Moments of Permanence - In which I was born to turn my parents into Bad Parents

From: firefly21 Date: June 28th, 2012 11:22 pm (UTC) (Link)

Speaking as the mum of the baby who gave you the cold... ;)

Those sorts of articles really annoy me sometimes (disclaimer: I haven't read it, I don't need my blood pressure rising that high this early in the morning). I think it puts unnecessary pressure on parents (especially new parents) who read it and think "If my child is crying AT ALL I am doing something wrong or there is a need I am not meeting." Yes, you need to meet your child's needs, but babies just cry sometimes! Sometimes they don't want to go to bed at bedtime. Sometimes they are just grumpy. And sometimes you just can't fix it.
Also, feeling like you have to make the baby stop crying at all costs can lead to all kinds of issues later on - the kid learns if he doesn't want to go to bed at bedtime, just cry, and the parents will relent. Or if he doesn't want to eat that particular food or do a particular thing - just scream until your parents relent. Sorry, kid, but you need to learn that life doesn't always work that way and you can't always have what you want. That doesn't mean you deny food to a hungry baby or leave a screaming child in a pooey nappy for hours because that would be cruel. But telling parents that they are damaging their child if he is crying at all is equally cruel and untrue, in my eyes.

/rant

:)

(Reply) (Thread)

From: velithya Date: June 29th, 2012 12:18 am (UTC) (Link)

since when do you have a dreamwidth

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: sami Date: June 29th, 2012 12:27 am (UTC) (Link)

since february dude you totally told *me* that just then

(Reply) (Parent)

From: firefly21 Date: June 29th, 2012 04:14 am (UTC) (Link)

Since dreamwidth wouldn't let me login to comment on one of Sami's posts with my OpenID from Livejournal, despite me entering my username and password correctly. *sigh*
I don't actually read your dreamwidth, I only read Sami's. I check your LJ instead, when I check my friends list :P

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: sami Date: June 29th, 2012 05:09 am (UTC) (Link)

:smug:

I just added you to my access list, so you can now read locked posts, too. The ones where I talk about how much I hate you and hate your kids I MEAN UH NEVER MIND >.>

(Reply) (Parent)

From: sami Date: June 29th, 2012 12:26 am (UTC) (Link)

Yeah, that's kind of what I meant to be getting at, but I think I managed maybe one passing remark because I wrote that before breakfast/meds, but: yes. It's seriously uncool to put CRYING IS DAMAGING YOUR BABY'S BRAIN pressure on parents. That's why the subject line - because, seriously, my parents were not, under any circumstances, going to be able to keep me from crying really a lot as a baby. And I did at least still turn out really quite intelligent, and so on.

And it's your kids make me really kinda dubious about the emotional damage thing, I think. Correlation is not causation, and maybe there's a bias towards parents who are not good, emotionally/nurturingly, with parents who let their babies cry *a lot*, but - your babies get to cry sometimes, but your boys are seriously amazing, and extremely well-adjusted. They ADORE you, and they're not dependent or untrusting. I know they're not, because I babysit them, and I have never known kids so utterly unconcerned about their mother leaving as yours.

When you walk out of the house and they're awake, they're chill, because hey, you'll be back, and they clearly feel in no way abandoned by your departure.

And if you've left while they're asleep and they wake up to me, I get a sort of sleepy blink, then the recognition that hey, it's Sami, and then a happy smile. They're just not fussed. The only time I've had either of them be unhappy about the situation is when, trying to juggle both of them, I momentarily seemed to give R the impression that his bottle was not forthcoming and he didn't like that notion at all.

So I would venture to suggest that kids having trust issues and neuroses is probably going to have more complex causes than just being allowed to cry sometimes. (And hey, even though I'm not even his mother, J-man still totally loves me despite the fact I let him scream out his tantrum that time.)

(Reply) (Parent)

From: lady_ganesh Date: June 29th, 2012 08:20 pm (UTC) (Link)

+ 1

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: sami Date: June 30th, 2012 11:20 am (UTC) (Link)

yeah especially her kids her kids are super unreasonable >.>

(Her kids are awesome, wonderful, delightful boys and I am almost disturbed by how generally cheerfully disposed and well-adjusted they are. Fortunately, the not-quite-two-year-old can be an absolute ratbag when he's in a Pushing Boundaries mood, or I'd suspect she'd implanted control chips into their spines.)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: lady_ganesh Date: June 30th, 2012 07:48 pm (UTC) (Link)

Yeah, my cousin will complain about her kids sometimes and I'm like, um, do you know what the other kids their age are like? Have you not been paying attention?

