This morning

[Bella_Bee]

I'm pretty disgusted by it, to be honest. There really isn't an excuse I've heard so far that has led me to believe it was necessary.

The little boy clearly was wanting his parents and they were ignoring that. He was desperate... Climbing out of his crib and hurting himself to get to them... And they were just finding more ways to get him to go into his crib and stay there. Not once did I hear mention of them just letting him stay up with them or them going to bed with him. He obviously slept but when he woke and they weren't there he'd go looking and wind up messing about as toddlers get distracted.

Honestly, when you choose to have a child your own needs and wants will always come second. Down time in the evening is a luxury and should never come at the expense of your child's emotional wellbeing.

What about bolting every other door to keep hin safe, what about bolting their bedroom door and co-sleeping so he couldn't get out to mess around without them noticing (if this really was the issue)? What about just being there with him?

The things they say are so telling. Calling him clingy, talking about needing time in the evening... The messing about in the kitchen was less of a focus than him just being sick of his child not being "normal" and refusing to be "fixed".

So, rather than sacrifice anything they just resorted to what is, essentially, child cruelty. Children have rights, it might have passed some of you by... If you wouldn't like your partner to lock you in your room ignoring your screams whilst he had some time to himself after a long day at work then why would your child be any different? Emotionally, they are even more vulnerable.

I judge them. And so I should. Turning a blind eye and allowing parents to do whatever they like, without question, to their children as though they are their property somehow is terrifying. Sometimes children need other adults to stand up for them and say something isn't OK rather than indulging their parents for fear of upsetting them... It's madness. I couldn't give a stuff about upsetting a grown adult... That's their issue. But a child?!

I'm, sadly, not even surprised by the reaction. I've known for a while what a horrid mess our society is and expected nothing less. Deep down, we're a selfish, ignorant mess.

Interesting to watch that mother squirm and look so uncomfortable. Her eyes told a completely different story. I'd be interested to know what she isn't saying.

 

[babyrough]

At the end of the day, the child now sleeps fine all night in his own bed, and it only took two nights of a bit of crying. People do CIO all the time on babies, I wouldn't do it myself but saying that nor would I allow a child of 3 to sleep in my bed every night, they have to learn somehow. The parents said they had tried everything else.

 

[bumpbear]

It really annoyed me when he dropped in that he was falling asleep in meetings trying to close million pound deals. SO WHAT?! What a bloody show off.

He totally lost my sympathy at this point too.

why did he lose your sympathy? his childs night time behaviour was affecting his ability to do his job doesn't matter what his job is? bet you wouldn't be saying this if he was a Dr or a surgeon with other peoples lives in his hands! he could of easily lost his job and put his family in great risk of losing their home, becoming homeless. what would you think of that?

with regards to having your baby/toddler co sleeping with you my best friends sister would still keep getting into her parents bed when she was 12! They had to put a lock on their bedroom door to break her of this habit!

I personally am all for controlled crying which I will be doing with my youngest in Feb as I did with my eldest. As Philip Schofield said with regards to his daughter whats the difference with a child being in a cot that they can't get out of and not being picked up screaming his/her head off and being locked in their bedroom?

I know I am going to get jumped on for my views by some people who are very closed minded so go ahead as, it really doesn't bother me or will upset me if you do will be interested to hear rational views on this.

Because I don't really see why on earth it mattered that he was doing million pound deals. I think anyone doing their job suffers with sleep deprivation whether they are a bin man or a surgeon. That detail felt showy and unnecessary to the discussion.

and my point is is doesn't matter what job he does it was affecting his ability to do it to the company's expectations and lets face it alot of company's don't care if you are having sleepless nights due to your children what they care about is their employee's doing their jobs. losing his job due to falling asleep would of been one of the worst things that could happen to any family. I feel he was letting the public know exactly how much the sleep deprivation was affecting his whole life as, there would be people watching who don't have children and have no idea what continous sleepless nights does to you

I think it's relevant. You're much more likely to get fired if you mess up a million pound contract than you are if you eg scan a loaf of bread twice.

 

[ChristinaG]

nobody knows what they would do...

 

[readytotry]

I think they are attention seekers and I bet it's all made up anyway.

I feel sorry for the child that his parents insist on dragging all their parenting through the Mail.

 

[LoraLoo]

@Bella, I dont think of it as child cruellty at all He is loved, he was safe in the bedroom, within 3 nights he was sleeping through the nights. If he was still screaming 6 months later i'd be agreeing with you. But 3 nights? Nah. He was probably crying for 3 hours a night prior to having his door locked.

 

[jenkins]

nobody knows what they would do...

I respectfully disagree.

It upset me reading the article and it wasn't about a child I even know.
I can honestly say that I would never ever do what they did.

And I am genuinely not being confrontational, just respectfully disagreeing.

 

[Natsku]

I don't like that they let their toddler cry for 3 hours without going in to comfort him, I think CC would have been the better option but I don't see whats wrong with locking the door at night. It was for his safety. I basically lock Maria in at night as I have a stairgate on her door - its for her safety cos she sometimes gets up in the night to play and doesn't cry so I don't always wake up so I don't want the risk of her wandering out of her room as she can open the front door now and there's two flights of stairs outside the door - she could really hurt herself. Plus playing with the oven etc.

We dont know that they didnt try CC though, they said they tried everything. Like i say i personally think they should have picked 1 method and stuck to it, but everyone has their breaking point. I dont think they are bad parents for doing what they did.

Thats a good point, they might have tried CC already without it working so resorted to CIO.

 

[LoraLoo]

nobody knows what they would do...

I respectfully disagree.

