Do You Use Child Leashes? - Page 6

[MittensKittens]

I actually went to look at some child leashes today (for my 18 month old runner) but around here, all we have is those horrible harnesses. I didn't end up buying one. For now, I will stick with putting him in the ergo when he starts getting restless and there is a danger of him running. That is just because I don't like the psychological aspect of the leash for me though. If they had the backpack type leashes, I would have bought one.

Actually, I don't think there is a lot of judgement going on in this thread at all. Reading other peoples' experiences has been useful.

We're pretty crunchy, very AP. But my kid DOES NOT have an inborn sense of safety, in all situations. As the parent, it is my job to keep him safe. Isn't that AP too?

[Dr.Worm]

And here we go....honestly, why can't someone do something differently than another parent without the whole "well, MY kid never ran away so it must be your fault" instead of "hey, sounds like the leash is working well for your family." I am sooo very tired of the competitiveness of parenting.

[sapphire_chan]

Originally Posted by MammaB21

Hhhhmmm, I don't know, I seem to be getting misunderstood. Has anyone here read The Continuum Concept?

One more time I'll try to explain: Children are born with an innate sense of safety. If you put a baby in front of a large hole, or a bonfire, they'll steer clear of it on their own because they see the danger there.

And then there was Dettwyler's experiences where the tribes she observed DID have a children crawling into the fire and getting burned. So I'm inclined to believe that Liedoff's tribe was putting out subtle warning signs to their kids that she couldn't see.

[sapphire_chan]

Originally Posted by MammaB21

Of course that experiment would have to be practiced in a safe place, but my VERY adventurous DD was always willing to follow me when I would put that responsibility and expectation back into her own hands.

Yep, I've tried that. I was even walking INTO the local Children's Museum. She's been there pretty much every week since she was about 6 months old, usually twice a week. She cheerfully repeated "Saur!" when I reminded her that there were dinosaurs to see inside.

Instead of coming to follow me, she ran for the door to the parking garage. What turned her around was the groups of people entering and walking towards the museum. And dd isn't even a "runner" to the extent that some kids are.

[sapphire_chan]

Originally Posted by MammaB21

there happens to be a fire going, I'd say instinct would keep the child within a safe distance from the fire.

The kids at the last bonfire I went to didn't care about getting far closer than any adult ever would. And it's not like they were getting close because they were approaching it deliberately, they got close because they were running around chasing each other. At least one child was kept out of the fire because an adult caught them after they tripped. (Possibly more while I was in the house.)

[sapphire_chan]

Originally Posted by zippy_francis

I guess I screwed my kids up by not practicing yet another theory...


So much for the support, only criticism to be found here.

No, read farther up thread. While MammaB21 really likes how CC theories have worked well for her family, she made it clear in an earlier post that she is talking about why she personally does not use harnesses and ymmv.

[heathergirl67]

Quick video of an interesting experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyxMq...eature=related

It shows that while kids may recognize something as potentially dangerous, the look to adults for confirmation. They don't have that instinctual "safety" for the same reason that they aren't born with claws or fangs- unlike other animals they have an extremely effective safety mechanism: their parents.

[sapphire_chan]

Originally Posted by heathergirl67

Quick video of an interesting experiment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eyxMq...eature=related

It shows that while kids may recognize something as potentially dangerous, the look to adults for confirmation. They don't have that instinctual "safety" for the same reason that they aren't born with claws or fangs- unlike other animals they have an extremely effective safety mechanism: their parents.

Interesting, and that supports my theory that Liedoff was missing safety cues.

[felix23]

Originally Posted by Dr.Worm

And here we go....honestly, why can't someone do something differently than another parent without the whole "well, MY kid never ran away so it must be your fault" instead of "hey, sounds like the leash is working well for your family." I am sooo very tired of the competitiveness of parenting.

