or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Co-sleeping and the Family Bed › Help Define CIO
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Help Define CIO

post #1 of 124
Thread Starter 
Ok there are varying opinions on what constitutes CIO across MDC.

I think, in the intrest of community and of course, to keep mommas from feeling TOO Judged, we should really come up with a semi solid, kinda jello-ish...well mabe doughy definitition of CIO:

Ok,

Can we all agree that:

Letting child Cry in room alone to train him/her to sleep = Bad

Putting Child down in safe spot *room alone even* to cry for 5 minutes while momma gets brain together and child HAPPENS to fall asleep = Good



Feel free to add...

We REALLY need to clear up the definition around here..
post #2 of 124
IMO ignoring a child's cries on purpose in an attempt to get them to go to sleep or train them to sleep is CIO.
post #3 of 124
Good thread.

Choosing to "let" them cry when you know that doing something would stop it is not okay. (letting the cry when they want to nurse instead of nursing)

-Angela
post #4 of 124
I'm pretty hardcore anti-CIO, so I don't even find your second situation acceptable. I consider CIO to be intentionally failing to immediately and appropriately respond to a child's cries.
I know not everyone agrees, and this is something that, even on MDC, I don't think everyone will ever agree on a definition of.
post #5 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by alegna
Good thread.

Choosing to "let" them cry when you know that doing something would stop it is not okay. (letting the cry when they want to nurse instead of nursing)

-Angela
ya know I agree with this too in many cases as well. (i say many cases cause I know its not always possible to prevent this, especially with more than one child, lol).
post #6 of 124
Letting your baby cry without doing everything you could to help them.
post #7 of 124
I see crying it out as not responding immediately to your child's cries, despite being capable, leaving a child alone in a room to train them to sleep, or any situation where you could soothe the child but are trying to force them self-soothe by letting them cry until they are too tired to make anymore noise. The term 'crying it out' to me means just that.

Letting a child cry for five minutes while you rinse the shampoo out of your hair or wipe your bum is not CIO. Letting a child cry because you want to finish a movie is or are hoping the child will stop before you feel like coming is CIO.

Putting a child down for ten minutes at night, when you're exhausted, sleep-deprived, and going out of your mind so much that you're afraid of losing your patience or temper and because you need a break to recuperate is not CIO. Putting a child down to cry so you can go to sleep or in hopes the child will cry himself to sleep is.

Sometimes, you can't come immediately. Sometimes it's better if you don't come immediately. I can't come if I'm going potty. It's not good for my son to nurse while shampoo drips into his eyes. If your child is cholicy or has been up all night, you're protecting them by taking a break to relax, regain your thoughts, and recharge. Stressed out parents are more likely to be abusive, and I'd rather see a child left alone to cry for five minutes than to be yelled at or even hit because mom has been instructed never to put down a crying baby even when she's going nuts. That's not refusing to respond immediately to a child's cries; that's doing everything you can for the child, then getting out of the room for some peice and quiet so you can come up with a new plan to handle the situation, have a few minutes to ponder what' could be wrong and what other methods could help soothe the child, and calm down so you don't lash out.
post #8 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by moonfirefaery
. That's not refusing to respond immediately to a child's cries; that's doing everything you can for the child, then getting out of the room for some peice and quiet so you can come up with a new plan to handle the situation, have a few minutes to ponder what' could be wrong and what other methods could help soothe the child, and calm down so you don't lash out.
Even Dr. Sears has recommended this...and he's hardcore anti-CIO. I have had to do this....it was only for a few mins, but it was that or ds was going to get shaken or slapped if I didn't do it. As soon as I had an inkling of sanity I picked him up again and tried to figure out what was wrong. I was hormonal, sleep deprived, and in no way able to control myself at that moment. To people who say I shouldn't have done that, I ask if the alternative would have been better? That's not CIO at all.
post #9 of 124
Maybe I am just extraordinarily literal, but I take CIO to mean crying it out. In other words, being left to cry the need for a parent out of you. Leaving a child for a few seconds or minutes when you WANT to return to them and understand that they need you but you need this time to think, pee, poop, eat, find the car keys, find the aloe vera gel or benadryl, or whatever little thing that is happening NOW that you must do NOW even though you really want to also be attending to your child IS NOT CIO. Because, this is not leaving your child to cry it out.

Extremists may dicker this point with me, but literally, I think it means leaving your child to cry their need for their parent out of them. They learn that mama is not coming and so they cry and cry and eventually the cry is out of them and they learn to just deal with being abandoned in their little cage.

And, if someone wants to argue with me that there is something wrong with putting your crying baby down for a few seconds so you can pee with both hands free, then I would like to know what antidepressants you are on, because seriously, I cannot imagine that a sane person can attend immediately to each and every peep their baby makes. And, trying to make others believe that it is CIO and it is wrong to leave your baby for a few moments to attend to one of your own basic needs is just mean and harshly judgemental. Being a mom, especially a new mom, is really hard and you want to hold your baby as much as you can and attend to its every needs, but sometimes you just gotta go poop or get a drink of water. Jeez, back off with the negativity.

