Actually I think it's probably right and proper that people with an alternate point of view and a seemingly 'anti' stance to sleep training such as cc and cio come and comment on here. Because in the first instance, there are other methods and avenues to explore and if there's one thing that the person requesting support hasn't tried and it's the thing that works without resorting to letting a baby cry, then hurrah that that one person commented. And I am always mindful with these kinds of debates that there is good research to suggest that leaving a baby to cry is harmful so if I can try and talk to somebody about why it might not be appropriate to sleep train a child of this age, then it might prevent that harm from happening. Of course, your child might not be harmed in the slightest but while the research is there, I will continue to comment and offer other povs. It's the same with weaning. There might be a legion of 'I did it this way', 'my baby's feeding a lot', 'I'm weaning early', but when best practice and good evidence suggests that early weaning is inadvisable then I will comment, even if my opinion wasn't the one originally sought.
Additionally, what also happens on threads when you seek only certain advice is that misconceptions become fact. Newmomma, you quite confidently assert that bfing is the main part of nutrition to 6 months and not after that. That's woefully incorrect. Milk is the main part of a baby's diet for a year. Solids are introduced as a complement to milk and become the main diet after 12 months. And between 6 months and 12 months, though your supply is established, drastic changes to feeding, particularly removing night feeds can be detrimental and sometimes fatal to a bfing relationship. When nightfeeds are the ones that protect and bolster supply, cutting them out is damaging. I cannot know exactly what happened in your case but you say it was your son's decision to cut down to 2/3 feeds at 8/9 months. Well I think the decision to deny night feeds from 6 months informs this and it's not about a baby reducing his feeds according to his own needs but adapting to a new routine that's entirely parent-led.
I would never dare to presume to tell a parent to do things a different way or that their choices have to be my choices but I will continue to believe that responding to a child's needs and nightime parenting are an influential factor on a child's development and attachment.
It think the other thing happening here is a dichotomy of opinion. There are those that believe that a child must 'learn' how to sleep, that it is something you 'teach'. There are those that think it's a developmental thing and that a child comes to it on their own, the same as walking or talking and in the middle there are myriad options and methods and gentle encouragements. There seems to be an implication that if you don't 'train' a child to sleep, then they won't. That children that aren't taught and having methods used on them are feeding through the night into toddlerhood (some are and it's fine if that's what works for you), that they can never self settle, that they are unhappy and sleep deprived. It's just not that polarised. I remain firmly in the development camp, did not sleep train at all and have a matching, happy, sociable child that self settles and sleeps well. But like tiy and flight, she has never cried and people comment on this as noteworthy because it's just never entered into my consciousness to think that crying is every necessary or good when I have the means to help.
I think the other point I wish to make is that we're talking abou 6 month and 8 month old babies. I would probably be less opposed if it was a toddler who had alternate methods of communication, clearer needs for guidance and refusals and a comprehension of what is happening, sharing the way things happen to them as opposed to having them done to them and not understanding.
I do often wonder if it's expectations that are difficult. I completely understand that having to go back to work, other stresses and strains, other children means that a full night's sleep becomes this ridiculous and unobtainable holy grail. That we expect babies of 6 months to sleep through the night, not feed or drink in that time and self comfort at every waking. It takes 9 months to grow a baby and they are born utterly vulnerable. Their development in comparison to other mammals is steady. I see a 6 month old as still very much a vulnerable and malleable prospect. Still changing so enormously, going through massive growth spurts and developmental changes, learning to stand and crawl and roll, to self feed. And with a tiny tummy that needs replenishing and a fast developing sense of self that needs nurturing and a fear of how much bigger the world is becoming on a daily basis and a need to be comforted and guided and supported through that. They have a long childhood and a whole lifetime to slot into the weird and wonderful regulations of the adult world, I am happy to follow their changing needs through that babyhood.
My first reaction, always, to how demanding and constant parenting a baby is was how I could make things easier for me while still nurturing my child's needs. So sleeping in the day, asking for help, co-sleeping, simple cooking, sod the housework etc. My needs could be met in other ways and I had the power to understand that and consciously change. A baby doesn't and it's doing things to them that elicit a stress response of crying. As a powerful form of communication and signal of distress, I could never have ignored it.