Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Guest posts

Guest post: "I am an attachment parent because of my feminism, not in spite of it"

79 replies

MumsnetGuestPosts · 18/03/2015 15:14

There's a pervading myth about 'Attachment Parents': that we're mostly evangelical and exclusionary, and that we believe there is only one set of rules for decent, wholesome parents to follow. Parenting practises closely associated with AP (babywearing, breastfeeding, bedsharing) all provoke much tortured discussion, too.

Attachment parenting is often said to place huge demands on new mothers (‘how can you ever have a minute to yourself!’ friends have exclaimed) - but I am an attachment parent because I am a feminist, not in spite of it. You may disagree, but I believe that attachment parenting is the most genuinely feminist ‘parenting philosophy’ out there.

It puts the mother first. It recognises how important the role of mother is, and it encourages women to do what feels right for them. It's about getting motherhood truly recognised as an important sphere, not a relegation role or something people do when real life isn't happening. What's more, there's no checklist etched onto the clubhouse door - AP is for anyone who wants to follow their instincts when parenting.

There are those who argue that motherhood shouldn't be put on a pedestal: that the idea that a mother has a unique relationship with her child is regressive; that it puts too much pressure on women, or excludes fathers, or discourages co-parenting. It's not very trendy, when politicians are busy discussing how we can get more women back to work and share the 'burden' of childcare more evenly with men, to argue for an emphasis on the instinctive relationship between mother and child.

It is important, though, because the role of primary care-giver has been undervalued in society in recent history, to women's detriment. Motherhood is held up as the most virtuous and self-sacrificing of roles, but also the lowest in the ranks simultaneously. Our politicians tell us they want to get women back into the workplace after having children, but rather than championing ways for that to happen whilst also honouring the importance of the primary caregiver's role, we're told that cheaper childcare is the only way forward, devaluing our labour again.

Attachment parenting, then, is political. But I also think it's important for emotional wellbeing, too. New parents are continually told about what is dangerous and prohibited. In every aspect of parenting, mothers go against what feels right – and what's easiest for them, more importantly – because it's ‘not what the book said,’ and self-doubt abounds. I wish I'd had someone there, with my first child, to tell me, 'you're not a terrible mother because your child sleeps in your bed'.

Contrary to telling women what to do, attachment parenting takes no stance on how parents should feed, sleep with (or not), carry (or not) or birth their babies. Instead, it advocates for better information to be made available to all parents and parents-to-be about all of their options. It wants women to have the best experience possible in their mothering, and wants us to be free to listen to ourselves.

Of course, no sensible AP advocate would encourage a woman to go against good medical advice - but women, and their mothering instinct, should be given more authority. Whether it's in labour or in the first weeks after birth, women should be treated with dignity - like people who know their own bodies, instead of just observers in their bodies’ processes.

Attachment parenting does what society doesn't: it tells women to take their time in easing into motherhood, to make their children’s infancy as relaxed as possible (for them and for their kids) and to just – if possible – take some time out. This doesn't necessarily mean time away from a beloved career or from your friends - it means just going easy on yourself, letting your body do its thing and making room to discover the new little person in your life without fear about doing this or that right.

Mothers matter – whether they are at home or at work full time outside of the home, whether they breastfeed, or co-sleep or babywear or none of the above. No one needs to prove themselves ‘mum enough’ at any point to make parent-child attachment at the forefront of their parenting.

OP posts:
26Point2Miles · 18/03/2015 21:53

*blogger not logger!

WhoKnowsWhereTheTimeGoes · 18/03/2015 21:53

If anything, AP appears to be designed to create significant inequality for women, the opposite of feminism. It seems to be to just be playing right into the hands of those who think there is no place for women in the workplace and that parenting should be solely the mother's role, a retrograde step IMO.

LonnyVonnyWilsonFrickett · 18/03/2015 21:53

I get you MI. I'm a feminist having a gin, therefore having a gin is a feminist act... Clearly it's not. Although it is very nice...

Nerf · 18/03/2015 21:56

Mintyy I deleted my response to Emma Freud because it was quite rude. So almost two.

So

houseofnerds · 18/03/2015 22:29

mothering 'instinct'?
Oh dear. Bad place to start, Chrissy.
'Puts the mother first'? Um, no actually it doesn't.
Does AP promote equality, ie feminism? Um. No. It doesn't. It promotes mothering being the primary caregiving role, in line with cultural expectations about care-giving of any sort being women's work. Poorly paid women's work, as you note.

That said, of course, AP is just another childrearing philosophy (non-judgemental my arse) and parents are free to pick and choose, to the extent that they are prepared to indulge the displeasure of any APers they meet along the way if they prefer other routes.

