or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › CIO in the car and I HATE IT!!!
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

CIO in the car and I HATE IT!!! - Page 5

post #81 of 154

Ya know, I DO understand that sometimes it can not be helped. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be sugar coated.

 

If I really want an orange and all I can get is an apple, I can accept that there is nothing I can do about it right now and eat the apple. Trying to convince myself that the apple is an orange is not helpful. In the same way, I can't convince myself or anyone else that allowing a newborn to cry without comfort is ok. It's not, the infant does NOT know the difference and I see no reason why I have to convince anyone that the INFANT can't understand that, it's the law, it's a safety issue, but that doesn't mean that it is not potentially damaging. And therefore should be done as little as possible to minimize any damaging side effects. (imo of course)

post #82 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarena View Post

Ya know, I DO understand that sometimes it can not be helped. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be sugar coated.

 

If I really want an orange and all I can get is an apple, I can accept that there is nothing I can do about it right now and eat the apple. Trying to convince myself that the apple is an orange is not helpful. In the same way, I can't convince myself or anyone else that allowing a newborn to cry without comfort is ok. It's not, the infant does NOT know the difference and I see no reason why I have to convince anyone that the INFANT can't understand that, it's the law, it's a safety issue, but that doesn't mean that it is not potentially damaging. And therefore should be done as little as possible to minimize any damaging side effects. (imo of course)




But it's your unsubstantiated opinion. My earlier link was about babies. We know in older kids that mum's voice produces oxytocin: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8675966.stm

 

So - all I'm saying is there is evidence mounting that even quite young babies will know that their mother is near by hearing her voice, and for me personally my opinion is that this is soothing and is not the same as CIO.

post #83 of 154
It seems obvious that it isn't ideal, and it also seems obvious that she should try to minimize it as much as is practical and reasonable, but it also seems obvious that it isn't CIO and isn't going to damage her baby.
post #84 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarena View Post

Ya know, I DO understand that sometimes it can not be helped. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be sugar coated.

 

If I really want an orange and all I can get is an apple, I can accept that there is nothing I can do about it right now and eat the apple. Trying to convince myself that the apple is an orange is not helpful. In the same way, I can't convince myself or anyone else that allowing a newborn to cry without comfort is ok. It's not, the infant does NOT know the difference and I see no reason why I have to convince anyone that the INFANT can't understand that, it's the law, it's a safety issue, but that doesn't mean that it is not potentially damaging. And therefore should be done as little as possible to minimize any damaging side effects. (imo of course)


The part I'm having an issue with is your (and several others') very narrow definition of 'comfort'... Comfort is not just holding a child in arms, although for many babies that is one of the most effective forms of comfort. There are many ways to comfort a baby though!! And sometimes the easiest or most effective way just isn't possible so we have to do our best with the other options available. I don't understand how you can say the infant doesn't know the difference. If you were upset, would you rather cry alone in your room or would you prefer to have a loving partner or friend nearby to listen and soothe, even if that person couldn't touch you???
post #85 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarena View Post

Ya know, I DO understand that sometimes it can not be helped. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be sugar coated.

 

 


This.

 

I do think the fact that people are in the car may be beneficial to the infant (they can hear voices, see the sibling, etc) but it does not negate the fact that it is still a screaming infant who is having his need to be comforted unmet (as is evidence from the continued screaming)  The fact that it is a car ride that might need to happen cannot be relevant to the newborn.

 

 I am not sure if this is developmentally relevant for a 3 month old but my kids were often angrier when they knew I was around and could not meet their needs than if I was not around.  Once upon a time in the throes of sleep deprivation I tried a modified CIO with my son.  Honestly, he screamed louder when I was in the room than out.  He was older an older baby though.

 

 

 

 

 

post #86 of 154
This is possibly the most depressing & guilt-inducing threads I have ever seen. greensad.gif
post #87 of 154
Quote:



 

 



 



Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchy_mommy View Post

This is possibly the most depressing & guilt-inducing threads I have ever seen. greensad.gif


Really?

 

Posting that CIO and screaming in the car share some similarities is guilt inducing?  Suggesting, in addition to many of the great suggestion in the early part of this thread, that she might want to consider minimisizing driving when possible (possible as defined by her) is guilt inducing? eyesroll.gif

 

I actually think it is totally fine if the Op decides to minimise driving as possible or to continue driving and use the suggestions as she sees fit to get through this period.  In both cases the baby and 4 year old will be fine.  Her call - and sharing thoughts around either idea is not guilt inducing.

 

TBH what she wrote at the beginning makes her sound like a wonderful mother. 

 

 

 

 

 

post #88 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post




This.

