Controlled Crying - stress levels stay high even when babies have learned to settle themselves.

[Codandchops]

OMG!!!

Even worse is that I could not bear to leave my DS as a baby so used to sit in the room and re-settle him every 5 mins. How shit is that? He could see me for 5 mins at a time not comforting him (even though after every 5 mins I did comfort him).

Have always felt an irrational guilt about DS's autism and wonder if I made things worse .

Need to read the research and look at numbers involved.

I don't have the time to read 526 posts, but has anyone mentioned yet that this study is about crying it out and NOT about controlled crying?

"Researchers measured the length of time they cried over successive nights, as their mothers waited in a nearby room."

Because, clearly, there is nothing "controlled" about sitting in the next room while your baby cries himself to sleep, however long that takes.

Good point cote - the thread is about controlled crying whilst the study is about CIO. I have to say I have no idea about CC and was under the impression it is more or less the same (not having ever done CC). COuld you perhaps summarise the main difference, cote?

I've read the actual journal article, not a Daily Mail overview . It can be found here (though maybe not everyone will have access to the full text, I have it via work).

From what I understand they measured the babies (and mothers) cortisol levels both at the beginning, and during, the sleep training program. The main finding was that these levels were similar (or 'yoked' as they call it)at the start, but as the program went on the mothers' levels declined but the babies' stayed the same, despite them learning to 'self-settle' and crying less, it is this 'loss of synchrony' that the paper reports on.

So the lack of control group is fine from that point of view (though it would have been interesting to have it). But the way this story has been reported in the media and discussed on here makes it out to be something more than it is, and suggests conclusions that just cannot be reliably drawn from this particular study.

Agree to with Cote these findings relate to a specific sleep training program (described below) done in a hospital setting, which probably doesn't bear much resemblance to the 'controlled crying' methods many parents here are using or have used at home. It's certainly not the same as the OP did with her baby, for example (re-settling every 5 minutes).

At all transitions to sleep, nurses and mothers would attend to preparing infants for transition to sleep by changing, feeding, and other naptime or bedtime activities. Following these activities, infants were placed to sleep in their own crib in a room separate from their mothers. Once placed in the crib for sleeping, infants were required to self-sooth and self-settle. Although mothers were present on the Unit and were aware of their infants' transition to sleep, inclusive of any signaling of distress during self-settling, mothers did not attend to infants' nighttime care while infants were learning to self-settle.

CC essentially involves frequent returns for reassurance. Exactly how frequent varies considerably, but the length between visits normally increases. It might also involve sitting in the baby's room and patting for reassurance at intervals.
Richard Ferber has a table that goes up to 45 minutes between visits which I think is just wrong. I can't believe anyone would think that a plan that involves a young child crying for two hours in a single evening is a good idea.
I would defend a very small amount of CC though - once the child is old enough that you can distinguish between angry "I'm knackered but I don't want to sleep" crying and bereft "where's my mum?" crying.

mayamama - CC is basically letting your baby cry for a bit and going back in for reassurance after a few minutes if you feel he needs it. We went in every two minutes or so, for example, except when we thought he was going to sleep very quickly.

It is not at all like abandoning your baby while he cries his lungs out.

We did this at 4 months with DD and 5 months with DS. At no point would they have felt abandoned, for DH was going in to comfort them every minute or two.

True, being left to cry for such length of time alone (I would not go beyond 5 minutes, tbh) is completely and utterly ridiculous and I feel very sorry for those mums who have had to do it. However, crying in itself, even if lasting for an hour or so, is not negative. Much research has demonstrated the benefits of shedding tears and AS LONG AS it is done cuddled up in parents' arms, children who are allowed to express their feelings appear to thrive very well, and after the initial lengthy crying spells start to cry less and after crying appear happy and relieved the "having a good cry" phenomenon. But this has nothing to do with either CIO or CC which both let the child cry alone, and it is the opposite of advice that suggests that it is ok to leave the child to cry to the point of vomiting. I wonder if people doing that ever tried to think from the child's viewpoint? I honestly do not see how it can be justified. *ephiny" I take your point re: measuring the loss of sync" but in addition, the point is also that children do stop exhibiting distress yet still are physiologically stressed. An interesting analysis of this study can be found here.

Lockets yes I realise with me not agreeing with things others do is judging as everyone in some way does judge others but it doesn't play on my mind how others parent their children and I don't feel the need to make them feel like bad parents.
I didn't have to leave my baby for too long wen doing cc two mins at first then gradually increased it, but she soon fell asleep. She never got too upset.