: I'm glad for those who have children that will not streak off at the first chance, but I ended up with two that will, so I have a great love for the harness. DD1 will stay with me now that she is a preschooler, but the toddler can be gone in a second. And she was NOT born with an innate sense of safety. She grabs at the hot stove and almost fell off a bank into a stream during the last nature walk. She has no fear and no concept that she can get hurt.

[Dr.Worm]

Originally Posted by felix23

: I'm glad for those who have children that will not streak off at the first chance, but I ended up with two that will, so I have a great love for the harness. DD1 will stay with me now that she is a preschooler, but the toddler can be gone in a second. And she was NOT born with an innate sense of safety. She grabs at the hot stove and almost fell off a bank into a stream during the last nature walk. She has no fear and no concept that she can get hurt.

Exactly. All kids are different..and even though my child was one who was not a runner I am insulted for mothers like you who have had kids run away and then it's implied that they run because they haven't been allowed to explore safety boundaries....puh-lease. Lets make mothers feel more inadequate cause we always feel so confident already. And I'm not going to put my baby near a fire to prove some sort of point. I don't do experiments on my child. I'm here to protect her.

[Marsupialmom]

Please do not be against them. Yes be against people using them instead of parenting. People have sewn tethers and connected themselves to their children for ever, whether it has been through a sling or stroller.

One of the most horrible insistent I had of Attachment parenting snobbery was when I was at a hospital with my 3 children. I took mass transit. I had this lady with baby in arms that said she would never use a stroller. I was sitting there with my oldest playing, my infant happy in the stroller, nursing my 2.5 year old after a medical procedure. Stroller was "Un-AP" and showed I was not a caring mom. I feel the same way as parents belittling other parenting aids.

My middle child is hard of hearing. That tether was a life saver at times. We had to work harder to communicate. She needed more work, time, and patiences to learn to listen and watch -- while respecting the independence she wanted. It is hard to do these things when you cannot hear. I never used one with my first child, only occasionally with my second one after the stroller broke. And I had to have my hands busy else were -- mostly at middle child's doctor and speech appointments.

I know disabled parents and less mobile grand parents use them.

I find the biggest irony and hypocritical of some AP parents is they would smile when I had my child attached to my body with a sling yet with I pulled it snug around her (their) chest and gave them independence the noises would go up. What is the difference? What is the difference between holding hands.

One of my friend's snubbed it until her child at 20months through himself down while she was holding his hand and he dislocated his elbow and shoulder. She borrowed my sling to use as a tether until she got her own. This way if he through a fit he didn't get hurt.

[Dr.Worm]

Originally Posted by Marsupialmom

Please do not be against them. Yes be against people using them instead of parenting. People have sewn tethers and connected themselves to their children for ever, whether it has been through a sling or stroller.

One of the most horrible insistent I had of Attachment parenting snobbery was when I was at a hospital with my 3 children. I took mass transit. I had this lady with baby in arms that said she would never use a stroller. I was sitting there with my oldest playing, my infant happy in the stroller, nursing my 2.5 year old after a medical procedure. Stroller was "Un-AP" and showed I was not a caring mom. I feel the same way as parents belittling other parenting aids.

My middle child is hard of hearing. That tether was a life saver at times. We had to work harder to communicate. She needed more work, time, and patiences to learn to listen and watch -- while respecting the independence she wanted. It is hard to do these things when you cannot hear. I never used one with my first child, only occasionally with my second one after the stroller broke. And I had to have my hands busy else were -- mostly at middle child's doctor and speech appointments.

I know disabled parents and less mobile grand parents use them.

I find the biggest irony and hypocritical of some AP parents is they would smile when I had my child attached to my body with a sling yet with I pulled it snug around her (their) chest and gave them independence the noises would go up. What is the difference? What is the difference between holding hands.

One of my friend's snubbed it until her child at 20months through himself down while she was holding his hand and he dislocated his elbow and shoulder. She borrowed my sling to use as a tether until she got her own. This way if he through a fit he didn't get hurt.