 

I do think the fact that people are in the car may be beneficial to the infant (they can hear voices, see the sibling, etc) but it does not negate the fact that it is still a screaming infant who is having his need to be comforted unmet (as is evidence from the continued screaming)  The fact that it is a car ride that might need to happen cannot be relevant to the newborn.

 

 I am not sure if this is developmentally relevant for a 3 month old but my kids were often angrier when they knew I was around and could not meet their needs than if I was not around.  Once upon a time in the throes of sleep deprivation I tried a modified CIO with my son.  Honestly, he screamed louder when I was in the room than out.  He was older an older baby though.

 

 

 

 

 


What about those of us who had colicky infants who screamed for hours on end for months? Were they not being comforted, even when being rocked, nursed as often as they wanted, held in slings, and stroked and loved? If they keep screaming, what we did wasn't beneficial, because they were still screaming?
post #89 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post





 




Really?

 

Posting that CIO and screaming in the car share some similarities is guilt inducing?  Suggesting, in addition to many of the great suggestion in the early part of this thread, that she might want to consider minimisizing driving when possible (possible as defined by her) is guilt inducing? eyesroll.gif

 

I actually think it is totally fine if the Op decides to minimise driving as possible or to continue driving and use the suggestions as she sees fit to get through this period.  In both cases the baby and 4 year old will be fine.  Her call - and sharing thoughts around either idea is not guilt inducing.

 

TBH what she wrote at the beginning makes her sound like a wonderful mother. 

 

 

 

 

 


Well it's more the idea that if you can't hold your baby (for whatever reason -- car ride, another child to tend to, bathroom break, broken arm, NICU etc...) that you are not meeting your child's needs... that physically holding the child is the only way to provide comfort... that if your child cries and you aren't able to console them, you are basically CIO (with all the negative effects)... that a child can't tell the difference between loving but non-physical comfort, and NO comfort.... that baby's needs ALWAYS trump the needs of other family members, particularly siblings... that people who live in non-walkable (and/or bus-free) communities should just stay home indefinitely if their child hates the car... I readily admit, though, that I am taking this very personally because of how my experience with DS has been...
post #90 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post


Really?

 

Posting that CIO and screaming in the car share some similarities is guilt inducing?  Suggesting, in addition to many of the great suggestion in the early part of this thread, that she might want to consider minimisizing driving when possible (possible as defined by her) is guilt inducing? eyesroll.gif

 

I actually think it is totally fine if the Op decides to minimise driving as possible or to continue driving and use the suggestions as she sees fit to get through this period.  In both cases the baby and 4 year old will be fine.  Her call - and sharing thoughts around either idea is not guilt inducing.

 

TBH what she wrote at the beginning makes her sound like a wonderful mother. 

 



But that isn't what many are saying in this discussion.  There are plenty of other posters here who have refused to acknowledge any distinction whatsoever between CIO and the OP's situation, and insisted that a baby crying in their carseat for 20 minutes is equally as damaging as being left indefinitely in his crib to cry without any comforting or soothing from a parent/caregiver at all.  That is what I and some others here are objecting to and that is what we have called out as being an unfair laying on of guilt.  To then insist that one doesn't need to sugar coat the supposed truthiness of one's unsupported supposition that a parent is inflicting permanent psychological and neurological harm to their baby by allowing for any incidence of sustained crying is really rather appalling.

 

post #91 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarena View Post

Ya know, I DO understand that sometimes it can not be helped. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be sugar coated.

 

If I really want an orange and all I can get is an apple, I can accept that there is nothing I can do about it right now and eat the apple. Trying to convince myself that the apple is an orange is not helpful. In the same way, I can't convince myself or anyone else that allowing a newborn to cry without comfort is ok. It's not, the infant does NOT know the difference and I see no reason why I have to convince anyone that the INFANT can't understand that, it's the law, it's a safety issue, but that doesn't mean that it is not potentially damaging. And therefore should be done as little as possible to minimize any damaging side effects. (imo of course)



To be clear in what I'm asking - specifically, what damage ensues from a child crying because they're unhappy/uncomfortable in a car seat for relatively brief but regular periods of time?  And where is the threshold for when it goes from unfortunate to damaging?

 

I'm NOT advocating CIO, btw.

 

post #92 of 154



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by crunchy_mommy View Post

This is possibly the most depressing & guilt-inducing threads I have ever seen. greensad.gif



I think that if you've attempted and been mostly successful at applying GD and AP principles to your parenting that you've done very well by your children.  hug2.gif

 

If you have a child who is particularly intense, needy or has any special needs, it's harder to read threads like this, because things don't tend to go as smoothly with complicated, intense kids.

