led" is not about delegating leadership. That is an incorrect definition.

"Child led" means that as a parent (or other educator) you take your cues from the child as to when he/she is ready for the next developmental step/skill by observing him/her very closely.

Well, Bonsoir, if that's the case then surely most parents do it naturally, why the need of yet another label?

I've already summed up, you can all talk about something else now.

Thatbuzzingnoize From what I have understood BLW is a way of going back to a time when Drs were not imposing their practises on Mums. Four hourly brestfeeding which we all know depletes your milk supply meaning you will have to move onto formula which wasn't very nutritious so you had to wean early as the babies were all losing weight.
Of course with all things manufacturers found a way to make money so developed 'baby food' pureed food which is all a 3-4 month old can manage. One mum uses it baby likes it and soon all her friends and family are using it and soon the next generstion is using it as well.
I fed my first two on pureed home-cooked food as was the norm but with no3 heard of BLW realised it fitted withthe way I wanted to feed my child and never looked back. DC3(21months) loves her food and will happily eat just about anything, even salad leaves. She is also good with cutlery and able to determine her own portion size.

Rollmops - I can assure you, Rollmops, that "most parents" do not do it naturally. Knowing how to do it is a very advanced skill; "most parents" find it a lot easier to keep to a pre-ordained timetable.

Most parents are way to concerned about following guidelines and worrying about what Mrs X's little boy next door is doing to take the child's cue. Hence so many people finding potty training a nightmare instead of a one or two day process with minimal problems and stress. Or fighting a losing battle with a baby and a spoonful of baby rice instead of letting the child nibble on bits when the rest of the family are eating.