Please dont hate me! - Page 2

[Kay11]

I'm in the UK and I think our parenting culture is very similar to the mums in the US. However, we're talking mainstream, popular parenting approaches, which you're not going to find here. I find those changes very disturbing because I can imagine the effect they'd have on my children if I enforced them. Gently weaning off nursing or co-sleeping or bottles or whatever is one thing (though I wouldn't do it personally), but forcing it in the short period of time that supernanny does it is cruel imo. So the kids will live, yes. They'll be fine, debatable.

I think that people in the UK are on the whole just as interested in forcing independence before they children are ready. I think children are adaptable because we all have to be to survive, but it doesn't mean it doesn't affect them somehow. It might not be immediately apparent, but for a child for whom bf or co-sleeping or a bottle or having mum or day lay down with them to help them fall asleep is important, there will be an effect eventually.

[alegna]

Originally Posted by Janelovesmax

There was one episode that I hated. I think you all know which one I'm talking about, where she told a mother not to nurse her 14months old on demand especially when those two were not connected as is.
In general, there are some situations where Supernanny does good, but in general she is not pro AP.

:

Sure, kid survive all sorts of things and turn out pretty okay. Doesn't make those things right.

-Angela

[alegna]

Originally Posted by thismama

What does this mean? Children still have emotions. They still have feelings. Attachment relationships are essential to children's emotional growth and development. This is an attachment parenting site, that belief is kind of core to the ideology here.



I don't believe that "Well life is not fair" is an appropriate rationalization for disrespectful parenting strategies that undermine attachment relationships.

I don't think "life isn't nice" is a factual statement. And I don't think it is parents' responsibility to teach that subjective lesson. In many ways, life is what you make it, kwim? And the things we cannot control are... well, things we cannot control.

I don't go banging my head into walls because life includes pain. And I do not harm my children in the name of "well life isn't nice anyway, children are resillient." There is enough for them to bounce back from that we cannot control. Let's not impose more trauma.

-Angela

[ThreeBeans]

Originally Posted by Manfa

Our parenting culture is sooooo different over here! 'i find none of those changes particularly shocking or disturbing. i suspect they were harder for the parents to implement than the kids tho.

I could not disagree more.

[Manfa]

I think you misunderstand the essence of my post which was that when kids make a scene I really believe that its not as bad as it looks! That's not to say they don't have feelings. Just that they can't control or express themselves as we do. However I'm not going back and picking apart the post to explain myself more thoroughly because I don't enjoy banging my head against a brick wall either, which is what I suspect this thread would turn into!

I do agree though that I wouldnt be happy "pulling the plaster off quick" either. Gradually does it IMO. I'm no fan of Ferber!!

Life isn't NICE is NOT what I meant - life isn't EASY - I should read back what I type more carefully. I'm not saying make your kids life difficult on purpose to teach them this. I'm saying that we can overcomplicate things and worry too much. If nothing else, kids pick up on this. I'm speculating that if the parents on the tv show were more relaxed and confident about the change in the household, the kids would follow suit. But I admit it IS just specualtion.

[nabigus]

I've only seen it once or twice, and I agree with the pp who criticized the "weekend fix-it" mentality. I also disagree vehemently with the non-cosleeping, non-nursing, CIO-esque approach she seems to favor. On the other hand, the situations that they televise are designed to be out of control, over the top, and a couple of the things I saw that I liked were her emphasis on consistency and her get-down-at-their-level approach to talking with kids.

[NaomiMcC]

Originally Posted by Manfa

You could be right.

I don't know though, I think if you are looking at the kids like miniature adults I believe this is a mistaken view. If an adult was doing those kinds of things you would imagine they were suffering terrible bereavement. However, I genuinely don't think children doing those things are suffering that level of distress. They simply don't HAVE the philosophy to cling to, the ability to rationalise or control or express their emotions as effectively as adults.

I distinctly remember the first time I was left at playgroup I thought I would NEVER see my mum again. I wailed and wailed and threw the biggest tantrum of my life. Do you know within 5 minutes I was making hand prints and painting with the rest of the children, all tears gone. No it WASN'T easy. No it wasn't nice. But life isn't! At what point do you learn that? IMO kids can be more reslilient and adaptable than many people give them credit for.

Manfa...I TOTALLY agree...which is why I like the Supernanny. While I may not agree with every single thing she does...I find it the same way with this board. (no offense people) so I take the information I like and what works for me and continue on.

[Manfa]

Originally Posted by thismama

I don't go banging my head into walls because life includes pain. And I do not harm my children in the name of "well life isn't nice anyway, children are resillient." There is enough for them to bounce back from that we cannot control. Let's not impose more trauma.

I'm not sure I like the subtle implication that I would do this (emboldened). I'm starting to get the feeling that the general air on this thread is turning to "Look here comes a "mainstream parenter"! Close ranks!" I'd like to know what "mainstream parenting" is so that I'm not nervous about posting in future for fear of being flamed.

WRT "trauma" - that is what I am questioning - whether or not it is truly traumatic for the children to undergo these changes. I'm not saying it ISN'T as I am not sure myself. I'm sitting on the fence and I could go either way. I'm saying I'm questioning it. It's definately given me food for thought anyway.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Manfa

I'm not sure I like the subtle implication that I would do this (emboldened). I'm starting to get the feeling that the general air on this thread is turning to "Look here comes a "mainstream parenter"! Close ranks!" I'd like to know what "mainstream parenting" is so that I'm not nervous about posting in future for fear of being flamed.

It is not about mainstream as a non-specific trigger word. I haven't seen that word used at all, and I am often at odds with GDers on this forum, so I am not closing ranks against you.

