April Chit Chat - Page 21 « Back to Group Discussions

[Abraisme]

This sounds like a very scientific and one-sided way to enter this topic.  My entire parenting philosophy basically tries to remove science and look at how humans have been raising babies for the majority of our history.  How evolution and nature would have done it.  I honestly don't believe that before a scientist/specialist came along that anyone sleep trained a baby.  Does that mean that before Ferber everyone had sleep issues?  This is a legit question, I'm not trying to be snarky. 

Originally Posted by birdhappy85 

• Lastly, my DH (who works in sleep health for a living) wanted me to tell everyone that the best quality of sleep everyone in the family can obtain is leaps and bounds more important for our health than allowing a baby to kind of run the show, if you will. He stresses the importance of helping babies get the best and earliest start with properly developing their circadian rhythms. It could help protect against future sleep disorders as well. If a baby will stay up extra late resisting sleep and a parent refuses to intervene in a firmer way when simple comforting and encouragement won't help, then that parent is essentially choosing to neglect the baby's sleep health out of fear of emotionally hurting them in a way that isn't even proven to be true. This is why at 2 months old we chose sleep training versus just going with whatever the baby's sleep habits naturally produced. Solid sleep for everyone is right up there at the top of the list of most important things - if not the most important thing - for our health, ESPECIALLY for growth and development. Even allowing a baby to cry herself to sleep is better than her losing sleep, just like giving a baby formula is better than letting her starve if breastmilk isn't available. It may not feel like the best thing, but it's the best alternative in some cases.

[birdhappy85]

I just want to clarify that I am in TOTAL support of providing babies with reassurance, attention, and all of that good nurturing attachment- and trust-building stuff. And in no way am I insinuating that we should be forcing our babies to feel a certain way by doing something that's more convenient for us as parents. I don't believe in "training" babies to need us less. (Sleep training is different to me.) The training to reduce needs is an extreme way of thinking and doesn't even seem like parenting (I mean why have a baby if you don't want to take care of it?).

I cannot believe for a second that doing 3 days of sleep training that got our baby to sleep through the night would've done something damaging to her. If I nurse her to sleep (which she rarely wants to do anymore anyway), she wakes up multiple times throughout the night expecting to eat just because she fell asleep that way. If she falls asleep on her own in the crib, she gets more restorative solid sleep and only wakes once and now sometimes sleeps straight thru until morning!

[Paigekitten]

Originally Posted by birdhappy85 

Here is some final food for thought:

