If I can’t leave my baby to cry then what am I supposed to do here???!

[parpsb]

Everything I read online says you cannot leave your baby to cry. I obviously have always tried to avoid this. He’s now 10 months and goes absolutely crazy if I am not with him. He does sleep at night but in the day it is non stop. I can’t cook or eat or shower. My partner works away in the week and this can’t be changed. No family nearby and nobody local to help unless we paid.

What am I supposed to do? Even if he’s in his high chair and I start cooking he will lose it, wants to get out, then I take him to the playpen and go back to cook and again he’s screaming, howling. I just want to disappear.

Leaving to cry in this situation is different to leaving him to cry to sleep. When you leave the to cry themselves to sleep, they give up. In these situations you can still be within sight, talking to him so.he can hear you etc. As long as you're responsive you're doing no harm. It will pass.

At 10 months, you can tell a grumpy grizzle from an actually distressed wail. And I think being responsive doesn't have to mean holding the baby - having them contained in a bouncer, playpen etc but talking to them or looking every now and then while you cook or whatever is the best you can do.

Sometimes you just have to say 'like it or lump it, baby!'

When you say give up, do you mean fall asleep

Because that's what happens

Aw it‘s so hard at that age. If it’s any consolation my Velcro baby who spent ever moment stuck to me is a happy independent tween now. She’s a sensitive child. Still loves a cuddle but that stage definitely passes. Sometimes I had to leave her cry when I did something essential. I had her in a sling a lot. Are they always like this -maybe they are having some discomfort .

Having baby in highchair, or whatever, close by is not leaving them to cry. * *
Mine used to wail while I cooked, but we had to eat! I'd sing/talk to him throughout and he could see me most of the time too, so he always knew I was there. He cried, but he wasn't "left" to cry. Doesn't make it any easier to hear your baby upset, my mum would still feel bad if I cried to her after all, but you can reassure yourself it doesn't make you a bad parent.

This is completely normal and is a developmental stage that will pass. I highly recommend a good sling to have him in when you need hands free to do something and don't want to leave him crying for too long. Slings are brilliant tools and will give you more freedom whilst being able to keep him close. Also brilliant for walks where you don't want an awkward buggy. If you have a local sling library go there and get fitted/try some out.

I had a baby like this. I couldn’t do anything. I couldn’t even go to the toilet without a baby on my lap.

Go to a sling library and ask them to find you a good quality carrier you can backcarry with. Game changer. Your baby gets contact while you are hands free.

https://www.carryingmatters.co.uk/sling-pages/

I disagree with this. Neither of mine were easy and still aren’t as a toddler and primary aged child. My oldest had a condition that meant he nearly died, barely slept and cried every night all night until he was operated on at 10 months. My second is just an absolute Velcro baby - she (unlike him) hated being in a sling (and pram and car seat) and usually breastfed for hours and hours at a time nightly. My mum friends all thought they seemed pretty tricky babies, luckily by number 2, anything was easier than a baby screaming in pain night after night and you as mum being unable to solve it! There is a difference between a baby being with you in a room in a safe place and crying and being ‘left to cry’. It’s a science based suggestion relating to attachment theory and also the release of stress hormones. It’s very different having an involved parent cooking dinner and chatting to the baby and having a parent who puts the baby down and doesn’t return for hours despite the baby crying. I probably also find comments like this a bit more offensive than most as an adoptee though.

OP, don’t feel he can’t cry at all. He can be in the room with you crying while you cook or shower or fold laundry and that crying will gradually reduce. Chat to him, play music and see if that helps, give him some toys, except a bit of crying is expected and give him a big hug at the end. It’s really hard, but he will gradually understand it’s ok. I think 10 months is the beginning of a peak for separation anxiety, so don’t panic, it does get better as they grow.

Does baby have eczema, allergies or other health issues? It does get better and it will pass. Don’t leave them to cry.

We let my oldest cry for short periods of time and she was such a good baby. Slept through from 2 months and has consistently done so (now 3.5 years). She’s a happy, confident, feisty little girl.
So I know some controlled crying works and does them no harm. Yet I’ve struggled to let my 7 month old cry. She cries every time I leave the room, will only sleep on me in the day, wants to be held constantly. To say I’ve made a rod for my own back is an understatement 😂. She’s also an incredibly light sleeper, you only have to walk up the stairs or go to the loo and she’s crying! She does sleep through the night (as long as everyone stays still and quiet 😂). So the last week or so my husband has basically said ‘this has to stop’. So she will cry when I go up the stairs, he holds me back and literally she stopped crying and went back to sleep in less than 2 minutes!! I would have spent at least 30 mins cuddling and rocking!!
So I now let her cry in bed and it always stops quickly!
Next job is to get her to nap in her cot and go to bed awake so I can actually get all the jobs done in between school runs 🤦🏼‍♀️

All of my kitchen cupboards had child locks on bar one, which had Tupperware, wooden spoons, saucepans etc that the littles could pull out and play with.
I also did a treasure box of household objects which would engage my son alone.
But it’s fine to leave them to cry for short periods whilst you do essentials.

