Attitudes to AP/NP in Baby Club...

[Lightworker]

Littlestar- I do agree that being AP parent does not restrict you to a particular lifestyle as such. I worked fulltime from 6 weeks postpartum with DD1 and still did the "AP-related parenting". I am now a SAHM, with LO and still do it. I also agree that in BC the dynamics are skewed such that non-AP parents can say anything (someone once said she thought extended BF was disgusting, and nobody called her on it except me) but AP cant. It's not right to judge but sometimes opinions are mistaken as judgement.

 

[Lightworker]

Ellie - I thought your long post about AP and the psychological studies was good.

 

[Rachel_C]

I really can't understand why people say "Just look after your own child, why does it matter what another mother does with her child?". Of course it matters! Before I say this, I will clarify that I am NOT saying that people who do things I disagree with are abusive but... I care if a mother locks her child in the bathroom for a day because she can't be bothered looking after him. I care if a mother beats her child with a belt because he's 'naughty'. I care if a mother only feeds her child on chocolate. Just like I care if a mother does something I consider to be dangerous or cruel or selfish even if other people disagree with how I feel about those things. IMO it's people who DON'T care about other mothers and their children that are awful people. I can't imagine going through life not caring. How horrible would it be if nobody cared? If I get labelled as 'on my high horse' or 'holier than thou' because I CARE, well bring on that label! I can think of far worse things for me to be, and one of those is somebody who doesn't care about other children, other people.

As for facts just being opinions, no, facts are facts. Only people who dislike the facts try to make them out to be opinions. Or teenagers, when they're disagreeing with their mothers.

 

[aliss]

Janidog, did you read the links about what AP actually is? Because your comments ("time and lifestyle", etc.) seem to suggest that you don't. AP is not about sitting at home all day, not working, with a baby attached to your boob in your bed, it's a philosophy about strengthening the bond between baby and mother, striving to use the most 'natural' methods for that bond (breastfeeding,babywearing,etc).

Some people would be surprised to know that AP includes vaccination, disposable diapers (there's no differentiation really by using cloth), and traditional weaning.

You can be a full-time working formula-feeding stroller-using AP mother. Sears addresses this directly in his books, there are chapters worth of explanations about it.

Another exception with AP, in addition to CIO to make it clear, is the use of physical discipline. Aside from CIO (as sleep training and NOT as a means to break away from an angry situation) and physical discipline are methods that directly weaken the bond according to AP and not used.

 

[fluffpuffin]

Facts and opinions are two completly different things. Yes you can base your opinion on a fact but it doesnt change the fact existing in the first place.

But you can't say its a 'fact' about CIO damaging babies, when the only research has been on those children that has been abused and not on the babies that have been brought up by loving nurturing parents that 'OMG' have used CIO/CC - it might be the opinion of certain developmental psychologist, but certainly not all

But its not just CIO that has problems, its a fact that BF has more benifits for mum and baby than formula and that rear facing is safer than foward facing but people still get jumped on for saying so despite the facts being there to see.

But just because other subjects have had lots of research, but CIO has not so its still just someone else's opinions

Im sorry but so many of you on here are very narrow minded and can not think outside your own mindset. Not everyone on BnB has the same time or lifestyle as you all, so therefore lets just tell them how wonderful a parent you all are and lets tell the rest of them here how there lifestyle is damaging their babies

So you wonder why other parents have attitude towards AP

I didn't BF, I went back to work with my baby when he was 2 weeks old, he went to nursery from 12 weeks old 3 afternoons a week, i didn't co-sleep and LO was in his own room from 10 weeks and do you know what he is a very happy baby boy with no developmental issues, so yes I do get annoyed when AParents tell me im damaging my baby and causing him harm

It is a fact that the more a baby cries the more cortisol (the stress hormone) is released in its brain. Cortisol is linked to behavioural problems and negative effects on the bond with the mother.

I have to agree with Janidog about the studies not being convincing evidence as they look at a household that is not loving in general and neglect and abuse. I'm all for looking at evidence and while I now wouldn't do cc / cio anymore it still raises a few questions for me:

what about those mums with older children / twins / triplets that they have to attend to as well? Inevitably, unless you have lots of help at hand at all times one baby might be left to cry or a period of time due to circumstances Will that baby be damaged too?

