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

Parenting

For free parenting resources please check out the Early Years Alliance's Family Corner.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Cry-it-out used on newborn

88 replies

Sappholit · 29/10/2010 09:28

I know someone who has a 10-month-old baby who she left to cry-it-out from the age of 4 days because her husband said they couldn't have a bay who would only sleep on their chests. They shut the baby in another room until she stopped crying.

The baby has always slept through the night and this couple in genuine innocence are very proud of the method they used. They seem to have no idea about why newborn babies cry.

They are now expecting their second child and will be doing the same thing. I really want to point out the effect of such treatment on a newborn but (a) I'm not sure it's my place and (b) they are very opinionated and blame the fact that I have a sleepless 8-month-old on the fact that I didn't put her down for the first 6 weeks.

WHat would you do in my situation? I usually just think everyone should be left to bring up their children as they see fit, but this is such a massive issue for me - I am very worried about the impending baby being given such brutal treatment as soon it's out of the womb.

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

ragged · 29/10/2010 13:46

Not feeding or comforting a newborn thru the whole night qualifies as abuse in my book. Little babies are on a big growth curve and they don't understand that they can be safe on their own.

I'm afraid I'd end up bluntly telling them as much. They might hate me for it, but I don't think I could keep my mouth shut on that one (and I am pretty reserved about commenting on most parenting choices, too). I guess I'd tell them (somehow not as brutally as this, but close) that I'd rather have a clingy baby (child) with good self-esteem than a baby (child) who KNOWS that its parents can't be bothered to meet its needs properly.

Firawla · 29/10/2010 14:44

4 days old!!! that is neglectful not sure how people can think otherwise
shocking
op try to say something

Frrrrightattendant · 29/10/2010 14:54

The problem is the people already did it to their other child, so anything OP says NOW will be taken as implying there's going to have been damage to their other kid as well...they won't take kindly to that.

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

Families General parenting

EvilAllenPoe · 29/10/2010 14:55

i think you have to recognise this is within the remit of parental choice.

the OP has not said the newborn will be left all night though - has she?

there is no evidence that this causes any kind of long-term distress - comparisons to orphanage kids are just ridiculous - and those that term this abuse need to get some perspective - the child is fed, warm, has loving parents. Just because hose parents have different views to you about what constitues acting on that love - does not make them abusers.

SconesForTea · 29/10/2010 14:57

Leaving a newborn to cry all night with no feeds IS neglect. Probably abuse. That poor baby. OP in your shoes I would have to say something. Probably refencing the BBC article is a good idea.

Yes it is an implicit criticism of their older child but.... It is just so wrong.

RadoxBabyBel · 29/10/2010 14:58

If they think it's ok to express a view on your parenting choices, I think it's ok for you to reciprocate!

RadoxBabyBel · 29/10/2010 14:59

And I had understood that there is evidence that it causes harm- raised cortisol levels etc (or have I got that round my kneck)?

EvilAllenPoe · 29/10/2010 15:03

lasting harm no - cortisol is pretty short term, and obviously what happens is the baby stops yelling....

Again, the op has not said twould be all night.

Unprune · 29/10/2010 15:07

Yes, she has.

Sappholit Fri 29-Oct-10 13:18:03
I'm afraid I do think it's neglectful - the baby wasn't fed at all at night.

Frrrrightattendant · 29/10/2010 15:09

Hello? Cortisol rises with the crying, which in the first few months of life raises the baseline cortisol level which is still being worked out. This in turn sets the stress response level for LIFE.

So yes it does long term harm.

EvilAllenPoe · 29/10/2010 15:13

you presume that it wouldn't work though frright - all babies cry.

there is no long-term study showing any such effect - it's pure conjecture on fairly sketchy science!

Frrrrightattendant · 29/10/2010 15:16

Crying alone and crying although accompanied and attended to and talked to and HELD are two very, very different experiences.

by 'work' I suppose you mean the child learns it won't be responded to when in distress, and thus stops crying out of adjunct despair rather than relief from its distress?

Frrrrightattendant · 29/10/2010 15:17

BTW - ds2 only cried TWICE in his first 6 months. Literally twice. I learned to respond to his cues before he reached crying level. He never had to bother unless he had bad tummy ache or whatever caused those two incidences, and during those I held him for half an hour or however long it was.