The advice now is that babies are mentally harmed by being left to cry, even for a few minutes, so poor mums are driving themselves into the ground and sacrificing their own mental and physical well-being to ensure this doesn’t happen. ‘Wearing’ your baby constantly, even if you don’t want to, is seen as a badge of honour. If you don’t you’re guilty of harming your baby.

The result is older toddlers who won’t entertain themselves, babies who don’t sleep through the night until they’re 3, parents getting hardly any sleep or privacy because their toddler is still sleeping in their bed and parents who are so frazzled they end up only have one child because being a parent is too hard.

It’s fab 👍

Bravo @SadDustBunny

I wish more people would stand up and say this.

To be fair this has always been part of African and Indian cultures (babies are encouraged to be held so they never cry unless seperated from mum / gran) and it has never resulted in women only having one child unless there are fertility reasons for it. The problem in the UK specifically is that there’s no confinement period - women are expected to do it all from day 1. That doesn’t happen in other cultures.

I agree.

Other cultures seem to do this without it resulting in harm to mum but we are doing something very, very wrong and I think the pressure on parents these days is going to result in many long-term problems.

I agree that part of that is lack of proper postnatal care and zero focus on maternal wellbeing.

Maybe he screams as he knows you come running? Seriously it won't harm him.

I did have twins, and this is absolutely true. They got used to being put down a lot because they were put down a lot by necessity. I just chatted and sang to them and 'checked in' with them lots. They didn't go the loo with me because I couldn't carry them both, so they got used to being left alone for short periods - safely in their cot of course (when they were tiny we had one cot in the living room and one in our bedroom).

The mentally harmed bit is ott

Dgd has never been left to cry and she can't seem to entertain herself for a minute now that she is older

Yes and co sleeping some of the time

I couldn't understand why dd had to take her to the loo all the time

There’s a big difference between leaving a baby to cry and a baby being upset because you’ve had to pop to the loo/make dinner/put a wash on. Can you put the dancing fruit from
you tube on for him? Or get a carrier/sling and strap him to you? I have the babybjorn and my wee boy is nearly 2 and we still use it when I’m cooking/hoovering etc. If you don’t like front carrying, do a back carrier? Honestly though, sometimes you just have to let them cry for a little bit while you get stuff done.

🤔 at all the posters suggesting OP uses YouTube/TV to entertain the baby while she pops to the loo.

I genuinely don’t understand how this could possibly be better than letting him grizzle? He’s 11 months old ffs. Introducing a screen as a babysitter at this stage means you will resort to this more and more until you get to the point where he will demand it and scream if it’s not given. Believe me.

It’s a science based suggestion relating to attachment theory and also the release of stress hormones.

IS there actually any science behind this? I've never looked but I'm very sceptical. I thought attachment theory in relation to loving families (as opposed to neglected babies, adoption etc) is bollocks with little evidence? Very much open to correction.

You are absolutely correct.

There's also a difference between putting baby in cot and simply walking away for the night and coming back after 5, 10 etc minutes to reassure baby that you are still there.

Attachment theory works for all families, the point is that in a loving stable family where needs are met, children are securely attached. That was my point, that there’s a huge difference between chatting to a baby while cooking or nipping to the loo and then comforting them, and leaving them for hours despite their crying and not meeting needs. Obviously OP is the first one, so she doesn’t need to worry.

Its attachment parenting which is completely separate to attachment theory that has little evidence.

Attachment theory is valid. Attachment parenting and attachment theory are not the same thing, though. Attachment theory is about basically saying you can't just swap a baby around to a load of different carers, they need to have a small number of consistent carers (ideally 1 or 2 primary attachment figures) that they can form a bond with. And also that their caregivers actually have to care about them and be responsive to them. Mechanical care that is just about physical needs (food, safety, sleep, warmth) is not enough - babies need emotional warmth and loving care or they don't develop properly. We learned this from the Romanian orphanages.

The poster you quoted was referring to babies who are left to cry to the point of neglect! Yes, neglecting a child will fuck up their attachment. This is highly likely to cause them issues in later life.

But (like the poster said) leaving them for 5 mins while you shower or complete any essential task is not the level of crying that is going to cause attachment disorders. And neither is something like sleep training, which is generally frowned upon in AP circles.

Loving families vs neglect basically is what attachment theory is. There is no attachment theory only in relation to loving families.