Leaving babies to cry can result in "Shutdown Syndrome"

[morningpaper]

I read this on Dr. Sears and thought it was very interesting.
----------
THE SHUTDOWN SYNDROME
Throughout our 30 years of working with parents and babies, we have grown to appreciate the correlation between how well children thrive (emotionally and physically) and the style of parenting they receive.

"You're spoiling that baby!" First-time parents Linda and Norm brought their four-month-old high-need baby, Heather, into my office for consultation because Heather had stopped growing. Heather had previously been a happy baby, thriving on a full dose of attachment parenting. She was carried many hours a day in a baby sling, her cries were given a prompt and nurturant response, she was breastfed on cue, and she was literally in physical touch with one of her parents most of the day. The whole family was thriving and this style of parenting was working for them. Well-meaning friends convinced these parents that they were spoiling their baby, that she was manipulating them, and that Heather would grow up to be a clingy, dependent child.

Parents lost trust. Like many first-time parents, Norm and Linda lost confidence in what they were doing and yielded to the peer pressure of adopting a more restrained and distant style of parenting. They let Heather cry herself to sleep, scheduled her feedings, and for fear of spoiling, they didn't carry her as much. Over the next two months Heather went from being happy and interactive to sad and withdrawn. Her weight leveled off, and she went from the top of the growth chart to the bottom. Heather was no longer thriving, and neither were her parents.

Baby lost trust. After two months of no growth, Heather was labeled by her doctor "failure to thrive" and was about to undergo an extensive medical exam. When the parents consulted me, I diagnosed the shutdown syndrome. I explained that Heather had been thriving because of their responsive style of parenting. Because of their parenting, Heather had trusted that her needs would be met and her overall physiology had been organized. In thinking they were doing the best for their infant, these parents let themselves be persuaded into another style of parenting. They unknowingly pulled the attachment plug on Heather, and the connection that had caused her to thrive was gone. A sort of baby depression resulted, and her physiologic systems slowed down. I advised the parents to return to their previous high-touch, attachment style of parenting?to carry her a lot, breastfeed on cue, and respond sensitively to her cries by day and night. Within a month Heather was again thriving.

Babies thrive when nurtured. We believe every baby has a critical level of need for touch and nurturing in order to thrive. (Thriving means not just getting bigger, but growing to one's potential, physically and emotionally.) We believe that babies have the ability to teach their parents what level of parenting they need. It's up to the parents to listen, and it's up to professionals to support the parents' confidence and not undermine it by advising a more distant style of parenting, such as "let your baby cry-it-out" or "you've got to put him down more." Only the baby knows his or her level of need; and the parents are the ones that are best able to read their baby's language.

Babies who are "trained" not to express their needs may appear to be docile, compliant, or "good" babies. Yet, these babies could be depressed babies who are shutting down the expression of their needs. They may become children who don't speak up to get their needs met and eventually become the highest-need adults.
----------

margo, I would expand that....there is not jsut as many parenting styles as parents but as children
What I mean is, that even as a parent, I parent all mine different, as thery are so different with different needs...

Sorry, I got sidetracked on another thread.

I completely agree with Dr. Sears' quote in BabiesE's post
and so does dw. We also agree with sleep training which in our dd's case certainly involved tears.

Having listened very carefully to our dd we came to the conclusion
that the crying was neither lack of attachement nor hunger nor any other
need that has to be met in order for her to thrive.

She was angrily protesting about us changing a habit.
That's all it was.

And we know because we do buy into the AP idea that you have to genuinely
try and understand this little person that you have brought into the world.

So the response - soothing her at intervals i.e. controlled crying -
was appropriate.

Is that a decent explanation, BabiesEverywhere?
By the way, good blog!

i wish i had never tried cc.

my eldest is quite needy, and spent most of my time, cold on the floor of her bedroom, trying to comfort her.

with my other two, bf for ages, slept in our bed and even my hubby, (who was very dubious) didn't complain!!

with my youngest (sling, bf, slept in our bed), i never heard her cry for the first six months.

i think you simply can't 'spoil' a baby. a toddler who can understand 'later', 'after dinner', 'next time' can be spoilt.

a baby has needs, not wants.

DaddyJ, you have captured my thoughts on this. Thank you.

DaddyJ..Again I agree with what you say but I don't feel you are doing CIO.

You are responding appropriately to your child whilst still nighttime parenting. You are ensuring that all her needs are met and giving her space to settle herself.

i.e. Linky Link
3. Respond appropriately. You don't have to pick up a seven-month-old baby as quickly as a seven-day-old baby. In the early weeks of cue-response rehearsals, respond intuitively and quickly to each cry. As you and your baby become better communicators, you ? and only you ? will know whether a cry is a "red alert come now" cry or one that merits a more delayed response.

Thanks for the compliment on my blog

But this is where the labelling comes in. It can't be CIO because it sounds quite acceptable and we acceptable people don't do CIO...

Let's put that one to bed immediately then:

CIO in the classic sense of sleep training a baby by
simply letting him cry for hours in a dark room or in the
garden is a really blunt and unnecessarily stressful method.

Why would you want to do that to another human being, let alone
someone you love so completely?

margoandjerry, I rejoice every time I see your posts on threads like this
I can assure you have not done CIO!
There have been occasions where I have done exactly the same
thing because it was clear my presence in the room was actually distracting dd.

But what I read in the book on this does not describe what you are describing.

I only mention the book because I happen to have read it - not because I became a devotee of its teachings. It did have helpful things to say though. Maybe I am remembering it wrong but the main principles were all about self-settling which is actually about giving a child confidence and it seemed very thoughtful to me.

