Would you let a newborn cry it out?

[babyhopes2010]

i think its v easy to judge people who let baby cio IF you have support or have a content baby ect ect i used controlled crying at 5 months it worked. she learnt to settle. she never slept and was v v v unhappy baby after months of nothing working we tried this and it worked

now my ds is 2 days old and is v content 'if' he stays like this id never even cross my mind to allow and sort of controlled crying. it was a last resort.
now if he were my 1st id find it easy to judge people that are pro-controlled crying

 

[staralfur]

I was never left to cry and have a myriad of attachment, anxiety and OCD issues. How do you prove it was CIO that causes these kinds of problems in adulthood? You can't. I'm a good example. Mentally, I'm a mess, but it wasn't caused by CIO, because it was never done to me. I don't buy it. Sorry.

No one ever said that cio is the only thing that could cause these things, though. You probably weren't severely physically abused as a child, either, but we know that physical abuse can also cause your symptoms. Just because you have the symptoms without one of the possible causes doesn't debunk it as a possible cause.
Frankly, if I had anxiety issues, I'd be much less inclined to cio in case there's a genetic link and my baby were having uncontrollable anxiety problems causing the wakefulness at nighttime.

Not much gets me really cross but this post is disgraceful. I think you are misleading and your views are potentially damaging. How dare you insinuate this?! You have sensationalised this topic to the point of idiocy and use vague studies to make others feel like sub par parents. I hope this poster disregards this cruel suggestion.

you mean the poster that doesn't want to leave her infant to CIO? What are you even talking about? How is it cruel to not CIO?

I think it was more the implication that pinklightbulb was potentially doing her baby extra harm given those circumstances. Not a terribly empathetic thing to say to someone who admits to having anxiety issues as is.

 

[jd83]

I was never left to cry and have a myriad of attachment, anxiety and OCD issues. How do you prove it was CIO that causes these kinds of problems in adulthood? You can't. I'm a good example. Mentally, I'm a mess, but it wasn't caused by CIO, because it was never done to me. I don't buy it. Sorry.

No one ever said that cio is the only thing that could cause these things, though. You probably weren't severely physically abused as a child, either, but we know that physical abuse can also cause your symptoms. Just because you have the symptoms without one of the possible causes doesn't debunk it as a possible cause.
Frankly, if I had anxiety issues, I'd be much less inclined to cio in case there's a genetic link and my baby were having uncontrollable anxiety problems causing the wakefulness at nighttime.

Not much gets me really cross but this post is disgraceful. I think you are misleading and your views are potentially damaging. How dare you insinuate this?! You have sensationalised this topic to the point of idiocy and use vague studies to make others feel like sub par parents. I hope this poster disregards this cruel suggestion.

you mean the poster that doesn't want to leave her infant to CIO? What are you even talking about? How is it cruel to not CIO?

I'm pretty sure she meant the comment insinuating there may be a genetic link with the anxiety, so being less likely to CIO due to that. Insinuating the genetic link part for anxiety being the part that was offensive to the poster, I think.

 

[HanaK]

^^ This is correct.

 

[overcomer79]

oh to be the perfect parent...I was wondering how long it would take before this thread turned ugly.

 

[MommyJogger]

I don't find this the least bit helpful. By bashing the methods that many on here found to have worked wonderfully for their babies, you are pushing your own beliefs on others rather than offering advice/opinion. There's a difference between offering advice, as well as your opinion on something, and pushing your beliefs down others throats and making them feel awful if they choose to do things differently. Bashing the method? Its basically the same as bashing the parent who chose it when you continually go on about it.