Some babies cry more when being held / rocked if they want to go to sleep than if you put them down - wind down crying. I know mine did - she would cry for hours and hours when I held her. But when I put her down in her cot she maybe cried for a couple of minutes or less but then would go straight to sleep. Which scenario is more damaging to the child? According to the cortisol studies it would be the first scenario.

 

[aliss]

Just to clear something up,

This is the AP stance on CIO. It doesn't talk about how it will permanently damage your baby, it talks about how it affects trust and bonding. Distance, etc. There's a difference between what some people say (CIO will damage your baby) and what AP says (it can seriously hurt your bond and create distance). 2 totally different things...

https://www.askdrsears.com/topics/fussy-baby/letting-baby-cry-it-out-yes-no

 

[Cloberella]

I really can't understand why people say "Just look after your own child, why does it matter what another mother does with her child?". Of course it matters! Before I say this, I will clarify that I am NOT saying that people who do things I disagree with are abusive but... I care if a mother locks her child in the bathroom for a day because she can't be bothered looking after him. I care if a mother beats her child with a belt because he's 'naughty'. I care if a mother only feeds her child on chocolate. Just like I care if a mother does something I consider to be dangerous or cruel or selfish even if other people disagree with how I feel about those things. IMO it's people who DON'T care about other mothers and their children that are awful people. I can't imagine going through life not caring. How horrible would it be if nobody cared? If I get labelled as 'on my high horse' or 'holier than thou' because I CARE, well bring on that label! I can think of far worse things for me to be, and one of those is somebody who doesn't care about other children, other people.

As for facts just being opinions, no, facts are facts. Only people who dislike the facts try to make them out to be opinions. Or teenagers, when they're disagreeing with their mothers.

I agree 100% with this.

And I do feel like AP parents are sidelined in baby club.

 

[purplepower]

Facts and opinions are two completly different things. Yes you can base your opinion on a fact but it doesnt change the fact existing in the first place.

But you can't say its a 'fact' about CIO damaging babies, when the only research has been on those children that has been abused and not on the babies that have been brought up by loving nurturing parents that 'OMG' have used CIO/CC - it might be the opinion of certain developmental psychologist, but certainly not all

But its not just CIO that has problems, its a fact that BF has more benifits for mum and baby than formula and that rear facing is safer than foward facing but people still get jumped on for saying so despite the facts being there to see.

But just because other subjects have had lots of research, but CIO has not so its still just someone else's opinions

Im sorry but so many of you on here are very narrow minded and can not think outside your own mindset. Not everyone on BnB has the same time or lifestyle as you all, so therefore lets just tell them how wonderful a parent you all are and lets tell the rest of them here how there lifestyle is damaging their babies

So you wonder why other parents have attitude towards AP

I didn't BF, I went back to work with my baby when he was 2 weeks old, he went to nursery from 12 weeks old 3 afternoons a week, i didn't co-sleep and LO was in his own room from 10 weeks and do you know what he is a very happy baby boy with no developmental issues, so yes I do get annoyed when AParents tell me im damaging my baby and causing him harm

It is a fact that the more a baby cries the more cortisol (the stress hormone) is released in its brain. Cortisol is linked to behavioural problems and negative effects on the bond with the mother.

I have to agree with Janidog about the studies not being convincing evidence as they look at a household that is not loving in general and neglect and abuse. I'm all for looking at evidence and while I now wouldn't do cc / cio anymore it still raises a few questions for me:

what about those mums with older children / twins / triplets that they have to attend to as well? Inevitably, unless you have lots of help at hand at all times one baby might be left to cry or a period of time due to circumstances Will that baby be damaged too?

Some babies cry more when being held / rocked if they want to go to sleep than if you put them down - wind down crying. I know mine did - she would cry for hours and hours when I held her. But when I put her down in her cot she maybe cried for a couple of minutes or less but then would go straight to sleep. Which scenario is more damaging to the child? According to the cortisol studies it would be the first scenario.

I may have misunderstood this, but from what I can gather AP does not mean not letting your child cry (this would be impossible). It represents not letting your child cry because you think it's good for them or to sleep/train them to do something. Does this make sense? For example my LO woke up crying at the supermarket checkout, I leant over the pram, stroked and reassured him, I paid for my shopping and then took him to the cafe and fed him, he had to cry for a minute or two while I was able to attend to him but I hadn't left him to cry, that is how I see it anyway.