I think, often people confuse CIO and CC....and that sort of smudges the borders, etc...

indeed CIO is inhumane....CC is often put into the same category, whilst it is nothing to do with it...

Gotcha. I think the book was referencing going in and out so was prob CC not CIO?

But I really can't remember. I was just lucky to have a sleepy girl.

margo which book (sorry you probably emntioned the title before...but well...sort of try to read fast)
Reason I am asking is, I might be able to tell you which technique it's describibng as I have read so many different books, lol

This thread had me all confused!

margo, you mean Dr. Ferber's book, don't you?
I just clicked on BE's link called CIO and found much-maligned Dick!

BabiesE, you have got the wrong end of the stick
DrF's book is very clear about wanting to present an alternative to CIO!

DrF was critical of CIO because it is very stressful for all involved
and hence he 'invented' this concept of allowing protest but
keeping the lines of communication open, soothing baby in the process.

And he called it Controlled Crying (CC).

I read the Ferber one - sort of by accident actually as my sister was struggling with her children's bedwetting and it has stuff on that. I read it even though my daughter never had any trouble sleeping (she was prem) because it seemed to have a lot of sense in it about self-soothing.

Also a friend who had a very physically disabled child recommended it because her daughter had never gone to sleep on her own because she had so much medical paraphernalia to deal with in the early days that her sleep routine was connected with having people around. So by the time the child was five-ish and not medically dependent anymore, she was still struggling to sleep through because every time she woke up in the night she needed a parent to help her go back to sleep. The bit I found helpful in the book was that it explains that everyone wakes up 10-20 times in the night but you just don't notice because you roll over and go back to sleep. By helping the child to learn to put themselves to sleep at the start of the night you teach them that skill for the rest of the night.

I found that really helpful and not the demonic practice that seems to be described on here!

Thanks DaddyJ for shedding some light on this! I was confused too but yes, Ferber is CC

What I consider CIO and CC is when the following things are encouraged:-

(the following is just my unqualified opinion not from any particular books etc)

: The baby is left crying for a set amount of time with no flexibility to return early to meet any upcoming need.i.e. When the parent is told they leave the child crying for 5 minutes and then return.

: When on return to the babies room, the child is neither picked up, feed or changed, spoken to, no eye contact. For the same reason as above, the child may 'need' one of any of the above things.

: I also include any case where the child is left to sobbing uncontrollable, being sick, head banging, left to cry for hours or displaying any other sign of stress.

These to me are CIO/CC cases and these are the ones I do not feel are compatible with secure attached parenting.

Oh yes, I have read Ferbers Book...an older version though, where he still recommends it even for younger Baby's...but I am really pleased that in newer versions he does make it clear that it is not a method to be used on a child younger then 6 month, and I think he even goes as afar as saying preferable it shyouldbn't be done till 9 month (but I may have just dreamed that, lol)

And yes Ferber is an advocate of CC not CIO...and whilst he outlines a certain "timetable" he does, even in the old version I had, make clear that you could time it much closer, if you feel the given time is to much, etc...

Ferber doesn't say anything about not comforting...he does say to keep your behaviour level, i.e. to go through the smae rooutine and depart wiht the same words...I assume to reduce confusing a child...I think, CC, if doesn correctly and persistet with (i.e. not jsut tried for a while then given up on) it cna be a tool...however, if it is done for a little bit or one night and then not, and then again...that is when a child will get confused and insecure....

Hmm, crossed posted with DaddyJ.

I am interested in the difference between CIO and CC.

I know Dr Feber recanted his stance on night parenting and a couple of years ago has published a new book with his new nighttime parenting policies.

But as I haven't read either I have only got quotes online to go off.

So is original book CIO and new book CC ?

See this "I also include any case where the child is left to sobbing uncontrollable, being sick, head banging, left to cry for hours or displaying any other sign of stress" is plainly not what anyone is advocating.

This is just awful. I really don't think there are many people advocating leaving your child to cry for hours or until it's sick.

This is why the polarising isn't helping. I don't do AP but I don't do the above either!

I think we should recall that some of the parenting advice is aimed at the very, very troubled, disordered parents with drink or drug problems who are struggling to get through life. Their version of CC would be extreme and awful. But for normal people, it's just another parenting technique.

nope, Ferber was always for CC...it was sometimes called Ferberising...

as far as I am aware the only thing he did change was the age recommendation...but I have not read the newer book...so...there might be some other changes of course.

CIO means Cry-it-out...which means basically you put your Baby down and let them scream until they are that exhausted they fall asleep...no going in and reassuring at any time

3andnogore, if you can find me the bit where
he says it should not be done before 6 months
I will send you a bunch of virtual flowers!

I have heard this unconfirmed rumour so many times on MN
that in the end I read the book myself.

I found one reference to 5-6 months but the context was that they are ready to sleep through by then.
Ironically, a statement we would have not agree with (dd was ready at 7 months).

margo, glad that's resolved.
I should have posted on a previous thread
where I noticed BabiesE making Ferber the
inventor of CIO.
Didn't have my tin hat handy, though,
so left it.

"Babies who are "trained" not to express their needs may appear to be docile, compliant, or "good" babies. Yet, these babies could be depressed "

Makes me glad I never had any 'good' babies then. First time ever.

Daddy..i have not read the new version of the book,. like i said, but was told that he changed his recommendations...and have read that soemwhere, too...hm..can't rememebr where...must go out now....NCT Playdate

DaddyJ, I am also happy to be corrected when I posted incorrect information, especially if that person has access to information I haven't got. As I said I have never read either book.