• Ash made a good point when she said, "I'm not a supporter of letting your child CIO when you are capable of comforting them." I tend to agree with this for the most part, but the key here is to make concessions for how well each of us know our individual babies and whether or not we're "capable of comforting" them during certain daily tasks as others. Car rides, while getting better, are still difficult for my baby. I have to drive her everywhere since DH is asleep when we're awake (so I can't sit and comfort her during drives, nor does she take a pacifier), and I also think it's much more valuable for her development and socialization to get her out of the house often to explore the world, even if it means she's crying in her carseat for short periods of time unattended. Infants don't need socialized.  They need their mommies.  Maybe mommies need to socialize, but we are also capable of finding ways to do that that don't disregard our children's needs. Remember: Some benefits in certain situations outweigh the risks of stressing a baby out with a little bit of crying. Even for children it's best to be forced into doing some things they don't feel comfortable doing because it builds their confidence and shows them their capabilities. I disagree with this.  I treat my older children with the same respect I do my infants.  Forcing a child to do something they are not ready or interested to do decreases their confidence, and is not beneficial to their learning. I was allowed to quit every activity I was fearful of as a child, and I feel much worse off and stunted because of it. When it comes to babies, I think it's good for them to experience a little discomfort but know that mommy always comes back! Aren't our babies at the age where they understand object permanence now? They may be begining to understand but they will fully understand when their brains develop into it, whether or not they had forced unnatural separation before that point.
• Along those same lines, I agree with the women who have pointed out that we parents just plain need to be able to get some things done around the house without a baby on us from time to time.That doesn't mean it has to be bed time, that doesn't mean we can't find someplace to put the baby for a few minutes that they enjoy, that doesn't mean we can't hire a neighbor to come over and play with the baby for 20 minutes, or step out for a minute while our partner has the infant.  I do those things when my baby naps. If any mother here can 100% honestly say that they haven't gotten frustrated as h*ll at times while not getting a break from their baby when they're trying to get something done, then kudos to you (although I think you'd be lying to yourself; nobody is perfect). For the rest of us humans, we get stressed, we can get burned out, we need to just set the baby down sometimes to recharge our batteries. I think all around that this would be BETTER for a baby/child because they are observing their mommy take care of herself (highly important) and they're also reaping the benefits of living in a household that is shedding less stress.Yes, mother's absolutely need to model taking care of themselves.  They also need to model not doing so at the expense of others. Babies, at least my baby for sure, can pick up on distress around them. My baby likely experienced higher cortisol levels secondhand from being held by me for days at a time while I was depressed and anxious trying to be a perfect AP mom. Now that I have relaxed with my parenting perfectionism and fears of doing damage (which I think is what drives some women in the natural world), I am a happier healthier mom and my baby reaps those benefits far more than she did when I wasn't getting sleep and was in a state of angst trying to put her to bed to no avail many nights or hermiting myself inside the home because I didn't want to experience her crying in the ca. That's great that you guys are in a better place, that's awesome she's calmer.  Maybe those are the best options for your family, maybe there are options that work even better for both of you.
• My DH made the best point thus far when he said, "How can anyone assume that they know what a baby is thinking?"If anyone could know what a baby is thinking, the most likely person would be an in-tune, available mother. Are babies capable of actually thinking, "I have been abandoned?" They probably just feel like they miss us, but I wouldn't automatically jump to the conclusion that they feel entirely neglected for just short crying sessions just because they aren't physically touching us or in the same room as us (although I do think newborns are a different story). I have found my children need constant touch as newborns (0-3 months), to be within arms reach 3-6 ish months, to be within sight for 6-18 months, and still need verbal/emotional contact from that point forward.  I feel strongly about this because I remember as a child that I did logically think those thoughts when I was neglected by my parents, but it didn't start until I was into my childhood. Regardless, if babies are actually capable of thinking that, then a few minutes out of the day spent crying unattended would definitely not reverse the rest of the 14+ hours we're spending nurturing and loving on our baby, helping her feel secure and attached. To think otherwise would be naive.I don't know that anyone said that, I think we are saying the less crying over all the better.
• Now, if the issue with letting a baby CIO for any length of time is about the elevated cortisol levels "damaging" them mentally and not what they're thinking and feeling per se, then I feel even more strongly that our bedtime routine with our baby is the best thing for her! It sounds like we do a modified Ferber method and I LOVE it. Like I said, she'll endlessly cry in our arms just to resist going to bed no matter what we do to comfort her. But shortening the length of her crying by allowing her to do it alone for 10-15 minutes instead of an hour with us seems hands-down a healthier alternative and less cortisol-producing That's good that is less crying for her.  That doesn't mean it's necessarily the only option that would work that way.  Perhaps she's overtired and holding her is overstimulating, perhaps starting earlier and holding her quietly would have the same effect, perhaps laying her down before she starts crying and patting her back works better.  Maybe you've tried all these things and that really is the only thing that works.  If it were me, I'd still be uncomfortable, and keep looking for something a little more hand on then leaving the room when she is crying, even if it was more hands off then I wanted to do. Plus, she is learning how to soothe herself to sleep. While I wouldn't normally think encouraging a child to learn self-soothing in that manner would be productive, I have had a psychologist concur with me about the importance of humans learning to self-soothe very early on This is something on which lots of psychologist disagree greatly. I would also put out there that children learn to self soothe as we help them calm down and remain calm ourselves, not when we walk away. I am a case in point: I never learned to self-soothe,and it has been immensely stressful and highly damaging for me throughout my life to not have acquired that skill as I should have.You were attachment parented? I'm not saying that I know whether or not an infant is capable of connecting the dots this early with the whole self-soothing thing; I don't have a degree in this stuff. But I do know there are many ways of doing things and achieving the same outcome or otherwise most people these days (who likely were left to CIO as kids) would have attachment disorders. Except a lot of people DO have problems with attachment, anxiety, depression, self worth, motivation, sleep problems, and addiction.  And lots of people were NOT left to CIO as well, I never was, even though my parents didn't know what AP was.
• Lastly, my DH (who works in sleep health for a living) wanted me to tell everyone that the best quality of sleep everyone in the family can obtain is leaps and bounds more important for our health than allowing a baby to kind of run the show, if you will.Babies don't run the show.  They express their needs.  Parents set the tone and can choose to include the babies needs, or overlook them in attempting to fulfill their own. He stresses the importance of helping babies get the best and earliest start with properly developing their circadian rhythms. It could help protect against future sleep disorders as well. If a baby will stay up extra late resisting sleep and a parent refuses to intervene in a firmer way when simple comforting and encouragement won't help, then that parent is essentially choosing to neglect the baby's sleep health out of fear of emotionally hurting them in a way that isn't even proven to be true. Infants don't even START producing melatonin until 4 months old.  They don't HAVE the same circadian rhythms as adults. Was you husband trained in infant sleep?  Because it's a lot different then adult sleep.  And the risks of CIO are researched.  They are documented.  They are at least as valid as any other research regarding infant sleep. This is why at 2 months old we chose sleep training versus just going with whatever the baby's sleep habits naturally produced. Solid sleep for everyone is right up there at the top of the list of most important things - if not the most important thing - for our health, ESPECIALLY for growth and development. Cultivating good sleep doesn't mean leaving your baby alone to cry. Gently guiding baby into a rhythm that matches the family doesn't mean sleep training. If infants can even BE sleep trained.  Their natural development in sleep changes between 2-4 months, chances are even if you'd done nothing she still would be sleeping better.  I have changed nothing in my way of putting Éowyn to bed and in the past 3 months we have progressed from being attached and nursing all night long (with her falling asleep around midnight) to me being able to lay her down on a separate bed around 8 pm, and two nursing sessions during the next 10 hours. Even allowing a baby to cry herself to sleep is better than her losing sleep, just like giving a baby formula is better than letting her starve if breastmilk isn't available. It may not feel like the best thing, but it's the best alternative in some cases Yes, but formula is the last ditch least preferred option, not option number two.  There are a lot of options before corn and soy and sugar full formula, they pump their own milk, they find milk donors, they make their own.  There are a lot of options between neglecting a tired baby and leaving them alone to cry.
•  

