How do you give anti-CIO advice??? - Page 3

[luckiest]

I generally tell people that from the research I've done, CIO doesn't seem like the best way and actually seems harmful (this is very far from my actual opinion, CIO horrifies me and makes me want to vomit when I think of babies crying in distress all alone...but I don't say that).  And honestly, the little bit that seems to make an impression on ladies, is when you point out that the concept of object permanence doesn't set in until kids are 18-24 months.  If you are within sight, they think you are GONE.  They don't know you're standing in the doorway, or listening from the next room. They truly feel alone.  That's why peek-a-boo works - they can't see you, you're gone forever...then poof!  There you are again.  A surprise every time.  Anyway, they "learn" that at nighttime, they don't have a mommy.  

Someone suggested Ferber to me on Facebook a while back...I just said that it would be hard to Ferberize a baby who sleeps in your bed!  And left it at that.

[sosurreal09]

Originally Posted by newmamalizzy 

I think that pro-CIO people actually think that what WE do is endangering to babies, hindering...I'm not sure, exactly....their maturation, their independence, their character development, something like that.  I've read arguments that frame it from the perspective that not doing CIO prevents your child from getting the sleep they need, leading to development delays, etc. 

That is sick and disgusting that anyone would think a baby needs to be independent when they are a fully dependent human being. Also CIO increases SIDS risk b/c you are ignoring your child at night and something may actually be wrong. Also b/c the babies "learn" to STTN and ignore it when they have a breathing issue ect. There are studies on that too.

I can not imagine a single study ever being done with a CIO baby and a non CIO baby and the CIO baby is more independent.  Where is the proof for that? I have only seen incessantly clinging babies during the day that are left to CIO at night. Not to mention the brain damage they get from neurons not connecting right or actual spaces in their physical brain from CIO and yes that has also been proven. Everyone always says "but that is in extreme cases" so letting your child cry for hours and hours every night until they learn you checked out for 12hrs is not extreme? Why b/c you said so. CIO has been linked to a lot of mental problems and disorders.

I could go on for hours on this! Seriously though how much can you love a child that you let incessantly cry? At the very least you would be de-sensitized to it at some point and no longer respond to the babies needs. How will that impact your forever parenting relationship with that child?

My heart breaks for all the CIO babies.

[newmamalizzy]

Originally Posted by sosurreal09 

That is sick and disgusting that anyone would think a baby needs to be independent when they are a fully dependent human being. Also CIO increases SIDS risk b/c you are ignoring your child at night and something may actually be wrong. Also b/c the babies "learn" to STTN and ignore it when they have a breathing issue ect. There are studies on that too.

I can not imagine a single study ever being done with a CIO baby and a non CIO baby and the CIO baby is more independent.  Where is the proof for that? I have only seen incessantly clinging babies during the day that are left to CIO at night. Not to mention the brain damage they get from neurons not connecting right or actual spaces in their physical brain from CIO and yes that has also been proven. Everyone always says "but that is in extreme cases" so letting your child cry for hours and hours every night until they learn you checked out for 12hrs is not extreme? Why b/c you said so. CIO has been linked to a lot of mental problems and disorders.

I could go on for hours on this! Seriously though how much can you love a child that you let incessantly cry? At the very least you would be de-sensitized to it at some point and no longer respond to the babies needs. How will that impact your forever parenting relationship with that child?

My heart breaks for all the CIO babies.

Well, that's just the thing:  Someone, somewhere, somehow convinced the entirety of middle-American women that this "tough love" approach was hard, but just one of those things that you have to do as a mother.  However it happened, it was a brilliant feat of mass mental manipulation.  I'm guessing it went along with women trying to work AND mother, coupled with increasing isolation from family and community, and finding it just too much for them to handle...CIO gets women off the hook, and the weird, complex logic behind it makes it so women FEEL like they're making this amazing sacrifice for their child, when they're really just giving up.  I spend a lot of time thinking about it, and, like you, I keep coming up with more and more different angles from which to frame an imaginary argument against CIO.  Because....it's just AWFUL and makes no SENSE!  From a sociological perspective, I'm completely fascinated by trying to understand how these weird, f-ed up practices ever came to seem "normal".  I've heard tell (though I haven't really looked into it) that not even Ferber intended parents to let young babies cry unattended.  I'd love to read a good, sciency book about about baby-raising philosophy and how and why it's changed over time....anyone know of one?

[tjlucca]

Originally Posted by anjsmama 

I try to gently remind moms that babies do not cognitively or emotionally understand why you are allowing them to cry. They cry for communication... so they want or need something when they cry! When you DON'T come, they will only get more upset. And then yes, they will eventually fall asleep, from mere exhaustion. I typically say something like "CIO is very controversial, since babies don't understand this method their parents use. Talking to your pediatrician and doing some research before choosing any approach can be very helpful!" -  Then I don't feel like I'm saying.. "ARE YOU CRAZY?" but instead trying to gently point them in the right direction and then just pray.

