Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

News

Flip

Original poster

Can you over-bond with your baby???

21 replies

wintera · 06/12/2008 11:36

Wouldn't have thought it was possible myself! But Nicole Kidman's mum seems to think you can!

www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1092262/My-mum-thinks-Ive-bonded-baby-I-dont-care-says-devoted -Nicole-Kidman.html

OP posts:

catweazle · 06/12/2008 11:56

No of course you can't. But if she's that precious you'd think they'd use a car seat

hecAteAMillionMincePies · 06/12/2008 12:03

no, I don't think you can over bond, but I think you can be over possessive, where you won't let anyone else near the baby - including the father!! That is a problem. I know women who won't let the father do anything because they think he'll hurt the baby or he just isn't capable of caring for the baby like they can... that sort of thing is not healthy at all.

littleboyblue · 06/12/2008 12:07

That doesn't sound like over-bonding, that sounds more like over-possessive and over precious.
Understandable after trying to conceive for so long I think, but def not good in the long run.
I am utterly devoted to my ds, but not the point where I can't bear to be away from him. Bit ridiculous IMO

27 · 06/12/2008 12:10

Yes, you would think she could afford a car seat wouldnt you.

I wonder if her family are concerned about her two older children. Nicole seems so pleased to have a biological child, I wonder how her older children feel now.

(Thats if any of this article is true of course )

TheButterflyEffect · 06/12/2008 12:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

TheSeriousSanta · 06/12/2008 12:21

I agree. She already has two children which she seems to simply have walked away from.

Apparently, they call Katie Holmes mum now and don't see Nicole Kidman at all.

I think Nicole Kidman is quite odd.

Original poster

wintera · 06/12/2008 12:23

The picture without the car seat seems to have been taken in a limo, maybe just arriving somewhere? So thats probably why there is no car seat. Sort of like getting into a taxi I suppose.

OP posts:

TheButterflyEffect · 06/12/2008 12:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

TheSeriousSanta · 06/12/2008 13:01

I wouldn't leave my kids over a religion. ANd I wouldn't leave them with a father who thought religion more important that the only mother they've ever known.

To be fair, they seem happy well adjusted kids, so who knows.

I am FAR to well up to date on sleb twaddle

mindalina · 06/12/2008 13:02

I think the reason she doesn't have much to do with the adopted children is indeed because they are being brought up as Scientologists and she isn't one. I am reasonably certain I read something insinuating that, and that she was quite sad about it, but can't for the life of me think where to link it.

I agree with Catweazle. I also wonder why it's seemingly ok for Nicole Kidman to take her child in the car without a carseat when Britney Spears got sucha pasting for it (rightly so, obviously)

TheSeriousSanta · 06/12/2008 13:03

well, Britney was driving... i think that's the main difference!!!

TheNewsMongersGeansaiNollag · 06/12/2008 13:11

Absolutely butterfly, this is not her first child.

Conor and Bella may be entitled to feel a bit put out imo.

ElfOnTheTopShelf · 06/12/2008 13:32

I am sure I read somewhere (possibly details from an interview a magazine did with Nicole) saying that Tom made it difficult for her to see the older children, and that she found it incredibly painful that they called Katie "mom"

TheButterflyEffect · 06/12/2008 13:51

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster

wintera · 06/12/2008 15:05

Nicole does see the other kids. It was agreed when her and Tom divorced that they would spend 6 months with Tom and the other 6 months with Nicole. They are probably having their time with Tom Cruise at the mo I would imagine.

OP posts:

Saturn74 · 06/12/2008 15:09

You'd have thought she'd have splashed out for a car seat.

TheSeriousSanta · 06/12/2008 16:38

Wintera - no way do the kids spend 6 months with her. Name one time you have seen her with the kids in the last two years. Compare that with the number of times TOm Cruise and Katie Holmes have been seen with them.

Original poster

wintera · 06/12/2008 17:25

Well that was the agreement at the time I believe. I remember it being in the papers at the time of the divorce. Defo 6 months each I am sure thats what I read. Because I was confused at the time about what they would do about school etc. . Or maybe the agreement has altered now or something.

Now that you mention it - Didn't she get some stick in the press not long back for moving back to Aussie and not seeing them much or something?

OP posts:

TheSeriousSanta · 06/12/2008 18:32

Exactly. She's been back in Australia and Nashville since the split. The kids have always lived with Cruise in LA.

Not sure if they had a deal or not, but the kids haven't ever moved.

Though what do we know, eh?

AussieSim · 06/12/2008 23:04

I would say that Isabel and Connor have to go to school - so 6mo turn about would not be practical. They are probably old enough to express their preference for where they live and not be 'forced' to go to Nicole if it wasn't convenient for them. And given that they have been raised scientologists it is not too hard to imagine that their preference is to remain with their dad rather than be dragged back and forth between Australia and the USA.

tiredlady · 06/12/2008 23:25

From what I've read in the papers, Nicole Kidman does indeed seem to have walked away from her 2 adopted children.

She "can't bear to be apart" from her new baby,but apparently is quite happy to be living on the other side of the world to her 2 other kids. Would she do this if she had given birth to them. Possibly not.
Very sad for them

Flip