[Paigekitten]

And some kids might not be ready until much later then 2-3.  My 4 year old still needs help making that "switch to sleep"  she's still learning how to do it, and sure I could leave her alone and let her cry until she figures it out, or I could be there right next to her helping.  I choose to be with her.  She chooses me to be with her.

There's still a whole world of things to try between nursing to sleep and leaving them alone crying.  Éowyn tends to sleep better when she has not fallen asleep nursing too.  Often we nurse and she pops off and we just sit for a few minutes while she drifts off.

ETA: having a child who defies all the typical strategies in the "scientific" baby books made me just chuck it all out the window and follow the lead of her needs and my needs and find creative ways of working around both.  I like science, I find it fascinating, and informational, but that doesn't mean it knows how to be the best parent to my child.

[birdhappy85]

Originally Posted by Abraisme 

This sounds like a very scientific and one-sided way to enter this topic.  My entire parenting philosophy basically tries to remove science and look at how humans have been raising babies for the majority of our history.  How evolution and nature would have done it.  I honestly don't believe that before a scientist/specialist came along that anyone sleep trained a baby.  Does that mean that before Ferber everyone had sleep issues?  This is a legit question, I'm not trying to be snarky. 

I don't want to come off as insulting, Abra, but I feel that you're seeing things in black and white and not taking entire contexts of statements into account either. I'm not sure why you asked the Ferber question. My point this entire time, and my DH's point, is that parents should do what provides the best sleep outcome for their individual child. That's not science; that's common sense. (I'm not trying to be snarky either.)

You can remove science from your parenting philosophy while still acknowledging that quality of sleep is damn important. I guess I just overly assume that people know how intricate sleep health is... I'm sorry. I've lived in that world and gained so much knowledge for so many years and it's just second nature to me, so I forget that most people literally do probably just look at it as just one word: "sleep"  --- and not all of the actual details of how it works and runs the body.

[Jaimee]

Originally Posted by seraf 

Lol, Jaimee, ...
For the record, I don't think diapers are child abuse. I think they are a tool that can be used appropriately or inappropriately...

