Separation anxiety...mine, not hers! - Page 2

[Brandybutter]

Originally Posted by holothuroidea 

Ask your DH how he would feel if he was the baby, put into a room full of strange giants and just passed around from one to another without any thought for how he is feeling? Honestly! It rankles you because it is not a nice thing to do to another person! Who want's to be treated that way? 

Once, an elderly lady came up to my 3 year old DD in the farmers market and started stroking her arm saying, "You are such a nice girl. What a nice girl you are." My DD stared at her, wide eyed. I said to the lady, "Excuse me! Would you like it if I came up to you and did that?" She backed away with a look like, "Well, I never!" When she was gone, DD said to me, "Thanks, mommy, that lady scared me." Just because they're not crying doesn't mean they're not scared. You know the difference, too, as you've explained. Sometimes people are very respectful and are genuinely interested in holding the baby if it's OK, and that's fine! When my first was a baby, she loved being held by everyone, she'd be all smiles if someone asked to take her. But I would never let a stranger come up an touch her anymore than I would let a stranger do that to me. 

I agree with everything you've said here, holothuroidea.

OP, I think it comes down to respecting your DD's body and senses. I, too, would ask your DH to put himself in your DD's shoes. It would feel weird to be passed from person to person and I imagine, extremely confusing. Babies are taking in so much visual and auditory stimuli at a party full of strangers.

My son would have freaked out at that age. I recall one time at a family party when my son was on the floor playing (~7mo) and all of my in-laws gathered around him (~ 12 adults standing in a circle around him, all staring at him.). He started wailing and he hardly ever cried, so I knew he was terrified. No one touched him, but there was so much attention focused on him that it overwhelmed him. He's a very social boy now at 18 mo, but it's interesting - he's very affectionate with other kids and babies, but he still doesn't like many adults to handle him. He engages adults, especially our extended family, but is not at all cuddly with anyone but DH and I. I don't consider this a problem - he needs to feel safe. And it certainly makes me feel safe to know that he won't walk off with just anyone.

[Jennifer Z]

Originally Posted by holothuroidea 

Maybe it makes you uncomfortable because your DH is acting like your baby is a puppy. 

You are perfectly rational and no, being around strangers is not necessarily good for her social development. In this stage of her development the only interaction she needs is primarily from you, her dad, and maybe a couple grandparents/aunts and uncles. In other words, you and people you are close with.

Being around strangers can be very stressful for babies especially at this age when they are developing some anxiety about them and it's really not fair to the baby to expect her to deal with this potentially stressful situation without her mommy! It is unreasonable for your DH to expect this to be okay with you. I'd just tell him that you get the final word because you are the primary caregiver and he can go enjoy company by himself. 
 

Wow, this is totally wrong, and incredibly insulting to boot.

First, her dh is NOT treating the baby like a puppy.  That is so incredibly rude and uncalled for.  He is treating her like his precious baby and wants to spend time with her and let her be loved on a bit.  She is WAY past newborn stage, where germs are more of a concern, and his reaction is totally normal, healthy and desired.

And, it isn't like you are sending her in there alone.  She has her dad, her other primary caregiver, who loves her dearly. 

I can not for the life of me understand why people are upset when dad's "don't spend enough time with kids" and complain when they want to spend time with kids.  They learn to parent, the child learns to trust them the exact same way mom's learn to parent and children learn to trust them, and that is by DOING it. 

I understand social anxiety, I understand that it is really hard to let go and let the other parent go solo when you aren't available, but it is very important for everybody's relationships to have times like this.  It helps you keep from getting burned out, it helps the baby feel safer, it helps him develop a close relationship with the child, and it lets the baby know that the world is an interesting and wonderful place.

[Jennifer Z]

Originally Posted by holothuroidea 

I don't know your particular family's situation but if your DH is the type that works all day comes home and spends 2 hours with the baby before they go to sleep at night.. that doesn't really qualify him to take her wherever he wants whenever he wants just because he is the dad. What SilverFish said makes very good sense for older children (maybe at 2-3 when they wean?) but not babies who are very mama centered, just coming from an attachment parenting perspective.

If he only has 2 hours a night to spend with the child, wouldn't you go out of your way to increase the time?  That is a much bigger reason to encourage him to go on solo outings with the child when you aren't available, not discourage it.  He needs to be given as much time as possible to develop the nurturing relationship with her, and even if that time isn't in neat 12 hour blocks, it is still valid and important.

You aren't doing your job as a parent if you alienate your child from the other parent she should be attached to.  It is disservice to you, your partner, and your child to not allow an 8 month old out of your sight.  I can understand not wanting to do overnights, and would support that, but a few hours at a gathering?  That is some serious over the top gate-keeping IMHO.

[ErinYay]

Originally Posted by holothuroidea 

I don't know your particular family's situation but if your DH is the type that works all day comes home and spends 2 hours with the baby before they go to sleep at night.. that doesn't really qualify him to take her wherever he wants whenever he wants just because he is the dad. What SilverFish said makes very good sense for older children (maybe at 2-3 when they wean?) but not babies who are very mama centered, just coming from an attachment parenting perspective.

So. Many. Issues.

1) In the modern, and the current, economy, people are lucky to be employed, period. That makes those of us who are lucky enough to be able to stay home *extremely* lucky. You really think we should also start calling our partners who work "the type who pretty much never see their kids and thus are totally and completely incapable of caring for them outside of our watchful eyes?" Because it really sounds like you're saying that.

2) HE IS THE DAD. If you're married to a dude who can't be trusted for 2 hours with his own child, of any age, then guess what? Then you're the negligent parent, as your partner clearly has no business being around kids. 

3) Babies, even AP babies, can and do wean much younger than 2-3.

4) What about for those of us mamas with children who were never mama-centric? Should we take your words to mean that we didn't attachment parent them correctly? 

5) You ever hear that line about "it takes a village?" Wonder why it's not "it's takes a mama and just one mama all the time, no matter what, for 2-3 years at least?" Because the idea of a baby being physically and emotionally attached to just one caregiver, just the mother, is not an idea based in reality. By and large, having one primary caregiver is a very modern concept, and the idea of a baby who *isn't* just handed off to anyone, nursed by any area lactating woman, played with by all ages and relations of children, is a very new idea.

[homemademomma]

This is one of the most bizarre threads I have read in a long time! OP, I certainly do not mean to make light of your fears/anxieties. I had a really hard time separating from my first, too. But unless your baby has shown you that she really does not like parties, then there is no reason at all- none, zero- for your dh not to take her. It would never have occurred to me to tell my dh not to bring our baby to a party.

holothuroidea, it is offensive and weird to say that your baby's father is not one of their primary caretakers (unless they are an unfit parent). No offense, but I found the contents of your posts to be perplexing and quite ridiculous.

[MoonWillow]

This thread is from August....