Define Cry It Out (Spinoff from working mamas) - Page 2

[Lissybug]

Originally Posted by siobhang

I sorta feel the judgement of "you must attend to your baby immediately at all times when s/he cries or you are being abusive" makes for some VERY frustrating and upsetting times for mamas (okay, me) when there are reasons why they can't attend to the baby at that precise moment........

Obviously, avoiding the situation is the best for all concerned, but sometimes things cannot be avoided.

nak
I agree with these these statements (not that I feel judged here, just the overall statement) I think when we have unrealistic expectations of ourselves it sets us up for guilt and depression.

For me- I try to plan ahead as best i can to avoid melt downs. But they happen- I'm not perfect, and sometimes one or the other of us is just having a hard day. We have to be forgiving on ourselves as parents

Example: The other night it is 8:30pm I have tried everything to get ds to sleep, I'm getting angry, he's crying, finally I get out of bed shov ds into dh's arms and say (very grouchily) I'm just going to make dinner, I'm starving. Well- once dinner is made we give a bit to ds and he wants more. lots more. he's very hungry. After we all eat ds falls asleep peacefully in 10 minutes. Oops! With transitioning from nursing to solids i didn't realize the poor kid was hungry for solid food. Sometimes we are trying to meet kids needs but we don't understand them, we're always learning too, and i think this story demonstrates that we need to remember to meet our own needs as well so we're not too tired/grumpy/hungry to think straight.

[nextcommercial]

OMG!! I seriously didn't think that this many people thought it means to walk away from baby while in a baby containment device. LOL


I have always been taught (in college btw) that to "cry it out" with an infant means to help sooth a baby to sleep and teach him or her self soothing methods. It is basically patting a childs back (I went to school in the 80s when babies slept on their tummies) or bum. Leave, and go back in three minutes repeat the patting thing. Leave and go back in five minutes. You keep doing this until you reach 10-15 minutes. If the baby is still crying, you have just wasted the last hour of your life.....pick the baby up. Try again later. (or tomorrow)

With my own baby, I couldn't do it. For some reason the cry of your own child is too strong. But the cry of another's child doesn't pull the same heart strings.

I have only done this with three babies. This last one was hard....,his parents really wanted me to help him learn to sleep. They were at the ends of their rope. But, he was tough. He likes to sleep.....he just sees no reason to sleep when there are so many other things better going on.

[DevaMajka]

I think cio is intentionally NOT doing what baby wants, and is crying for. If he wants to be held and you refuse, or he wants to nurse or rock or cuddle and you won't. You don't have to leave baby alone for it to be cio. If you know what he wants and you won't do it, or you don't know and you don't try to figure it out, its cio.
This applies to babies under 6 mos to a year or so. Obviously, a toddler crying because he wants candy, and you won't give it, is not cio. lol

Originally Posted by siobhang

I mean, if I don't pull the car over on the freeway to nurse my baby for 45 minutes but rather let him cry until I get home 10 minutes later (all the while singing and talking to him), is that going to psychologically damage him for the rest of his life? God, I hope not, since I have had to do that more than once.

I had that problem too. I could pull over, nurse him forever, and he'd STILL cry when I put him back in his seat, no matter how long I waited, no matter what I did. So if we only had 5 minutes left, I had to decide which would really be less bad for him. It always depended on how upset he sounded, etc. And I'd talk to him, or sing, or whatever. That was hard- we tried to go in the car as little as possible.

[oceanbaby]

Hmmm, I'm not sure where I fit in. I definitely think there is a difference between fussing and crying though. I usually pick up my babies if they do either, but ds2 will sometimes fuss next to me for about 60 seconds (the whole "eh eh eh" thing), and then roll over and go to sleep. Not picking him up while he fusses for that one minute is not CIO, IMO. I've never left him crying next to me without picking him up.