I used some AP stuff with mine, and I am a feminist. I would not, however, attempt to conflate the two to salve my own conscience about whether I was being a crap feminist by my actions.

Sometimes, it isn't feminist. And feminists still do it, because something, anything, has to be easier than attempting to instil routine into a newborn.

Please do continue to raise your child however you please, but please, no more claptrap about AP being inherently feminist. There is nothing wrong with AP if it suits you.

MajesticWhine · 18/03/2015 22:56

I don't generally mind the guest posts. They at least get people thinking and talking about (usually) an interesting topic. But, there is a book by the OP on this topic so I wonder if there is a commercial angle for mumsnet?

Breadwidow · 18/03/2015 23:28

I think it kinda depends on your definition of AP. Personally I hate the label, though in many ways I am an AP type parent, mainly cos I fell into ways that felt right and suited my family, though I do find myself agreeing with some AP philosophy. I'm and a feminist and I'm lucky that my husband is a true feminist too and has been a stay at home dad for some time - it's made sense for us financially & means our home is more equal than many I know. AnywY my point, is AP and feminism can go together . . . Especially if you co parent with your partner (including dad taking an active role in enabling breast feeding). I also agree with the guest post that I think an important part of feminism is rejecting / standing up to patriarchal (sp?) structures that for me include the way our working lives are structured in a way that doesn't not suit many families, the removal of children from the public sphere and a 'masculine' attributes being favoured over the 'feminine' etc - for me feminism is not about women being enabled to get ahead in a man's world but about women working to change that world so it's better for everyone, so including children. And in a way that does link to the AP philosophy. I don't think I've made myself very clear . . .

FatSwan · 19/03/2015 00:22

After 6 years old, isn't all parenting the same? Teach them right from wrong and love and house them?

As for the feminist aspect-I disagree.
Recognizing a working woman as a mother first would very likely be grounds for discrimination.

houseofnerds · 19/03/2015 00:46

Bread - absolutely, but you are only reading that context (of equality by removing gendered attributes) because you happen to be AP with a sahd. I have never met another AP family where that happens. So, grand. It's great that you are able to tie the threads together in your own context. But the OP uses 'mothering' specifically. There's no sahd. There's no fathering instinct. Just a celebration of what women are supposed to feel and do. There's no room for those women who don't recognise this 'instinct' or who seek to defy it at as a cultural diktat.

If it helps, I feel exactly the same way about ecriture feminine. 'This is how women should write'.

Anything that genders instincts and behaviours, rather than unifying or accepting a raft of them, is by definition not equality. It's cultural dictatorship.

houseofnerds · 19/03/2015 00:50

I don't think I'm being clear either. I don't subscribe to the version of 'feminism' where value is measured by traits currently gendered as masculine. No ball breaking necessary. Fathers need to be as free to parent as mothers. Mothers need to be as free to work as fathers.

Attributes that are gendered need to be broken down as individual choices.

This article seeks to maintain the status quo by reinforcing the woman as carer norm.
Blee.

Seshata · 19/03/2015 01:53

The underlying philosophy of attachment parenting is focused on the baby's needs and what is thought to be best for the child. It's not about feminism or empowering mothers.

Yes, some women do find AP useful and even empowering. But that doesn't make it inherently feminist.

Feminism is about ending the systematic gender discrimination and inequality within our society- including the idea that parenting is primarily a woman's responsibility. AP doesn't do this, and (as far as I'm aware) doesn't claim to. AP isn't supposed to be about dismantling the patriarchy. That's fine. Things can be valuable to people (including feminists) without being feminist.

FlorisApple · 19/03/2015 05:11

I agree with BreadWidow. I think as feminists, which I would label myself as, if not an as an AP practitioner, although I have practiced many of the tenets, we should be so very wary of how much feminism has been coopted by capitalism. It seems to me it is constantly equated with "women working." I do bloody work, and I work bloody hard; at a fulfilling, challenging and stimulating job looking after my kids in the home. More and more, that labour seems absolutely invisible to everyone, and the only validated labour is in the paid workforce. The constant push to "get women back to work" by politicians, has little to do with them prioritising womens' needs and desires, and mostly to do with them balancing the books. Many women who talk about going back to work as empowering have highly-paid, stimulating, jobs, which is great. But what about the many of us who had insecure, boring, unstable, shit jobs; are they also just as empowering and fulfilling as looking after children in the home?