 

[Kota]

Yep, there is a BIG difference between your child crying for a few minutes because you are physically unable to meet their needs right there and then. However even if you can't pick them up, you may be able to sing to them, talk to the, stroke their face, etc etc. you are still communicating to your baby that you are there, you know they need you, and you are doing what you can until you are able to fully meet that need by picking them up. etc.

and doing CC/CIO in the sense of a child 'must learn to self settle'. Walking away from your child, with the intention of letting them cry, is 'training' your child to not need you........



to fall asleep.


From an AP stand point, why would you ever want to teach your child, especially at such a young age.. that they don't need their mother/father for any reason.

 

[fluffpuffin]

Thanks for the info girls

 

[DanielleM]

I just want to say thank you to you all for sharing all of your opinions and facts in this thread, it has severely changed my attitude to AP/NP parenting as I was very niave and clueless before to it!!

I am a frequent reader and occasional poster in BC and I have to say I will never jump on an AP/NP parent, and where possible will help other people to see your side of things!

this thread has at least changed one persons mindset!!

 

[ellie]

Facts aren't the same as opinions
Although it may be more comfortable to sometimes dismiss a fact if it does not fit with your beliefs, that's a natural human trait that we all have and we all do it sometimes.
You could debate 'what are facts' forever though, as lets face it there is no "ultimate truth" in anything really, life is not that black and white ....

In which case, I thought I would just explain a bit more. When I talk about "facts" I am talking about a LOT of research, studies, theories, writing etc, which all point to the same thing and which has become a known in attachment psychology and even neurology. Also, behaviourists, or other ways of thinking, will have their own theories, research, studies, writing etc. The thing that makes the difference for me is that AT/AP has more and more physical evidence (so could be taken as "hard facts") about the effects on the brain of things like neglect, leaving to cry, but also extreme attachment problems. Yes they are extreme cases and you could argue wouldnt be general to everybody. But the brain studies do show how attachment develops physically in the brain, and that is general to everybody, so I think it is naive to dismiss thinking about it even in loving families when it comes to things like CIO/CC/"sleep training". Even if you believed that (say) a bit of CIO didnt have any effect on your babys developing brain, you should still know about the theories and research to make a properly informed decision, before deciding to go along with the very pervasive belief that "cc/cio works". Even if you believe there would be no consequences in their adult relationships, you should still know that it is a possibility before deciding whether to do it or not.

Others have said this already but I think the essence of AP is the basic attachment theory principle, which is that the infant forms a 'model' in his/her brain during the first year of relationships, based on the very first attachmetn relationship (usually the mother). This model is lifelong and will be hard wired into our brains from very early on. It will tell us how to think about other people, what to expect from them, how to behave with them, whether you can rely on them, and how you manage your emotions. So in a generally loving family, its not about developmental milestones, its about their lifelong pattern of how they see the world. It is also a fact (ie. according to what I said above about facts) that this is very difficult to change, especially past a few years old.
Here's an example of how the attachment relationship builds up :
Baby cries (in response to something in them that they need, or something outside)
Parent responds, by picking them up or being nearby (so you could argue that CC could satisfy this)
Parent helps baby to calm down and work out what they are feeling "oh are you hungry? wet? tired?" etc and link their emotions to whatever it is
Baby is brought back to their calm state via the parents' response
The brain cells make these links and every time this is repeated the link is made stronger

So if you cry and your needs are met, you learn that you are loveable and worth attention, and that others are available and trustworthy and caring. You learn that your emotions can be labelled and managed.
If you cry and your needs are not met (or you are not comforted/held), you learn that you are not loveable and that others are rejecting and can't be trusted. So you grow up believeing that you have to be self sufficient, you cant rely on other people to be there for you, that your feelings are so big and overwhelming that no one can cope with them (not even you). You become over-sensitive (e.g to anxiety/anger) because those bits of your brain get more links sent to them.

