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.

They'll be discussing this tomorrow on The Wright Stuff.

Flak jacket and tin helmet ready!

No doubt they will be getting it Wrong.

:o

Ah, here we go again with another Gina Ford bashing session.

If you don't like her techniques, then why take such an interest?

So she has never had children, what has that got to do with the price of bread. My DS went to a nursery where none of the staff had children, his current teacher has no children - does that make them crap at their job?

I liked Gina Ford and love her idea of routine. How many parents do you see coming on here, tearing there hair out that there 1 year old won't sleep through the night or they are having to breast fed every 2 hours and are knackered. I didn't have any of that. I kept my sanity thanks to Gina Ford and her advice on routine and structure. I was still up, shaved, dressed, hair done when the health visitor called round and that was after having a C Section.

We still have routine and structure in our lives now and DS is 6. He knows what is happening and when it is happening in terms of getting up, meal times, bath and bed time. It makes life so much less stressful all round if there is routine and structure.

Most professionals (Doctors, nurses, health visitors, teachers etc)will tell you that children thrive better if they have structure and boundaries.

There is a very simple solution - if you don't like Gina Ford don't read her books and don't read any articles about her.

I agree with Lucy. Just re-read the op and was struck by the first sentence which I had skipped over, about your 'hatred' reaching new levels.

That is actually quite worrying. Wy do you 'hate' ?? If you don't agree with her, er, then raise your children how you like. So far as I know she is not campaigning for her techniques to become law.

I ponder whether this is linked to the thread about Petronella Wyatt and whether or not society discriminates against childless single women. If GF was married with six children, would you 'hate' her less and just settle for polite disagreement?

Anyone who can 'hate' someone they have never met just because they advocate a child rearing method you don't like (but many others do) possibly needs to spend a bit of time having a word with themselves.

I agree with Spero and Lucy, does she really deserve all this bashing??? Her advice obviously works for a lot of mothers and with all advice given as a new parent - do you take all of it? Nope. You take the bits that resonate with you - same as the book.

I can admit to reading her book - then throwing it away and laughing BUT I did take away from it that routine was important and that worked well for me and my daughter so I have that to thank her for.

What Gina may be trying to get across and please don't shoot me! Is that a lot of relationships break down after having babies because of not having sex etc. so the idea is to make an effort to preserve it in the long run. I do get this from knowing a lot of male friends that are very frank with me and tell me what they get up to with other women whilst wife is tending to baby/children. Sad yes I know. They come across to the wife as being understanding and loving but are getting a lap dance on Thursday nights and sleeping with other women whilst away on business or when the opportunity arises. What I am presuming GF is trying to say is that contrary to what is "right" in our eyes and what we think our husbands are like - a lot of men have a physical (not emotional) need for sex and leaving it more than 2/3 months after having a baby may cause anxiety to men....hence the start of problems in relationships. Whether we like it or not and say "Oh poor them what about us" it doesn't change that, it's one of lifes unfair handouts.

Now before I get shot I want to just say that I'm bloody grateful that I was a single parent when having my daughter as I would be with the rest of you and told him to get stuffed if he came near me within the first 2 months but I can understand where GF is coming from. My now husband had this same thing with his ex wife, it went from having sex continuously to concieve, to nothing whilst pregnant, nothing for 6 months after and then periodically....twice/three times a year. It's not the best formula for a great marriage me thinks?

Some of what she is saying does make sense but whether we choose to accept it or be able to comply that's a different story all together. I know I couldn't give a stuff about my toenails after giving birth but I would have loved to have been able to, so I take my hat off to those women who manage it!

x

Lucy88 I'd put money on the fact that your nursery/primary school staff don't give the parents advice on their sex lives too, unlike Ms Ford.

My ds has many routines, which I hit on by watching him as a baby and seeing when he needed to eat/sleep etc, and copying this - rather than one person telling me all babies should be up by 7 or whatever.
My HV commented on the fact I had matching clothes/shoes on a few days after csection - so what? I was a mess inside.

She pisses me off because she has no medical training yet contradicts accepted medical advice in her books that some people are clueless to follow to the letter.

The reasons I can't stand Gina Ford are not because of her methods specifically. They don't suit me personally but I understand some people thrive on routines, and appreciate advice on them.