I'm so sorry that happened to you. Yeah, because we all know strollers and leashes are child abuse. It all makes me sick...what is the greatest message of AP? Is it love and closeness to our kids or is it a checklist of perfection? And isn't part of the whole idea of love to also teach our kids to love and accept others who are different than us? That so-and-so isn't a good mommy cause she uses a stroller or a bottle or a leash? Wow...what a sad and judgmental attitude to teach them.

[JavaJunkie]

Originally Posted by MammaB21

Hhhhmmm, I don't know, I seem to be getting misunderstood. Has anyone here read The Continuum Concept?

One more time I'll try to explain: Children are born with an innate sense of safety. If you put a baby in front of a large hole, or a bonfire, they'll steer clear of it on their own because they see the danger there. How do you think animals avoid danger? Have you ever seen a mama duck walking with her ducklings? She doesn't turn around and call the one at the end of the line. She certainly doesn't need to use any physical contact to keep them following her. They do it because it's instinct.

I'll go ahead and jump into this thread on this. I used to live where we had ducks and ducklings around. It was so interesting to observe them! I was surprised to see just how on top of things the mama ducks were. They would, indeed, turn around and check their ducklings. And when one would stray(and there always seemed to be a duckling "runner" in every group! LOL), she'd go after the duckling and quack at him/her to get back over with the others! She'd turn and quack at the others to make sure they stayed put. It was always so interesting and humorous to watch. Certain ducklings did not seem to have an innate sense of safety.

I frowned upon child "leashes" when my oldest ds was little. As he grew older, I grew less judgmental about things like that.

My youngest is the first child that I've actually considered using a leash for. I plan on buying one. She is getting much better about holding my hand without screaming, but I think she'd enjoy having the extra freedom that the leash would allow. She's been refusing the stroller for awhile now. Of course I carry/wear her, but that wears thin with her, too. She would much rather walk.

[Cinder]

Originally Posted by MammaB21

Hhhhmmm, I don't know, I seem to be getting misunderstood. Has anyone here read The Continuum Concept?

One more time I'll try to explain: Children are born with an innate sense of safety. If you put a baby in front of a large hole, or a bonfire, they'll steer clear of it on their own because they see the danger there. How do you think animals avoid danger? Have you ever seen a mama duck walking with her ducklings? She doesn't turn around and call the one at the end of the line. She certainly doesn't need to use any physical contact to keep them following her. They do it because it's instinct. Because children of any species have a basic understanding that mom=survival. The thing that makes human children so different (ie: running from us instead of to us, the ONLY species on the planet who will do that) is our society forcing unnecessary 'safety' tactics on our children. Because of the society we live in, it's near impossible to raise a child completely in this way because the outside world has an influence on them. But children who are left to learn safety limits on their own FROM INFANCY are far less likely to run from their parent in the first place. It's not even an option because they've spent their life up to that point being expected to stay close.

Sure, kids are still learning impulse control, but there are ways to avoid dangers without directly damaging a childs development in their own safety limits. Like it's obvious that leaving a knife on the floor within reach is probably not a good idea. Or not holding a childs hand to cross the street. But for me personally, I feel like the leash is a far cry from standard safety precautions. I'd be curious to know what a child who is notorious for running would do if their parent simply kept walking with the expectation that the child would follow them. No prompting, no running after the child, just simply continuing on their business. Of course that experiment would have to be practiced in a safe place, but my VERY adventurous DD was always willing to follow me when I would put that responsibility and expectation back into her own hands.

From everything I've read and seen children have next to no depth perception before they learn to crawl, and so they don't even know that hole is a hole...and if your kid skips crawling it takes quite a bit of walking to get that down (crawling is a much better way to learn it, since if you get to a ledge and your hand no longer has anywhere to go, you just turn around...if you walk of a ledge, you just fall)...Janelle skipped crawling and she definitely had this issue, not noticing when a deck or side walk ended and tripping cause she didn't notice the difference in heights/drop offs that were there, and from reading and watching a lot of stuff on typical child development world wide, this is completely typical of kids who skip crawling.

and, umm, I've seen a lot of baby ducks killed by cars, so I wouldn't trust that as an example.