Hope that makes sense. Bear with me! If you are a generally loving and caring and attentive parent (and lets face it, pretty much everyone on BNB will be by default), a bit of crying now and again (like when you physically cant help or cant get to them) will not be causing lots of damage, because you'll repair it by comforting them as soon as you can and they learn to trust that they will be comforted. All the psychologists I've come across have said don't worry, all babies cry, you very likely havent caused them any damage, as long as you've repaired it afterwards - so I doubt anyone on here has any reason to worry!
I've been thinking more about "sleep training" though and the reason I reckon you won't find any studies saying "CIO works to teach babies to sleep" is because you have got no way of knowing what is going on in their little brains until they get to adulthood, by which time there would be way too many factors to say for sure that X when you were a baby led to Y (unless theres clear cut abuse / trauma / neglect).

I thought I would also post some reading on attachment theory / attachment parenting, in case people are interested and want to read more. The best book (and most readable) is "Why Love Matters" by Sue Gerhardt. This has a great chapter about the cortisol/stress theory. There is also "What every parent needs to know: the remarkable effects of love, nurture and play on your child's development" (Sunderland).
Some other books (for those who might be interested):
Bowlby's "Attachment and Loss"
"Attachment and Adolescence - the influence of attachment patterns on teenage behaviour" (in "Teenagers and Attachment: Helping adolescents engage with life and learning" (Karl Heinz Brisch)
Anything by Dan Hughes (he mostly works with looked after children)
Solomon, M, & Siegel, D (2003) Healing trauma: attachment, mind, body and brain.
Ainsworth et al (1978) Patterns of attachment: a psychological study of the strange situation.
Schore, A.N. (1994) Affect regulation and the origin of self: the neurobiology of emotional development.
Stern, D.N. (1995) The interpersonal world of the infant.
I have lots of refs for studies but theyr mainly about trauma, looked after children etc, but pm me if you want them. One more general one though is Lott D (2003) Brain development, attachment and impact on psychic vulnerability. Psychiatric Times, 15(5), 1-5.

I think there are lots of good links on the Dr Sears site, there are also quite a few great ones posted on this thread!

Anyway, back on topic of the thread, I wonder what people think now about the title of this section? Do people still want it to be attachment / eco / natural etc? There is lots of talk about cloth nappies in here so it would still need to be that right?

Sorry another long one but I don't get on here frequently so when I do I have to spill my guts

 

[ellie]

I just want to say thank you to you all for sharing all of your opinions and facts in this thread, it has severely changed my attitude to AP/NP parenting as I was very niave and clueless before to it!!

I am a frequent reader and occasional poster in BC and I have to say I will never jump on an AP/NP parent, and where possible will help other people to see your side of things!

this thread has at least changed one persons mindset!!

Cool!

I think we try really hard to see the 'other' side of things and disagree that AP's/NPs dont think outside of their box or whatever. But it does feel like you're sometimes!

 

[mandarhino]

Facts aren't the same as opinions
Although it may be more comfortable to sometimes dismiss a fact if it does not fit with your beliefs, that's a natural human trait that we all have and we all do it sometimes.
You could debate 'what are facts' forever though, as lets face it there is no "ultimate truth" in anything really, life is not that black and white ....

In which case, I thought I would just explain a bit more. When I talk about "facts" I am talking about a LOT of research, studies, theories, writing etc, which all point to the same thing and which has become a known in attachment psychology and even neurology. Also, behaviourists, or other ways of thinking, will have their own theories, research, studies, writing etc. The thing that makes the difference for me is that AT/AP has more and more physical evidence (so could be taken as "hard facts") about the effects on the brain of things like neglect, leaving to cry, but also extreme attachment problems. Yes they are extreme cases and you could argue wouldnt be general to everybody. But the brain studies do show how attachment develops physically in the brain, and that is general to everybody, so I think it is naive to dismiss thinking about it even in loving families when it comes to things like CIO/CC/"sleep training". Even if you believed that (say) a bit of CIO didnt have any effect on your babys developing brain, you should still know about the theories and research to make a properly informed decision, before deciding to go along with the very pervasive belief that "cc/cio works". Even if you believe there would be no consequences in their adult relationships, you should still know that it is a possibility before deciding whether to do it or not.