I'm not sure that I agree with "if you're not doing whatever it takes to meet their needs then it's CIO." I mean, I haven't slept through the night in almost 5 years because I do everything I can to meet the needs of my children, even at 2am. But there have been moments when I have had raging eczema on my breasts, the 16 month old baby has nursed 3 times in the last 2 hours, and I'm just sitting in bed holding him while he cries when I know he wants to nurse again. Or times when I nursed ds1 back to sleep 6 times in the past 3 hours, and now dh is walking him up and down the hallway while he is crying. We both know he wants to stay latched onto the nipple and sleep that way for the next 3 hours, but there's only so much I can take.

Anyway, I guess some could consider it CIO. I think CIO is abandoning a baby to cry alone. I'm not a fan of just rubbing a baby's back when they obviously want to nurse, but I know that every mom has their breaking point, and if the worst thing that happens to that child is that they are lovingly caressed rather than nursed (we're talking about older than an infant), then I can deal with that.

[Hazelnut]

I also think there are degrees to cio. I think there is a huge difference between people letting their kid cry for shorter periods (fussing, not wailing) when they're desperate, have tried better methods, or have other kids to eal with--and following the weissbluth method and not going to a very young baby all night long and not even trying other methods. It's always so black and white around here. I know people who let their kids cry 15 mintues and still go to them after or later in the night, and people who begin the weissbluth sleeptraining at 4 months with their first child and don't enter the room all night. It just makes me sad that some moms around here are nearly dying of exhaustion and they feel too guilty to let their comforted, overtired baby cry for five minutes. Because I've been there.

[malibusunny]

Originally Posted by thismama

For me it's not about the sleep method, or the sleeping arrangements, or whether the child is being held during the nap, etc.

It is about 1) is the child crying, and 2) is the parent doing everything possible to comfort the child?

If the answer to #1 is yes, and #2 is no, it is CIO. Simple as that.

Yep.
Age makes a difference here, too, because my new baby fussing was just pre-crying, but my toddler fussing might be changing positions, adjusting blankets, etc and not need anything from me.

[oceanbaby]

For me it's not about the sleep method, or the sleeping arrangements, or whether the child is being held during the nap, etc.

It is about 1) is the child crying, and 2) is the parent doing everything possible to comfort the child?

If the answer to #1 is yes, and #2 is no, it is CIO. Simple as that.

I guess I don't entirely agree with number 2. I would rephrase it to say that the parent is doing the best they can to comfort the child. Is it possible that I could have nursed ds2 for the 4th time that night on my cracked, eczema ridden bleeding nipples and stopped his crying? Yes, it's possible. But I just didn't have it in me. The best I could do was hold him while he cried in my arms. Like one of the pp said, I have been in situations where I am about to pass out from exhaustion or pain and feel guilty for not doing everything possible to comfort the child, feel guilty that "all" I did was hold them. (Although, if he had been 4 months old or so I would have nursed him no matter the pain, so age is definitely a factor for me.)

[Jennisee]

Originally Posted by Kathryn

If you are letting a child cry when you know they would stop by picking them up, that is CIO. Doesn't matter if you leave the room, talk to them without touching, or pat them on the back. You are still going against their needs to reach a goal.

ETA: There is no difference to me in "fussing" or "screaming" for CIO. That's like saying spanking is ok if you call it a "pop" instead of a "hit".

Originally Posted by thismama

For me it's not about the sleep method, or the sleeping arrangements, or whether the child is being held during the nap, etc.

It is about 1) is the child crying, and 2) is the parent doing everything possible to comfort the child?

If the answer to #1 is yes, and #2 is no, it is CIO. Simple as that.

Ditto.

I also agree with the person who said that there are different degrees of CIO, and that CIO can look different for different ages, and this is where some of the disagreement lies. People will say, "Well, I'm not using the Weissbluth method, so I'm not doing CIO," but I think it may just not be as extreme a degree of CIO. I also think it is absolutely possible to use CIO for the toddler who is crying over candy if the parent is making no attempt to comfort the crying child, is ignoring the child's cries to "teach them a lesson," etc. I remember crying for my mother in a crib near the age of 3, and I don't think it was any less traumatic just because I wasn't an infant.

[Ruthla]

If you're patting the baby's back, then you're WITH the child, and that's not CIO IMO. If you can't hold the baby because you're already tending to another baby, but the crying baby can see/hear/smell you, that's not CIO either- that's doing all you can to soothe 2 or more babies at once.