(Reply) (Parent)

From: rainbow Date: June 29th, 2012 02:30 am (UTC) (Link)

it sounds like you're starting from assuming that crying it out means allowing an infant to cry. cio != crying

i've had cio described to me as the adult deciding what needs are valid for the infant and checking a crying infant just for those: is the diaper dirty? will the child actively nurse?

if not, then the parent goes away and leaves the infant alone with no regard for what's actually wrong (discomfort/pain due to gas, teething, etc; loneliness; not feeling well; needing to comfort nurse) with no company so that the child will "self soothe"; this is to teach the child that crying "for no reason" means attention, affection, and comfort will be withdrawn, while only crying for reasons the parent approves of will get those needs met. (eta: i should note that when i was babysitting in the 70s and 80s, thsi is exactly how i was told to take care of infants by their parents. gah.)

it's not the *crying* that's dangerous to infants; it's the physiological and psychological stresses of having valid needs unmet, learning that one can be abandoned at any time, and being left to cry oneself into a stupor or to the point of vomiting with no comfort.

an infant who cries inconsolably while being held and comforted can still be in pain/discomfort, but they aren't being actively taught that their needs are unacceptable and result in being abandoned by their caretaker/parent.

(as for cosleeping, evidently intentional cosleeping (in a safe bed with an adult who is unimpaired) is safer than a crib. the dangerous cases are people who didn't know how to make the bed safe or who were impaired. cosleeping has physiological benefits for the infant; it helps teach the immature system how to regulate by mimicking the adult system, so the infant doesn't fall into a sleep so deep it can't around itself if needed. parents and infants who cosleep tend to have synchronised sleep/wake cycles so that doesn't happen.)

Edited 2012-06-29 02:33 am (UTC)

(Reply) (Thread)

From: firefly21 Date: June 29th, 2012 04:11 am (UTC) (Link)

I have to respectfully disagree with your 'cosleeping being safer than a crib' comment - while I agree that it is possible to cosleep safely, it is strongly discouraged by most government and maternal health bodies. When I had my two babies in the last few years, my hospital had a very clear 'no co-sleeping' policy and were adamant that it was dangerous and unsafe.
You can gain all of the benefits you mentioned by having the baby sleep in a bassinet right next to the parents' bed, with none of the risks.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: sami Date: June 29th, 2012 05:11 am (UTC) (Link)

Right, the bassinet thing is how I've always known the newborn phase to work.

I nearly said bascinet. Not the same thing but the mental image is kind of hilarious. I'm picturing R-buddy sitting in one like a Bumbo. With a tiny, tiny sword.

(Reply) (Parent)

From: rainbow Date: June 29th, 2012 06:32 pm (UTC) (Link)

i absolutely agree that it's frowned on by most govt and medical groups; but the research is getting replicated more and more, so i think in time they'll catch up. (fwiw, i don't know how it is where you are; in the usa the many [if not most] rules within hospitals are mandated by their liability insurers rather than by what's best for the patient. but that said, a hospital bed, at least the common sort in the usa, would absolutely not be safe for co-sleeping; the oens here are high off the floor and the sides are bars.)

i'm not an expert in the field and am depending on what those i know who are have explained to me, but iirc, the physiological effects require body contact, so i respectfully disagree that a bassinette would provide the same. but i DO agree that it's far, far better than being in a separate room!

(Reply) (Parent)

From: sami Date: June 29th, 2012 05:07 am (UTC) (Link)

I know, but... the "self-soothing" thing isn't the same thing as abandonment or ignoring needs, either. It *is* an important skill to learn. And I don't think it's neglectful to let a kid cry for five minutes, if he then goes back to sleep.

I found it hard to get used to, at first, as a babysitter, but... seriously, the babies I know who are being raised that way are the happiest, most emotionally secure babies I have ever met in my life.