I realize you feel very strongly about it, otherwise you wouldn't have so much to say about it. But from the perspective of someone who is pro-sleep training when age appropriate and when sleep needs indicate a need for it (I don't always think its needed. Some babies sleep just fine, with only a few regular wakings to feed, etc), I feel the benefits can definitely far outweigh the cons (crying, obviously, and feeling stressed). I did CC with my boys around 6-7 months old when they were continually waking beyond needs for feedings or diaper changes, and I have to say, the change in their demeanor and attitude from getting such a good night sleep cannot be discounted. They were immediately much happier babies from not being overtired from lack of good sleep. I was better able to care for them because I wasn't having to get up every 2 hours all night long, only 1-2 times a night after CC. Having happier babies and a happier mommy who could care for her boys better? That's what matters to me. I really dislike that you are making so many moms feel badly about their parenting decisions when it has such a positive impact on so many families.

At some point, it becomes less about beliefs and more about understanding empirical evidence. I find pro-extinction sleep training propaganda to be unhelpful to moms who feel desperate. Instead of acknowledging that there are gentler methods that are better for baby, all I ever see on here is "hey it worked for us and my babies are great and so much happier now". I see so few people on here seeking advice about gentler methods and making sure they've tried other things before resorting to cc/cio. And that's at least in part because they don't know or understand the potential for harm these methods have and because they see so many doing it on these boards and raving about its efficacy.
I also see too many of the same people talking about both sleep training and limiting daytime sleep to make sure the sleep happens at night to believe that it's somehow all about making sure children get adequate sleep. Quotes like "My child better know I'm not coming if they kick up a fuss at bedtime because after 7pm is adult time" distinctly stick out in my mind. And I never see a single sleep training advocate telling these people that shit like that is not okay and poor reflection of 'responsible' sleep training.
In short, parents considering cc/cio should be scared. If their children really are sleep deprived and they've tried literally everything else, they will eventually decide that the risks of their baby's sleep deprivation outweigh the risks of cc/cio. But it should be a long, dredging, very well-thought out journey to get there.

 

[fieryphoenix]

^^ This is correct.

Gotcha

 

[MommyJogger]

I don't see how pointing out that there could be a genetic component to anxiety is offensive. Sorry if pointing out a logical possibility offended the poster I was responding to.

oh to be the perfect parent...I was wondering how long it would take before this thread turned ugly.

Yup, because we all know that if someone disagrees with someone else, they must be a martyr with perfect children, loads of time on their hands, and believe themselves to be a perfect parent. Because it's not possible to deal with the same struggles, time and patience limitations, and self-doubt and still come to a different evidence-based conclusion.

 

[Magsy]

Did you read the link? Do you even bother reading the studies at all? Do you critically evaluate them in the least? Because every single study saying "there is no harm" fails to use any physiological marker as an indicator. Every single one of them use parent reported attachment, stress, and sleep quality as a measurement of harm. Every study that says "there could be harm long term, there is harm short term" uses either physiological measurements of stress or blind-reported independent evaluations of attachment and dyad interaction.
Everyone strawmans the extreme stress studies saying that they're not comparable to cio, but completely ignore the plethora of published work on mild-to-moderate levels of stress that also point to disimproved attachment, cognitive function, and stress management.
ETA: to bolded: Pro-cio-ers always say that baby only cries for a few nights. This completely ignores that it's been shown that signalling stops, stress does not. Just because they stop telling you about their stress doesn't mean it's not there. The other study based on mother-reported sleep difficulties also shows that sometime between 4w and 6mo after training has taken place, the infants made to cio and the infants with mothers who wio report comparable sleep reports-- meaning that either sleep would have sorted itself in that time or the cio babies stopped sleeping as 'well'. A majority of the cio families had had to sleep train again within the 6mo. So it's not a few nights for most families. It's who knows how many nights of unsignaled stress, to be repeated again when the training wears off.
ETA again: I have no interest in bashing the people, but I will bash the methods you may choose to use. Please don't confuse the two.

I believe the difference between that is that I've considered studies done on both sides. You seem to disregard all the opposing studies (I'm not even going to get into the invalidities of measuring stress solely based on cortisol levels) because you don't agree with them. If you want to believe that something has been proven then that is your right. The scientific community at large, however, has not come any such consensus. That's all I was saying.

