GF: Love her or hate her? the Great Debate. Please leave all weapons at the door and NO stomping off, offended. OK?

[SoupDragon]

OK, to avoid the Great Debate cluttering up other threads where pro-GF mums are asking for help, I've started this one. It may have been done before...

If you read another thread and have nothing helpful but want to share your GF feelings, do it here!

I guess it could get heated here so please don't get offended and storm off in a huff as has happened elsewhere with other contentious issues - just avoid this thread

OK, for what it's worth, I have no problems with GF except for the fact that all babies are different so her rigid routine may not fit in with your baby. You should maybe see her routines as flexible - half an hour or an hour either way isn't going to make much difference is it? And I think that before 6 weeks is way too young to be messing with feeding routines, especially if you're breastfeeding. It can mess up your supply in theose important first weeks and I think this is why breastfeeding counsellors seem to hate her so much.

Right, I'm off to duck beneaththe parapet and let you get on with it!

I am not anti-routine. In fact, my children follow a pretty regular routine. It just isn't the GF routine. For example, neither of my children would sleep after they had been up for 2 hours, even when they were very small. They were awake for longer than that at almost every waking, except in the night.
My children are very happy in their routine, which was to a certain extent imposed by me. But it was a routine that suited our life. We have to fit a lot of what we do round bus times as I live in the country without a car, and once I am out for the day I am out! My children have had to learn to sleep in buggies, in other peoples beds, on my knee on the bus etc, else we would do nothing.
We also could not have had a 7pm bedtime. My dh has evening surgeries some evenings and if the children went to bed at 7 he would not see them, and we didn't want that to happen. So they go to bed at 8pm, to allow him to do baths and bedtimes when he hasnt seen them all day.
Not all of us who don't use GF are anti routine, we just have chosen not to use her routines. And I have a relaxed parenting style, yet my toddler is disciplined and well behaved at playgroup and childminders, as well as at home.
I don't know where I got the ideas from, it certainly wasn't GF, but I knew about putting children down for naps and feeding at roughly the same times (except bf) and did that without anyone having to tell me. It could have been from my Mum, but I'm not sure.

Bloss, you've just put into words what has been going round and round in my head as I've been reading this thread, but couldn't seem to express! Agree with pretty much everything, except that I don't follow the GF routines slavishly, just found them a good starting point. And my routine only applied to sleep, not feeding, while I was b/feeding.

I think you said in an earlier post that part of the problem is that GF is the only book which gives advice about setting up a routine. I have found others - the one I used a lot was 'Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy child' by Marc Weissbluth, but agree that in general most parenting advice around nowadays is very vague about sleep and routines, and makes you feel a bit of a failure if your baby isn't responding to the 'go with the flow' cuddles and jiggling approach.

Some of the posts on this thread seem to be implying that all you need to do is love your baby more and all will be well - its not surprising these posts make others upset/angry/imfuriated! And I don't think these people have even read the book either.

So what you are saying Bloss, is that unless we want our babies to be miserable we must follow GF from the outset - otherwise the problems are self-inflicted.

Did it never cross your mind that a happy contented baby on a GF routine from birth might have been a happy, contented baby anyway? So all those that she chalks down to her success, are probably nothing to do with her at all.

Ok, so you are an 'innocent mother' who has been 'misguided' your 'young maternity nurse,' who dared suggest that ' demand feeding was best and the a baby should be allowed to find his own sleep pattern.' and your baby has got into 'sleeping and feeding problems'. Do you really think the methods she advocates are worth the potential damage being done to the child?

Elliot, I have the book right beside me now, for fear of being accused of uninformed ranting. I bought it specifically (10p from charity shop, and not worth a penny more IMO) so I knew what I was arguing against, and could debate in a rational way, and I have read it from cover to cover.

I don't think the response "well you don't know what you're talking about anyway" which is effectively what you are saying, is helpful anyway. Disagree by all means, but there is no need to belittle anyone elses views.

I am well aware that in some cases it takes more than just love to solve the problems you come up against as a parent. I do still believe, despite others' protests, that a lot of the problems arrive because we are unable/unwilling/not allowed to follow our own instincts. But I am also aware that it is not always that straightforward, and again, the same applies - one solution will not work for all babies.

I also refuse to believe that the methods she has described can be justified in any way.

I bought the GF book and chose to chuck it away shortly after my dd was born - life felt too stressful without worrying about even more targets and standards expected of me. My dd turned into a happy healthy baby with own own flexible routines and daily structures. She slept well, ate well and socialises well. She has passed every check the health visitor has thrown at her with flying colours, walked early, talked early etc. etc. She has her moments like any child and has her father?s fiery stubborn personality but is otherwise a wonderful child.
However, we recently underwent a lot of upheaval at home and she has had her routine totally ruined for several weeks now. Now that life has calmed down (and I am able to go online again) I am finding it unbelievable hard work trying to restore her routine. She isn?t sleeping properly, her eating habits are all over the place - very picky, and her social behaviour is not far off being plain terrible - very demanding, attention seeking, screaming fits etc. etc. I know the cause and am doing my best to get back on track, understanding that it isn?t her fault but I have to be firm etc. etc.
Is it too late to go back and buy that GF book and start now she is 18months or should I just struggle on? As I type this she is stripping herself of all clothing and screaming at me (I have spent the past two hours playing with her and wanted 5 mins to myself!!!) Sorry if this is rambly - tired, fed up and confused at the mo!!