And sometimes, even babies can have wants that aren't needs, and don't need to be indulged. When J was at the crawling stage, he went through a phase where, if I'd picked him up, he would cry when I put him down, just because he wanted to be carried all the time. A viewpoint on his part which garnered zero sympathy from either me or his mother, because not only do adults not live to carry out his every whim, but if we indulged that one, he wouldn't have any need or incentive to move around on his own, and he wouldn't be developing the muscles and motor control that he should be.

J is a happy, happy kid. He adores his parents, but he's relaxed and happy when they leave him with a babysitter, too. He's secure enough that he's loved that I've never seen him show jealousy towards his little brother even once - indeed, he watched me play with his little brother, and, as soon as we finished the game, exclaimed "More!" to encourage me to do it again, because his brother can't do that himself yet. When he's unhappy for a reason, or has a problem, he immediately asks for help - he doesn't assume he'll be ignored. Even if he's in another room, the call of, "Ehp!" is heard, by which he means help but that's a *super-hard* word to articulate, and if you don't answer, he figures you didn't hear, and calls louder before he goes anywhere near crying. Or comes and fetches the adult himself.

As for cosleeping: I'm still on the wary side, not least because "unimpaired" describes no new parent I have ever known. Sleep deprivation renders you impaired in and of itself, and sleep deprivation is unavoidable. And I can't imagine what's supposed to make a bed safe from, say, a parent shifting in their sleep and accidentally smothering the baby with their own body. Sleeping in four-points hardly sounds comfortable.

And a baby's sleep regulation isn't supposed to mimic an adult's. Infant and adult sleep needs are radically different. I'm not even sure what you mean by "a sleep so deep it can't [arouse, I presume] itself" - I've never known a baby to fall into a random coma, or fail to wake up after a period, and someone who doesn't have even the most basic motor control doesn't really have any chance of dealing with any problem that could arise, so the baby doesn't really need to be able to wake itself up any time before it's going to develop sleep cycle regulation regardless in its own bed.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: rainbow Date: June 29th, 2012 06:51 pm (UTC) (Link)

self soothing doesn't need to be taught via cio, and letting an infant cry for five minutes to see if it's going straight back to sleep isn't the same as the cio. i get that they both involve not immediately responding to the cry, but that's the end of the similarity.

i respect that we have different experiences and know different parents. i now one parent who didn't cosleep because of medication needs. i know over a dozen who did, none of whom were impaired.

I've never known a baby to fall into a random coma, or fail to wake up after a period, and someone who doesn't have even the most basic motor control doesn't really have any chance of dealing with any problem that could arise, so the baby doesn't really need to be able to wake itself up any time before it's going to develop sleep cycle regulation regardless in its own bed.

i'm very, very glad you don't know anyone who's gone through a sids loss. sids and sids prevention is something i'm very passionate about; back in the 80s i knew 2 sets of parents who lost a child to sids. it was much less well researched back then.

now there are many more studies showing that post mortem exams on sids infants often show prolonged hypoxia before death, and the research is increasingly showing that a combination of an immature and underdeveloped respiratory and cardiovascular system plus an inability to arouse themselves as needed is involved. both can be genetic; it's not common for a sibling of a child who died of sids to have the same issues with arousability. but it can crop up elsewhere, as well. there can also be other factors, certainly.
(one of the articles i have bookmarked is http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2910535/, if you're interested in the research side)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: sami Date: June 30th, 2012 04:56 am (UTC) (Link)

Okay, I have known families with SIDS losses, that is not the same thing. But you see, relative to the initial article, you're actually totally agreeing with me. You say letting an infant cry for five minutes to see if it's going straight back to sleep isn't the same as the cio, but the author of the article I was referring to would contend that it is. The article in essence makes the claim that a good, caring parent should attend to a baby's every need before it cries, and in particular, that if a baby is crying and continues to cry, that is causing harm to the baby. Even if the parent is trying to soothe it. If they aren't succeeding, if the baby keeps crying, then the parents are doing it wrong because they don't understand their babies well enough to recognise their needs.

We're not talking about letting kids cry for hours. We're talking about an article that's telling parents that if their babies cry, at all, ever, then they are bad parents.

Which: no.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: rainbow Date: June 30th, 2012 06:32 am (UTC) (Link)

are you saying sids losses are not about an infant who isn't able to arouse itself when needed? because yes, they are.

