This morning

[smelly07]

are there any other links about this story -

when did the child sleep before they resulted in locking in him? he must of fell asleep happily at some point what changed?

 

[lhancock90]

I don't care how safe the room is. How tired or stressed you are. How badly behaved your child is. Or how in trouble your marriage is. There is no excuse for locking your child of any age, in a room whilst they scream for 3 hours and then leave them for another 9 and not once bother to check on them. It goes against what a parent should be.

Then your argument doesn't really have anything to do with the door locking if those are your issues.

The crying part- any parent who has a child in a cot could leave them to cry for 3 hours if they so chose.

The not checking on them part- there was a thread on here a while back on how many times a night you check on the baby. Alot said not at all, once they are in bed, thats it. Doesn't really have anything to do with locking the doors imo, if you want to check on them you can whether door is locked or not. The door locking issue is irrelevent.

My issue isn't that they didn't check on him all night long, its that they let him cry for 3 hours without checking, and didn't bother once he'd fallen asleep, for all they knew he could have collapsed. I have a seperate issue with locking him in. Hes a child not an animal, i wouldn't even lock my dog away for 12 hours, night or not. There is no excusing what they did.

 

[Natsku]

Yeah my home is open plan, and my front door can't be locked from the inside.

OT, but how on earth do you lock your door at night?

The lock works so that its always locked in the sense that the door can't be opened from the outside without the key but from the inside it just opens by turning the handle.

 

[fidgets mammy]

R u implying working parents dont need breaks because they get then at work?

 

[Mrs Doddy]

R u implying working parents dont need breaks because they get then at work?

I don't think going to work is a break ! Well apart from lo's constant chatting - I get moaned at by clients instead - at least my child loves me lol I walk through the door at night, spend about half an hour with her and put her to bed. Working and looking after a child in between is hard work

 

[LoraLoo]

R u implying working parents dont need breaks because they get then at work?

I don't think going to work is a break ! Well apart from lo's constant chatting - I get moaned at by clients instead - at least my child loves me lol I walk through the door at night, spend about half an hour with her and put her to bed. Working and looking after a child in between is hard work

Oh i dunno when i worked full time i used to enjoy the break I used to also get a full nights sleep lol, as I had to sleep over.

 

[fidgets mammy]

Being stressed and tired often leads to parents losing their temper with their kids. Sometimes u have to do what u have to do

I'm not buying the whole "they need a break" argument. As a working mother, I will say that they get about a 9 hour break at work each day, esp considering they both went back to work even when they could afford not to (from another one of his articles), so obv at least his job is less stressful than SAHDing. I'm not saying that working parents aren't parents 24/7, but when both are working, I think it's important to parent very purposefully during the time you're home with them. Fobbing off the responsibility of teaching your child to sleep to an empty room is the opposite of that. Part of the reason I bedshare is to facilitate night parenting. I can't be there during the day, so I want him to have access to comfort and cuddles as much as he wants at night. I expect it to get harder as he gets older; that's part of raising a kid.

As for this quote, to what extent are people allowed to take "do what you have to do"? You could also teach him to stay in his room by belting him when he comes out, but I doubt anyone would be for that. It too, leaves no lasting physical damage when done correctly, but for either of these scenarios, the emotional damage is immeasurable (as in, "not measurable due to it's nature", not as in "too great to be measured"). (And not that I think at all that belting is comparable, just that they're both past where that limit should be.) If someone left a pet alone, in distress, and freaking out for 12 hours it would get taken away. But do the same to a child and it's "parenting"?

12hrs ?? Who mentioned twelve hrs? Yes as parents we do do what we have to do. Some use cio some cc sime bed share some rock some go to work some dont. All of those are doing what they have to do. I dont understand yr point to be honest. Ive said all the way through its not something i would do
But as a last resort and to ensure the safety of their child and their sanity i can understand it. Ive worked with many families who were exhausted because of their kids behavior/night time issues and these were workibg parents. Too tired to go to work, then feeling giulty about not spending enough time with their kids then being at breaking point because theyve been up all night exhausting ways to get them to sleep. My son was 3 before he slept through. I dont see it as an issue but for others it might be. If theres one thing ive learnt un 13 yrs as a nursery officer its to respect parents because they r the ones at home trying their god damn hardest to do the best often feeling like theyre failing and no one knows what its like to be in another parents shoes. Like i said each to their own.

 

[omfgski]

I'm o.

 

[BlueHadeda]

I think what bother me most, is when I imagine how that little boy felt. Even now as an adult, I would've felt immense fear and feelings of abandonment and worried that no one would ever get me. My thoughts as a child would've been:
"What if my parents forget unlocking me in the morning?" and
"What if something happens to them at night, and nobody comes to unlock me?" and
"what if I die and my parents only come upon me in the morning when they unlock the door?" and
"what if there's a flood and I can't get out?" and and and and....
Children are quite creative in their imaginations.

I just simply cannot fathom how you do that to your 3-year old, and then like another poster said, doesn't even CHECK if he's okay after 3 hours of crying and flailing his body against the walls and doors. Then, 12-hours later, found him asleep on the floor behind the door. How long did he lay there, staring with big eyes into the dark, too spent to cry anymore, too scared to sleep.

My 11-year old son's room is close to our tv-room. And when we watch a movie, the sound sometimes bother him when he wants to sleep. But he refuses to close his door. Just CLOSE his door to sound, so that he can sleep! And he's 11!!! And confident and happy and secure. But still doesn't want to be that closed off from us. He needs his door open, as it has always been in his 11-years. And he isn't even upstairs away from us (we don't live in a double story).

