Attachment parenting vs 50/50

[opheliatickle]

I think it’s a very cruel policy, to expect women to carry and nurse children but then to turn those things round on the mother and child and call them ‘enmeshed’. So the woman does all the work with breastfeeding and cosleeping, deals with angry husband because she doesn’t want sex (hormones screaming ‘no more babies for 5 years please for a reason) then he becomes abusive because his nose is out of joint and she gets out, trying as best she can to care for her babies with no emotional support, she becomes depressed before/ during/ after.. ends up needing MH support as he constantly gaslights her, then he realises he doesn’t look so good so decides to be super dad, demands 50/50, if she objects she is accused of 'parental alienation' and risks having full access transferred from herself to the father, while he gets a big round of applause from society for being such a great guy and wonderful father.

Yeah, I've thought very deeply about AP in the last 5 years, I started off trying to be one and then was turned off by the sactimoniousness and martyrdom of many of the women

Lots of the arguments for AP are complete nonsense. Proponents of it say that cultures throughout history co-slept, breastfed abd baby wore (I hate that term)therefore we should do the same because it is natural. For starters, it's offensive to lump all cultures throughout history together- what cultures are they referring to? The Babylonians? Sumerian? Ancient Greeks? And why cherry pick these parts of the cultures and not others - for instance, smacking children? Surely humans throughout history raised children in the ways that were convenient and easiest, not because they were ideal parents. For instance, they would have carried their offspring in a sling not because they thought it was nurturing and providing an ideal connection, but because of practicality- if women had to work long hours in the field or gathering food. Likewise breastfeeding- it wasn't about trying to promote bonding and give the best start in life, it was simply all that there was.

I think I read somewhere that Dr Sears who invented AP was deeply in to traditional roles, stay at home mother etc. I think AP is deeply mysogonistic. When I belonged to AP groups, the women were deeply judgemental about other women's choices and what they did with their bodies- breastfeeding and natural birth being the gold standard. Any women who went back to work or weaned early were frowned upon.

So the woman does all the work with breastfeeding and cosleeping,

That's not "all the work". There is a very large amount of things that a male partner could do that aren't feeding and co sleeping.

deals with angry husband because she doesn’t want sex (hormones screaming ‘no more babies for 5 years please for a reason) then he becomes abusive because his nose is out of joint and she gets out, trying as best she can to care for her babies with no emotional support, she becomes depressed before/ during/ after.. ends up needing MH support as he constantly gaslights her, then he realises he doesn’t look so good so decides to be super dad, demands 50/50, if she objects she is accused of 'parental alienation' and risks having full access transferred from herself to the father, while he gets a big round of applause from society for being such a great guy and wonderful father.

This is not a normal experience or what you should expect if you breastfeed and co-sleep. I'm guessing it's your personal experience and it is truly shit that your partner (or anyone else's) behaved like this. But it's nothing to do with breastfeeding and co sleeping and everything to do with entitled sexist male behaviour.

Yes I have to agree with assassinated - we coslept as my partner's idea (he was really worried at how tired I was getting - ds1 didn't feed well at first, so I was exhausted). We baby wore because we didn't have a car and mucking about with a pram or buggy on public transport was a pain, and whilst my boobs were off the table for years, and we didn't have a lot of time for sex, we still coslept with the second and we're still happy together (and I would be the one pushing for 50/50 if we split)

I can see you're really angry but it's not how it goes for everyone, it's not inevitable at all

That sounds like a shit experience but it's not my experience.

An abusive man is an abusive man regardless of how you parent

We AP'd before i knew it had a label & it worked for us but i dont care how others parent (obviously provided loving & caring) as it's none of my business.

I understood the OP’s post as saying that the unhappiness wasn’t caused by the close bonding with her baby (breastfeeding/ Co sleeping etc) but that her partner was psychologically abusive and didn’t help her with the baby and pressured her for sex she wasn’t interested in having due to having a new baby.
I then understood that he used the 50/50 parenting idea as a way to hurt her not because he actually has interest in minding the baby but as a way to virtue signal to others while trying to spitefully take the children away from her as revenge.

I could have totally misunderstood that though. I hope you’re OK OP.

For what it’s worth, although we (DH and I) never read up on the various parenting theories and just winged it and used our instinct and common sense, it turns out, that unknowingly we have been both attachment parents as well as being 50 50.