We're not talking about letting kids cry for hours. We're talking about an article that's telling parents that if their babies cry, at all, ever, then they are bad parents.

you may not be, but that's exactly what the "cry it out" philosophy is about, and the term is in the title of the article and the references are specific references to problems with the cry it out philosphy.

i disagree that it says anything about a baby who continues to cry being about being a bad parent; resources are offered for parents who don't know different things they can try, but it's the effect of the distress that's discussed. (in fact i'd say it says the opposite of "bad parents" because it says "What does extensive baby crying signal? It shows the lack of experience, knowledge and/or support of the baby's caregivers. "; not have experience, knowledge, or support doesn't make one bad; it only means one needs more of them.)

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: sami Date: June 30th, 2012 11:16 am (UTC) (Link)

I'm not going to be continuing this discussion. I'm finding it frustrating, and I have little doubt that that's going to be to a reasonably large extent because I'm sick. I'm finding it quite difficult to think clearly, even more difficult to express myself clearly, and I don't really want to get into an argument right now, and I'm not currently capable of having this conversation in a way that *isn't* an argument.

Sorry. But seriously, I've been nastily ill for nearly two weeks, I just don't have it in me.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: rainbow Date: July 1st, 2012 07:47 am (UTC) (Link)

no worries, and lots of healing vibes and love headed your way if you'd like them.

(Reply) (Parent)

From: willow Date: June 29th, 2012 04:15 pm (UTC) (Link)

I don't know if the article is US based or not. Haven't read it - cause it'd aggravate me as well. But I know for the longest time there's been this thing, _ vs _ between parents who believe one should leave a baby in their crib to learn how to sleep on their own, even if it means they cry for hours - 'cause they have to learn'. And people who DO NOT believe in doing that. And actually find it offensive to be told 'babies crying are attempts to manipulate their parents and they have to learn'.

Whereas I'm all - an infant under 18 months doesn't have to learn DIPSQUAT except to eat what they get fed and not to touch pointy things. (After 18 months, it's 'don't pull that down when you're walking')

Anyway, my observations when dealing w/ my siblings and reading the various books etc, is that there's a lot of talk of the psychological implications of leaving a child to cry themselves to sleep.

There's no place for a case by case middle ground, because it was 'THE THING TO DO' and then people started questioning it. Heck, as recently as 10 years ago, one tv show did a commercial free 30 min long special wherein the couple was dealing with their crying infant and comforting THEMSELVES because they thought the kid needed to learn to sleep on their own. That, was actually the point in which I stopped watching the show - didn't watch the episode, never watched the show again.

(Reply) (Thread)

From: willow Date: June 29th, 2012 04:23 pm (UTC) (Link)

PS:

I agree with you by the way, about the 'sounds of the crying' telling information. For a couple of years after I left home (and thus my young siblings where I'd been a primary care giver) I couldn't be near children in malls and on the street, especially if it was very young children with new parents. Because I could HEAR 'I'm hungry, I'm tired, I'm hot' in the crying and the parents didn't and would be fussing, or angry, or confused. And going up to a complete stranger to tell them the baby's pitched indicated x would have been WEIRD.

Crying equals communication to me. Even when that communication is 'I'm lonely'.

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: sami Date: June 30th, 2012 05:01 am (UTC) (Link)

I know EXACTLY what you mean. It's so horrible to hear a kid with a patently obvious (to me) need and parents not meeting it.

Alternatively, I also find it annoying when I see parents indulging small children having tantrums, because gah, and also, I have to live in the society that will eventually deal with that kid being a little shit if you keep rewarding their worst behaviour.

I saw a mother whose kid asked really politely and nicely for something, and she completely ignored him. The kid kept trying to get her attention, and got whiny, and progressed into total tantrum meltdown, at which point she yelled at him but bought him the thing he wanted.

I wanted to confiscate the boy and tell her that she had just failed at parenting and could reapply for a child when she had grown the hell up and was able to pay attention to the existence and needs of another human being.

If you're willing to buy the kid the thing, buy it when he asks politely. If you're not willing, don't, but tell him that WHEN HE ASKS POLITELY. If your child speaks to you, you should pretty much NEVER IGNORE HIM.

(Reply) (Parent)

From: sami Date: June 30th, 2012 05:12 am (UTC) (Link)

Well, an infant under 18 months has more to learn than that, but it involves things like "motor control" and stuff and frankly their learning capacity is generally maxed out.

