Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Sleep

Join our Sleep forum for tips on creating a sleep routine for your baby or toddler. Need more advice on your childs development? Sign up to our Ages and Stages newsletter here.

what do little babies think of controlled crying?

108 replies

longlady · 09/11/2007 18:42

"He awakes in a mindless terror of the silence, the motionlessness. He screams. He is afire from head to foot with want, with desire, with intolerable impatience. He gasps for breath and screams until his head is filled and throbbing with the sound. He screams until his chest aches, until his throat is sore. He can bear the pain no more and his sobs weaken and subside. He listens. He opens and closes his fists. He rolls his head from side to side. Nothing helps. It is unbearable. He begins to cry again, but it is too much for his strained throat; he soon stops. He waves his hands and kicks his feet. He stops, able to suffer, unable to think, unable to hope. Then he falls asleep again." I think this description from Jean Liedloff is very convincing and very heartbreaking. Babies cannot know that their parents are in the next room.

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
notnowbernard · 11/11/2007 22:26

It wasn't about 'sleeping through' for me. I just wanted to be able to put my baby in her cot after her feed and her not go into one almighty meltdown... and then wake up every 1.5 - 2 hours for the rest of the night. And to not feel loke a zombie the next day. And to not have to contemplate a return to work on next-to-no sleep.

Yes, babies wake up alot for loads of reasons. If they sleep through completely uninterrupted every night, that's bloody marvellous!

But surely having to live every night over and over with that level of distress and disruption is no good for anyone. Even if it is 'only for a year'.

Shitemum · 11/11/2007 22:27

should be a comma after DD1, sorry

Shitemum · 11/11/2007 22:31

For me it's purely a matter of habit. Babies like what they know and expect. If you change what they expect they get used to it pretty fast. I mean if you are there every time they wake up that's what they'll expect. If you stop being there, as gradually and kindly as possible, they will get used to you not being there and learn to fall back to sleep themselves.

seeker · 11/11/2007 22:33

I meant Dr Ferber - sorry couldn't remember the name. And he does now recommend 12 months as a minimum age. If you are are going to do it, then the baby has to be old enough to be aware that a person who goes away is going to come back and hasn't just vanished off the face of the earth. They also have to be old enough to have some control over their emotions and actions - and to have reached an age where they can have wants that aren't also needs.

DaddyJ · 11/11/2007 22:35

Mala, thanks for the info!

I checked his book at the library the other day
and the only age reference I could find was
5-6 months with reference to when a baby should be able to sleep through.

No mention of earliest CC could be done.

On this page of his hospital's website he again reiterates
that babies should be sleeping through by 4-5 months
which in our experience was actually too early for our dd.

Where did you read about the 12 months thing?
I am a bit confused now!

Shitemum · 11/11/2007 22:38

I still think it's far more traumatic for a 1 year old than for a 3 month old. But DD1 never cried for more than 4 minutes at a time, went to sleep after a total max of 15 minutes and was sleeping through after 2 or 3 nights, so maybe I was just lucky...

DaddyJ · 11/11/2007 22:39

Thanks for coming back, seeker.

I am really looking forward to reading this revised advise,
even more so because it completely conflicts
with everything I have found so far in terms
of literature, Mumsnet and personal experience.

In fact, I would not recommend CC for children
who are older than 1 year and display the kind
of maturity that you describe.
Gradual withdrawal would be much more appropriate.

seeker · 11/11/2007 22:42

If anybody's got time, this is interesting

seeker · 11/11/2007 22:44

DaddyJ - I'll look out the reference!

Shitemum · 11/11/2007 22:45

DaddyJ - there was a big hoo-ha about this wasn't there? i thought you discussed it on the other thread at the beginning of the year. In the new edition he says 12m minimum, apparantly...Personaly I think he was maybe just trying to move with the current climate to avoid going out of favour. Were there any long-term studies of the effects of CC in the end?... can't remember...anyway, I think there are too many variables to be able to know for sure if CC has any long-term effects or if other factors are affecting a persons development

Shitemum · 11/11/2007 22:48

DaddyJ your link to Ferber's page is for a June 2004 newsletter - he revised the lower age limit after that I think.

Shitemum · 11/11/2007 22:54

Thanks seeker, I think most people who are not attachment parenting have at some point left their babies to cry for the same time it took DD1 to learn to fall asleep by herself. What's the difference between a baby crying in the living-room for 5 minutes while you finish hanging out the washing/deal with an important phone-call/stop the dinner from burning etc etc and crying for 5 minutes in their cot? All they know is that you are not there, not why.

seeker · 11/11/2007 23:04

Read the article in my previous post - it has some scientific research about the effects od cc on infants.

DaddyJ · 11/11/2007 23:07

Mala, there certainly would be a big hooha
if Dr. Ferber suddenly said that CC before
12 months is in any way 'bad' -
the guy is in the US, all the parents who
did CC before 12 months on his advice would sue him!