I can't stand her because:

1. In the CLBB, she constantly reinforces the message that her way is the only way, and that if you don't follow her methods you are setting yourself up for failure. This is untrue - hers is just one of many possible methods. This can - and does - have a negative effect on many mums who read her books

1. Her methods are not supportive of breastfeeding. In fact they could actually undermine BF. Therefore her methods actually work against the interests of mothers and babys IMO, and could be damaging to the health of both.

1. Her books can be damaging for the self esteem of mothers - because many mums who do not manage to get their babies into the routines feel like a failure - and also because her methods tie the mother so firmly to the house. Her routines discourage mothers from getting out and meeting other mums, or simply being out in the world.

1. Her methods are unscientific.

1. Her books are best-selling. They pop up everywhere. Well-meaning friends and relatives buy them for new mums, not realising they could be giving them the gift of a sense of failure and an attack on their self esteem! Because she's so ubiquiitous I think those of us who have read it have a duty to let others know what a pile of claptrap it is!

1. She threatened to sue Mumsnet, for a comment which was obviously a joke. It was an important case. Had it got to court it would have probably set a precident, as Gina Ford's laywers were arguing that Mumsnet should be responsible for all the content we posters write on this website. It's an important question. Are Mumsnet (and other forum owners) effectively publishing the crap that we write? Should people be able to sue Mumenst for lible for stuff that we say? This was never resolved in court. But if it had made it to court and Gina Ford had won, it could have had an enormously negative impact on free speech across the internet, if forum owners became scared of being done for libel. Had she won it could well have shut mumsnet down too, and we wouldn't be having this conversation - well not here anyway. AFAIK mumsnet settled out of court and I suspect they have some kind of agreement to police what we say about her. If that's true resent that she's put mumsnet in that position, personally, and am outraged that she tried to shut us down, for a joke!

I have nothing against routines as such. I wish someone else would write a guide to setting routines for your children which supported BFing (as well as FF), which encouraged mothers to feel good about themselves, which was based on some kind of science, and which wasnh't written by someone who thinks threatening to sue a parenting forum is a good idea.

Yes, I can't stand the woman, and for good reason, don't you think?

*libel not lible!

Everything that alice said.

Plus - she glosses her experience to make herself sound like an authority. I think she should be frank and acknowledge that her way is an OPINION - and nothing more. No more or less valuable than the opinions of all who post here and all who don't.

If you follow GF's methods even slightly then its likely that you will be getting more sleep than baby led methods. It is therefore feasible that you may want to pop out of the baby bubble and connect with your DP/DH and feel the way you did before DD/DS arrived. Or you may not and feel that investing all your time and energy into your offspring is the best way. It's a choice and GF is simply expressing her opinion from having worked with many families over the years. I don't hold with the theory that no kids = no valid opinion in the same way that I don't think male gynaecologists are not valid because they lack a vagina! I was an exponent of the 70's parenting of bottle feeding/routine and controlled crying so I suspect that many MN'ers will think I don't qualify to have an opinion on this (as did my midwives) you just have to do what's best for your family and that does include your DH/DP. You don't have to martyr yourselves unless of course that's exactly what you want to achieve.

I don't particularly want to get involved in this debate, mainly because on the whole I come down on the side of GF, which clearly most people on this thread do not. I found her routines worked for me on the whole (and yes, I bf all 3 of mine exclusively) and gave me a great guideline on how to do stuff. I always find it strange how everyone on Mumsnet seems to hate GF, but almost everyone (probably 80% of my friends with babies) I know in RL used and found her contented little baby book helpful. I don't know why there is such a discrepancy.

I haven't read her new book and probably never will as my youngest is now nearly 3, but the summary seems fairly sensible to me. As far as I can tell she is saying that in her experience of new mothers (and despite having no children of her own she has probably observed more new mothers close up than any of us - most of our own experience is based on one person, i.e. ourselves) those who are happiest are those who make time for their relationship with their partner, who remember that they are a person and have a life beyond the astonishing new little bundle that has sent a whirlwind through their lives.