My friend's boys were supposed to learn to sleep by themselves, but there was no crying for hours involved. The plan she was following, which she'd read about in a book, started out at "one minute per month of age". I don't really know where it goes after the first few months, because by then, the boys' own sleeping habits were known, by her and by me as regular babysitter.

Like, the younger one, when he wakes, makes noises that gradually ramp up from little soft whimpers (at which point he's actually still asleep, as far as I can tell) to full-blown crying. If he gets as far as crying, he's harder to resettle, whereas if soothed before he actually wakes up completely, he goes right back to sleep. If he does wake up and you go talk to him and stroke his head, he can resettle, but if you pick him up, he will NOT go back into that crib without screaming his head off.

Although last time I was there he was really sick, so my priority was mostly to keep him from crying at all because it would combine so very badly with the congestion he had.

His older brother used to wake up and want some water then be willing to go back to sleep, but I'm told that at the moment, he's in a phase where if you leave him for a couple of minutes, he'll go back to sleep, but if you go in, no way. (But he's past 18 months now, and has started talking, so if he's actually wanting something specific, he can ask for it.)

I know what you mean about the middle ground, though. There's this weird thing where people seem to adhere to Theories about childcare, rather than just recognising that, hey, every kid is different, so how about you work out what does and doesn't work with each kid?

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: willow Date: June 30th, 2012 04:32 pm (UTC) (Link)

The eldest of my little brothers (is and always was) very opinionated. If he woke up and he was alone, it'd start with a little cry and if he didn't hear anyone calling his name or coming up the stairs, it'd develop into not only full blown crying - but as he got older an attempt to shake-wheel his crib to the door.

I always joke that he had a very set idea that 'Babies are not supposed to be left alone!' Thus for him? When I was looking after him, I ended up strapping him to my chest while I did chores or homework and he'd sleep peacefully, or giggle and talk to me and look at everything and have fun with me blowing soap bubbles AWAY from him. He liked extended bonding time.

My sister, on the other hand would wake up, and wait patiently for someone to come, with only a few little 'is anyone there' cries. On the other hand if her big brother (my little brother) was around? He'd go right to her crib and wait with her for an adult. But like I said, he had it in his head that babies weren't meant to be left alone. At 2 he could point to the monitor and go 'Baby' if he heard her wake up.

Meanwhile she was a wake up and settle. And he was a 'no, I'm up, unless someone's in the room and then I'll go right back to sleep'. Two different personalities. Two different ways of crying and fussing - example; he has always fussed when he gets tired or hungry, whereas she withdraws and gets quiet. But she cried sometimes for seemingly no reason, until I figured out that she was just less demanding about loneliness but felt it all the same.

It meant that a playcrib in the living room? And everyone was happy.

My sibs now? Pretty independent, well adjusted (despite the dysfunction that is our family circumstance) kids. Who KNOW (in ways that amaze me) that I'm there for them. They didn't 'rule' me as infants. I listened. And now they have this unshakeable faith in me, that I don't even have in my own MOTHER. And I'm amazed that listening to them when they were younger is apparently all it took.

(Reply) (Parent)

From: sami Date: June 30th, 2012 11:26 am (UTC) (Link)

Replying to another comment just reminded me of some of the hilarity attendant to firefly21's older son, and the learning-things thing.

There are a few rules he's supposed to follow. Really very few, but they're there, and he's supposed to follow them, and he knows that. However, sometimes he wants to test the boundaries of adult authority, so he breaks them.

Now, you can tell he's knowingly breaking them, because of the way he acts - watching the supervising adult carefully to see their reaction, doing things like reaching *one fingertip* towards the thing that he's not supposed to touch while he watches you.

What's pure comedy is that if you happen not to be *looking at him* when he's doing this, he will call you to get your attention so you can *see* that he's doing it, and tell him not to. (And it's definitely getting-your-attention, too, because he does it the same way he calls for attention when he wants something specific or just wants attention.)

In his case, "don't pull that down" is less an issue than "don't find various objects, stack them, climb on them and fall".

(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)

From: willow Date: June 30th, 2012 04:36 pm (UTC) (Link)

he wants to test the boundaries of adult authority

What you describe is SO obviously 'Does this still apply? Will they let me now?' - it's ADORABLE :)

(Reply) (Parent)