i think that people are forgetting that deciding when & whether or not to drive somewhere isn't a luxury everyone has.
i personally think that if a child can hear your voice then you are attempting to soothe and it isn't cio.
You are repeatedly asserting that a baby is damaged by brief periods of crying without providing any evidence.
I think there's a distance between saying crying is not optimal and saying that it's damaging.
please re-read the very post you quoted. I am not saying that the child WILL be damaged, I'm saying that there is still potential.
you sure about that?
You know what, you are right. I DON"T know that for a certainty. However, I am not going to expect a newborn to understand. I assume if that newborn DOES understand, they would react to that knowledge and be calmer. ie those that DO calm down when they hear their mother explaining it. I assume if the mom is talking and explaining and singing, etc and the baby is still screaming that they do not comprehend the difference.
OK wait a min! Hold the phone! Some of you are saying a baby will suffer damage by crying? So what about my baby?
My DD was NEVER left to CIO but had wicked bad colic and intestinal issues and cried 3-9 HOURS A DAY until she was 9 months old!
I did everything I could! I wore her almost exclusively all-day-long, she nursed every 45mins around the clock, I always sang to her, let her sleep on top of me, you name it I did it! She still cried and cried and cried no matter what I did ever! I never even left her to keep my own sanity! Not once!
So she is brain damaged then? I just don't get it....if she were left completely alone in a room by herself screaming for hours on end, yeah I could see it, but I was ALWAYS right there with her no matter what but she still cried regardless. Not a calm cry either a screaming at the top of her lungs, ear piercing, no one wants to even come over to visit it's so bad cry! She cried every single car ride too and I did minimize them greatly but she still cried just as much. I always snag to her in the car and she knew I was there by my voice and my smell and I really don't think that was so horrid for her.
So all the hell I went through to not let DD CIO was in vain? B/C CIO would have been a hell of a lot easier than what I went through.
OK wait a min! Hold the phone! Some of you are saying a baby will suffer damage by crying? So what about my baby?
My DD was NEVER left to CIO but had wicked bad colic and intestinal issues and cried 3-9 HOURS A DAY until she was 9 months old!
I did everything I could! I wore her almost exclusively all-day-long, she nursed every 45mins around the clock, I always sang to her, let her sleep on top of me, you name it I did it! She still cried and cried and cried no matter what I did ever! I never even left her to keep my own sanity! Not once!
So she is brain damaged then? I just don't get it....if she were left completely alone in a room by herself screaming for hours on end, yeah I could see it, but I was ALWAYS right there with her no matter what but she still cried regardless. Not a calm cry either a screaming at the top of her lungs, ear piercing, no one wants to even come over to visit it's so bad cry! She cried every single car ride too and I did minimize them greatly but she still cried just as much. I always snag to her in the car and she knew I was there by my voice and my smell and I really don't think that was so horrid for her.
I think this thread is triggering for a lot of people.
If you go through this thread carefully, I think you will find very few posters are saying crying in the car will equal damage, and no one has said crying in arms equals damage.
If I am wrong and numerous posters have said such things, please point them out to me.
If I am wrong, I think it would be great if those who said "damage" would come on so we could discuss it. What kind of damage? What are the parameters? Is there solid evidence one way or another?
In your case it might have been difficult to assess whether she was crying in the car - or just crying. In mine it was fairly easy - my non-crying prone babies screamed in the car and my voice, etc did little to soothe them. Sometimes I had to drive and that was just that, but sometimes I think life would have been easier if I didn't choose to go to some places.
The whole damage thing is making my head spin - simply because your child will not (in all probability) be damaged through crying in the car does not mean it is OK. There are degrees in between damage and " it is fine if the baby cries in the car". Crying in the car is unpleasant for everyone, and perhaps even unsafe for the driver if they find it too distracting.
Ok, prefacing by again clarifying that I'm not advocating CIO. When our kids were little we avoided crying. We subscribe to AP and GD principles, and of course it's not optimal for babies to cry.
