Anyone seen todays Times about Gina Ford's new book?!!!!!

[louby78]

OMFG is all I can say. Anyone who doesn't like her will now see their hatred excel to a new level.

Apparently new mums should go on a date night with their husbands 4-6 weeks after the birth of their new baby and have sex even if they don't feel like it. Other mums share their tips and one woman actually says...."you may have to grin and bear it"!! EXCUSE ME?!

When her mums are feeling down she tells them to have a bath, shave their legs and paint their nails!!!! Not sure about anyone else but when my children were babies I could just about manage to brush my teeth! And as for sex...... well sleep would be my priority but I guess if I'd listened to her my babies would be sleeping through from 6 weeks after I put them in their own room and left them to cry until they got the message.

All this from someone who has never even had a baby. If she too had pushed out a baby bigger than a melon, had to be cut and then stitched together again (not to mention the bruises which made it hard to sit down for a week), then she maybe qualified to offer new mums advice. Until that day she should just keep stum.

It's like reading something from the 1940s. Silly cow.

If a parent was imposing routines so that he or she could cope I would be quite worried about the baby. Parents not coping is rightly something hvs and ss would be concerned about.

Got up to feed the baby?
How about co-sleeping mothers and breastfeeding babies?

And surely mothers sleeping for a long time is what GF promises?

I freely admit I found it hard to cope. I did not bond with my baby for months. what helped men was writing down '7 am breakfast. 9am nap 10 am feed etc etc'

What would have sent me over the edge was someone saying 'justvlisten to your baby! Trust your instincts!'

My only instinct was fear. I am glad I read GF. She got me on a track that was good for me and my baby. But by no means do I buy into all she says.

Most of my clients bottle feed, so questions of routine become really important as you need to factor in sterilising bottles, making upmfeed at right time etc.

I just think her whole approach is misguided and sad, and based on priorities that are rooted in cultural expectations of women and indeed babies from many decades ago, and not on any good scientific evidence. Essentially, everyone in the home is a satellite of the head of household according to GF and the sooner the baby gets with the programme the better for all.

There is no vitriol against GF specifically on my part. I take a jaundiced view of the entire baby guru phenomenon. GF is a particularly egregious example of the way so-called experts can peddle their so-called expertise to a market that is ripe for the fleecing. It's all objectionable in my opinion.

Wouldn't it have been better to address the fear, find out what was causing it and overcome it?

I was just going to say, I often hear about mothers having low confidence- do you not think a better way to build their confidence is by finding out themselves what works for them, making decisions based on scientific evidence rather than deferring to a self-appointed expert who has never met them or their baby?

Well of course it would have been good to address the fear, but unfortunately I had a baby that needed looking after NOW, not after I had successfully completed a years psychotherapy.

I don't think I am that unusual - I wasn't the 'natural' earth mother type, inhad been working for fifteen years and used to being in control and having thing on my terms. A baby is a massive shock to those assumptions but you have to work within your own capabilities.

For what it's worth, I mostly agreebwith all you say about GF. It is just a pit that not everyone uses your measured tones.

But guess it is an issue that pushes a lot of buttons.

A bit blunt there and unnecessarily critical -- what I had in mind was that maybe a chat with someone who could have reassured you as a new mother and boosted your confidence might have eased your transition to motherhood.

I think there is a lot of pressure on new mothers to get things 'right', to feel this eternal spring of mother love flowing from every pore, to live up to the image we have been fed of sparkling house, dimpled baby, the scent of baby powder and home baking wafting around in the domestic air and it is very easy to be discouraged by the reality and to feel a failure. Really, people have won Oscars for performances that weren't half what is expected of new mothers, and it is important to remember that the 50s and 60s were the era when valium was known as 'mother's little helper'.

O how I wish, wish, wish I had had someone warm and caring who could have reassured me. Instead what I got was a HV who said 'you WILL breastfeed' (after my baby had pulled away from my bleeding nipple in disgust) and a mother who just said everything would be ok, she doesn't really 'do' emotional problems. Plus a then partner who tookma weeks paternity leave and spent it at work.

Hmm the source of my emotional incompetence is becoming clearer...

I agree with you about the 1950s vision of domestic bliss. I made a rod for my own back in manynways. But I do seriously believe that I would have gone under without some baby books to give me a framework.

I am not an earth mother either. I am a good enough mother and the only perspective I have ever sought on that question is my own. You can be a mother who does her own thing and not be an 'earth mother'.

Becoming a mother is a complete shock for everyone. Your life is changed irrevocably no matter what you have done up to then. Babies humble you like nothing else can (using humble for want of a better word). I don't think anybody is a natural mother the first time round, nor even the second or third time. It takes a long time to get used to not being able to finish a thought in your own head because someone who is completely self centered is going to interrupt you, or not to have time to pick your nose because there are endless things to attend to. And just when you think you have things going smoothly something can happen to knock you for six.

'Experts' peddling 'hope in a jar' at least deserve a clap on the back for identifying a terrific market but a big for the basic premise of their trade, which is that it can be easier, if only you will x or y or z, and will that be cash or credit?