 

post #93 of 154

Just following up on what I wrote a couple of days ago.

 

Kathymuggle, interesting what you wrote about your baby doing worse with you in the room.  The screaming fits that my almost 6 month old does in the car?  Only ever when I am in the car, and usually doesn't matter if I am the driver or somewhere else in the car.  When her father drives her around or her grandparents?  Not.One.Problem.

 

And we found a solution, at least it worked a couple of times!  All of us talking or singing to her didn't help.  But if *I* sing to her only, and I sing specific songs, well then, that she drifts off to sleep to that.  Awesome!  See folks?  An infant *can* be comforted and calmed without being held!

 

I too live in an area where there is little to no public transportation.  It's wouldn't have been realistic for me to not drive.  And I live ten minutes from the nearest place to do any grocery shopping and walking there would have been dangerous.  You do what you have to.

post #94 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamazee View Post



What about those of us who had colicky infants who screamed for hours on end for months? Were they not being comforted, even when being rocked, nursed as often as they wanted, held in slings, and stroked and loved? If they keep screaming, what we did wasn't beneficial, because they were still screaming?


I think you do all you can (within the limits of your own sanity).  If you hold them, nurse them, etc and they still cry...well, they still cry.  You really are doing all you can do.

 

If you are driving you cannot "do all you can do"  (sound like the army, lol)  because you are driving.  You cannot nurse, hold, make eye contact with, etc.  Sometimes you have to drive - I get that.  Sometimes you choose to and that is fine too.  I do not think any long term damage will be done by screaming in the car - but that hardly makes it pleasant.  If I had my life to live over again I would have driven a little less while my kids were in the screaming stage.  

 

I do not think my ability to offer comfort (even if they do not respond to it) is as high when driving as it is while not driving.  This is not meant to shame at all - it is simply a statement of fact.  My ability to offer comfort or a range of comfort is less while driving.


Edited by purslaine - 7/17/11 at 9:01pm
post #95 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lolagirl View Post




  To then insist that one doesn't need to sugar coat the supposed truthiness of one's unsupported supposition that a parent is inflicting permanent psychological and neurological harm to their baby by allowing for any incidence of sustained crying is really rather appalling.

 


I reread this thread (somewhat quickly).  I did not see anyone say anything like this.  Do you have a quote?

 

post #96 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by kathymuggle View Post




I reread this thread (somewhat quickly).  I did not see anyone say anything like this.  Do you have a quote?

 

she is misquoting me. I'm the one that used the term sugar coating. I was stating that while allowing a baby to cry in the car is not CIO, it can potentially have the same damaging effects because an infant doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that your intentions are not CIO. And that I'm not going to sit here and say oh don't worry sweetie, just toughen up, the baby will be fine. No, I don't know the child will be damaged in any way, but I also can not assure her the baby will "be just fine" I'm not going to lie to her. THAT was my point. I am not going to LIE to make someone else feel better - EVER.
 

 

post #97 of 154
Quote:

Originally Posted by Czarena View Post

 

 because an infant doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that your intentions are not CIO.


you sure about that? 

post #98 of 154

Here's my experience. My youngest screamed bloody-murder in the car til she was around 1, I don't know if she outgrew it or really loved the "new" minivan we'd just bought. It was amazing though to not hear screaming when we went somewhere!

 

We had to: sing "the ants go marching", sing "hush" by Afroman(you know how babies can become attached to some weird things!), or I'd have to sit next to her and nurse her if dh was driving(and he usually was, as we only had the one vehicle til I got the minivan).

 

Her screaming got so bad we'd have to pull over and get her out so she'd calm down and breath. Her screaming was so bad she'd choke. As long as I was next to her with my boob in her mouth, she was ok(and I could just learn forward and nurse with no problem). It wasn't the safest way for me to be but it beat the nerve-wrecking screaming.

post #99 of 154

nm

 

Op  - hope you are doing OK.

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by purslaine - 7/18/11 at 8:46am
post #100 of 154
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarena View Post



she is misquoting me. I'm the one that used the term sugar coating. I was stating that while allowing a baby to cry in the car is not CIO, it can potentially have the same damaging effects because an infant doesn't have the mental capacity to understand that your intentions are not CIO. And that I'm not going to sit here and say oh don't worry sweetie, just toughen up, the baby will be fine. No, I don't know the child will be damaged in any way, but I also can not assure her the baby will "be just fine" I'm not going to lie to her. THAT was my point. I am not going to LIE to make someone else feel better - EVER.
 

 



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.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › CIO in the car and I HATE IT!!!