Anais - I think that is an unfair assessment of what Bloss said. The point that she was making - and she had kept out of the debate for a long time - was that for HER child she only resorted to GF as a last resort, after everything else had failed. And for HER child it worked. She then chose to use it again with her second and had success - but in no way is she is saying it is a cure all for ALL kids. Nor is she "damaging" either of her children by finally coming up with a system, using GF, that works for them. I've "known" Bloss (or rather read her postings) for a couple of years on both this and another discussion board, and can remember the diffulties she used to have with her ds. HER experience is that using GF resulted in a happier child (and mum! ). Horses for courses.

Again, it goes back to the debate about "intelligent" use of outside advice - if it works for you, who is anyone else to judge? The dilemma is how to keep that sense of perspective - for example in Susanmt's case, where GF had a damaging effect. And having a newborn, especially a firstborn, can be a very vulnerable time.

For the record, I've never read GF, developed my own "routines", demand b/f ds (and continued to fully bf for a full year), but did have to "impose" some feeds as he was a sleepy baby and slow to gain weight, did a small amount of "sort of" controlled crying, even from the early days (ie letting him cry himself to sleep when I knew he wasn't hungry or wet/dirty and was just tired) and have a happy and contented baby who has slept through almost from the start (we actually had to wake him up to feed him for a while), who goes to bed at 8 quite happily wide awake and occupies himself happily in the morning until we get him up. AND I'm an older mum!

Anais and tracey: your baby knows nothing but his parents, you are their world. Imagine how scary it would be thinking you'd been left alone by those you love to cry and cry. They don't understand that you'll (eventually) come back. As they don't understand that teddy is still there when you hide it behind your back.

You do not seem to understand the concept of object permanance to babies. Until they grasp this concept at about 6 months, they do not know that Teddy or Mummy exists when he is not there in front of them. They do not get upset when Mummy dissapears, bacuase they immediately forget that she exists. When I leave my dd at nursery every morning (because Yes traceyhay to add to my drinking and control freakery I also work full time and damn well enjoy it. If you don't do these things because you don't want to - then good for you) she doesn't sit there wondering where I have gone and missing me, she just gets on with playing. I am hoping that by the time she does start to remeber that Mummy is not here, she will be secure enough in the nursery environment to not care.

Anais that IS NOT what Bloss was saying at all - I am uttely bewildered as to how you can make those claims based supposedly on what she said!

Hear hear Bloss ! I'd promised myself to stay out of this but I just want to thank you for your well written post.

Nice one bloss.

Really enjoyed your posting Bloss, thank you. I do love Mumsnet for this insight into other people's life. It's funny how human nature just makes one assume everyone else's baby/husband/birthstory/breastfeeding etc is the same as your own. But life's not like that, and it is really interesting to see other situations to your own.

Personally bought CLBB in a moment of joint insecurity between me and dh when dd was about 12 weeks. A day's read and it was clear GF was not for us, despite dd's dreadful sleeping habits - it just didn't gel with our parenting style or personalities.

But hey, everyone else's personalities are different to mine! (after all I enjoy being a working mum, I'm perfectly happy that my baby moved on from bf to formula and I could raise a family on 15k a year...)

Anais - thought you might be! But please do not put us GF mothers down for following routines you do not agree with. My dd was certainly NOT a contented baby. I had no family nearby, a useless HV and I didn't know what to do with her, I didn't know about daytime naps and stupidly thought that the later she went to bed at night the longer she would sleep! When we bought the GF book we were sceptical - have the baby sleep from 7pm to 7am? No way! But within 3 days of following the routines it worked. I was transformed from an overtired, irritable, depressed mother to a well rested and pleasantly happy one, and my dd certainly seemed to fit into the routine well, it was as if she was saying "Now that's more like it!" I could kiss GF's feet just for introducing the idea of a daytime nap to me! I had (and still do sometimes) 2 hours every day to myself, which was very much needed, and dh and I had the evenings to ourselves too.

Now she is older I can chop and change, so sometimes we will keep her up longer and let her have a lie-in at weekends. If I'm out all day I'll take the buggy so she can fall asleep in that. She is still incredibly happy on the routine and I wouldn't swap it for the world.

Yes I know many of you found these routines anyway, but you are the lucky ones. Either you have that maternal instinct that I lack (see the Trouble with Motherhood) or supportive families and friends, or just a good HV. Ok I wasn't stupid enough to feed my baby crisps, but I certainly didn't know a damn thing about what babies wanted or needed. GF helped me through weaning my baby off the breast and onto the bottle and she helped when it came to solids. It's amazing how little information you can find about these two topics alone, no-one could tell me the right way to wean her off the breast, or how much solid food to give her and how frequently. But GF had useful measuring tips such as an icecube of mashed carrots - I could work with that!