I do find your last statement interesting. I don't think any further discussion with you will be productive since your stated intent is to bash a parenting method you disagree with. You've clearly come onto this thread to preach your message instead of discuss opposing point of views.

 

[overcomer79]

I don't see how pointing out that there could be a genetic component to anxiety is offensive. Sorry if pointing out a logical possibility offended the poster I was responding to.

oh to be the perfect parent...I was wondering how long it would take before this thread turned ugly.

Yup, because we all know that if someone disagrees with someone else, they must be a martyr with perfect children, loads of time on their hands, and believe themselves to be a perfect parent. Because it's not possible to deal with the same struggles, time and patience limitations, and self-doubt and still come to a different evidence-based conclusion.

sorry but I consider it that attitude when someone is on here making everyone else feel like dung because of decisions they have had to make. And then telling moms that use this method that they should be "scared" of the risk??? Maybe you should take all our kids since your methods are the only ones that work for all. And yes with all the research that you like to spit at us...I do think you must have loads of time on your hands to read every article and decipher it. Either that or you are supermom *rolls eyes*

 

[staralfur]

I don't find this the least bit helpful. By bashing the methods that many on here found to have worked wonderfully for their babies, you are pushing your own beliefs on others rather than offering advice/opinion. There's a difference between offering advice, as well as your opinion on something, and pushing your beliefs down others throats and making them feel awful if they choose to do things differently. Bashing the method? Its basically the same as bashing the parent who chose it when you continually go on about it.

I realize you feel very strongly about it, otherwise you wouldn't have so much to say about it. But from the perspective of someone who is pro-sleep training when age appropriate and when sleep needs indicate a need for it (I don't always think its needed. Some babies sleep just fine, with only a few regular wakings to feed, etc), I feel the benefits can definitely far outweigh the cons (crying, obviously, and feeling stressed). I did CC with my boys around 6-7 months old when they were continually waking beyond needs for feedings or diaper changes, and I have to say, the change in their demeanor and attitude from getting such a good night sleep cannot be discounted. They were immediately much happier babies from not being overtired from lack of good sleep. I was better able to care for them because I wasn't having to get up every 2 hours all night long, only 1-2 times a night after CC. Having happier babies and a happier mommy who could care for her boys better? That's what matters to me. I really dislike that you are making so many moms feel badly about their parenting decisions when it has such a positive impact on so many families.

At some point, it becomes less about beliefs and more about understanding empirical evidence. I find pro-extinction sleep training propaganda to be unhelpful to moms who feel desperate. Instead of acknowledging that there are gentler methods that are better for baby, all I ever see on here is "hey it worked for us and my babies are great and so much happier now". I see so few people on here seeking advice about gentler methods and making sure they've tried other things before resorting to cc/cio. And that's at least in part because they don't know or understand the potential for harm these methods have and because they see so many doing it on these boards and raving about its efficacy.
I also see too many of the same people talking about both sleep training and limiting daytime sleep to make sure the sleep happens at night to believe that it's somehow all about making sure children get adequate sleep. Quotes like "My child better know I'm not coming if they kick up a fuss at bedtime because after 7pm is adult time" distinctly stick out in my mind. And I never see a single sleep training advocate telling these people that shit like that is not okay and poor reflection of 'responsible' sleep training.
In short, parents considering cc/cio should be scared. If their children really are sleep deprived and they've tried literally everything else, they will eventually decide that the risks of their baby's sleep deprivation outweigh the risks of cc/cio. But it should be a long, dredging, very well-thought out journey to get there.

What even. Who says that, exactly?

 

[staralfur]

Because it's not possible to deal with the same struggles, time and patience limitations, and self-doubt and still come to a different evidence-based conclusion.

Maybe that's something you should remind yourself of.