Since I am a feminist, I don't in any way think that this labour in the home needs to be done by women exclusively, but I do value that someone has to do it. If I sent my kids to nursery, the childcare would largely be done by a low-paid female workforce, and I don't understand how that is somehow seen as more feminist than me doing the same labour at home. To me, AP is about valuing this labour as important, especially in the early years - I don't think it means women can never go back to paid employment. On that front, I think employers should take some of the flak for the stupid myth that you can't take a few years off then get back in, as somehow you will be out of touch. That is what many of our feminist mothers did in the 70s and 80s, but now it seems to have become an all or nothing decision.

BackCrackAndNappySack · 19/03/2015 05:54

I don't see how you can practice proper attachment parenting yet still go back to work before the child is about three, or even leave the child with anyone else for more than a hour or two. For that reason alone it is not terribly conducive with feminism and choice, is it?

BackCrackAndNappySack · 19/03/2015 05:56

I have found most of the Guest Posts to be a self-absorbed load of rubbish to be honest.

TheHoneyBadger · 19/03/2015 06:53

agree with so much of what has been written in response to the 'article'.

the same issues continue into communities who see themselves as 'unschoolers' or practising consensual parenting etc. it is discussed as if it was a parenting thing or a family thing but rarely is there any mention of the father who like someone else mentioned seems to just conveniently pay the mortgage to allow for this total submersion into ones whole identity and life revolving around being a mother.

i've seen so called APs (in reality it is mothering not parenting) and unschoolers/home educators etc berate single mothers because they should be able to find a way to do it - it is as if they don't even see the gender and economic issues involved in their lifestyle to the point that it doesn't occur to them that someone does actually have to pay for the food in the cupboard and the clothes on a child's back. i've also seen women be lectured for not enjoying cleaning up after their kids or wanting their kids to help clean up because it should be an act of love to do it for them so rather than give them advice on how to achieve a balance that maintains their health and needs they essentially get told to further subsume their needs and forget their own health.

i also dislike the implication that either you're a self labelled attachment parent or somehow you're a cold unattached parent who leaves your child in a box at the end of the garden Confused

it also tends, imo, to overlook that all children are different rather than homogenous blobs who want to be worn.

and yes yes yes to parenting and childhood being about so much more than the first year or two of babyhood ffs. i honestly believe AP and all of these so called parenting styles are actually more to do with identity crisis and self esteem than parenting. if you are genuinely secure in how you are looking after your baby and leading your life you don't need a bloody label and rule book and to try to convert others. you get on with it.

LowryFan · 19/03/2015 07:43

Aren't we all guest posters really?

26Point2Miles · 19/03/2015 07:56

Well no lowry we aren't...... Do you posts get stickied at the top of the page for a week? It's like MN are holding them up as being 'ideal' but it's all very 'look at me' and as a pp said, self absorbed

SolomanDaisy · 19/03/2015 08:11

The attachment parenting 'bible', by Dr Sears, has a big section on combining ap with returning to work, choosing childcare etc.. And it was initially aimed at the American market, so is talking about returning to work as early as six weeks. It is also very much not just aimed at mothers, given that he was a father who practiced ap himself.

I am a feminist and all my parenting inclinations were naturally ap. I found having a baby brought a profound change in h ow I viewed feminism. It was the first time I genuinely felt that connection of being part of a community where many of the experiences were unique to women. I also felt extremely pissed off with people denying there is any difference between mothers and fathers and with people describing ap as anti-feminist. There are versions of ap which can be coopted by misogynists, but it is also an approach that can be empowering and which makes it clear how valuable the non economically productive work of caring for a baby is.

cestlavielife · 19/03/2015 09:44

any philosophy which claims it is the "only one" stands to guilt trip insecure parents...by subscribing to a philosophy, labeling what you do and declaring it thus you are piling on angst on the person who is then told they are terrible parent for not co-sleeping. instinct should allow for whichever way works. co-sleeping/not co-sleeping. it's not one or the other... but AP philosophy sets rigid requirements. you must do this... or we frown upon you.

and yes the older child/teen etc part of parenting can be far more difficult than meeting the primal needs of a newborn which is to be fed, loved, kept clean etc (which ever way you choose to do that - probably sometimes attached, sometimes not. sometimes sharing with the father or other caregivers or family...it's not just about the mother).

motherinferior · 19/03/2015 10:23

Pretty well every feminist enterprise, from demands for a decent education on, has been countered by "your destiny is to be a Mother: focus instead on being Good Mother: leave the world outside hearth and home to the men".

Personally, bugger the hearth and home.