Real moms, even die hard anti-CIO advocates like myself, know that there are a few times in your mothering life when you just gotta do something and the baby is crying and you will get to them as soon as you do this very little important thing. That is not CIO; that babe is not being left to cry the need for mom out of him or her.
post #10 of 124
I do agree. Thank you very much for posting this...very eloquently said. Although now that ds is older I take him withme to the potty and let him play while I do business, then we both get to wash lol. Just what I do..I try to minimize oppertunities for crying as much as I can.
post #11 of 124
And, we need to find more ways to be inclusive about this. Defining CIO in any other way than literally is just going to be divisive. There are bigger fish in the sea to fry than a new MDC mama who wants to put her crying child down to go pee.

Quote:
But, many sleep experts contend that babies need to fall back to sleep on their own. And most of them will eventually have to "cry it out" to do this.
http://www.cyberparent.com/parent/pa...-nighttime.htm

Instead of spending time defining it here, if you really want to do something about it, write a book about it or write a letter to all the baby "experts" who advocate it.
post #12 of 124
I feel like I missed something? was there a post or something that said putting a child down so you can pee is CIO?
post #13 of 124
: I've nursed while sitting on the pot..... : just so dd wouldn't have to cry all alone....
post #14 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by dukeswalker
: I've nursed while sitting on the pot..... : just so dd wouldn't have to cry all alone....
So have I.
post #15 of 124
Quote:
I feel like I missed something? was there a post or something that said putting a child down so you can pee is CIO?
No, but there was a poster that felt letting a child cry for 5 minutes so mom can get her brain together was unacceptable. Then I stated that I felt it was fine, just like letting baby cry for five minutes to finally go pee is fine with me. I can't understand why 5 minutes of sanity would be unacceptable to someone but that same person would be ok with a 5-minute potty break, and I think the others might be feeling the same. That's all.

I've nursed while on the john before, too...but I don't get up off the john mid-urination when my son wakes up and begins to cry. :P

I agree with the poster that said 'crying it out' is making the child cry the need for the parent right out of them, as in until they forget what it is they wanted, cry themselves to sleep, are just too exhausted to continue, or just acept that the need will be met. That, to me, is crying it out and is bad. Leaving a child for five minutes of peace and quiet so you can calm down and recharge, maybe have a drink of water, then come back and coninue rocking, crooning, and singing, is not CIO.
post #16 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatchyMama
I feel like I missed something? was there a post or something that said putting a child down so you can pee is CIO?
Oh, was that not in this thread? It was in the other thread. I'll go find it.

this one talks about needing to put baby down in order to go pee, even if baby is crying. I got the two confused.

And, I agree with the above post. There are times when we are frazzled and tired and angry and upset and we need a moment to ourself. If baby has to cry for a few minutes so we can gather our thoughts and not go insane, that is not CIO.

And I've nursed just about everywhere, including the pot. I got to the point where I could do just about anything one handed. But, I also had a colicky baby who I needed to put down occasionally and she would cry a bit until I came right back. There is a difference.
post #17 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockStarMom
I'm pretty hardcore anti-CIO, so I don't even find your second situation acceptable. I consider CIO to be intentionally failing to immediately and appropriately respond to a child's cries.
I know not everyone agrees, and this is something that, even on MDC, I don't think everyone will ever agree on a definition of.
I agree. I know that there are times when a baby's cries get to you. If you have to put your dc down for a minute while you take a breather, then do it, but come right back and comfort them. If this is a daily occurence, there's a problem. I think I've had to put ds down crying maybe twice in his life because I was frustrated, and it's been for 1 or 2 minutes, not 5 or 10. That seems like a very long time for a baby to be crying alone. I've peed many times with ds on the floor, and in the middle of the night, latched on to my boob. I shower at night when dh is home and ds is asleep. I can't always do what I want to do, when I want to do it.
post #18 of 124
Quote:
Originally Posted by dukeswalker
: I've nursed while sitting on the pot..... : just so dd wouldn't have to cry all alone....
Throw me in here too lol...heck I still do that!
post #19 of 124
I am very defiantly against all CIO. CIO as I see it is leaving your child to cry alone to get them to sleep or longer than just a few minutes while you actively ignore them.

Having more than one small child, inevitably someone will be left crying on an occasion. I think the needs of everyone present at the time need to be assessed and sometimes that means the baby will need to cry while you bandage a cut on another child or change a diaper on someone other than them or hold a bucket while someone gets sick. It happens sometimes, and I don't think that is CIO at all. I have nursed while on the toilet or changing another's diaper, but I physically can't do it all at once every time.

My personal assessment of the baby's crying is:
1. Is the babe in a safe place?
2. Is the babe fed?
3. Is the babe clean and dry?
4. Will I only be a few minutes?

If I can answer yes, then I am OK with him crying for while (a while being <5 minutes) I tend to another child's or my own need (a need meaning something that can not wait.)

ETA: my sanity is a *need*.
post #20 of 124
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RockStarMom
I'm pretty hardcore anti-CIO, so I don't even find your second situation acceptable. I consider CIO to be intentionally failing to immediately and appropriately respond to a child's cries.
I know not everyone agrees, and this is something that, even on MDC, I don't think everyone will ever agree on a definition of.
Sooo..are you saying that I was better off killing my child after letting her cry for 3 hours in arms...with NO Support, NO significant Other to hand her off to, NO HELP whatsoever?

Nice...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Co-sleeping and the Family Bed
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Baby › Co-sleeping and the Family Bed › Help Define CIO