There is no measure to ascertain damage at the level of kids who intermittently cry while being offered comfort. There is a measure of trauma and failure to develop where kids have experienced trauma (abuse, severe neglect etc). But it's based on current functioning and history. They can measure hormone shifts in response to stress, and certainly ongoing stress hormone responses have the potential to change a child.
Humans, including infants, live within a system. Others in that system also have needs and the adults need to ascertain how best to balance everyone's needs. And when infants live within that system, they are not ONLY getting messages and encoding based on crying periodically - they're getting lots of other messages about having their needs met which I think far overwhelm intermittent crying.
As for the preschooler gettting to preschool - if the child has adjustment issues, social skills challenges or a host of other issues, I think preschool may very well constitute a need, and I think there are way more measures of "harm" for preschool-aged kids who don't get early supports to develop appropriately than there is evidence that a 20 minute car ride a couple times a week is going to harm an infant.
And for the posters with colicky or otherwise intense/high needs babies - I think this is apples and oranges. The crying was some physiological response which was unavoidable. If you were doing your best to offer comfort and connection, there's nothing to feel badly about.
I think this whole thing is overblown. Crying within the context of loving, attached, connected parenting is very different from unattached parenting practices.
A lot of people are saying that the baby crying in the car is damaging for the baby b/c he is not being consoled, which is my point my baby couldn't be consoled (in a car or a wrap, with a breast, nothing) so wouldn't that mean my baby would be damaged from all that crying?
I mean yes, I was actively trying to console her but it just wasn't happening, and she was crying a heck of a lot more than a 20min ride 2 days a week. KWIM?
I originally said in my first post that I always struggled with the car too as in if it would be considered CIO or not BUT at least you are right there and the baby can hear and smell you which has to count for something, no?
I think this thread is triggering for a lot of people.
If you go through this thread carefully, I think you will find very few posters are saying crying in the car will equal damage, and no one has said crying in arms equals damage.
Settle down, people. I also had a baby with "colic" (which we actually figured out to be food allergies, and later an immune disease) who cried a LOT her first year. I never once said or implied that a crying baby in arms was the same as a crying baby in a carseat. But even so, YES- it can be damaging, regardless of your intention. I'm not saying you can always necessarily do anything about it... if a kid is sick and in pain, they are going to be sick and in pain whether you are holding them or not. I'm saying that when there IS something you can do about it (like dress less often IF POSSIBLE), then you might want to think about it.
Joensally - I agree with much of your post.
I think camp for some families is a need or extremely beneficial, and that will outweigh an infant screaming. I think camp for most families, though, is a want. It still might outweigh screaming in the car, but it might not, and I really think that is something the Op needs to figure out for herself - it cannot be weighed here given the little info we have.
I also think this issue is being blown out of proportion. This is not CIO, never will be unless mama's intention is to 'teach' baby how to act in a car by purposefully withholding all measures of comfort.
Driving in a car while singing/talking to/etc to a distressed infant is nothing like it, in intention or practice----- nor is gently dealing with colic or chronic crying ] (which I feel is a completely different issue and can't be compared to this situation, as nothing in our control can soothe these special babies. Quite different.) Can we just leave CIO out of this discussion? I believe it is only causing confusion and unnecessary defensiveness. Nobody here is served well to be told that what they are doing is akin to CIO. It's just not true. All of us aim to be as present, empathetic, and comforting as our personal situations allow.
This whole idea of doesn't me singing/talking/etc to my crying infant while driving count for something?---- Sure it does, it is better than totally leaving them to cry alone with no one attempting to soothe them. I know when I HAVE to drive and my DD is in frantic distress, sobbing trying to catch her breath, all I CAN do is tell her "almost there, just x minutes, I know baby, mama wishes she could hold you but I can't. It is for your safety" and reach back and stroke her face. Sometimes she eventually accepts this form of comfort and calms down, but many times she doesn't. In those cases, talking and stroking isn't what she needs, and is in fact seems to feel like mocking her attempts to communicate as she proceeds to scream LOUDER. What she NEEDS is for me to stop the car and get her out. She is clearly communicating that.