I wouldn't dream of leaving him to it.

Dylthan · 29/10/2010 15:18

I don't agree with it whatsoever. However I think it would be pointless to report this to the health visitors. At 6 weeks dd went through a difficult phase where she wanted to be held by me all the time but not fed.

Mentioned this to my hv who said if she didn't want feeding I should just put her down and let her "cry it out" I was

I think it's a recognised parenting technique so you can't really comment without coming across extremly judgemental. However I personally find the technique very cruel!

RadoxBabyBel · 29/10/2010 15:19

I am aware of a study by Schore (sp? which suggested that episodes of extrme cortisol flooding had an effect on brain development. It was a 1996 study but I think he went as far as to suggest rather than just inhibit certain development, spikes of cortisol actually destroyed certain neural pathways. Research may have moved in obv. Also remember that book by Leech somebody who presented a body of evidence suggesting it was harmful. I'm sure there is also contrary evidence too, as with most things.

In any event, how people choose to parent is up to them. However, OP I do think that if they think it is acceptable to make a comment on your choices, you also have the right to express an opinion (maybe a copy of "why love matters" as a welcome baby gift?! ) haha!

Frrrrightattendant · 29/10/2010 15:19

Anyway the bad science argument takes us about as far as the decision about whether it's worth the risk. IMO it's not.

Dylthan · 29/10/2010 15:21

The hv also said I was giving in to my newborns demands too much and that she was learning that all she had to do was give a little cry and I'd come running. As if that's a bad thing

Giddyup · 29/10/2010 16:05

How long did it take for their DC1 to sleep through? not agreeing with their methods but you say the baby has always slept through?

wannabeglam · 29/10/2010 18:50

People do bizarre things. I think that's quite neglectful, but they won't. Brutal it certainly is.

Dont think you will have any effect on them I'm afraid. However, you could say you don't want to hear about it as the thought of it causes you great distress (might give them food for thought but doubt it - at least you won't have to put up with hearing about it).

I think I'd probably have to say something and then stop being friends with them.

JazzieJeff · 29/10/2010 20:46

How could this woman live with herself??? Regardless of what my DH would ever say, I could never leave my DS to cry. His hungry/distressed cry in the night makes me feel sick and I feel a physical urge to get to him instantly to cuddle him and comfort him. What kind of mother doesn't feel that? I'm struggling a bit as a new mum to cope with 2week old DS, but there is no way I wouldn't comfort him. It sounds to me like that woman's DH must have one hell of a lot of control over her to be able to stop her going in to comfort her baby. Frankly, wild dogs couldn't keep me away.

mathanxiety · 29/10/2010 20:56

Sounds like neglect to me and I would have a word with the HV -- and yes a brutal way to treat a child. I don't understand how people could just shut a door and tune the baby out. and . Is the baby The Enemy in their minds?

Animals treat their offspring better than these people. My cat would respond to the DCs crying as babies.

Frrrrrightattendant -- I agree, how could anyone risk it.

happygilmore · 30/10/2010 05:47

Surely in a newborn not being fed all night is actually dangerous? I would think they could get dehydrated really quite quickly.

Georgimama · 30/10/2010 06:02

With DS as a newborn I tended towards the jungle school of thought - and you wouldn't let an infant scream its head off in the jungle. You'd all get eaten.

When he got a bit older (nine months plus) I did use controlled crying which is not at all the same thing as crying it out.

My brother and SIL left both their babies to cry themselves to sleep if they wouldn't settle from a very early age (they got night feeds but were left to cry afterwards if they wouldn't go back to sleep). It worked, but their older child (4) is now very self contained and not huggy at all. I wonder why....

tellnoone · 30/10/2010 06:38

Miles is a quiet baby, he knows no one comes whether he cries or not - words from an NSPCC tv advert.

Georgimama · 30/10/2010 06:53

Yes, I used to say that, only half joking, about my nephew (not to my brother and SIL, obviously).

Training a child not to cry because they know you won't come to them is nothing to be proud of.

Flip

1 2 3 4