When you are going nuts, and the crying is getting to you, and you're on the verge of lashing out or breaking down, one or two minutes is not enough. Walking away, taking a deep breath, and returning isn't always enough to help a mama recharge.
How can it be crying it out unless the child literally cries the need out of them? What child cries only 5 minutes until they no longer have or care about the need? Crying 5 minutes while mom finishes taking a dump or goes in the other room to lay down, stare at the cieling, count to ten, call someone for support, or just clear her head isn't the same thing as crying until you accept the fact that mom is not coming or until you're so exhausted you zonk out, which is what crying it out is generally considered to be. Letting a baby cry for a few minutes isn't the same thing as forcing them to cry it OUT because you want to teach them a lesson or are just being lazy.
I agree there is no time limit for a mother who is taking care of a fussy baby alone and is feeling like she may do harm to herself or the child. Crying for 5-10 even 15 minutes is better than being slapped because mom lost it and was afraid to go away for 5 minutes because that's considered CIO and is evil.
Most of the time, if a mom is about to lose it and goes in another room for a few minutes, obviously whatever she was doing to help such as holding, rocking, or nursing wasn't helping the screaming child anyway. Otherwise, she wouldn't be all stressed out; she'd have a baby that was happily nursing.
I think we need to just remember that everyone has different situations. There are cholicy babies, for example, that just are not comforted by anything. Parents will do all they can, even drive around the neighborhood or sit in a certain position for hours, to keep their cholicy babies calm. Some babies with cholic, however, have no option but to CIO until they are done. Parents in that situation, especially single ones, if they cannot calm down the baby and it's getting to them, definitely need to just let the baby cry for five minutes so they can calm down, clear their heads, take some advil, or try to brainstorm for more ideas. In that situation the baby probably would be crying if she was in mom's arms just the same as she is in the crib while mom grabs a glass of tea to soothe her throat that is sore from crooning and singing.
If you could comfort your child, but aren't; if you're forcing your child to scream and cry until they accept the fact that mom is coming and fall asleep from exhaustion or just lay there because their cries are ignored; if you're letting the baby scream so you can watch a TV show... that's not good. But when you're tending to your own needs, the needs of other children, or protecting your baby from your own anger by leaving for a moment, or recooperating so you can come up with a new approach to soothing the infant... that's not CIO. Crying it OUT means crying the need out of you. That doesn't usually happen in 5-10 minutes. It may be a long time to cry, but the rest of one's life is a long time to have brain damage from mom shaking you because she's freaking out.
I definitely agree that meeting their needs doesn't mean giving them everything they want. I think a lot of people confuse the two. I don't think a delayed response to a need is a good idea, but I do think a delayed response to a specific want is acceptable.
I have had the impulse, especially in the middle of the night when I'm sleep-deprived and going nuts from the crying, to strike out at my son. And to my everlasting shame, there were occasions when I did not put him down and leave the room or did not leave the room long enough. And I regret the outcome of that much more than I now regret letting him cry for ten minutes while I calm down.
|If that magically becomes OK then why isn't CIO for sleep training the same kind of OK? I don't get it.
Because there's a difference between doing something because you OPT to and because you HAVE to. Because CIO usually means leaving a child for 30 minutes, even longer, to scream--not for five mnutes while you rinse your hair or clean up another child's vomit. It's like being left out in the cold. You're a lot less likely to freeze to death being outside naked in the snow for 5 minutes than for half an hour. If you can't avoid something, there's no point in feeling guilty about it. It doesn't mean it's okay, but it does mean that it's just life, that you can't change it, and that you have to work around it.
|I beleive that it all has the same effect on the child... however, it can happen and it doesn't mean that the person is a bad mother etc... but it doesn't mean that because the intentions are different the results may not be the same
Better those results than the results of mom shaking the baby and causing brain damage because she was afraid leaving the baby for 10 minutes would cause irreversible damage. Most children are left to cry, for at least five minutes, at some point in their lives. It's unavoidable. Can you point me out the adults or older children that were left to cry for 5 minutes here and there and the ones that never, ever cried alone for a few minutes? I can't distinguish, but I can certainly tell the difference between a baby with shaken baby syndrome and a baby whose mother left the room for 5 minutes to get her head cleared. I can also tell the difference between a child/adult whose needs when young were ignored and an child/adult whose parents did everything they could to nurture their child.
|A child screaming for 3 minutes, 5 minutes, 20 minutes is never what is BEST FOR THE CHILD.
In the situation where it's either that or be shaken by mom because of her anger... I'd say that screaming for 3, 5, 20 minutes is DEFINITELY what's best for the child. What's truly best would be for the child to stop crying and feel better, but if that's not possible, you have to do whatever AVAILABLE option is best.
|My need for a break never comes before my daughter's need for me,
Mine does in the situation where I may lash out if I don't take a break. Mom's need for a break, in some instances, can be the baby's need as well. When baby needs mom, he definitely doesn't need mom in a state of mine so negative and nerve-wracked that she may not make the best parenting choice for him or may even hurt him or herself. My needs are my baby's needs in some cases. If I haven't got a clear mind, he's not going to get the best care. If I haven't been able to eat much, his meals won't be very nutritious. If I'm thinking about how badly I have to pee, he's not going to get the best attention. Moms do have to take care of themselves, because if they don't, they won't function as well...and baby suffers a lot more from that than from crying for five minutes while mom grabs a granola bar, after not eating all day, or sits down in a quiet room to try and analyze the situation to figure out a better approach of handling it or lies down on her bed, screams, counts to ten, and then comes back feeling more calm and less likely to be abusive.