We would have heard about it and there would
be definite sources - not just on Mumsnet!

All the advocates of CC I have found advocate
3-6 months with reference to Ferber.

It mystifies me, why would Ferber suddenly change
his views after 2004? Did any new evidence emerge?

All the scientific studies (yes, we found them alright!)
showed that CC was perfectly safe for babies from
4 months onwards.

DaddyJ · 11/11/2007 23:10

seeker, there is one particularly illuminating post on that
blog, let me find it!

That particular post appeared a few weeks
after we had this epic debate about CC on MN
which makes me suspect that the Aussie blogger occasionally has a look on MN

DaddyJ · 11/11/2007 23:30

Found it!

This is the only post on her entire blog that actually
contains any reference to bona fide scientific studies
on Controlled Crying.
Unfortunately, those studies all show CC to be safe!

'There is abundant research that clearly indicates that leaving a baby
to cry for any amount of time is harmful,..'
Such research does exist but it shows the opposite!

She 'can only find three' of these studies (there are more)
and she fails to provide any links - why?
That's because their existence is an embarrassement to
her espoused faith.

She then goes on to critise the methodology without
being qualified to do so and without suggesting any
alternative methodology.

The sentence that really takes the biscuit is:
'the only method used to measure the infants emotional state is maternal observation'

Sacre bleu!? They asked mothers if their babies were okay?!
Who would trust mothers to make such judgement calls?
Surely, only men in white labcoats can really know if a baby
is fine or not.

seeker, apologies for ending this post with a portion of sarcasm,
it's not aimed at you but everytime I get into this stuff
it reminds of Scientology:
purporting to be science but bearing all the hallmarks of organised religion.

seeker · 12/11/2007 05:46

'Other adverse effects of controlled crying on the infant are also significant and lifelong. Psychoneuroimmunologists have found that under stress the adrenal cortex releases cortisol, which causes an inhibition in the formation of antibodies (Rapee 2001, p. 51), and, in chronic stress situations such as controlled crying, results in long term immunological impairment (Buckley 2006). Early adverse experiences can interfere with establishment of social bonds and the regulation of emotional behavior later in life (Wismer Fries 2005). Experiments on infant rats have even found that early maternal inattention adversely effects the development of the limbic system, the vermis and the hippocampus, which, for humans, has lifelong effects on sexual arousal and the ability to love, and results in an increased risk of developing borderline personality disorder (Teicher et. al. 2001, p. 157). These negative effects show that viewing and treating a person from a purely scientific perspective and completely disregarding the holistic, embodied nature of an infant, can have lifelong effects on the formation of a positive personal identity.'

seeker · 12/11/2007 06:01

Sorry - didn't mean to post that uncommented on.

I don't think anyone can know with absolute certainty that cc is either safe oe unsafe. Certainly I haven't seen any scientific proof of its safety - and frankly, I don't see how there can be any. Not unless you track two groups of babies through to adulthood recording their emotional states on a regular basis as you go! But it seems to me to be likely that a system where a parent does something that upsets both parent and child is more likely to have adverse effects than a system which doesn't.

DaddyJ - you challenge the statement 'the only method used to measure the infants emotional state is maternal observation'.

Maternal observation is not scientific proof. Parents through the ages have carried on with lots of questionable child rearing techniques from weaning at 3 weeks to smacking saying "Well, it didn't do my dcs any harm"

TwinklylightAttendant · 12/11/2007 06:04

I don't know the answer here, never tried cc, haven't needed to because it's just me and the children so we all share a bed, and a bed-time.
I do however remember being left when I was little, calling out for my mum from my bed, she wouldn't come - I would lie under the covers terrified, sweating, unable to move, barely able to breathe, and call over and over again until she would storm into the room saying 'what???' really angrily. I often lay awake for hours until the sun came up.
That's why I can't bring myself to leave my children to cry, but I know there are people whose situations and children are different and it might be somehow more appropriate for them, I don't know.

systemsaddict · 12/11/2007 07:07

Sorry, this will be long but that quote really affected my experience and I need to respond with our story for spottyshoes and anyone else who's worried.

I read the Liedloff book when first pregnant and that quote stuck in my mind, so I would never leave ds to cry at all the first few months - had co-sleeper cot till he grew out of it then used to dash upstairs to him at 1st noise. Fine when he was tiny, and exactly what I will do with the next one too, but by 6 months he was still waking several times a night and needed a feed to get back to sleep. I was getting exhausted, not a good mum during the day, and he was becoming increasingly cranky and miserable.

Eventually I started doing a lot of reading - Elizabeth Pantley was good, tried her methods for weeks but no progress. Finally, reading the discussions DaddyJ refers to I came across systematic reviews of different sleep training methods, to find the most effective seemed to be 'extinction' (CIO), which didn't seem to be associated with any heightened anxiety; but since parents couldn't bring themselves to try it, the next most effective was CC, with regular checks. So after much soul-searching decided to try CC.