I hope you know I wasn't talking about you!  That point of view was presented by the extreme friend I mentioned in my previous post (the one who was kicked out of our AP group b/c people found her too offensive).  She was simply trying to make a point about what we consider acceptable to do to our babies, but would not find acceptable to do to anyone else.  It's sort of like your grandma comment.  We don't allow adults to sit around in their own waste or if we did, we would be horrified.  This was her point.  I found her point challenging and was glad she caused me to think about this topic more.  And for the record, I also do not consider diapers child abuse, but it sparked my interest in EC and I feel I am a better parent than I was b/c of it.

[dashley111]

Originally Posted by Abraisme 

You might consider having her eyes checked as well.  When I was a baby I didn't bear weight on my legs and I ended up walking really late (although I did walk on my own).  It turns out that I needed glasses.  I walked at 15mo, but before that my mom tells me that I just sat like a lump and everyone was SOOO sure that something was wrong with my legs.  I got glasses shortly there after and have been wearing them since I was about 17mo.  Both of my parents said that I was so happy to be able to see that I never took my glasses off!  :)

Thank you. I think I'm going to bring her in and have her completely evaluated, all systems.  I know when it comes to babies sometimes its hard to tell what the root of something is, because it can present differently than it would in an older child or adult.

[jbk21]

I do appreciate different points of view and other parenting styles.  I like hearing what works for others and what their thoughts are regarding specific parenting practices.  I do hope, though, that we can continue discussing controversial topics without the passive-aggressive hurtful words.  Describing the situation of another mother and then referring to it in a negative way is, I think, completely out of line.  I am also personally bothered by opinions stated as if they were fact, when there is nothing to back it up.  We can share feelings, opinions, and personal experiences but we all have to realize that doesn't make it true for everyone.  Maybe I am alone in thinking that, but I do think that it is extremely harmful to others if we just start acting like everything we read is fact.  I guess you could say it's a pet peeve.  

I also personally feel like we are living in this time and society, we have evolved to THIS level of thinking, and science is a part of that.  We have evolved as humans to be able to understand our actions.  Research and being able to find correlations between things is a part of that.  And we have discovered what is good research vs. what is bad research.  We are raising our babies in this society, not in a tribal village.  I also find it pretty silly to only use "science" or seemingly scientific studies to prove the points that we like.  I think that has been done in the past in some of our discussions, so to then say that all science and research is faulty is a pretty heavy double-standard...
 

I am also curious about if there is really a difference between instances of intense crying in the car vs CIO for sleep.  I am unsure if the baby can even hear the caregiver's voice or if they are affected by the soft touch when in those intense moments.  Dylan can get pretty worked up in the car.  He is generally a really great passenger, so it has only happened a couple of times, but he goes from 0-60 pretty quickly.  There is nothing- no song, no touch, no pacifier or toy- that works in those instances.  It doesn't even begin to touch his emotion.  Luckily we have never taken him on a long trip- we are usually just jaunting around town so nothing takes longer than 20 minutes and he is certainly not crying that whole time- it's usually towards the end as we reach our destination.  It's also pretty difficult to pull over when driving in the city, but we have done it when it can be achieved safely.  But my point is, touch and words don't seem to calm him down once he gets worked up like that.  So at least on the surface, it seems to me that such an episode is similar to what people think of with CIO.  Also, he is crying no matter what so those stress hormones are being released even if I am there to comfort him.  It's the stress level that is of concern here, so I really don't think we can make distinctions between different crying episodes- even when in caregivers' arms- without empirical evidence.  If anyone has evidence from reputable sources, I'd love to see it as I am trying to work this out in my own mind.  I tend to believe that we can't avoid all stressful situations for our little ones, though we can certainly try, but a lot of love goes a long way in making them secure.  

That being said, I also want to play devil's advocate and say that the Ferber method (going in and reassuring after certain blocks of time) seems a lot like a carseat situation to me.  There is parental reassurance and presence.  

I am still not personally comfortable with having my baby cry when I can intervene.  That is my choice, though, and it works for my family since I am a SAHM (actually WAHM) and can be here for them.  That doesn't make my parenting inherently better than anyone else's, it is just what feels right to me.  I am just trying to highlight where I see some possible failures in logic.  I want my baby to cry as little as possible and that is for a lot of reasons but mostly because I feel terrible for him and I also feel pretty awful myself when he is crying!   