But the unfortunate fact of life as parents is that we can't meet every single need 100% of the time, as much as our heart pleads for us to. We are not perfect. It is often not safe to stop the car when we need to. We have external pressures influencing our choices; such as time constraints, commitments to other people, weather, traffic, a big payoff once we reach our destination, etc. So we have to measure if this temporary distress is worth it. Yes, I do believe that 'damage' (as in, a negative consequence due to crying) is possible, depending on the child and circumstance. Some babies cry and cry and doesn't hurt them in the least, while some do suffer mental and psychological anguish, as well as physiological effects. Damage such as temporarily severed trust, raised cortisol levels, anxiety, withdrawal, and feelings of abandonment and helplessness. The parent is the only one who can ascertain that 'damage' has taken place from the crying by observing their LO. If it has, then amendments to the parents' approach seems in order, if possible. There is no need to let word 'damage' scare us. My goodness, our children will be damaged in all sort of ways during their young childhood. We are there to pick them up, dust them off, and dish out the love to help heal their wounds.
In the case of the OP and her infant--- only she can decide what to do, whether to stay home to avoid her infant's distress, or push through it somehow for her older child. She will have to weigh the pros and cons and choose the best route for her family. Whatever she does, whether it is x, or y, or not z.... she is not a 'bad' mama. (and why why why does this good parent v. bad parent rhetoric enter our discussions on here? We all care for our children and are doing our best, whether AP or not. That is enough!)
I had a car crying baby, it was AWFUL! .... but it was also temporary. He grew out of it around 5months. DH and I would take turns riding in the backseat, or if I could I would stop the car and nurse and soothe him for a while (if it's possible that is, may not be easy with older kids). At night I used a glow worm and just kept pressing the damn button and it kept him pretty happy. Be gentle with yourself! I hope you can get through this without feeling guilty (easier said than done, I felt so bad every time I drove) ... but it will get better!
PS: I don't really think this is like CIO at all, because you're there, baby can hear your voice, you can stop and calm them, and you're not letting baby CIO at any other time!
I also think this issue is being blown out of proportion. This is not CIO, never will be unless mama's intention is to 'teach' baby how to act in a car by purposefully withholding all measures of comfort.
Driving in a car while singing/talking to/etc to a distressed infant is nothing like it, in intention or practice----- nor is gently dealing with colic or chronic crying ] (which I feel is a completely different issue and can't be compared to this situation, as nothing in our control can soothe these special babies. Quite different.) Can we just leave CIO out of this discussion? I believe it is only causing confusion and unnecessary defensiveness. Nobody here is served well to be told that what they are doing is akin to CIO. It's just not true. All of us aim to be as present, empathetic, and comforting as our personal situations allow.
Just coming back to this discussion, and ITA with the above.
It's true that a big part of the anti-CIO rhetoric is wrapped up in (albeit limited) studies indicating that babies can sustain some neurological harm as well as potential harm to the parent-child bond from extended crying. But, from what I understand of those studies they are in the context of actual textbook extinction method CIO where a baby is left alone in a crib to cry alone without any comfort from parents or caregivers until such time as the baby stops crying and goes to sleep. Of course that can equal extremely protracted bouts of crying, possibly for several hours at a time and over several days in duration. But, as I have pointed out repeatedly in this discussion, that sort of scenario is completely different from a baby crying for 20 minutes or so in a carseat a few feet away from the caregiver but still within earshot of the caregiver's (and potentially other family member's) verbal attempts to soothe the baby. Once the car ride is over, the OP and others here have pointed out that the baby is immediately removed from the carseat and soothed in arms in order to get him to stop crying. Again, this is completely different from CIO, where the caregiver is at no time supposed to step in and attempt to soothe the baby's crying in any way.