I don't think it's possible to stop ALL crying, at least not past the newborn stage.

[Hazelnut]

I agree. I voted walking away from a child. The extreme definitions bother me when cio is considered very pejorative and a mom is doing everything she can to avoid it. And I think there is a difference between fussing and crying. It's not always just a linguistic twisting to make it sound better. I've heard people say things like, oh the baby doesn't know the difference as to why the mom is doing it, they only know that they're crying. But I disagree. I think a baby is going to feel different effects if they are left to cry alone all night vs. crying for a few minutes while mom regroups or goes to the other baby, or whatever. It's never ideal, of course. But as this forum regularly shows, it can get complicated, and isn't always ideal.

[sapphire_chan]

Definitely 1, 2 depends on the child and is definitely not CIO if the rubbing's happening while the baby lies next to you in bed/cosleeper, 3 isn't, 4's nice but some babies don't like sleeping in slings* (which is why 2 depends on the child).

So I'm going with 1 since that's the only one that I feel is always CIO.

*: that I end up with a child who loves to nap in a sling.

[Lazyhead]

[QUOTE=nextcommercial]OMG!! I seriously didn't think that this many people thought it means to walk away from baby while in a baby containment device. LOL

I have always been taught (in college btw) that to "cry it out" with an infant means to help sooth a baby to sleep and teach him or her self soothing methods. It is basically patting a childs back (I went to school in the 80s when babies slept on their tummies) or bum. Leave, and go back in three minutes repeat the patting thing. Leave and go back in five minutes. You keep doing this until you reach 10-15 minutes. If the baby is still crying, you have just wasted the last hour of your life.....pick the baby up. Try again later. (or tomorrow)=QUOTE]

i guess i don't see the difference between these 2 things.

[The4OfUs]

Originally Posted by Deva33mommy

I think cio is intentionally NOT doing what baby wants, and is crying for.

ITA. BUT, I think that this also means that a baby who likes to be left alone and would cry an hour in arms, but would fuss for 2 minutes and then drop off to sleep if just set down, should be set down. I just can't be convinced that crying hard for an hour in mom's arms is better than grumping for a couple minutes and then being soundly, peacefully asleep. I do see a distinct difference between fussing and crying. You can hear it and even feel it. I don't think my job is to shield my child from any negative emotions whatsoever, but to not purposely look for situations that make them experience negative emotions, or refuse to comfort them when they do have negative emotions.

I think it's about listening to YOUR child, and doing what is best for THEM, which may not necessarily be what you are "supposed" to do. My own DS went through a stage where he was loads happier in his crib....so instead of pushign the co-sleeping and making us all miserable, I put him in his crib. Then, he wanted to be back with us.

I think the danger is getting stuck into one mindset and that there is a one-size-fits-all approach, and not being responsive to your child, even if their needs seem to be different than the norm.

[MoonJelly]

I couldn't really respond in the poll as I think it's less to do with what you are doing with child and more with how they are acting while you are doing it.

Also, you can't really do much else if you are holding the child and they are still crying (well, other than offer the boob ). My DD was colicky (for lack of a better word) and would cry every night from 6-10pm. I held her the whole time, nursing her when I could, and tried to do what I could to soothe her. She still cried. But that is not CIO.

CIO is a child being left to cry by themselves, wherever that may be. I would only consider patting on the back okay if the child is older than 15-18 months or so and only if they were very mildly fussing. And by this age, I think moms have a better knowledge of their child's personality and whether they are truly upset or really just about to fall asleep. I am not saying it is necessary to even do this, just I think it's acceptable if that is what is working for mom and child. I don't think this is going to be good for every child and I think it needs to be on a case-by-case basis.

As far as co-sleeping is concerned, I think it's necessary for baby to be in close proximity to mom at least in the first year of life. Simply, not co-sleeping is not CIO, but not being able to respond to your child's needs promptly at all times is under the same umbrella as CIO.