But ... CC didn't work, because ds would just get crosser when we went in to check him. So with a heavy heart, one day, we tried CIO. In desperation, and only because I'd read the research on extinction. First time: 45 minutes crying, then asleep. I was crying too. Next time: 10 mins. Next time: 5 mins. Next time: straight down. Started sleeping almost through straight away - the breakthrough was that he had learned to settle himself at his brief night wakings.

But I still had the Liedloff quote in my head and was worried, so was still reading, and finally found something on Dr Sears which said, look, if you are really desperate and feel you HAVE to try CC or similar, then carefully observe your child's behaviour during the day. If you see them getting depressed or anxious at all, that's your sign to stop. And that was my 'lightbulb moment'. He was SO much happier during the day from day one of doing this, he was like a different baby. It was absolutely clear that this was what he had needed, he is a child who needs lots of sleep and that reliance on me to settle him back was really disturbing that sleep and making him very grouchy.

He still cries himself off (now 14 mo.) for a few minutes sometimes if he's tired, but now I see it as him just being grumpy and tired. If he wakes and cries in the night now and doesn't settle after a minute I know there's something actually wrong, and I will of course go in - whether it's teething or I think he's had a couple of nightmares and just needed a cuddle. But now I know when there's something wrong. And he is a blissfully happy child, really chilled out, affectionate and clearly doesn't feel abandoned in any way.

I am absolutely not advocating CIO for everyone. I would have loved the no-cry solutions to work for ds, or even CC, but they didn't. Different things work for different children, and we only know which will work for ours by trying it out. We will make mistakes - the main thing is that we want the best for our kids and love them. Also not everyone has sleep problems, so some people are lucky enough never to have to think about this stuff!! But I do feel we shouldn't be frightened off trying methods which have been proven to work for some babies with sleep difficulties by emotive things like this with no evidence behind them.

No offense to OP but I know spottyshoes and others may feel really upset by that quote, just like I was, so I wanted to make sure the other side of the story was heard.

theUrbanDryad · 12/11/2007 09:22

great post systemsaddict - it's really good to hear the other side of the story IYSWIM!!

some interesting points of view here - DaddyJ, i'm curious, did you use CC or CIO? when did you find it worked for you? i have also heard (anecdotally) that Dr Ferber recanted his statement that CC was appropriate from 3-6 months, i'll try to find a link.

i found Pantley very interesting, because for me, she changed the definition of "sleeping through". she says sleeping through means 5 hours uninterrupted sleep, and when you put it like that, of course sleeping through becomes a much more achievable goal! ds was sleeping through (by this definition) at around 8 weeks, and then at 17 weeks all hell broke loose! he has been a crappy sleeper ever since, and will fight with me rather than go to sleep. i'm trying the No Cry Sleep Solution, but if it's not working after 60 days (which is the longest time period Pantley found for it to take effect) then i will go to CC, and if that doesn't work, to CIO. ds will be 12 months by then, and i'll be such a zombie that i won't care!!

Pantley's methods centre around making a sleep log for you child, then working around his basic routine. she also goes into the biological basis of sleep - circadian rhythms and so on, and working to implement a good biological clock for your child. she does advocate an hour of "quiet time" before bed, a gradual winding down which will help the child learn that when (for example) he has a bath, a massage, and a story, then it's bedtime. she also introduced me to the idea of "key words", which are words that you use at nap and bedtimes, such as, "Time for bed sleepy boy," or, "It's sleepytime now." i like the theory behind it, because it seems to be a middle ground between CIO or CC and living with it! she's also very objective and the book is written in simple language which for me, in my sleep deprived state, is a godsend!!

TwinklylightAttendant · 12/11/2007 10:16

I don't know how many desperate mums here have tried co sleeping but it works really, really well here and basically the desperate nights are very far and few...I am starting to believe that children and parents sleeping near each other is natural and desirable.
During the few times I tried getting ds1 to sleep in his own bed, yes it was achieved but at huge cost to my sanity and I was exhausted...despite family and friends saying it was wrong etc. I have gone back to letting him share, and now ds2 is here and we all share.
I get lots of sleep and would recommend it to anyone - I would have gone insane by now without co sleeping.

TheQueenOfQuotes · 12/11/2007 11:52

Twinkly - we WERE co-sleeping with DS1 and it made sod all difference, we co-slept from day one (even in the hospital!). We didn't get any sleep with him co-sleeping.

FluffyMummy123 · 12/11/2007 11:53

Message withdrawn

TheQueenOfQuotes · 12/11/2007 11:56

"can't even remember the number of times I have known dd was safe and warm and all of the above, but she'd managed to get her arm stuck in the cot, or had an extra burp to get rid of, or was getting a cold, or a million other things I can't possibly have known about if I hadn't gone to her when she cried."

ermm that's why with CC you go back and check them at regular intervals.....