[AllyRae]

Originally Posted by thyra

I have not read the continuum concept, but I don't think I need to remind you that not all ducklings survive to adulthood unscathed, nor do all squirrels avoid getting hit by cars.

Yes, EXACTLY! A lot of wild animal babies are eaten long before they reach adult hood. Some fall victim to human traps. Some are hit crossing the highway. And some, like the baby mice I didn't know where there, are hit by the lawnmower and killed. I'm pretty sure that's why many animals have multiple babies at once...with hopes that at least one survives.

And babies are born with instincts to survive by crying to avoid hunger, attaching to avoid abandonment, etc. There is no human DNA or gene that is preprogramed with the knowledge that running in front of cars can get you killed. Hence why my 16 month old routinely runs for the street at any given opportunity. Just like many human babies, including my own, try diving head first into the bathtub when she hears me turn on the faucet. She'll also attempt to rip the dog's fur out when clearly the dog is not enjoying it. She frequently attempts to reach up onto a hot burner. She'll attempt to jump off high stairs or the table. Man-made dangers are NOT pre-programmed into a child's dna to avoid. I'm pretty sure she needs me to help her figure out what is safe and what is not, unless it's something that is safe to let natural consequences teach her. She was born with the instinct to a) breathe to avoid oxygen deprivation, b) cry to avoid starvation, and c) use attachment behaviors to avoid abandonment. In a natural environment all over the world, babies are born with these instincts. But you can't convince me that American babies are born with the instinct to avoid American dangers (cars in the road, bathtubs, etc.), babies born in the jungle are born with the instinct to not be eaten by jaguars, and babies born in the desert are born with the instinct to not touch cacti. :

ETA: And we just had a bonfire this weekend. Guess which curious little 16 month old thought it'd be real fun to continue to try to leap into it? Yep, mine. So, even if she was born with the instinct, she lost it soon after she learned to walk. : And that's what the harnesses are for...babies who lost their survival instincts once curiousity and mobility took over.

[Cinder]

Originally Posted by MammaB21

In a natural environment you wouldn't put a baby on a 4 foot changing table. That would be consitant with the examples I gave of common sense parenting coupled with allowing a child the freedom to learn safety limits.

They do know that fire is hot. Fire gives off heat whether you touch it or not and it doesn't take much of that heat to pull back or know to stay away. Most fire accidents come from carelessness, not confusion about the fact that the fire is hot.

Again, I agree with all of you that in our society we have man made dangers and therefore I don't trust to use this theory 100% of the time. There are times I remind my daughter to "stop at the end of the sidewalk to hold my hand". But as a general rule I think we show our kids what we expect from them. If we show them that we expect that they'll run from us, they interpret it as reassurance that it's okay to run from us. It's not okay, and they have to learn that sooner or later. I'd just prefer they learn it sooner, I guess.

See, I have 2 kids who will do that. If I tell them to stop and wait for me they will, at 10 months old Janelle was doing that! As soon as Kincaid wanted to walk places instead of be carried/be in a stroller/cart he was doing that (he was quite addicted to his stroller though, so he was older)... They will always wait for mommy. If I walk away from them at a store, they follow. All though, Kincaid broke his toes without feeling it at a rate of 1 toe per month for a couple years, so I doubt he would of figured out that fire felt hot...but, that's another issue.

Travis? He knows how to climb anything, open any lock, does not stop if I ask him to, and as far as I know, doesn't even know what a sidewalk is, since he has failed every hearing test 100% but seems to be able to hear somethings sometimes, we also don't even know if he can hear/understand us when we ask him to do things... He has no sense of danger, he climbed over the back of the couch and fell on his head at 9 months old, he couldn't even walk yet! Right now, he likes being in his stroller (or carseat...he likes to be strapped into things), but when that ends, if he still doesn't understand what stop means, or that cars can be dangerous, then yea, we will use a harness of some sort for him.