It upset me reading the article and it wasn't about a child I even know.
I can honestly say that I would never ever do what they did.

And I am genuinely not being confrontational, just respectfully disagreeing.

I do agree with you. Before I had my 1st baby and said I was against smacking, lots of people said 'wait til she is 5!' Nope, I always knew I would never smack. Still haven't, never would.

 

[fidgets mammy]

just because we wouldnt do it doesnt mean we cant try n see why they did

 

[omfgski]

..

 

[Larkspur]

At the end of the day, the child now sleeps fine all night in his own bed, and it only took two nights of a bit of crying.

Assuming what he wrote is true, I just cannot get on board with the idea that three hours of a toddler screaming locked in a room alone until he collapses with exhaustion is "a bit of crying".

 

[LoraLoo]

just because we wouldnt do it doesnt mean we cant try n see why they did

I agree. As i previously stated i have never smacked my children, not even a tap on the hand, but thats not to say Im not against other people that use that method, i can see why they do. Its not for me, but works for others.

 

[x Michelle x]

i think they did say they had tried everything, and why is it so different to a child in a cot or one who can't reach a door handle? Personally, if things got that bad it would be something i would try... but then i did CIO and CC with both of mine. Much rather a pissed off child in their own room than one wandering around the house, possibly hurting themself?

 

[babyrough]

At the end of the day, the child now sleeps fine all night in his own bed, and it only took two nights of a bit of crying.

Assuming what he wrote is true, I just cannot get on board with the idea that three hours of a toddler screaming locked in a room alone until he collapses with exhaustion is "a bit of crying".

In the grand scheme of things, if it took a few hours of crying for him to every night sleep well and in his own bed which in turn makes him a happier child in the daytime then and if nothing else they tried worked then they did what was best for them. Assuming everything they said was true.

 

[fidgets mammy]

isnt it the same when babies r left in a cot to cry?

 

[LoraLoo]

isnt it the same when babies r left in a cot to cry?

See i wouldnt do that either- but i dont disagree with those who do or call it child cruelty. Ive used CC, which other people may say is just as 'bad' as CIO I personally dont give a rats arse what anyone thinks of my parenting, I do what i believe is right for my children, their siblings and myself. x

 

[Larkspur]

In the grand scheme of things, if it took a few hours of crying for him to every night sleep well and in his own bed which in turn makes him a happier child in the daytime then and if nothing else they tried worked then they did what was best for them. Assuming everything they said was true.

I guess this is where there are divergent schools of parenting thought. In my "grand scheme" I see that the child may appear happier, and that the problem has been 'solved', but to me the underlying issue has never been addressed and the child has simply been taught that if he is not compliant, his parents will abandon him completely until he becomes so.

This is a "grand scheme" lesson that I do not wish to teach my kids, because I believe that it could (not *will definitely* but I think there is a good chance) lead to anxiety problems, parental/authority distrust, parental resistance, or conversely, excessive acquiescence, people-pleasing behaviour etc, later in life. I would rather co-sleep, re-settle, search harder for the source of the problem, wait-it-out, etc than resort to leaving a child to scream for hours. Other people might well disagree, but it's just not in me to do that.

 

[LoraLoo]

In the grand scheme of things, if it took a few hours of crying for him to every night sleep well and in his own bed which in turn makes him a happier child in the daytime then and if nothing else they tried worked then they did what was best for them. Assuming everything they said was true.

I guess this is where there are divergent schools of parenting thought. In my "grand scheme" I see that the child may appear happier, and that the problem has been 'solved', but to me the underlying issue has never been addressed and the child has simply been taught that if he is not compliant, his parents will abandon him completely until he becomes so.

This is a "grand scheme" lesson that I do not wish to teach my kids, because I believe that it could (not *will definitely* but I think there is a good chance) lead to anxiety problems, parental/authority distrust, parental resistance, or conversely, excessive acquiescence, people-pleasing behaviour etc, later in life. I would rather co-sleep, re-settle, search harder for the source of the problem, wait-it-out, etc than resort to leaving a child to scream for hours. Other people might well disagree, but it's just not in me to do that.

Why does there have to be an underlying issue? Why can it never be children exploring something new, testing their boundaries? Somethings just dont need such in depth analysis all the time (IMO) I completely disagree with your last statement that 3 nights at 3 years old would cause any long term 'damage'. Im also with you on that its not something I would do, because other methods have worked for me, but for this family, it did not.

 

[Soph n Chris]

In the grand scheme of things, if it took a few hours of crying for him to every night sleep well and in his own bed which in turn makes him a happier child in the daytime then and if nothing else they tried worked then they did what was best for them. Assuming everything they said was true.

I guess this is where there are divergent schools of parenting thought. In my "grand scheme" I see that the child may appear happier, and that the problem has been 'solved', but to me the underlying issue has never been addressed and the child has simply been taught that if he is not compliant, his parents will abandon him completely until he becomes so.

This is a "grand scheme" lesson that I do not wish to teach my kids, because I believe that it could (not *will definitely* but I think there is a good chance) lead to anxiety problems, parental/authority distrust, parental resistance, or conversely, excessive acquiescence, people-pleasing behaviour etc, later in life. I would rather co-sleep, re-settle, search harder for the source of the problem, wait-it-out, etc than resort to leaving a child to scream for hours. Other people might well disagree, but it's just not in me to do that.

Why does there have to be an underlying issue? Why can it never be children exploring something new, testing their boundaries? Somethings just dont need such in depth analysis all the time (IMO)

Thank you sooo much for saying this!! I agree. And don't see why a child cant just be being naughty either......