 

[Wobbles]

This has been moved to the debates section. While moderation is lower within this section please be aware the following rules still apply:

Rudeness, flaming or trolling is not tolerated on, or about, BabyandBump or its members.Any member who is intentionally disruptive may have their account restricted or banned without warning.

Antisocial, discriminatory or offensive messages (intended or otherwise) aimed at the community at large, certain demographics (including parenting styles) or specific members, are not permitted.

 

[fieryphoenix]

I don't find this the least bit helpful. By bashing the methods that many on here found to have worked wonderfully for their babies, you are pushing your own beliefs on others rather than offering advice/opinion. There's a difference between offering advice, as well as your opinion on something, and pushing your beliefs down others throats and making them feel awful if they choose to do things differently. Bashing the method? Its basically the same as bashing the parent who chose it when you continually go on about it.

I realize you feel very strongly about it, otherwise you wouldn't have so much to say about it. But from the perspective of someone who is pro-sleep training when age appropriate and when sleep needs indicate a need for it (I don't always think its needed. Some babies sleep just fine, with only a few regular wakings to feed, etc), I feel the benefits can definitely far outweigh the cons (crying, obviously, and feeling stressed). I did CC with my boys around 6-7 months old when they were continually waking beyond needs for feedings or diaper changes, and I have to say, the change in their demeanor and attitude from getting such a good night sleep cannot be discounted. They were immediately much happier babies from not being overtired from lack of good sleep. I was better able to care for them because I wasn't having to get up every 2 hours all night long, only 1-2 times a night after CC. Having happier babies and a happier mommy who could care for her boys better? That's what matters to me. I really dislike that you are making so many moms feel badly about their parenting decisions when it has such a positive impact on so many families.

At some point, it becomes less about beliefs and more about understanding empirical evidence. I find pro-extinction sleep training propaganda to be unhelpful to moms who feel desperate. Instead of acknowledging that there are gentler methods that are better for baby, all I ever see on here is "hey it worked for us and my babies are great and so much happier now". I see so few people on here seeking advice about gentler methods and making sure they've tried other things before resorting to cc/cio. And that's at least in part because they don't know or understand the potential for harm these methods have and because they see so many doing it on these boards and raving about its efficacy.
I also see too many of the same people talking about both sleep training and limiting daytime sleep to make sure the sleep happens at night to believe that it's somehow all about making sure children get adequate sleep. Quotes like "My child better know I'm not coming if they kick up a fuss at bedtime because after 7pm is adult time" distinctly stick out in my mind. And I never see a single sleep training advocate telling these people that shit like that is not okay and poor reflection of 'responsible' sleep training.
In short, parents considering cc/cio should be scared. If their children really are sleep deprived and they've tried literally everything else, they will eventually decide that the risks of their baby's sleep deprivation outweigh the risks of cc/cio. But it should be a long, dredging, very well-thought out journey to get there.

What even. Who says that, exactly?

I've seen posts similar to that on here before, not lots, but some here and there.

 

[MommyJogger]

I don't see how pointing out that there could be a genetic component to anxiety is offensive. Sorry if pointing out a logical possibility offended the poster I was responding to.

oh to be the perfect parent...I was wondering how long it would take before this thread turned ugly.

Yup, because we all know that if someone disagrees with someone else, they must be a martyr with perfect children, loads of time on their hands, and believe themselves to be a perfect parent. Because it's not possible to deal with the same struggles, time and patience limitations, and self-doubt and still come to a different evidence-based conclusion.

sorry but I consider it that attitude when someone is on here making everyone else feel like dung because of decisions they have had to make. And then telling moms that use this method that they should be "scared" of the risk??? Maybe you should take all our kids since your methods are the only ones that work for all. And yes with all the research that you like to spit at us...I do think you must have loads of time on your hands to read every article and decipher it. Either that or you are supermom *rolls eyes*

Roll your eyes all you want, it's literally my job (not my mom job, my paid job) to read and dismantle research. You should be scared of the possible risk of every decision you make. You should research it. It's our jobs as parents. These are our children, they have to live with these decisions.

