nannyme/crusts, I agree that crying in a baby is a form of expression, but it is their only form of expression when they are uncomfortable, in distress. So whilst crying in itself is not bad, long periods of crying without being responded to is damaging to the emotional development of a child. Particularly that of a baby whose brain is being shaped in response to the sensitivity of his/her carer. There are numerous studies on how crucial the first years of a child are in their developing a sense of self, particularly the first 6 months. If you wish to read up more, there is John Bowlby and his attachment theories.
I don't believe that CC, even with going in periodically to reassure or PUPD, is necessarily any better for the baby. Babies need to be responded to in a manner which meets their needs from their perspective, not some arbitrary action which is meaningless to them. I only say this because my dd's crying would have made her so hysterical she would not have noticed what I was doing, whichever form of CC I chose to adopt.
I am not having a go at you and CC. I take heart that you are open to other parents' experiences. It is perfectly fine to suggest GR, or CC etc. because it could work quickly and relatively painlessly for some babies. But as a person who works with parents, I hope you will remember to caveat it that it may not work for all babies and if baby is violently opposed, to back off for a month, even up to a year or two.
My difficulty as a first time mum reading GWMNBN or Whisperer etc is that they are so prescriptive. I know your wiki does say "if the baby protests" or something to that effect, but that language can be rather coy. My baby did not just "protest", she screamed, as if for her life.
And there is nothing wrong with co-sleeping, which worked like a dream for dd and I. And which I am also using with ds. I would like to see the day that co-sleeping is mentioned as a sleep solution with equal billing as CC and its variations. If babies are expected to adapt, then so should parents.
.