Your son is a baby. A wee baby! No such thing as spoiling him Mama :) You are ensuring he knows this is a secure place and that he can trust you for all he needs! That's healthy attachment, not spoiling  But I know how you feel! 2.5 year old DS has a cold so is not sleeping well & super cranky, and 10 week old DD is nursing like around the clock right now! Definitely seems like her new growth spurt. I'm feeling a little frazzled myself! 

Also - you'd be amazed at just how much attention you can give TWO kids. I cuddle, hold, wear, nurse, etc, DD pretty much ALL the time without feeling like DS is ever left out. Even though DS isn't nursing (I didn't know anything about EBF, AP, or pretty much anything else when he was a baby), he stays close with us while I nurse DD & we all nap together (one on each side). I'm not sure how those logistics would work out with 3 (hmm.. time will tell?)... but you can do it with two!

I like this!!

[Ginger Bean]

Originally Posted by newmamalizzy 

Well, that's just the thing:  Someone, somewhere, somehow convinced the entirety of middle-American women that this "tough love" approach was hard, but just one of those things that you have to do as a mother.  However it happened, it was a brilliant feat of mass mental manipulation.  I'm guessing it went along with women trying to work AND mother, coupled with increasing isolation from family and community, and finding it just too much for them to handle...CIO gets women off the hook, and the weird, complex logic behind it makes it so women FEEL like they're making this amazing sacrifice for their child, when they're really just giving up.  I spend a lot of time thinking about it, and, like you, I keep coming up with more and more different angles from which to frame an imaginary argument against CIO.  Because....it's just AWFUL and makes no SENSE!  From a sociological perspective, I'm completely fascinated by trying to understand how these weird, f-ed up practices ever came to seem "normal".  I've heard tell (though I haven't really looked into it) that not even Ferber intended parents to let young babies cry unattended.  I'd love to read a good, sciency book about about baby-raising philosophy and how and why it's changed over time....anyone know of one?

Insightful post!

I don't know of any book like that, but I read on Wikipedia (so who knows how accurate it is) that CIO can be traced back to a famous American ped in 1895.

My family is originally from China, and now my husband and I live in Europe, and in all my experience I haven't heard of CIO outside of the USA/Canada/the UK/Australia. I'm not saying people don't leave their babies to cry elsewhere in the world, but that's usually called neglect and not done purposefully.

I suspect one could trace this kind of parenting to the Victorians. They had a lot of strange notions against children sharing a family bed with their parents due to sexual prudery.

Well, I'm not raising my son according to some jacked-up anglo beliefs. I'm not English or Victorian!

P.S. You're right about Ferber.

Edited by Ginger Bean - 4/26/11 at 12:13am

[Catubodua]

Originally Posted by Ginger Bean 

I don't know of any book like that, but I read on Wikipedia (so who knows how accurate it is) that CIO can be traced back to a famous American ped in 1895.

i received multiple copies of the book Healthy Sleep Habits, Healthy Child at my baby shower.  it's entire premise is how CIO is good, and right and the best thing for you to do for your baby.  there's a section on how you let them cry for an hour before you check on them.  then, when you go in there, you don't pick them up, you tell them it's bedtime and lay them back down (if they are standing up) and then leave again and let them cry for another hour before going in there again.

i threw all of them away.  i didn't want to pass any of them along.

[belltree]

Originally Posted by Ginger Bean 

My family is originally from China, and now my husband and I live in Europe, and in all my experience I haven't heard of CIO outside of the USA/Canada/the UK/Australia. I'm not saying people don't leave their babies to cry elsewhere in the world, but that's usually called neglect and not done purposefully.

My experience is quite different. I grew in Europe and have lived in Germany, France and spent extended amount of time in Spain.  I do know that CIO is common practice in quite a few European countries.In Germany it is not Ferber but Mrs. Kastzahn and her books is very popular and comes recommended by many pediatrician. People in Germany also believe that crying strengthens the lungs of a baby and a child needs to learn that it cannot always get what it wants. People think it is silly to not want your infant to CIO.

But there are also strong advocates against CIO in these countries, just as there are in the US. I don't think there is a big difference between these countries and USA/UK attitudes.

But I agree, I haven't met anyone in Japan yet that would advocate CIO. Although for some parents it is about not disturbing the neighbors.

[Ginger Bean]

i received multiple copies of the book Healthy Sleep Habits, Healthy Child at my baby shower.  it's entire premise is how CIO is good, and right and the best thing for you to do for your baby.  there's a section on how you let them cry for an hour before you check on them.  then, when you go in there, you don't pick them up, you tell them it's bedtime and lay them back down (if they are standing up) and then leave again and let them cry for another hour before going in there again.