I really think this issue is FAR beyond "simple" CC or even the "normal" CIO. It really isn't about letting the child cry because he (and his parents) needed sleep. It's the whole thing, how it played out. Letting the child scream for 3 hours straight without ever going in, letting the child then sleeps/be quiet for 9 more hours before going in. Locking him in. Locking him in night after night months and months after it wasn't "necessary" anymore. Not trying some other things first (even though they claimed they tried everything - I don't believe they did!). Anyway, so for me it's the WHOLE thing, the way it was done. So for people to defend it and saying it's like CC or CIO...not to me, it isn't.

 

[Emma&Freya]

Plus pulling something over is something a child in a non-locked room could do Im just not getting this argument, sorry.

Like I said wasnt arguing

 

[LoraLoo]

Plus pulling something over is something a child in a non-locked room could do Im just not getting this argument, sorry.

Like I said wasnt arguing

Nor did i say you were, i said i didnt get your argument, there is a difference.

 

[lhancock90]

Plus pulling something over is something a child in a non-locked room could do Im just not getting this argument, sorry.

Like I said wasnt arguing

Nor did i say you were, i said i didnt get your argument, there is a difference.

Yes but if your child pulled something over in the house, you'd see. It wouldn't be a 12 hour wait...

 

[LoraLoo]

Plus pulling something over is something a child in a non-locked room could do Im just not getting this argument, sorry.

Like I said wasnt arguing

Nor did i say you were, i said i didnt get your argument, there is a difference.

Yes but if your child pulled something over in the house, you'd see. It wouldn't be a 12 hour wait...

Im still not seeing it, if a child is in its bedroom with the door closed, locked or not, it could pull something over. This issue is obviously with checking on the child in that 12 hour period, not the actual door locking. I agree, you shouldn't leave any child in a bedroom for 12 hours and not check on them, but that wasn't what this thread was about.

 

[lhancock90]

Plus pulling something over is something a child in a non-locked room could do Im just not getting this argument, sorry.

Like I said wasnt arguing

Nor did i say you were, i said i didnt get your argument, there is a difference.

Yes but if your child pulled something over in the house, you'd see. It wouldn't be a 12 hour wait...

Im still not seeing it, if a child is in its bedroom with the door closed, locked or not, it could pull something over. This issue is obviously with checking on the child in that 12 hour period, not the actual door locking. I agree, you shouldn't leave any child in a bedroom for 12 hours and not check on them, but that wasn't what this thread was about.

The thread was too discuss what the parents did was it not? Things are bound to offshoot on that, especially when we are discussing what COULD have happened. Especially in news and debates. I'm sorry but i view all of it as wrong. The ultimatum, the locking, not checking for 12 hours and CIO for 3 hours.

 

[Jaylynne]

What's worse? Crying for 3 hours or allowing a child to injure himself and have crap sleep for the whole family?

Crying for three hours is harsh but it's still better than more months without sleep for a child. Its not just the parents who are sleep deprived in this situation. Sleep deprivation for a toddler can have major mental, physical and psychological setbacks.

I don't think it was right to give the wife the ultimatum though. But people at the end of their rope aren't always the nicest.

And the not checking for 12 hours thing. Didn't the article say that the boy woke up at the slightest creak? I would let him sleep than go through more crying. Maybe they had a video monitor (i would hope anyway. The dad sure says he makes enough)

 

[Breezy]

I lock our son in his room every night and for his naps. If I didn't he would come out every 3 seconds and never go to bed. When he's asleep, I check on him. Tuck him in again if he has kicked off blankets and then leave the door unlocked in case of fire or other emergency. He falls asleep within minutes now as opposed to hours.

 

[lhancock90]

I lock our son in his room every night and for his naps. If I didn't he would come out every 3 seconds and never go to bed. When he's asleep, I check on him. Tuck him in again if he has kicked off blankets and then leave the door unlocked in case of fire or other emergency. He falls asleep within minutes now as opposed to hours.

You check on him then unlock the door. Totally different.

 

[Kate&Lucas]

It seems really extreme and definitely not something I'd ever do. However I don't think I know a parent RL that doesn't use a safety gate on their childs' room and other parts of the house; is that not still locking them up?

I try not to judge until I've been there really but I'd be interested to know what other methods they used. I'm not sure what I'd do in their situation but I know for certain it wouldn't have been that.

 

[vaniilla]

I don't understand why it's considered so different to using a stair gate on the door which as far as I can tell parents use for small children who wake up early and need a safe place to play for a short without supervision not a method of sleep training but maybe I'm wrong.

If they were at the end of their tether then they should have paid for a sleep therapist or something similar, they're trying to to treat the symptoms not the cause, the problem won't go away without being addressed properly, how ridiculous that they'd take their story to the press, how distasteful.

 

[MommyJogger]

I don't understand why it's considered so different to using a stair gate on the door which as far as I can tell parents use for small children who wake up early and need a safe place to play for a short without supervision not a method of sleep training but maybe I'm wrong.

If they were at the end of their tether then they should have paid for a sleep therapist or something similar, they're trying to to treat the symptoms not the cause, the problem won't go away without being addressed properly, how ridiculous that they'd take their story to the press, how distasteful.

For me at least, it's that 1) he wasn't playing, so his state of mind and the actions (flailing, self-harm) that stem from that would be inherently different, 2) it wasn't for a short time, they left him after his breakdown without checking as far as I can tell for 12 h, and 3) kids in your scenario feel safe in their space; a lot of kids who have been through what this boy went through don't see the area they were "abandoned" as a safe space anymore and their stress hormones can go through the roof upon re-exposure.
Def agree with you about treating symptoms v cause.