And Paigekitten, I have to respond to a few things you said to Joanie.  First, I would be pretty offended if you did the same to me and acted like I hadn't tried all the options for getting my child to sleep.  Seriously?  Are you at her house?  Is Sora your child?  I think you need to reframe some of the things you say, to be completely honest.  This might be a forum of like-minded women but evaluating, point-by-point, another mother's parenting is out of line.  That is crossing from "this is what works for me, this is my perspective" into "YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG". 

Secondly, Sora is crying less overall.  Isn't that the point?  

Yes, psychologists have a wide spectrum of beliefs regarding self-soothing.  I am personally not in the camp that believes in teaching a child to self-soothe at this age, but I also don't think Joanie did any harm to Sora with what she is doing.  I actually fully support it and given the little bit I know about her family I feel like it is absolutely wonderful that they have found something that they feel comfortable with and that is working.  Based solely on the article you posted earlier, it seems like you are reading pretty fringe psychologists.  Darcia Narvaez does not speak for psychologists in general.  The article was, for all intents and purposes, and opinion piece with some of the same faulty research I was referring to previously.  

A lot of people DO have issues with anxiety, etc etc etc BUT if you look around here on MDC as a "case study" I think you'd find that A LOT of children of AP parents also struggle with anxiety, social disorders, sleep issues, etc.  If that weren't the case, that would be a pretty good example of why AP is "optimal" for everyone, but unfortunately that is not how it is. 

At 4 months is actually when infant sleep becomes more adult-like.  Are YOU trained in infant sleep?  

The risks of CIO are researched but again, the jury is still out and a lot of those studies are not valid.  

Finally-  object permanence is most certainly developing at this age.  I wouldn't say a child has a full understanding of it, but it is developing for sure.

[birdhappy85]

Originally Posted by Paigekitten 

Quote #1:

Having a child who defies all the typical strategies in the "scientific" baby books made me just chuck it all out the window and follow the lead of her needs and my needs and find creative ways of working around both.  I like science, I find it fascinating, and informational, but that doesn't mean it knows how to be the best parent to my child.

Quote #2:

Maybe those are the best options for your family, maybe there are options that work even better for both of you.

Quote #3:

Yes, but formula is the last ditch least preferred option, not option number two.  There are a lot of options before corn and soy and sugar full formula, they pump their own milk, they find milk donors, they make their own.  There are a lot of options between neglecting a tired baby and leaving them alone to cry.

I'm sorry, but you are so incredibly out of line and condescending and overly literal in your interpretations, I'm in absolute shock at the way you would respond with these quotes and so many more I don't even feel are worth listing. Almost all of your comments assume that my DH and I haven't exhausted our efforts after trying the optimal choices first, and you also assume that we are doing things out of convenience for US instead of following cues and needs of our baby. I am probably even more in tune with the needs of my baby than a mother without a spirited child because I put in that much more effort to meet her needs. I don't have the energy to explain our methods in detail any more than I already have, and you still take things out of context somehow. I am still in shock at your condescention, seriously. I respected all of yours posts up until this point. Who are you to assume that we haven't tried other ways of doing things? Who are you to assume that the word "formula" in my post meant non-organic store-bought Enfamil-type crap? IT WASN'T A LITERAL STATEMENT. It was an analogy. You see things so black and white that I now understand why you have the philosophies you do and are probably afraid to step outside of the lines for fear that not being perfect in your parenting will make the world around you collapse.

I am not this kind of person. I am like Jaimee in the way I welcome different points of views to grow as a person and parent. You, on the other hand, are outright attacking as if I somehow personally attacked you in some way earlier. I am outright confused.

[TalkToMeNow]

This is moving too fast for me today, but I did have a few points. Jaimee, as to your extremist stuff up there, about the other mom, etc. I agree to a point. Most people, IMO, do not respond well to extreme viewpoints, especially when they are said in an abrupt, rude manner. For example, the EC argument. Many people would be open to someone saying it's easier to EC, that it saves money, and that it leads to much earlier potty independence. Sounds good, right? However, most people would be totally turned off by someone saying diapers are child abuse. They would file that person, and other EC'ers, in the crazy category and move on. Because when you make a statement like, "diapers are child abuse," what you are really saying is that moms who use diapers are abusing their children! 

