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

Is this mean or am I ridiculously soft?

80 replies

skidaddle · 18/04/2007 09:11

Now I know it's not nice to judge the parenting of others especially when their dd is only a month old BUT...
a couple we know leave their newborn dd to cry while they are having dinner because they decided before she was born that she wasn't going to disrupt their life (?!). We have had dinner with them twice recently, once at theirs and once at ours and each time we have had dinner through her screaming her little heart out (also waking up our dd to boot!). Each time dinner went on for maybe 20-30 mins.
I just don't undertand this - we would have happily waited until she had fed her, or else could one of them not have picked her up while we ate? They also leave her to cry at night for 15-20 mins before getting up? I just don't understand this - am I really soft (I have been accused of this before ) or does this sound mean to you? Is there anything to be gained? I certainly don't think she will 'learn' anything from it, do you?

OP posts:

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

sandcastles · 18/04/2007 10:17

I think it is mean.

I also think, if they let it continue for long enough she will learn that no one comes when she cries.

luciemule · 18/04/2007 10:21

They sound mean! Their DD at a month old is obviously crying for something (food or comfort I'd imagine!). How unrelaxing having to eat through that!!! I'm sure they'll realise soon enough after a few more weeks of newborn crying and if they don't, they're not being realistic.

Original poster

skidaddle · 18/04/2007 10:31

Exactly sandcastle, and I'm sure I have read somewhere that not responding promptly to your baby crying actually means he/she will cry MORE in the longterm

But even worse would be that she stopped crying at all

OP posts:

Interested in this thread?

Then you might like threads about these subjects:

Families General parenting

2cheekymonkeys · 18/04/2007 12:58

That's just horrible, there's NO WAY i could have sat and eaten dinner when my tiny baby was screaming for me in another room.

If I'd been having dinner at their house I probably would have gone and picked the baby up myself. A baby that young will learn NOTHING from being left to cry like that. They need to feel their parents nearby and be reassured that they're loved and will be fed if they need it.

But then I can't stand to hear tiny babies screaming in the supermarket while their mums calmly float about inspect labels etc. I want to go up to them and shout JUST PICK HIM UP FOR GOD'S SAKE.

amess · 18/04/2007 13:12

Horrid!
As someone has already said, it reminds me of that NSPCC advert.

At such a young age? No.

I would have to stop having dinner with them, I just would not be able to eat properly, my stomach would eat as I tried to swallow each mouthful.

And your dd being woken too would just be the final straw.

kayjayel · 18/04/2007 13:29

Hi skidaddle, it sounds like an horrid position to be in.

Could you let parents know that controlled crying now not advised til 12 mths (6 if you have to), and that research shows that babies cry MORE if they're left to cry in the early days? Thus they might be storing up problems for the future? I know its potentially a row, but if its starting this early, this may be the first thing of many you disagree on, so it might be easier in the beginning to air it. You could say that you don't know if she knows it, but that it would be irresponsible of you not to let them know so that they could make a proper informed choice? Unfortunately people do have the right to be fairly horrid to their children, but sometimes people just don't know enough about those choices, rather than being horrid. And if they've read/ been told that its okay... If its still their choice, then its just up to you how you cope with it. There's the risk that they'll hate you, but also a chance that this baby's needs get met properly - is it worth that risk?

I've had this discomfort over loads of things and I usually try to give myself a slap and think 'its their children'. For most things you only get a snapshot. But you're actually seeing it happen. It feels like such a central issue for their later mental health/emotional wellbeing.

Good luck!

ps - you're not soft - you're 'emotionally responsive'!

2cheekymonkeys · 18/04/2007 13:31

My babies were attached to me pretty much 24/7 for at least the first few months (I carried them in a sling when I needed my hands free) and they were very calm, content and happy. hardly cried at all. I can't help feeling your friends are setting themselves up for having a very unhappy fretful baby.

lullamay · 18/04/2007 20:27

Hi, I was going to post something similar to your opening question except that in my case it's my sister & her husband. It really stresses me out but they see me as being too soft on my children & say they won't be "controlled" by their newborn.

I assumed it was a cultural thing as they live in Paris.

Blondilocks · 18/04/2007 20:33

Don't think 20-30 mins is too bad to be honest. If it was a leisurely hour + meal then that is pushing it somewhat.