[siobhang]

I think the key element we are getting at is "being responsive to your baby's needs". If your baby needs to be held, then you hold her. If your baby needs to NOT be held, but instead patted or soothed in other ways, then you do what needs to be done. I can even see a few exceptional experiences where leaving a baby to cry alone *is* being responsive (say a massively overstimulated baby who is so overtired that any contact makes things worse and really just needs to be left alone to calm down - very very rare circumstance and something I would only do if nothing else seemed to help).

And sometimes we cannot respond to their needs - either the need is beyond our control (baby needs to be fed, but mom is driving the car - or baby is gassy and needs to let out the gas, but mom can't control that - she can only try to help) or the need directly conflicts with other needs (baby is hungry but big brother just fell down the stairs and needs first aid).

A friend of mine recently said something which rang true - it isn't about what you do one single time, it is about the pattern - if you are dedicated to meeting your kid's needs, and do it 90% of the time, that is what matters. I think intention does matter because it manifests itself in many unconscious ways that kids definitely sense.

Siobhan

[siobhang]

Question: what do we do about the extreme sleep deprevation some moms go through? For us, co-sleeping helped a lot, but I know that for some of my friends, co-sleeping isn't an option (they can't sleep, baby doesn't like it, dh doesn't like it). And for some co-sleeping moms, they still have to deal with massive sleep deprivation when baby (or toddler) is up every hour.

This topic is so important since losing too much sleep can lead to psychosis in extreme circumstances, and we know in normal circumstances leads to irritability, bad decision making, etc, which I know in my personal experience makes me a much worse mom. The times when I have been tempted to hit or yell are usually related to lack of sleep.

CIO is attractive to moms for this very reason. What do we have to offer as an alternative?

Siobhan

[rachelmarie]

Originally Posted by Deva33mommy

I think cio is intentionally NOT doing what baby wants, and is crying for. If he wants to be held and you refuse, or he wants to nurse or rock or cuddle and you won't. You don't have to leave baby alone for it to be cio. If you know what he wants and you won't do it, or you don't know and you don't try to figure it out, its cio.

I agree with this. CIO includes more than just leaving a baby or child completely alone to cry to sleep in a crib. That is the most extreme, but there are other less extreme situations I would consider to be CIO. For example, any method used in order to "teach" a baby/child to sleep all night that causes them to cry for the comfort they need (even if one parent is there).

When a baby/young child cries they are in need of *something* and they should be responded to. When they are not responded to they learn their feelings, wants, or needs are not important enough to warrant the parent's attention. Obviously, there are some situations in which responding in the best way isn't always possible, like in the car when it would be better to just get home as fast as you can and stopping several times would just prolong the misery.

The main thing is doing what is the absolute best for your child and giving them what they NEED (and at a young age there are no wants, only needs) even if it means not getting dinner cooked right away or not getting to sleep all night like you used to pre-baby.

[mommy2evan05]

okay, so would rocking, patting butt and shushing my ds, who gets very fussy when he is ready to sleep and is finished nursing, be CIO? and laying him down after he falls asleep so that i can make a sandwich would be CIO (he will NOT sleep in the sling at home)? i'm confused

[la mamita]

.

[MoonJelly]

Originally Posted by siobhang

I think the key element we are getting at is "being responsive to your baby's needs". If your baby needs to be held, then you hold her. If your baby needs to NOT be held, but instead patted or soothed in other ways, then you do what needs to be done. I can even see a few exceptional experiences where leaving a baby to cry alone *is* being responsive (say a massively overstimulated baby who is so overtired that any contact makes things worse and really just needs to be left alone to calm down - very very rare circumstance and something I would only do if nothing else seemed to help).

And sometimes we cannot respond to their needs - either the need is beyond our control (baby needs to be fed, but mom is driving the car - or baby is gassy and needs to let out the gas, but mom can't control that - she can only try to help) or the need directly conflicts with other needs (baby is hungry but big brother just fell down the stairs and needs first aid).

A friend of mine recently said something which rang true - it isn't about what you do one single time, it is about the pattern - if you are dedicated to meeting your kid's needs, and do it 90% of the time, that is what matters. I think intention does matter because it manifests itself in many unconscious ways that kids definitely sense.

Siobhan

Yeah that! That's more what I was trying to say.