The same goes for CIO. When we make blanket statements that any amount of crying alone in bed is damaging to the brain and extremely selfish of us, we are saying that moms who do so are selfish and are causing their babies to have brain damage. There is really no other way to slice it. I am a very rational person, and I am not very sensitive to what others think of me. But if someone told me that, I would shut down on their point of view. 

People learn from kindness and support. No, we don't have to sugarcoat everything. But there is something to be said for tact. 

Every mother in this DDC wants the best for their babies. All of us love them like nothing else. But we also have different priorities for those babies. We have different backgrounds. And, most important, we have different levels of what we can tolerate. Some of us have zero need for alone time and also have no problem with wearing a baby 24/7. Others have a greater need to be alone sometimes and have body-free time. Some of us can tolerate a messy house of a little bit of chaos more than others. There is no right or wrong! 

[jbk21]

Originally Posted by TalkToMeNow 

This is moving too fast for me today, but I did have a few points. Jaimee, as to your extremist stuff up there, about the other mom, etc. I agree to a point. Most people, IMO, do not respond well to extreme viewpoints, especially when they are said in an abrupt, rude manner. For example, the EC argument. Many people would be open to someone saying it's easier to EC, that it saves money, and that it leads to much earlier potty independence. Sounds good, right? However, most people would be totally turned off by someone saying diapers are child abuse. They would file that person, and other EC'ers, in the crazy category and move on. Because when you make a statement like, "diapers are child abuse," what you are really saying is that moms who use diapers are abusing their children! 

The same goes for CIO. When we make blanket statements that any amount of crying alone in bed is damaging to the brain and extremely selfish of us, we are saying that moms who do so are selfish and are causing their babies to have brain damage. There is really no other way to slice it. I am a very rational person, and I am not very sensitive to what others think of me. But if someone told me that, I would shut down on their point of view. 

People learn from kindness and support. No, we don't have to sugarcoat everything. But there is something to be said for tact. 

Every mother in this DDC wants the best for their babies. All of us love them like nothing else. But we also have different priorities for those babies. We have different backgrounds. And, most important, we have different levels of what we can tolerate. Some of us have zero need for alone time and also have no problem with wearing a baby 24/7. Others have a greater need to be alone sometimes and have body-free time. Some of us can tolerate a messy house of a little bit of chaos more than others. There is no right or wrong! 

  

[Paigekitten]

Okay. Fine. I'm a tactless jerk.  I'm not trying to be.  But apparently that's just the way I am, so I'll take myself somewhere else until I can figure out how to play nice and still have an opinion.

[dashley111]

Yes, Amanda!

We are all different parents.  We share some common interests and opinions, but we are not going to always do things the same way.  Every bodies point of view is valuable- without different opinions none of us would have ever opened our minds to ideas that were different than the way we thought it should be before.  Just like with Jaimee referring to why she started EC- someone said something, and it opened her mind and made her realize she wanted to do something different.  When ODD was a baby I was far from AP, even though I did losely use some of the concepts.  She cried it out on occasion...and she ended up being an amazing kid, SUPER independent and confident, very compassionate, and in accelerated learning classes.  She also hated cosleeping, and preferred her crib to our bed. 

Those few times she CIO did not undo the 5 other years of awesome parenting and nurturing we put into her. 

And as far as crying in the car- sometimes it is just non optional for us.  I have 2 older children who have to go to school, and I prefer them to be on time- because while I want to comfort my baby in all her times of need, I also need to teach my older kids the importance of education, responsibility, and punctuation.  I pretty regularly calm the baby in the parking lot when we get to the school, then complete our drive home.  She is never alone back there, there is always a child with her and I talk to her, rub her head, etc.  I hold absolutely no guilt about it.

[TalkToMeNow]

Originally Posted by dashley111 

And as far as crying in the car- sometimes it is just non optional for us.  I have 2 older children who have to go to school, and I prefer them to be on time- because while I want to comfort my baby in all her times of need, I also need to teach my older kids the importance of education, responsibility, and punctuation.  I pretty regularly calm the baby in the parking lot when we get to the school, then complete our drive home.  She is never alone back there, there is always a child with her and I talk to her, rub her head, etc.  I hold absolutely no guilt about it.

Same here. I have to leave the house typically a minimum of 2x per day. Older kids have to get to school. Sometimes Jasper cries. Luckily, he is getting way better about the car.