No criticism to so called "earth mothers" you are obviously better people than me, more unselfish. And if your methods work then fair plays to you. But some of us are saying that GF works for us too, so don't criticise our ways and we won't criticise yours.

Anyway, Anais, Tracyhay and everyone, let's all just shake hands, accept our differences and be friends - life's too short!

As someone who had never heard of GF until I discovered this site, I don't feel I should make any contribution to this thread .

BUT, anais, did you actually READ Bloss's post?

Wow, I've been avoiding this thread as knew it would be a bit heated but I do have to say Anais that I did say 'Noooooooo' rather loudly when I read your post to Bloss!
I really think whatever works for each individual mother is most important. If that means strict routines then so be it as long a child is not being left for hours to cry. I don't really agree with GF but that said I did do controlled crying at about 7 months with my daughter to get her to sleep through the night and still revert to it when her routine goes haywire so this is sort of the same, just a bit later on.
Motherhood is such hard work that I really do believe everyone should be allowed to find their own way of getting through every day.

Hmmm, ok, ok, hands up. Had a bad morning this morning (ds being picked on at playgroup, and they are denying all knowledge, but thats a whole other story). I guess I was in argumentative mode. I do apologise

So why do women choose to work full time when they have kids?

Throwing cat among the pigeons. The thread started to wander off onto that topic, but didn't finish it. Looks the GF bit is dying down.

I know sometimes moms feel they have to work for money, and I wouldn't judge that. Or maybe you try having a baby but it was a bit of a mistake, and you'll do your best to raise & love the child, but work is more important after all to you. Would anybody be so honest as to admit that's how they feel?

I work part time; I can understand wanting something non-child in your life. But why have kids if you don't want to be the main person to raise them?

Just in case you were beginning to sympathise I'm going to make you all hate me again! Agree wholeheartedly Zebra...

Why is the question just addressed to women?

Presumably because nature designed women to raise children. Women carry babies for 9 months and are designed to nurture them. I know it's not pc, but thats the biology.

Ah well. I'm off for a few days now. Can't wait to catch up on this when I get back. Don't let me down will you ladies!

Will you miss me???

I'm a SAHM - partly through choice and partly through circumstances beyond my control. I'm starting to work from home (ds goes to nursery two days a week to allow for this) and have to say that doing so has made me realise just how much I miss being in the thick of things. No, I wouldn't want to work five days a week minimum and every hour that God sends as I did pre-motherhood, but I do crave the buzz of those "career" days - and that surprises me as I really didn't think I would miss it that much. Plus we could really do with the money.

As such I quite understand why women return to work - it's easy to imagine yourself as the best "hands on" mum in town while you're waddling around with your navel hanging down between your knees, but when it comes to it being a 24 hour mum is something that many women just aren't cut out for. Some might say that this is a denial of human instinct - I personally see it as the development of the species. We're now at a stage where most women do work and, as a result, our financial needs are based on two wages. How many couples do you know who's mortgage loan is based on 3 x the partner's salary? Long gone are the days when the few women who worked did so for pin money. Now we are allowed to have careers we love and decent salaries is it any wonder that some women choose to return?

Bloss - bless you, bless you, bless you ... I want to marry you and have your babies ...

I have said lots re GF so will not say any more ...

On the working mum front ... I had to work and hated it so had to move to the other side of the world in order to be a SAHM (very extreme I know, but true)...

HOWEVER, the whole point in this day and age is that we should be able to have the choice ... I have many friends who swear that they are better mothers because they work - they are able to be themselves for a few hours a day and give their children much more quality time than if they were at home all the time AND they are able to enjoy their children more ...

Women have fought long and hard for the right to be able to go out and work after centuries of being second class citizens chained to the home ...

Zebra ... Mrs Pankhurst and her suffragettes would be turning in their graves if they read your post ...

Well put, Willow2 and Ghosty. I enjoy doing my part time work, but couldn't do it full time. Then I really would feel that the children saw more of their minders than me, and that it wasn't worth it, but I feel for those who have to.

Although I'd agree with the second class citizen bit in fact it's not true that women have been chained to the home for centuries. Being at home FT is mostly a 2Oth century phenomenon. History shows that women have always contributed to the family income in many ways, working in the fields, as servants, in factories, down coalmines, (often with their tiny children, of course) in home industries etc. At one time, in the heyday of the Victorian jute trade, Dundee's workforce was mainly comprised of women, while the men cooled their heels, out of work (most likely not doing the housework or having a hot meal on the table when the Missus got in from a hard shift at the mill). Even better off women had their work cut out, running households full of staff and so on.

The home-based wife came into particular fashion after WWI, when the country was flooded with de-mobbed soldiers with no jobs and the country running into depression. Yet suddenly in WWII, as in WWI, the government couldn't get women out to work fast enough, making munitions, staffing field hospitals, as land girls, WACC's etc. Once WWII was over, women were dumped out of their jobs to allow the men to take over again. For many years women teachers, like my mum's aunt, had to give up work once they were married!

It's astonishing how women have been exploited over the years, although often no more so than children and even many men. Thank goodness times have changed.