Sorry, I meant I haven't heard of a book about the history of parenting styles... in response to the previous poster. I'm quite familiar with Weissbluth -- I even like him, except the CIO stuff. I know -- a HUGE "except."

Originally Posted by belltree 

My experience is quite different. I grew in Europe and have lived in Germany, France and spent extended amount of time in Spain.  I do know that CIO is common practice in quite a few European countries.In Germany it is not Ferber but Mrs. Kastzahn and her books is very popular and comes recommended by many pediatrician. People in Germany also believe that crying strengthens the lungs of a baby and a child needs to learn that it cannot always get what it wants. People think it is silly to not want your infant to CIO.

But there are also strong advocates against CIO in these countries, just as there are in the US. I don't think there is a big difference between these countries and USA/UK attitudes.

But I agree, I haven't met anyone in Japan yet that would advocate CIO. Although for some parents it is about not disturbing the neighbors.

Thanks for setting me straight! I guess I'm not surprised that some Germans have that attitude -- it's not so different from the USA/UK, you're right. What about France and Spain?

I live in Poland and haven't heard of CIO here. Co-sleeping is popular here, but I can't speak Polish so I don't really know what parenting books are out there.

[Midwesterner04]

Originally Posted by luckiest 

Someone suggested Ferber to me on Facebook a while back...I just said that it would be hard to Ferberize a baby who sleeps in your bed!  And left it at that.

This is great.

[belltree]

Gingerbean, the general attitude in France was that children need to be taught when to sleep and it will take a couple days of crying until they understand they have to nap at specific times of the day. There is generally a lot more discipline expected from children.

In Spain, I was surprised to learn that in a daycare situation, the children would be dressed up and put in the stroller before the mothers would come to pick them up, so they could easily leave with the child. The children were expected to wait no matter if the cried or were unhappy. On the other hand children had a lot of freedom and were generally more expected to be children - running around and making noise.

There are of course always exceptions to these experiences.

[JudiAU]

I given so many copies of No cry Sleep and the Sears Parenting book that I should get a discount... Of course, the same thing is true for the nasty books.

I generally say something along the lines of "a crying infant should always be responded to" and "infancy is a short period" and "infants cannot be spoiled"  pRetty lame I guess. If I know the baby is breastfed, I will discuss it in those terms, night nursing is important, I got a lot more sleep when I commited to cosleeping with my second.

If someone really wants to argue the point, I am happy to, but I usually don't start it. The conversation quickly turns heated and the minute someone tells me I am "ruining my child" I retort with some quote on "neurological damage" and that ends it with bad feelings on both sides.

But I also won't just blandly nod when someone is talking about actively doing it. I have to get away, sometimes ackwardly. I have a hard time maintaining relationship or viewing mothers positively after I know they CIO. It just really colors my view of them.

And after my MIL pushed pushed pushed pushed me and DH so hard, in so many ways, it almost undermined our marriage I had no problem ending the topic all together when she started with our second child with a "I think not responding to a baby is disgusting." Haven't heard a word about it since. Just occasionaly, I am willing to be really rude.

Edited by JudiAU - 4/26/11 at 3:50pm

[sosurreal09]

Yeah it always colors my view of parents who do CIO. I am sorry but that is the ONE thing I can't let go of and I can not be friends with that person.

[marinak1977]

Originally Posted by newmamalizzy 

Well, that's just the thing:  Someone, somewhere, somehow convinced the entirety of middle-American women that this "tough love" approach was hard, but just one of those things that you have to do as a mother.  However it happened, it was a brilliant feat of mass mental manipulation.  I'm guessing it went along with women trying to work AND mother, coupled with increasing isolation from family and community, and finding it just too much for them to handle...CIO gets women off the hook, and the weird, complex logic behind it makes it so women FEEL like they're making this amazing sacrifice for their child, when they're really just giving up.  I spend a lot of time thinking about it, and, like you, I keep coming up with more and more different angles from which to frame an imaginary argument against CIO.  Because....it's just AWFUL and makes no SENSE!  From a sociological perspective, I'm completely fascinated by trying to understand how these weird, f-ed up practices ever came to seem "normal".  I've heard tell (though I haven't really looked into it) that not even Ferber intended parents to let young babies cry unattended.  I'd love to read a good, sciency book about about baby-raising philosophy and how and why it's changed over time....anyone know of one?

I have a sneaking suspicion (no references to back it up though) that somehow the separation of baby into the crib, out of family bed, and then the increased use of formula provided the financial justification to the CIO movement. They just go together. There is no CIO if there is no crib, and since the arrangement also makes breastfeeding more difficult the formula follows, all the time justifying "convenience parenting".