 

[overcomer79]

As far as I am concerned, I'm doing what's best for my children as you are. I prefer to spend time with my children rather than mauling over every little (and yes this is classed as little to me) decision a parent has to make. I get so very few precious time with my kids that I like to make the most of it. You don't have to agree with me but honestly you are just on here being disrespectful. I have nothing more to say to you.

 

[overcomer79]

I'm confused...who brought up older babies? I thought it was about newborns??

 

[MommyJogger]

What even. Who says that, exactly?

I've seen posts similar to that on here before, not lots, but some here and there.

I notice it a lot more in the replies to "please help" sleep threads than in the op of the threads themselves-- the same people suggesting that they limited duration and frequency of daytime naps and then saying "we did cc/cio/whatever and now they sleep well". I've seen it frequently professed that people need "me time" in the evenings-- and if you pay attention, these are the same people that did cio to get their child to sleep in the evenings. In terms of that quote, I've seen it either exact or equivalent thrice on bnb in the past month.
And the one time I bothered to look at the new website created by the professed "sleep training queen", there were two support threads for different members who sleep trained so that their evenings were free, with everyone basically saying "of course! everyone needs some adult time!". Made me ill.

 

[jd83]

Apparently I've missed all that then. Because most sleep support threads that I read on here ask the OP how much daytime napping the baby is getting, in teh idea that not ENOUGH naptime in the day can also disrupt night sleep. The total amount of sleep is a major factor, not just how much sleep at night, or not just at nap time.

I also think that those who do CC/CIO don't choose it as a first choice. No one want to listen to their baby cry. Those of who have used these methods did so because othermethods were not working, and yes, if we are happy that it worked we are usually happy to share that fact. I won't feel bad about my choice to use it; it helped our family immensely. I tried other methods that were gentler and they just didn't work with my boys. It wasn't about me trying to get some "me" time. it was about getting enough sleep to function as a mom and to function at work. It was about making sure my kids got enough sleep to be happy during the day, rather than being overtired from continuos broken sleep and crankiness.

 

[MommyJogger]

I personally wouldn't leave my newborn to cry but I know people who have and you know what? No adverse effects. I think everyone gets so caught up in parenting philosophy that they forget to be human; responding to your baby's needs is paramount, yes, but I don't think a slightly misinformed father and MIL are really going to have any adverse effects on this baby.

Whilst I do believe that the idea of a fourth trimester is helpful to parents of newborns, ultimately a lot of parents don't give it so much thought and inadvertently employ methods which sound shocking to those of us who do a lot of research. Will these people being up less balanced children? You know what, I highly doubt it.

Apparently I've missed all that then. Because most sleep support threads that I read on here ask the OP how much daytime napping the baby is getting, in teh idea that not ENOUGH naptime in the day can also disrupt night sleep. The total amount of sleep is a major factor, not just how much sleep at night, or not just at nap time.

I also think that those who do CC/CIO don't choose it as a first choice. No one want to listen to their baby cry. Those of who have used these methods did so because othermethods were not working, and yes, if we are happy that it worked we are usually happy to share that fact. I won't feel bad about my choice to use it; it helped our family immensely. I tried other methods that were gentler and they just didn't work with my boys. It wasn't about me trying to get some "me" time. it was about getting enough sleep to function as a mom and to function at work. It was about making sure my kids got enough sleep to be happy during the day, rather than being overtired from continuos broken sleep and crankiness.

And you really think that your good experience with it excuses this post arguing that cio as a newborn isn't going to cause adverse effects? Then she goes on to say that I'm misleading? Because for some reason all the pro-sleep trainers don't bother to take time out to jump on something like that advocating what you guys are apparently against.
ETA: am I allowed to call people out for posts they've made? I'm under the impression that posting from other threads with the purpose of calling out what I think are unacceptable parenting decisions would probably get me banned.