Others have said this already but I think the essence of AP is the basic attachment theory principle, which is that the infant forms a 'model' in his/her brain during the first year of relationships, based on the very first attachmetn relationship (usually the mother). This model is lifelong and will be hard wired into our brains from very early on. It will tell us how to think about other people, what to expect from them, how to behave with them, whether you can rely on them, and how you manage your emotions. So in a generally loving family, its not about developmental milestones, its about their lifelong pattern of how they see the world. It is also a fact (ie. according to what I said above about facts) that this is very difficult to change, especially past a few years old.
Here's an example of how the attachment relationship builds up :
Baby cries (in response to something in them that they need, or something outside)
Parent responds, by picking them up or being nearby (so you could argue that CC could satisfy this)
Parent helps baby to calm down and work out what they are feeling "oh are you hungry? wet? tired?" etc and link their emotions to whatever it is
Baby is brought back to their calm state via the parents' response
The brain cells make these links and every time this is repeated the link is made stronger

So if you cry and your needs are met, you learn that you are loveable and worth attention, and that others are available and trustworthy and caring. You learn that your emotions can be labelled and managed.
If you cry and your needs are not met (or you are not comforted/held), you learn that you are not loveable and that others are rejecting and can't be trusted. So you grow up believeing that you have to be self sufficient, you cant rely on other people to be there for you, that your feelings are so big and overwhelming that no one can cope with them (not even you). You become over-sensitive (e.g to anxiety/anger) because those bits of your brain get more links sent to them.

Hope that makes sense. Bear with me! If you are a generally loving and caring and attentive parent (and lets face it, pretty much everyone on BNB will be by default), a bit of crying now and again (like when you physically cant help or cant get to them) will not be causing lots of damage, because you'll repair it by comforting them as soon as you can and they learn to trust that they will be comforted. All the psychologists I've come across have said don't worry, all babies cry, you very likely havent caused them any damage, as long as you've repaired it afterwards - so I doubt anyone on here has any reason to worry!
I've been thinking more about "sleep training" though and the reason I reckon you won't find any studies saying "CIO works to teach babies to sleep" is because you have got no way of knowing what is going on in their little brains until they get to adulthood, by which time there would be way too many factors to say for sure that X when you were a baby led to Y (unless theres clear cut abuse / trauma / neglect).

I thought I would also post some reading on attachment theory / attachment parenting, in case people are interested and want to read more. The best book (and most readable) is "Why Love Matters" by Sue Gerhardt. This has a great chapter about the cortisol/stress theory. There is also "What every parent needs to know: the remarkable effects of love, nurture and play on your child's development" (Sunderland).
Some other books (for those who might be interested):
Bowlby's "Attachment and Loss"
"Attachment and Adolescence - the influence of attachment patterns on teenage behaviour" (in "Teenagers and Attachment: Helping adolescents engage with life and learning" (Karl Heinz Brisch)
Anything by Dan Hughes (he mostly works with looked after children)
Solomon, M, & Siegel, D (2003) Healing trauma: attachment, mind, body and brain.
Ainsworth et al (1978) Patterns of attachment: a psychological study of the strange situation.
Schore, A.N. (1994) Affect regulation and the origin of self: the neurobiology of emotional development.
Stern, D.N. (1995) The interpersonal world of the infant.
I have lots of refs for studies but theyr mainly about trauma, looked after children etc, but pm me if you want them. One more general one though is Lott D (2003) Brain development, attachment and impact on psychic vulnerability. Psychiatric Times, 15(5), 1-5.

I think there are lots of good links on the Dr Sears site, there are also quite a few great ones posted on this thread!

Anyway, back on topic of the thread, I wonder what people think now about the title of this section? Do people still want it to be attachment / eco / natural etc? There is lots of talk about cloth nappies in here so it would still need to be that right?

Sorry another long one but I don't get on here frequently so when I do I have to spill my guts

Excellent post ellie.

The reason why I have refused to do CC/CIO is because it was used on me as a baby. I have self esteem issues, difficulties trusting people and forming bonds. We could argue round the houses whether it was do with my parents using CIO methods on me as a baby or other formative experiences in my life. My parents were otherwise very loving and very involved in my life. I have an excellent relationship with them as an adult.

I've chosen not to take the risk and have always gone to my daughter at night. And she was a horrific sleeper until about 3 months ago and I've worked full time for the past year. It has been f*cking hell on earth at times but I figured it is a short period in my life and a really important one in hers.