Well my SW saw me and dc4 only just awake at 11am and still in pyjamas when she was tiny. I had 2 under 2, a teenager and an autistic non-sleeper. I told ' miss snooty' that we we're doing fine and dd had a wonderful routine, just not inline with everyone elses routine.

GF would of hated our ' routine' it was very loose and fluid and to some extent child led but it worked for us! The kids at school we're up and ready on time, will fed and clean clothed and the little ones were happy and content. So what if me and dp didn't go out on 'dates' or if he had to wait for sex. We coped and he didn't run off with another woman.
and overall we were all happy

Bump

Spero, re. the legal action, you make it sound quite reasonable. It was anything but. GF cited daft comments that were clearly not intended to be taken seriously. The whole thing was ridiculous. What she really objected to were parents who dared to criticise her approach. Personally I prefer not to take parenting advice from someone who enjoys throwing her own toys out of her pram in quite such a spectacular style.

Here here Edam

Whilst I have firmly stated that I followed GF routine when my DS was a baby and we are both still very structured (give or take special occassions and holidays) I am in agreement with 2 things that other posters have said:

GF was totally OTT in wanting to take legal action - don't make a living out of writing books if you don't want other peoples opinion or views on them.

However, the second point is the way people attack her as an individual, rather than her ideas. I find some of the things people say about her as an individual to be quite nasty and extremely bitchy. Absolutely anyone has the right to disagree very strongly with her ideas and views, but to attack her personally, I find very childish.

Anyway, I have to admit to being a small minority of people who like and used her routines. Most of my friends thought I was mad and told me very strongly that I should not be waking my baby up at 7am in the morning and timing his sleeps and waking him for feeds. I was also wrong for bathing him at 6pm, then feeding at 6.30 and putting him to bed, then waking him at 10.30 for another feed. What a bad mother I was for doing that lol. Oh boy, did they eat their words when he was sleeping through from 10.30pm to 7am when he was 16 days old and sleeping right through at 3 months. Not that I ever talked about it very openly, just when I was asked, for fear of everyone thinking I was mad.

One of my close friends who spoke out very loudly against GF and her routines spent the first 5-6 years with her children not sleeping at all and she used to live off 3 hours sleep a night. I remember her once asking me for advice on how I got my son sleeping so well? I just laughed and said 'You don't really want my advice, as you will hear about GF and she's not your thing'.

As I understand the whole GF libel thing (I read an interesting article by the poster who wrote the infamous Lebanon comment) some of the comments were appalling. I don't particularly care if 'they weren't meant to be taken seriously'. You cannot expect the recipient of such abuse to stop and take a measured assessment of the state of mind of the abuser.

if it was all so ridiculous why did mumsnet cave at the first whiff of a libel action?

I am really quite astonished that on this site, where there are periodic moans about nasty posters and how horrid all the bullies are, that it is somehow seen as quite ok to abuse this woman in extreme terms.

By all means, criticise her methods and the underlying assumptions - I have seen on this thread that it can be done in a measured and reasonable way. But all this hatred and vitriol is bizarre and disturbing.

And still agreeing with Lucy.

People settle defamation cases even if there is no merit in them because the costs of defending yourself are ruinous. Even if you have a great case and the other side are just trying it on.

It's not 'bullying' for parents to discuss someone who sets themselves up as a parenting guru. If you don't want people to talk about you, don't write a book telling them how to live. If you invite public debate, you may find some of the comments are unflattering. That's the thing.

We are talking at cross purposes Edam. I have no problem with robust debate. I have no problem with mine or anyone else's views being challenged.

But if anyone suggested that I am likely to kill my daughter because of the views I hold, I might be just a wee bit fucking peeved and perhaps I might consider doing something other than just logging off and going to bed.

that thread was relentless, disgusting bullying. It was not just calm and measured debate about her methods.

there is a big difference between 'unflattering' comments and what was going on there.

Just my opinion, but one that GF and mumsnet seemed to share.

Nah, GF and her lawyers shared. MNHQ just had to stump up to stop it going any further. If you write a book that orders people to do X otherwise their children will be horribly damaged in all sorts of ways, you can expect some pretty robust debate. People might even object to your ideas and methods. They might even make personal remarks. Goes with the territory. A sober, level-headed person would realise that.

Looks like we will just have to agree to disagree.

I find certain of the shrieking about GF and the 'hating' of her every bit as disturbing as her rigid adherence to certain of her theories.

Both demonstrate quite a disturbed thought process.

It is possible to be right without dragging another person through the shit in order to prove yourself. If someone can't defend their position without abusing another, it doesn't fill me with confidence about the state of their argument or even their own belief in it.

The so-called problem of babies not sleeping through the night is one invented by people who do not know much about babies' sleep patterns, how they sleep, or why they sleep. Sleep requirements for babies and toddlers that you see in "How to Get Your Baby to Sleep' type books ot that you may hear from your hv, etc., are not based on research about babies' sleep needs. What we see as the norm is based on our cultural expectations.

Why 'so called' problem? It can be a blood big problem if you have to get up at 6am to commute for an hour and a half sitting on the floor of the 6.45 to kings cross. Happy memories.

Srsly, I 'get' that you can't force babies to sleep for your convenience but I am afraid I found 'so called' slightly irksome.