Would someone like to have an objective debate on attachment parenting vs. Ford?!

[ljhooray]

Hi everyone,
I know there are lots of passionate supporters of attachment parenting just as there are passionate supporters of very routine based parenting (i.e. Gina Ford). As Mumsnet knows well, its easy to find debate on Ford, but what I've been totally unable to find is a proper debate on Attachment Parenting. Having read Dr. Sears and others, I would find it difficult to follow what in a way is also a very strict approach. Although its the exact opposite of Ford, I feel it also puts lots of pressure on the family.

Please please please, can we find a middle ground somewhere? I think that's what I'm trying with my lovely daughter Sophie. We occassionally dip into Rachel Waddilove's Baby Book and Penelope Leach You and Your Child and although things feel right for us< i would love to get some thoughts from others.

Like krang says, no one in 'my' RL ever discusses parenting techniques. Only on MN

Oblomov, why do you say that extended bf is the very opposite of what you believe?

Read all the books and/or listen to everyone, then use the bits you like when you need them. Doing it all someone else's way wouldn't feel right to me.

Kids, and IME adults, need routine AND attachment in their lives. Its not an either/or - so I agree about middle grounds.

Its all been said, but another vote for taking bits from books if they help, but not letting anyone but yourself make the relationship/parenting decisions. Thats a tapestry that gets woven between you and your child.

I'm a bit anti-guru these days

Please harpsi, I don't want to go down this road again. I know lots of people like it. Its' not for me. Not post age 4. I have read the reasoning, and I can accept their views, just don't agree.

oblmov, it was just a simple question, no need to be so defensive.

sorry harpsichord. My first post ever was on the topic. I was naieve. What a baptism of fire.

oh I see. I didn't know that. tbh I was interested is seeing if someone would enter into any kind of reasoned debate about extended bf because all I ever read is insults and YUK! responses.
which don't really count as an counterargument imo

I have never discussed parenting 'methods' with friends either

occasionally we do a 'little johnny is driving me mental' 'maybe he is tired' 'yes probably' type thing

I agree anniemac, I find it quite bizarre tbh that anyone would follow the wholesale advice of a complete stranger who knows nothing about you or your baby.
especially, tbh, a complete stranger like Tracey Hogg.
why not take the advice of your mum? or a friend? or someone whose parenting you admire?

harpsi - I'll talk about extended BF if you like . My daughter is 2.7 and still going strong...

My friend called me the other day in tears because her 2 month prem baby wasn't following the breast feeding routine the book said he should, I went round and threw book in bin and now she (and DS) much much happier - too much pressure!!

Harpsi - you have drawn me in - I am intelligent enough not to have YUK issues, I just see it as unecessary , past the age of.... about 2, when my ds was sitting down eating a 4 yr olds meal of paella followed by strawberrries and cream. My personal opinion.

"unnecessary"
why?

Enid - "overtired" - yes I love those car adverts, with the two 'adult' boys.

not necessary or unnecessary - just nice....

Lots of things in life are unnecessary but agreeable, surely?

Frances5 - did Ford really advocate attachment theory before she wrote her book? That backs up why I don't believe in books very much at all and think modelling and hands-on advice is far more effective.

As far as the intelligent attachment theory debate goes, I have generally found that attachment methods are used by parents that can afford to stay at home. I think we choose the theory that suits our lifestyle.

Children and adults I know who come from attachment backgrounds tend to lose their way and need to find guidance - not all can find it themselves. Children are often insecure and later have problems focussing.

Children from homes with severe routines, or have been in nurseries early, have other problems, also to do with insecurity, (particularly in co-ordination and physical stuff) often highly achieving, but with an underlying hangup and possibly being less tolerant.

I think it's good to be flexible and go with the flow of your baby's needs when they're young, but as soon as they need to interact socially they need to learn that life has limits. The important things is that this transition from doting parent to firm parent happens smoothly, and that parents ease their children from one to the other gently.

I believe that bf is the best, no comparison, but only up till they can eat a varied diet. I don't want to offend people who choose to continue. Please, don't pick on the words I chose (past tense) - Maybe unnecessary was the wrong word.

sorry that looked like I was correcting your spelling
lots of things are unnecessary.
giving a child paella and strawberries and cream is unnecessary. he would be fine with much simpler things.
It's unnecessary to give your child cuddles.

Hi everyone,

Can I just say a big thank you to everyone on this post and I totally take the criticism of the title of my post. I didn't really think through the implications of the word debate but what you lot have done is exactly what I was looking for! You've given me the faith that actually most mums are sensible, grounded and recognise that life is about bringing up your baby in the best way that suits.

I really do think that as much as any guru, model or manual will assure you that their approach will work (whatever 'work might mean!), neither polar extreme can truly prepare a little one for the life ahead. Enjoying a life where they have people that love them (which means different types of attachement and relationships), where they can cope with some unpredictability in life confident and still look forward to some things that stay true (like a nice bubbly bath before bed!) is not a bad aim. We'll all take our different roads there, what I'm so happy about is that this is the first time I've seen this subject discussed openly rather than having to be in one camp or another.

Now back to being a mum [wink}

Oblomov tbh I don't really understand your argument.
In fact I don't think it is an argument tbh.
bf is certainly best until 2 years old.
after that, it remains fabulous, nutritious and wonderful for all concerned.
what's not to agree with??
I JUST DON'T GET IT

harpsi - what about those of us who didn't have advice from family or friends?

And for a reasoned debate how about this - whilst I have nothing against those who choose to do extended bf, in this modern age it is unnecessary because they have all the vitamins and minerals they want now. Whereas many years ago that wouldn't have been the case.

And I suppose the YUK comes from the sexualisation of women. Whereas it's now becoming acceptable for women to be seen in public breastfeeding a baby, to her to have a toddler hanging off her breast is still seen as gross in some parts.

I think finding your own way is half the fun of having a child.I was brought up around family in Ireland and we were all just expected to take the babies change nappies etc Then my mum had a baby when I was 15 and I saw again at close hand what its like.When I had ds I realised a lot of this had kind of seeped in and I just kind of took pot luck with things and kept going with things that worked and ditched the rest.We don't need these people to tell us surely?Who are they and what qualifies them?