This makes sense to me. After I had DD1 I was completely overwhelmed, but little things really helped me from floundering, e.g. my SIL coming over when DD1 was 2 weeks old and watching her while DH and I snatched a quick meal at the pub 500 yards down the road - suddenly we could talk and relax for the first time (and yes - it was about the baby, but we laughed at ourselves and our joint lack of knowledge on what we were supposed to be doing and felt happy and on the same side for the first time since she'd been born). This is exactly what GF recommends that people try and do - go on some sort of a date. Sex resumed soon after that and I can honestly say that I never once, during the whole time I was bf (3 children, so add it up and in total that makes nearly 2 years of my life) did I ever want it (must be something hormonal I suppose), but guess what, every time once we got going, it was wonderful and left me feeling fabulous, happy and more in love with DH than ever, and it made him happy too. Knowing this, I made the effort. These things are important, they just are and I think to deny it is a bit simplistic. People who manage to maintain a loving relationship with their partner during the baby whirlwind are going to be happier - surely that is all she is trying to say and then giving advice on how to maintain a good relationship, physical intimacy is generally a big part of that.

'If you follow GF's methods even slightly then its likely that you will be getting more sleep than baby led methods'

Can you back that up with any evidence ? Because I find that a highly misleading statement, and it doesn't fit in with my experience at all.

Fair enough Alice you make some very legitimate points about her methods. But why the need for venom directed against her personally? You can point out all the ways her methods are dubious without saying you 'can't stand her'

I appreciate the many, many posters who made comments about her on this site, which led to the threat of libel action did think they were being tres hilaire, but she clearly didn't find it funny. Given the nature of the comments I don't blame her for being upset.

I think it is making too much of a leap to say from that she poses a threat to freedom of speech in general and the internet in particular. I think people should be more careful when they post bullying and abusive comments, regardless of how 'funny' they think they are being.

that post was to marniemummy

Belgo, all I can say from my personal experience is that the parents I knew who followed a routine and had clear bedtimes for eg seemed a lot happier and relaxed than those parents I know who would not put their baby down at all or picked it up the moment it cried.

I work in child protection and lack of routine for a child in terms of reasonably firm routines around feeding and sleeping is seen as a warning sign that parents are not coping well.

Spero you see in my experience exactly the opposite is true.

I could also use my professional credentials to back up that statement.

But I won't because it means jack shit on the internet.

Belgo I don't think it means jack shit, I think it is a useful and interesting debate.

If it means jack shit, why are you here and commenting?

Attempting to use your professional experience to give credence to your opinions is meaningless. There is no way of proving who you are or what you do.

There are many comments on here which are simply opinions based on a very limited experience, without any real research to back them up.

And much of it is to GF's benefit, to help her sell more books.

I take your point I could be an evil troll. But hopefully a short search of my posts since 2007 would put your mind at rest on that one.

I am stating a fact, which is known to me through both professional and personal experience. People can give it as much or as little credence as they feel comfortable with.

But I don't see why debate should be stifled because some people are irresponsible and pretend to know things when in fact they don't.

No I won't search your posts - I never search any posts - I respond to what you post now.

And stating an opinion as fact, without being able to back it up, as marniemummy has done, is misleading.

Spero it's interesting what you say about not wanting debate to be stifled because it seems that GF herself does not share your views.

Well, I can only comment on what I have experienced of my own attempts at motherhood. I slightly follow GFs CLB advice, and like Marnie suggests, I get lots of sleep. My DD is happy and relaxed, can get herself off to sleep, is happy playing on her mat while I do the dishes or put the washing out. I went out three weeks after she was born for dinner with my DH (two hours out door-to-door, so perfectly reasonable when baby is asleep) and felt ready to d-t-d about 5/6 weeks after.

What Gina suggests is not actually out of the realms of possibility.

Of course, I am loathe to admit the above as anything other than suffering the effects of a non-sleeping, clingy baby is classed at being smug.

I didn't understand GF to be wanting to 'stifle debate' - it was a lbel action because things were said about her which were demonstrably untrue and extremely hurtful.

As this thread has not been deleted, I assume we are still allowed to have a debate about child care methods. GF has not shut this down.

When I state that lack of routines is seen as a warning sign in child protection case, this is not my opinion. This is a fact.

If you are saying that people should be cautious about accepting facts from anonymous internet posters, I completely agree with you.

But the fact that there are dodgy people on the Internet is not going to stop me from posting about areas in which I have an interest and some professional experience.