Hell maybe she'll still hate me when she's a teen and it won't have made any difference to how she turns out. I'll never wonder what if though.

 

[ellie]

mandarhino.
I feel the same as you. My parents wont tell me whether they left me to cry but they always say I never cried and slept like a log from the word go (but i was in neonatal on my own for 2-3 weeks, my mum was in another building and not allowed to see me mostly, this was the 1970s, so you might guess that maybe i was crying a lot there and ignored) ... hmmm.
Thats why I dont buy the "my baby is fine" argument, well chances are yes they probably are, but how on earth would you ever know how well they are able to function in a relationship as an adult.
Part of the reason why AP appeals to me so much and fits so well with us.

Yeah I feel crap often because I'm knackered and he's hard work but it'll pass. And like you I know too much about it now to ever think 'what if', and also my LO is tiny for such a small amount of time, I just feel its my job to be there for him no matter what and to make sure he knows he is loved and worthy, its such a small timespan in the grand scheme.

Plus I hate wasting things hence I dont use sposies which at least makes me feel a little bit like i'm doing something for the planet and I hate carting a buggy round in my car when a carrier is so much smaller and lighter, and I got to cuddle him loads more

Yeah he might still hate me when he gets older but if so I'll cross that bridge then and aim to work it out with him how I can help him (if he'll talk to me lol!) AP doesnt just stop when they start walking, does it, its a lifelong parenting approach.

 

[kmac625]

Littlestar- I do agree that being AP parent does not restrict you to a particular lifestyle as such. I worked fulltime from 6 weeks postpartum with DD1 and still did the "AP-related parenting". I am now a SAHM, with LO and still do it. I also agree that in BC the dynamics are skewed such that non-AP parents can say anything (someone once said she thought extended BF was disgusting, and nobody called her on it except me) but AP cant. It's not right to judge but sometimes opinions are mistaken as judgement.

I think actually you will find that a lot of people who post in bc would agree there's nothing wrong with extended bf and get upset when someone says it's disgusting (someone was banned because she got so upset and verbalized it). I think one of the main issues that causes disagreements in bc about AP is that a lot of people don't understand fully what it is (I know I didn't). Now that I've been reading about it in the NP section, I realize that for the most part it's what I practice, without knowing that's what I was doing. I would guess the same would go for many other of the Mommies in bc too.

 

[littlestar85]

I just want to say thank you to you all for sharing all of your opinions and facts in this thread, it has severely changed my attitude to AP/NP parenting as I was very niave and clueless before to it!!

I am a frequent reader and occasional poster in BC and I have to say I will never jump on an AP/NP parent, and where possible will help other people to see your side of things!

this thread has at least changed one persons mindset!!

DanielleMitch that's so nice to hear!

Ellie - your posts are fantastic

x

 

[littlestar85]

Littlestar- I do agree that being AP parent does not restrict you to a particular lifestyle as such. I worked fulltime from 6 weeks postpartum with DD1 and still did the "AP-related parenting". I am now a SAHM, with LO and still do it. I also agree that in BC the dynamics are skewed such that non-AP parents can say anything (someone once said she thought extended BF was disgusting, and nobody called her on it except me) but AP cant. It's not right to judge but sometimes opinions are mistaken as judgement.

I think actually you will find that a lot of people who post in bc would agree there's nothing wrong with extended bf and get upset when someone says it's disgusting (someone was banned because she got so upset and verbalized it). I think one of the main issues that causes disagreements in bc about AP is that a lot of people don't understand fully what it is (I know I didn't). Now that I've been reading about it in the NP section, I realize that for the most part it's what I practice, without knowing that's what I was doing. I would guess the same would go for many other of the Mommies in bc too.

I think that's completely true ^^^

x

 

[Lightworker]

A PP mentioned crying and African babies and it sparked my interest so I googled and found this

www.naturalchild.org/guest/claire_niala.html

I remember saying something similar in a colic thread but that was based on my own individual observation, but its similar to what she says.

 

[T-Bex]

I've read that before, and it makes so much sense. We kept being told to stop feeding her as much once she hit 6 months (three times a day, we were told, and none during the night, by HV ), but just offering her boob when she needed/wanted it seemed to make so much more sense, and made us a lot happier...