At the time, in France, 4 months wasn't a shocking time to sleep train. At the 4 month visit, DD's paediatrician told me not to wait too long to do it, because it (1) they get more stubborn after 6 months (not sure if these were her exact words - something about it being harder) and (2) it is much harder when they start teething.

It worked like a charm, too. DD slept through on third night and has been sleeping through ever since, bar the occasional illness or nightmare. DS took a bit longer but it was mostly waking up in the middle of the night to talk to himself for an hour or two which annoyed DH to no end but didn't wake me up at all.

at stubborn or inference.

Why on earth would you be sad about baby learning to sleep through in a few nights without ever really being left alone for more than a few minutes at a time? What seems to be so sad about rested babies and rested parents?

Except if you are thinking of this as baby's spirit being broken, which is silly. The only thing being broken is a habit, and that is much easier, naturally, when it is a new habit (of only a few months) rather than an old habit (of several years).

Agreed cote! Couldn't of said it better myself.

Fine, if done the way you suggest you did it. Many people in this thread have spoken of much longer periods of time and much greater upsets. And that is sad. I have nothing against well rested families, but it is sad it has to be achieved like this.
I also wonder, apart from all the biomedical stress this may cause to the baby, whether mothers who have to do this realise what they miss by not cuddling their LO when they are chirping about their day and quietly doze off. I realise people have different priorities...I just wonder how many people of those who use CIO (or some forms of CC which sound rather similar to CIO) would choose to use this if they were completely free to choose.

You went all teary eyed and sad in reply to my post, though. Don't expect me to read 500+ posts that preceded mine that were based on the wrong assumption that the study quoted by the OP was talking about CC. It wasn't.

Sorry, meant she went teary eyed and sad...

Nono, it was in response to prematurely citing the 45 minutes

5madthings quick update for you (apols to everybody else for slight derail again) I stroked (and sang) DD2 to sleep again tonight (even more inclined after she bit me, she has two teeth through, small, but sharp!) and DP managed to scoop her from the bed into the cot. This is how we mean to go on, until such time as we can stroke / sing in the cot, then just sing..then do gradual retreat.
She can't have been ready for sleep training.
yes mama we do use sleeping bags, though she was not in one last night as it was too hot.

I can't ask DP to do too much - he is working like a demon at the moment as I'm a SAHM at the moment.

I see the meaning in your name now - I am one of five. I have two myself as started a bit late, I would have loved a house full!

Maya...really? My god not sure if I've got this wrong but bloody hell! I did cc and I did not miss out on cuddles with my baby not in the slightest! I only did cc at bedtime not during day. I gave my baby the best start, 11 months of breastfeeding and 7 of those months I breastfed her to sleep every night till she was in a deep sleep where I would then put her in her cot and pray for at least two hours sleep. So she had plenty of cuddles, comforting from me and she still does, evening before bed and during the day. Even when I did cc she got lots of cuddles. Like I said maybe I got ur post wrong so if I did sorry for being so annoyed but if I haven't got it wrong then u are very mistaken

oh thats good cerealqueen glad you have found something that worked, and yes those little teeth can be very sharp, owch! i do indeed have 5! have you got any summer sleeping bags btw cereal, ihave some if you need some, my dd always refused to wear them, the boys all loved them but dd just never has! pm me and i will have a look at what i have in various sizes, they are just sitting in the wardrobe going to waste!

Indeed, I did not mean to say doing cc or even cio means not cuddling etc - but hey, anyway, as long as mum and baby are both happy with any method, it would be fine. It is about us guessing though whether both are indeed happy and benefit from one method more or less than another.
I do wonder also why not do detailed studies on how whatever method works in home settings, and what are the long and short term consequences of various methods. I am not saying science can give answers to anything but at least some bits would help. And if there was a sound backup to argue that certain methods indeed ARE harmful (especially long term, for instance in terms of mother-child relationship as well as children's outcomes), it should logically overflow to policy making and extending maternity leave or conversely, encouraging mothers to work more. Or am I taking it too far?

No I can see where your coming from maya
Parenting is hardwork, both my girls are sooooo different 8years apart in age though but the eldest was never as demanding as my youngest who is 11months now and already throws tantrums and bites and pinches.......actually is getting me very down. I think we all have to guess things and hope for the best that it works. It is trial and error some times. I agree though some certain science evidence would def help in some cases.