I can't see how throwing around the term damaging in reference to a baby crying would not rile up parents here who had babies that cried beyond what is generally considered the norm, whether that be from reflux, colic, NICU stay, carseat hate, the competing needs of other siblings, etc. Not every parent has a smooth go of things with their newborn and get curve balls thrown at them that make it next to impossible for them to avoid their baby's crying for sustained periods of time. I just can't see why it's so hard for some posters here to take a step back, thank their lucky stars that they were not met with such challenging circumstances (because make no mistake, it is pure and simple luck when one has a relatively easy to soothe baby) and offer some sympathy and constructive advice to parents like the OP. I hope she hasn't been scared off from this discussion as a result of how it has played out, because there are a lot of good resources here at MDC and (usually) supportive voices to help a parent through particularly rough times.
I think this is a big part of the picture. Parents of all parenting styles report excessive crying more frequently in children who later develop ADHD, and kids on the spectrum or with sensory issues are usually described in extremes of infant behavior by parents ("golden babies" or very high needs babies). My own children were all attachment parented. The oldest child screamed if we opened a pop can, screamed if he was in a car, couldn't self soothe unless walked outdoors or jiggled indoors in a specific way. We swaddled, we carried, nursed, sang, listened to hours of classical music, jiggled, bounced, and on and on. The saving grace was that he was my first so I didn't know it was unusual and kind of took it in stride (but lost a lot of weight constantly walking with him as it was the only thing that worked). The other two babies didn't have these issues at all. After years of suppositions as to what we should have done differently, where we went wrong, DS1 is in the process of confirming an autism spectrum disorder. At 11 years old, he is still an intense person and he still needs more from us to regulate himself.
Also, as a mother of three children (and I'm sure mothers of greater numbers have experienced this even more so), I see my family as an ecosystem, not a rigid hierarchy. It's true that babies need a lot from us, and that they do not have the cognitive skills to understand why their needs are not met. That being said, if their mothers are under extreme stress, and the siblings are very unhappy from not having their needs met, it will affect the interaction of the family members to the detriment of the baby.
And as to the damage from crying and ability to self soothe: as a former family support worker we used lots of resources from NCAST (just Google, I'm sure you could find it somewhere), which studies systems of soothing, sleep hygiene and infant communication. Actual evidence supports always rocking baby and soothing until asleep until 3 months (and, despite mainstream medicine connections, co-sleeping was actually supported), between 3 to 6 months no CIO but if you do not co-sleep, this is a good time to practice developing a soothing routine for transition times and introducing baby to his/her own fist or a pacifier. As much as I personally was comfortable with AP principles and never used CIO practices myself, there is some evidence that babies can self soothe without harm to their brains if they are over 6 months old and if the parents are available and present and verbally check in on the baby (as in hearing your voice talking in the car). Please don't ask for exact citations, I've been out of the field for 8 years, but I do think with some Googleling you can find this. I will post a link later tonight if I get a chance.
How do you know what an infant knows? How do you know that babies don't take their mother's or caregiver's voice and scent (as well as touch) as a source of comfort? And if you say "common sense" again, you might as well be saying "my own unsubstantiated opinion". Obviously it's not so "common" if so many people just in this thread alone don't agree on it.
Settle down, people. I also had a baby with "colic" (which we actually figured out to be food allergies, and later an immune disease) who cried a LOT her first year. I never once said or implied that a crying baby in arms was the same as a crying baby in a carseat. But even so, YES- it can be damaging, regardless of your intention. I'm not saying you can always necessarily do anything about it... if a kid is sick and in pain, they are going to be sick and in pain whether you are holding them or not. I'm saying that when there IS something you can do about it (like dress less often IF POSSIBLE), then you might want to think about it.