Ash, I neglected to mention earlier that I'm sorry you are worrying about Bettie. I hope you get some answers, and that those answers are that everything is within the normal range! Also, my dd1 did everything late. She had horrible muscle tone. She still does. She is still the slowest in her class and is the opposite of athletic. But she does okay. She has plenty of friends and has plenty of other talents. We've even managed to find a "sport" (rock climbing) where she can go at her own pace and not feel like she is the slowest or worst in the group. Oh, and she is thin as a rail. She has always been very, very thin. She looks like skin and bones. I took her to the dr several times when she was younger, and they always said she was within normal range. Just barely (lol) but in there all the same. I think the difference in the weight thing between her and Bettie is that dd1 was always super tall. It made her weigh more. So even though she was skinny, she seemed bigger because of her height. (Dad is 6'5). If her dad would have been shorter, there probably would have been more concern over her weight.

[birdhappy85]

[jbk21]

 LOL Joanie!!!

[TalkToMeNow]

Originally Posted by birdhappy85 

Lol!! Yes!

[Abraisme]

In Katies defense, I know her irl and she's not a harsh, critical person.  Yes, she has strong oppinions because of her experiences raising her own 3 kids.  I really don't think she's trying to be offensive, just give her counter oppinion.  It's very hard to determine what someones tone or intentions are online.  When I say that I think CIO causes brain damage, I'm not trying to be harsh or evil.  I'm simply stating that I think it damages the brain in some small way.  I think lots of things do this, some are out of our control and most we can over-come.  Humans babies are tough creatures and mostly turn out okay.  All we can do it strive to do our bests and lessen the amount of distress that they experience.  It's hard, there is no magical answer, there is no manual.  I think both sides have a right to their arguement.  Really, I have some very strong view points about parenting.  I've mostly calmed down over the years because being mean doesn't seem to help.  Also, I firmly do not believe that all parents do the best thing for their kids.  I'm attacking anyone here.  I'm just saying in general I know a lot of people who do things for their own self interests and not for thier children.  It's also a blanket statement (black/white) to assume that all people are trying their hardest to raise their kids. 

After reading Joanies posts for months and months I tend to think that she's doing a wonderful job and really working hard to uphold her beliefs when she's lacking support.  I truely commend that.

[CDsMom1031]

You guys are crazy! I can't keep up with you. LOL I thought about going back and reading all 26 (!!!) posts, but I opted out of it. That being said, I'm tired. I just put son down for a nap, started laundry and dishes... And I'm out. ZzZzZzZz I love days off work! =D

[Jaimee]

Originally Posted by TalkToMeNow 

Jaimee, as to your extremist stuff up there, about the other mom, etc. I agree to a point. Most people, IMO, do not respond well to extreme viewpoints, especially when they are said in an abrupt, rude manner. For example, the EC argument. Many people would be open to someone saying it's easier to EC, that it saves money, and that it leads to much earlier potty independence. Sounds good, right? However, most people would be totally turned off by someone saying diapers are child abuse. They would file that person, and other EC'ers, in the crazy category and move on. Because when you make a statement like, "diapers are child abuse," what you are really saying is that moms who use diapers are abusing their children! 

Amanda, in the past I would have 100% agreed with you and, for the most part, I still do.  I generally like to hear things presented nicely and in a positive light.  It feels good.  And, when this extreme mother made her comments about EC (and some others about other controversial topics) I was turned off.  I wondered to myself why in the world she did that (especially b/c I had seen her kids wearing diapers at playgroups) and dismissed her thoughts as crazy.  But I did not take offense.  She wasn't attacking me personally.  And I should insert here that it took me a while to no longer take things so personally.  This is something the east coast did manage to teach this west coast girl.  LOL.  Anyway, a different friend of mine who was also part of the group and a mom that I greatly respect got me to look at her posts in a different light.  She explained how the posts had challenged her.  She brought up the point that if we all ride in the middle lane how will we ever get somewhere new?  That made me pause and think.   I went back and read them again trying to see them as my friend did.  Suddenly I understood.  I had literally NEVER thought of things they way she was presenting them and I felt like my brain was expanding to think down this new line of thought.  It didn't matter that I didn't fully agree with it- I was challenging myself to examine my own practices and come up for valid reasons for why I was doing them, what I was okay with, and what I was not okay with.  And in the end, I did change how I had been doing things.