Although I think personally I would rather have they baby in a rocking car seat or something so I could have a quiet meal!

dingolimpet · 18/04/2007 20:35

That just sounds wrong, If that'd been in my houe i'd have to say something.
I've never left my ds to cry, and while it's been a pretty demanding two years, now he is the most independant happy little boy ever, and i feel like I definitely made to right desision to carry him round everywhere.

twentypence · 18/04/2007 20:39

knowing what I know about the infant brain - I would have picked up their child myself. At one month old she hasn't got the frontal lobe capacity to learn anything from this crying. Also if she is upset and abandoned then she is flooded with cortisol - which is not ideal for having a settled child. In the long run she will disrupt their lives more, because she will not develop the ability to relax.

I understand there are times you have to ignore the crying or some people would never eat. However it doesn't sound as if this is one of those times.

kama · 18/04/2007 20:40

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

foxybrown · 18/04/2007 20:43

much as I don't want to be judgemental, that's just wrong. I do get the leaving for 10 mins or so to see if they settle themselves, but not at a month old.

having a baby and thinking its not going to disrupt their life - oh well, its early days, they'll learn!

Skidaddle, I totally agree with you.

exbury · 18/04/2007 22:57

How awful - TBH, I think I would have gone and picked their LO up myself (and probably never been invited round ever again )

Original poster

skidaddle · 19/04/2007 15:32

Thanks everyone, now I think maybe I will pick her up next time. i do feel guilty as I was party to it, but it's so difficult to intervene when you know that they will take it as a criticism (which it would be).

kayjayel - i don't think it is just ignorance on their parts. They are both extremely educated well-informed people and their house is full of parenting/baby books. I am almost certain that the mum at least has read about controlled crying. I think it is an informed decision that they (well she really) has made. Which makes it even worse...

OP posts:

kayjayel · 19/04/2007 15:54

Oh no, that does make it worse! Hope you find a way to cope with this, good luckxx

electra · 19/04/2007 15:58

What they are doing is awful - poor child I used to hold the baby while eating if necessary.

electra · 19/04/2007 16:02

Controlled crying is not something any childcare expert would recommend for a baby under 6 months (at least, I would say) - does she know that?

dumbymummy · 19/04/2007 16:11

Agree with Harpsi - sorry, but they wouldn't be my choice of dinner date. I never left my ds to cry, not for one minute. I may have been lucky, but he never cried much any way. Now, at 2.5, he's confident and independent. My guess is that your friends will end up with the exact opposite of what they want - a clinging dd who's uncertain of her parents' affection.

harpsichordcarrier · 19/04/2007 16:12

this isn't "controlled crying" though - is it? controlled crying is about let the baby cry himself to sleep to teach them to get themselves to sleep. this isn't about sleep training or good habits. it's because the baby is inconveniently crying at a meal time

sandyballs · 19/04/2007 16:21

I could never have done this at 1 month with my twin babies - me and DH used to balance one each on our knee whilst we ate with the other hand, or put them in their baby seats right next to us, could never eat whilst they screamed. Poor little baby .

lady007pink · 19/04/2007 18:36

I am relieved to read these replies! I have been accused by DH, MIL and neighbours of being too soft with 5-month-old DD2 for picking her up the minute she cries. I could NEVER sit through a meal while she cries, but there's been a few occasions where I've been cooking using hot liquids and knives, then I'll leave her to cry rather than put her life at risk.
It's obvious this poor baby is starving!

wanderingstar · 19/04/2007 19:59

Oh God poor little mite.
Yes it's annoying when you're exhausted, starving and they start to cry, but there are indeed loads of things you can eat with one hand.

Personally I could never have sat through a meal thinking about the agony of any of my newborns' cries. For that's what that type of crying is at that age.

twentypence · 19/04/2007 20:06

If they are well read I could get you some research that says that they are damaging her brain and she will never reach her full potential because the brain cannot learn to do amazing stuff when it's stressed.

beckybrastraps · 19/04/2007 20:14

OK. My ds cried all the time. Really, all the time.

And for a while it was extremely hard for me to deal with. And there were times when I left him yelling and went into another room.

It was either long term psychological damage, or immediate physical damage. Seriously.

After a while I came to terms with it, and held him (usually still yelling, holding didn't always help) while doing other things. But it left me pretty desensitised to the sound of a baby crying, sadly for dd who came later.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Swipe left for the next trending thread