[Lucy Alden]

Originally Posted by MammaB21

Most fire accidents come from carelessness, not confusion about the fact that the fire is hot.

(bolding mine) So I guess my DS is careless, not confused. Fine, I have no problem with that label. He is brave and fearless and exceptionally curious. It's part of what makes him unique. Unfortunately its also puts him in danger. We don't want to squelch his sense of adventure. We just want to keep him alive so he can enjoy life past the age of 3!

Side note. There was an article called "Jumping Off Cliffs" in Mothering Magazine in the March/April 2009 issue. Much like my son, the boy in the article was full of endless energy, curiousity and fearlessness. They embraced it and tried to keep him safe while he explored his world. One of the pictures is of him as a little guy wearing a helmet so he could climb up into their treehouse. He's now an amazing dancer. I wish I could link to the article but it's not online.

Sometimes a child's need to "explore" is greater than their need for self preservation.

[AllyRae]

Originally Posted by zippy_francis

I guess I screwed my kids up by not practicing yet another theory...

No kidding, right? My poor doomed kids...I listened to their needs, took their desires into account, leashed them when it was appropriate (rarely, but when appropriate), and allowed them to be extremely curious inquisitive kids in a manner that kept them safe and alive while also allowing them freedom.

Poor kids are screwed. :

Actually, I have noticed a difference between my kids and a lot of kids...they aren't afraid to get dirty, to run around, to have a ton of fun, to explore new things...they are very wild and crazy and energetic. They spend hours splashing in giant mud puddles or walking through the woods exploring nature. They *love* exploring the world around them. And I'm pretty sure it was precisely because they were given the chance to be independent AND they were given the accomodations to make it safe. In 6 years of parenting, I have confined the children to a stroller less times than I can count on both hands. I have used a leash 3 or 4 times. They don't seem scarred by it at all... :

[MammaB21]

Originally Posted by sapphire_chan

No, read farther up thread. While MammaB21 really likes how CC theories have worked well for her family, she made it clear in an earlier post that she is talking about why she personally does not use harnesses and ymmv.

Thanks Sapphire_chan. I'm not bashing leashes, or trying to put down different parenting styles. I was mainly defending my point of view because I was feeling attacked in that nobody here seemed to understand the point I was trying to make. I think in my further explanations I've ruffled some feathers, which I was hoping to avoid.

I agree with you on the missed warning cues from parents. I absolutely believe in guiding my kids out of dangers way. I, personally, see a difference though. Making a statement like, "Don't do that, you'll fall," puts an idea in a small childs head that it is expected of them to fall. While using a leash is quite different from making a statement like that, it come a little too close for my comfort.

[MammaB21]

Originally Posted by Dr.Worm

And here we go....honestly, why can't someone do something differently than another parent without the whole "well, MY kid never ran away so it must be your fault" instead of "hey, sounds like the leash is working well for your family." I am sooo very tired of the competitiveness of parenting.

Actually, I said that my kid did run away, and that we certainly weren't perfect in our attempts. I also never said that it's the parents fault if they have a child who runs. However, I don't think that we can argue the fact that not all of a childs personality comes from genes. Some of it is environmental and as parents, we all do what we can and what we believe is best for OUR kids. Please don't twist my words into blanketed statements about other peoples parenting. I'm really not a judgmental AP competitive parent here. Like I said, I was feeling a little misunderstood, and I'm simply trying to defend my parenting choices without people labeling me as simply 'lucky' to have a compliant child. I believe I worked hard and I and DD benefited from it. Would it have worked with any kid? Probably not. I'm sure there are kids out there who need extra guidance, extra watching, extra warnings, even an extra safety device here and there.