kayjayel, I will be very careful not to sound too critical of your post because I can see
you took great pains to provide information without causing offence.
Will try and follow your example. (For once! )
You say that CC has a place but only as a last resort. At the same time, again you repeat the claim that no one knows
what the long term effects of CC are and you suggest that there are good reasons for believing that they are possibly negative.
I have come across this combination of statements quite a few times on Mumsnet and elsewhere but there is one thing I don't understand:
Surely, something that might have any kind of negative effect on my dd's mental health will never, ever be an option. Not even as a last resort.
Can you explain to me why you would consider something as a last resort that you think might damage your child?
I have looked and looked for the evidence of this long-term damage but to no avail.
Even if it is only a possibly tiny risk factor there must be a way to quantify it, there must be someone, somewhere suffering from it.
Has there ever been a documented case of someone mentally ill due to being sleep-trained as an infant?
Why, kayjayel, after 50 years of Attachement Parenting theory has this damage not been
unearthed, documented, quantified? Why is the paediatric world completely relaxed about this?
They deal with children every day for a living, why have they not seen this damage and flagged it up?
Why were we issued with a strongly worded advice sheet on the risks of co-sleeping when we left hospital but nothing at all about CC?
You use some very charged words in your analogy with CC ? I can?t blame subsequent posters for taking offence:
Learned helplessness, hopelessness, depression.
How do you explain that none of us parents on these forums and none of the parents in the studies posted encountered any kind of symptoms that could be related to helplessness etc?
I don't want to be disrespectful to you but don't you think that the reason you can see the analogy is because you want to see the analogy.
It is a shame that you cannot really see the analogy with your own eyes because you have never done CC with your lo so you don't actually know what happens in reality.
You are not alone. From what I have read just about everyone who argues against CC has never done it and will never actually 'see' it for real.
We have seen it and I can assure you the effects are overwhelmingly positive.
You would probably argue that we have only seen the short term effects but why would our los suddenly become mentally unstable
when in the immediate aftermath and months after this 'traumatic' event they seem more than fine?
Your last point - once they can talk it is a different story - is based on a highly contentious AP assertion: that all cries are the same and all cries necessitate immediate parental intervention.
And I agree with you to a certain extent:
if a parent is not capable of distinguishing between different cries then Controlled Crying might well have a negative impact on the parent's mental health and they should not do it.
I hope my post was as measured as yours!
Thanks again for your thoughts.