Mothering › Forums › Parenting › CIO spin-off...how'd they do it 200 years ago?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CIO spin-off...how'd they do it 200 years ago? - Page 4

post #61 of 74
In his genealogy research my dad came across an article about his great-great grandparents when they came to the US that talked about the German woman carrying their babies in a "pouch" while they hauled water and worked. And my grandmother always talked about how colicky my uncle was, so she spent a year working one-handed while carrying my uncle in the other. I imagine much of a baby's life was spent outdoors, or working a farm and so babies were probably TIRED. I know the days we spend going and going or spend lots of time outside, my DS sleeps so much better.

I wonder sometimes if our climate-controlled, carpeted, well-lit existence makes it harder for babies to sleep. And the expectation that a baby will have his/her own room and sleep in a crib.
post #62 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by Just1More View Post
I also think there was a wide range of parenting, and I think there has always been.

[...]

I guess my point is that there is a middle ground. On MDC, I am often frustrated about the one or the other scenerio. You can love your baby/child and teach them lots and lots and be caring and gentle AND not be totally AP.

I suspect that the same parent/child dynamic that exists today existed 200 years ago, and 300, and 400. Some people did, some people didn't. Some things just HAD to be because of survival. But, mostly, except for a few which we still have today, people loved their babies and did the best the could.
I cut some out of your post for lengths sake (though I really liked reading about your parents' parenting style). I just wanted to say your post is very insightful and I like it and agree with a lot of it.
post #63 of 74
My family is not from the US but I know my grandmother had 13 kids and all of my family seems to have tons of children...except for me. but I know babywearing was very common in mexico. like... sibling wore their younger siblings, mothers wore their babies, and having a baby on your back is just what you did. Not because some child psychologist said it was better but because if you didnt, you would get nothing done and your baby would probably starve because you could not sit down and nurse all day in a rocking chair. there was no time for that.

Beds? There were no cribs. When I visited they had bed with wall to wall on the backside of the house and we all slept there together. Adults, kids, visitors... one of my cousins as a teen got her own because she wanted her own space. Quickly after that all of the teens ended up in her room.

There is also a great deal of multi-generational living. Babies did cry, but they never let a child CIO. Also older siblings took care if younger siblings A LOT. My father (he was #9) was basically raised by his oldest sister (we think she was almost 20 at the time he was born but we have no real records of her birth or her real age). My great grandmother said that this was the way they had been doing it for ever... until modern times came and changed things.

I have no romantic view of it, since I saw it myself a great deal... my family had not changed many things until this last generation (my kids). I also know that many of my uncles, aunts, cousins, etc. died during birth or shortly there after. Both of my grandmothers lost at least 2 babies, i had great aunts that lost 4 or 5. When I lived there we had no running water or electricity. We got toilets in the ranch 10 years ago.

Things have changed now. One of my cousins was the first woman in our family to not "make enough milk" for her baby. We had never had a problem with that in the past.
post #64 of 74
I'm on a babywearing forum and we discuss tradition babywearing, including items from the past.

Several people have posted actual items from their family or photographs of people through the generations babywearing. Some items that come to mind are:

-Welsh shawls (triangular shawls with relatively long corners that cross over the woman's body, over the baby and are secured at the waist. This becomes a baby "sling"). A photo was shown that looked like it came from the late 1800's- early 1900's.

-A late 1800's photo showed a group of women in the fields with a baby suspended in a "tripod" made of wooden poles with a fabric sling.
post #65 of 74
I was going to post about Sarah Blaffer Hrdy's books but I see Siobhang already posted better than I could have. They are utterly fascinating and required reading for those interested in this stuff.
post #66 of 74
People did not obsess about parenting back then, they just got on with life instead of expecting life and the world to revolve around their kids.

Doesn't seem to have done any harm.
post #67 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by choli View Post
People did not obsess about parenting back then, they just got on with life instead of expecting life and the world to revolve around their kids.

Doesn't seem to have done any harm.
well..yes and no.

i know that for my family, their life was their kids... so yes life went on but it went on around the kids.
post #68 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by verde View Post

Re: that story about Indians putting their hands over babies mouths. I am extremely suspicious of that story. Usually stories like that were written by european colonists who viewed everything the indians did with suspicion and considered them savages. The reason indian babies didn't cry was because they were carried everywhere and everyone coslept.

btw, I use the term "indians" as used by the colonists. No disrespect intended.

Keeping babies separate from their parents is a modern, western 20th century idea.
Indians generally carried their babies because the women did the farming.

Most tribes traveled in large groups. One crying baby wouldn't have made a huge difference in the long run.

In my family there are many stories about the kids having to watch one another because the parents had to go pick cotton or do the farming or any number of things. Once the kid was very mobile their siblings did a lot of the childcare. I can't imagine picking cotton with a baby strapped to me but I know my grandmothers did it. I would really rather NOT have a baby on me while I was picking cotton if I had to do it. Cotton is picked in 90+ degree weather.

"100lbs of cotton" was a joke among my grandfather's family. "I would rather pick 100 lbs of cotton" (I would rather not do that chore) "I feel like I have been picking cotton" (I feel terrible) "You look like you have been picking cotton" (you look like hell) They picked cotton as children.

I can't imagine. We are so fortunate.
post #69 of 74
I'm pretty sure back in those days they often lived with extended family, there were probably extra pairs of hands. The nuclear family is a fairly recent thing.
post #70 of 74
Great discussion
post #71 of 74
Great thread - got to sub!
post #72 of 74
http://russian-ukrainian-belarus-his...peasant_russia

I thought this was a very interesting article and relevant to this thread...enjoy! (and subbing)
post #73 of 74
Quote:
Originally Posted by verde View Post

Keeping babies separate from their parents is a modern, western 20th century idea.
I think this is key. And back in colonial days, there weren't appointments to be kept, and the myriad of other things going on day to day that go on in modern society-and mom and children were home or around home most of the time. Babies and young children just went around doing whatever mama was doing, and the older children pitched in and helped.

Of course I have no facts to back this up, it's just my thoughts on the subject.
post #74 of 74
Originally Posted by verde

Re: that story about Indians putting their hands over babies mouths. I am extremely suspicious of that story. Usually stories like that were written by european colonists who viewed everything the indians did with suspicion and considered them savages. The reason indian babies didn't cry was because they were carried everywhere and everyone coslept.

btw, I use the term "indians" as used by the colonists. No disrespect intended.

Keeping babies separate from their parents is a modern, western 20th century idea.

I totally agree.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Forums › Parenting › CIO spin-off...how'd they do it 200 years ago?