I think the balance comes from realising that while a man can’t breastfeed, he can still be nurturing to the baby and supportive to the mother. AP doesn’t cut out the role of the dad. Also, both parents can work and still be very involved with their babies and children.

It’s a tough juggle but if both the father and the mother make family life their top priority while still making sure that (non baby / family) work also gets done, then it’s is possible for both to be contributing 50 50 in terms of input and output to the family

I basically APed my elder two without knowing about AP. It’s instinctivelybthe right thing for many mothers and babies.

I’m also uncomfortable with the assumption that 50/50 is the right way to do feminism. There aren’t always two parents. The second parent isn’t always safe to be involved. Having one “best way” to do babies that involves 50/50 doesn’t reflect the strength and labour of many, many women.

Always conceptualising single parenthood as dual parenthood gone wrong, or what you do by default when the requisite man in missing, is problematic to me.

The thing that initially attracted me to AP style parenting was that the AP parents I personally knew were all much more equal in terms of male/female involvement. I.e. Father's who carried their baby in a sling, who shared the family bed and the night wakings, who did more of the nappies etc to make up for the fact that they couldn't breastfeed, both parents changing working hours to accommodate children.

The non-AP parents I know are much more traditional/uneven in roles (i.e. father gets a good night sleep while mother sits up half the night in the babies room with a frequent waking baby, mother does 90% of all feeding/nappies/etc).

i largely AP'd, though not by design, I just did what instinctively felt right; I also happen to be a massive feminist and I don't recognise the scenario you've described at all. This is a shitty situation but a parenting model isn't responsible for abusive behaviour.

People do have a tendency to get a bit precious about attachment parenting I agree, at least they do online anyway; in real life I think people are just getting on with it the best they can like everyone is. I know quite a few mums who are still breastfeeding toddlers/preschoolers and are subsequently very tied to their homes and children - it would be insulting them though to suggest they aren't choosing to do exactly what is right for them, however much i might not fancy it myself. I also know some dads who seem to see this style of parenting as justifying them doing absolutely bollock-all with their kids or around the house; this isn't the fault of attachment parenting though, it's because they're arses.

Hello all

Thanks for picking up my post, I didn't think anybody was going to notice it!

Yes Quarks you have understood it correctly...it is based on my own experience and also from what I understand of Cafcass and the family courts policy of contact with fathers at any cost.

This is where my situation varies somewhat because I have not been through the FC (touch wood) and my ex, although he did become abusive, is genuinely interested in being an active dad, however it still annoys me that some fathers feel entitled to 50/50 whenever it suits them and the myth is endlessly propagated that women are favoured by the courts when this is not the case.

My ex is a narc and has already started to gaslight me saying I am getting in the way of contact (I'm not) and diagnosing me with Aspergers/ borderline personality disorder/ mental health issues... he is a CF! This is all because I called him out on his abusiveness and have called his bluff about ending our relationship.

I am concerned that down the line he may go for RP and my parenting will be called into question.

I looked back at what had gone wrong and most of it stemmed from the AP model (no regrets however) but I don't think women are prepared for the commitment this requires, when it is touted as the ideal model by WHO/ NHS.

This leads to 'enmeshment', isolation and depression, which opens up the mother to charges of being unfit by an abuser, however the evidence of the abuse suffered by the mother is often treated as suspect if brought later on.

Enmeshment is frowned on by the courts and used against women in cases where mothers are accused 'parental alienation' (stopping father from seeing their child). Cafcass boast a 'groundbreaking' approach to contact that supports fathers based on what has been called by Mothers United as junk science.

F4J have been campaigning for 50.50 to become default and enshrined in law I understand. The problem is that women who have been in abusive relationships are not able to protect their children if they have been abused, only in very rare cases is contact stopped. In extreme cases of Parental Alienation the child is ordered to reside with the other parent in a punitive, winner takes all conclusion.

My sources for this information is Mothers United UK (web and fb) and is anecdotal in as far as my research has taken me.

I think this is a feminist issue because women are not able to win in that they are encouraged to rear children with body and soul (AP) they are then liable if they fail to protect their children (SS) but are unable to do so because the courts favour contact (50/50 or full custody in some cases of PA).

Sorry for the badly written polemic, written on an iPhone with one thumb while breastfeeding.

I have a few petitions to share if anybody is interested?

*Mothers Unite UK