You didn't? I think an argument can be made that, at the very least, the implication was there in these comments that you've made:
Quote:
The baby does NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE between you leaving it to scream in a crib, or you leaving it to scream restrained in a chair.
....and this link:
Going by what you've said you believe about this topic....If a baby crying uncontrollably = a baby that is possibly terrified or traumatized (your words, again), then how would being held in his mother's arms while he's crying/screaming/terrified make any difference to the baby? If the baby can't understand the mother's intention and can't be soothed by her presence, scent or voice, then what is so different about being in her arms? This implications in that line of reasoning are what have offended and confounded some people in this thread.
ETA: Regarding the Dr. Sear's link, here's another take on that: http://mainstreamparenting.wordpress.com/2008/06/25/of-sources-and-straw-houses-the-annotated-dr-sears-handout-on-cio/
For the record, I don't know which POV is right or wrong or if the truth is somewhere in-between. But it's interesting and something to consider, especially for those who have been upset by this thread.
nm - again. Sorry.
This is not going to be much help but..my now 8 month old did exactly the same thing. He would cry and scream and work himself up into such a state that he would gag and choke, even when I was in the back trying to soothe and hubby was driving. I know the look you're talking about and it's a heartbreaker for a parent who never lets their kid CIO. I could never take him out alone in the car, we always had to be 2 because there was always a meltdown. We never figured out what the problem was and we tried all sorts of stuff: music, toys, singing songs,removing clothing, bundling him up, stopping the car to take him out and cuddle or nurse, etc. I couldn't visit friends or do anything with the car. Noone understood and thought we were exagerating or just didn't want to take him in the car, but seriously, it was frightening and stressful for me to listen to him scream like that so I just stopped doing it, even with someone else driving with me in the back to soothe. I switched to public transport with my son in an Ergobaby. Finally, around 5 months I was able to take him in the car but only in the mornings just at his nap time, he would fall asleep in the car. At 7 months he was no longer screaming and now at 8 months I swear he actually enjoys going in the car. I just give him a toy, he plays with it or daydreams looking out the window or dozes off. It's heaven!! Like I said, we never identified the cause and we kept using the same techniques as before. I told you this wasn't going to help but at least you know that it won't last forever. Can you find someone to take your child to camp for you?
I know I'm late to the party, but I just wanted to reply to the OP and say I have a car hater too. I wish I had known that she wasn't the only one back when it was at it's worst and I was at my wit's end!
She is 14 months now and the car is still hit or miss. Most of the time either DH or I have to sit next to her while in the car. Her crying peaked from about 2 months until 8 months when she started to occasionally be able to sleep in the car. I also experienced a lot of mommy guilt as she screamed her way through most car trips.
I've tried everything mentioned here. DVD's worked a little, so did the mirror but a policeman gave me some guilt about that and I took it down. Now I keep a ton of books and toys in the front seat and pass them back as she gets bored and tosses them away. Not a perfect solution, but short of never leaving the house...it works.
It helps me just to know that I'm not alone with this issue.
Just wanted to add that I felt precicely the same way when my dd was tiny. She screamed in her carseat any time we'd go anywhere, and we lived 45 minutes from town! :( I still remember the first trip, dh and I in TEARS when we finally made it home. I took her out of her carseat and ran into my bedroom and just cuddled with her and nursed her for HOURS trying to "make it up to her". No, I don't believe I had any sort of depression. Yes, I believe we are mothers who are very sensitive to our babies' feelings. And we know they are REAL feelings, even if illogical since they are so young and can't be logical about what's best for them yet. I didn't cry every time we went out, but I never got used to her car crying. I'd try not to go out very often - and found many other mothers who took the same course of action. I tried a pacifier even though I wasn't originally going to, but she wouldn't take it anyway. I just had to wait it out. She's almost 3 now and she's always been happy and loved. So it'll all work out. Hugs to you. :)
Follow Mothering