Whoishillgirl · 19/03/2015 11:51

I don't really get this criticism of the term 'mothering instinct'. There is a mothering instinct. And a fathering instinct. We are social mammals and an awful lot of our emotions and behaviours are instinctive. Babies and young children are such bloody hard work that we'd leave them on hills for the wolves without powerful evolved instincts pulling us in another direction. I get it is annoying that people bang on endlessly about mothering rather than parenting instincts but in this case OP was talking about her personal experience of being a mother IMO so the term was understandable.
My problem with AP is that it is kinda pseudo scientific, it seems to use research into the effects of truly awfully neglected children and extrapolate wildly from that to make parents think they are fucking over their kids for life if they don't follow certain practises.

LonnyVonnyWilsonFrickett · 19/03/2015 12:16

Floris I absolutely agree that capitalism has de-prioritised the work people/parents do in the home, and as this work tends to be done by women there's a clear feminist issue there.

Where feminism meets class (in a loose sense as indicated by the type of paid work) meets capitalism is (I think) intersectionality, which is as far as my theoretical knowledge goes - but all these things are linked. If someone else could get on with overthrowing capitalism, it would save a ton of time overthrowing the patriarchy, as the two things are inextricably linked - to me, in any case.

I don't think anyone's saying the labour is unimportant. But equally a parent could be at home doing the labour in a very different way and that wouldn't make it any less valuable than doing it in an AP way.

Bumpsadaisie · 19/03/2015 12:24

FWIW I think "attachment" parenting really just means "parenting the baby in a responsive with an understanding of its attachment needs". I am not sure it quite means what the author of this post says i.e. "taking motherhood easily" although of course if you are sensitive to children's needs and prioritise them, it does tend to slow down the pace.

It is perfectly possible to be a sling wearing lentil weaving hippie and be totally self absorbed/narcissistic and unable to really respond to the baby emotionally. (Note I am not saying this is often true merely that I can imagine a situation where a mother is so preoccupied with her own agenda she is not very responsive to the child at all, and perhaps is even smothering and controlling).

Likewise you could be a warm calm gentle mother who is good at responding emotionally to the baby, comforting it and taking on its distress and helping it to manage its feelings, without using a sling or co-sleeping.

Different babies are different, my eldest was a velcro one and needed a sling for the first three months and howled if you put her down. My second was happy as larry gurgling in his cot and we used a sling far less for him. They were both BF on demand. I do think the latter can be tricky for mums in one sense, as you are always on call, but it has other benefits as I think it actually forces you to sit down and connect with the baby and of course there is the oxytocin too. But I don't see why you couldn't bottle feed and be an attachment parent.

I would describe us as attachment parents, in the sense that in their infancy we expected to respond to and fit in with the children's needs as babies rather than expecting them to fit in with us and our needs.

Obviously as you grow from parenting a tiny baby to parenting a preschooler you gradually expect them to fit in a bit more, otherwise you end up with a spoilt brat. A three year old is old enough to learn that there are limits and they can't have what they want immediately all the time. But a tiny infant has no understanding of time and their needs are much more urgent. Being responsive doesn't mean being permissive or failing to set boundaries. But we do keep in mind our children's attachment needs. If they are upset about being left at nursery for example we think very carefully about just walking off and leaving them whereas I do think some parents think that this is something you just have to get through.

My youngest is 3.5 and has just had a wobbly phase being left at nursery. My instinct is that he is settled in enough now and old enough to manage a bit of distress at separation, so I did leave him recently with him crying - but I was confident he was with someone he loved (his teacher) and had an arrangement with her that if he was distressed for any length of time she would contact me.

Breadwidow · 19/03/2015 20:30

Thanks Solomon and floris for putting what I meant far more clearly and eloquently . . .

I agree my position is unusual but for me AP and feminism can go together. I would agree with those who had a problem with the OP's reference to mothering and it's association of AP with the heat care being only from the mother that obviously can get away with feminism, however thats not my interpretation of AP. Clearly breastfeeding is usually an important part of AP but for me that can be compatible with feminism as its about ensuring breastfeeding can be established - in this is helpful of the father gets actively involved and like floris puts about placing value on work which can only be done by women. However bf is the only part of being an AP parent that cannot be done by dad - it's about instinctive child led parenting delivered by all care givers, and I don't think it also means sacrificing all for the child. There's a big diff between sleep training and letting the child totally rule everything . . . I think anyway. Feminism's biggest enemy in my view is capitalism, not AP

Breadwidow · 19/03/2015 20:48

Sorry awful typos in above - I mean AP can get in the way of feminism if you insist that most of the APing has to be done by the mother but I don't interpret AP this way

Swipe left for the next trending thread