I am referring very concretely to you stating that you think Supernanny getting families to desert attachment rituals is not a big deal, because children are not like adults and life is not nice. Or life is not easy. Which is pretty much what you said, verbatim, in this thread.

I disagree with you about the importance of attachment relationships for children. If you are sensing disagreement from most people here, well that is probably because you are at an attachment parenting site. If nothing else, most people here are probably going to be in general agreement about this issue.

[eviesingleton]

Aside from the criticisms of her approach that I agree with, I think what bothers me about this show is that it takes issues of childcare/discipline in the lives of real people and edits it down to 22 or 45 (depending on the length of the show...something that I am not certain of) minutes and creates a product whose sole function is entertainment. It's a product, made to sell and act as a vehicle to see other products. I find it exploitative (in the larger, cultural sense) and not at all useful.

This is not the same thing as interviewing an expert on television or having families come on and discuss their issues. And I am not a proponent of daytime talk, but I find, from a structural perspective, Dr. Phil, Oprah, and others to be far less problematic.


Could you imagine an AP reality show?

[Manfa]

this mama: Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I don't recall saying that those things weren't important to children though. I think what I was trying to get across (and probably completely failing) is that how difficult (traumatic) it IS for the child when, for whatever reason, the parents DO decide to make those changes, is dependant on the parents themselves to a large degree. Being confident and relaxed is, I suspect, a key part of ANY successful parenting style.... no?

I mean, take the toddler who falls down and bumps his knee. We make a small thing of it right? Make a big deal and he will start wailing! A casual and cheerful; "oops a daisyy, up you get!" He thinks about crying and then he moves on. That is not to say that we don't CARE that he has fallen and bumped himself. And its not to say that we should SHOVE him over on purpose to teach him to get used to it!

Take it further. Child falls and bumps his knee and DOES start wailing. An adult making that amount of fuss would have a dislocated limb or similar. Often the child simply has a graze. That doesn't mean they don't have feelings or that we shouldn't care. We just know that the child HASN'T broken or dislocated a leg, it really ISN'T so bad as all that and we casually and cheerfully move on.... and so do they.

ETA: eviesingleton - WRT the exploitative nature of this kind of programme I couldn't agree with you more.

[NaomiMcC]

I know what you mean Manfa...

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Manfa

Take it further. Child falls and bumps his knee and DOES start wailing. An adult making that amount of fuss would have a dislocated limb or similar. Often the child simply has a graze. That doesn't mean they don't have feelings or that we shouldn't care. We just know that the child HASN'T broken or dislocated a leg, it really ISN'T so bad as all that and we casually and cheerfully move on.... and so do they.

Okay, I get that. Although it's not what I do, I pick up my child and commisserate about the sore knee, but different things work for different children.

The problem with the analogy is that you are likening the abrupt loss of a nursing relationship, and co-sleeping, and bedtime rituals, to... a skinned knee?

I do not think these things compare to a scraped knee, and I don't think you will find much support on this site for the position that they do.

[Yooper]

Originally Posted by Manfa

this mama: Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I don't recall saying that those things weren't important to children though. I think what I was trying to get across (and probably completely failing) is that how difficult (traumatic) it IS for the child when, for whatever reason, the parents DO decide to make those changes, is dependant on the parents themselves to a large degree. Being confident and relaxed is, I suspect, a key part of ANY successful parenting style.... no?

I mean, take the toddler who falls down and bumps his knee. We make a small thing of it right? Make a big deal and he will start wailing! A casual and cheerful; "oops a daisyy, up you get!" He thinks about crying and then he moves on. That is not to say that we don't CARE that he has fallen and bumped himself. And its not to say that we should SHOVE him over on purpose to teach him to get used to it!

Take it further. Child falls and bumps his knee and DOES start wailing. An adult making that amount of fuss would have a dislocated limb or similar. Often the child simply has a graze. That doesn't mean they don't have feelings or that we shouldn't care. We just know that the child HASN'T broken or dislocated a leg, it really ISN'T so bad as all that and we casually and cheerfully move on.... and so do they.

ETA: eviesingleton - WRT the exploitative nature of this kind of programme I couldn't agree with you more.

I usually *want* to wail and scream. I just have the experience and emotional control to stick to explatives and hopping around The pain, anger, and embarrassment are all still there. I have just done it enough times, being an adult and all, that I know it will pass, I will heal, and life will go on. My dd did not always know that and I had no problem empathizing with her on whatever level she needed at the time.

As to Supernanny..... I have never seen the show.....to not have TV. But I can say that the number one reason I dislike the show is that almost every_single_time I take dd to the park, some parent makes the steps to the play structure into the "naughty step" and I have to explain to dd what the heck that means. Not to mention all of the questions that come after that. One woman actually asked my dd to stay away from the steps until her dd was done being "naughty". Um.....no way lady. That show has become the how-to manual for half the parents I run into. Ick.

[ThreeBeans]

Just because it isn't a big deal to YOU doesn't mean it's not a big deal to the child. Children's feelings are just as important as big peoples' feelings and deserve respect.

As it is, when I stub my toe I really WANT to fling myself to the ground and scream and wail, so there.

[ladonnaken]

I did watch the one episode about the baby girl being forced into weaning (the 14m old). I watched and was thinking, "Hey, that toddler is trying to get mom's attention." Why couldn't the Supernanny teach that mama some creative ways to include her into the busy day? I bet if the mom had added some one-on-one time with the daughter (say, while the older chrn were napping), she'd see an amazing difference. Teaching her how to sling her and taking them all on a walk would help the baby girl have more mommy touch time and I bet the constant nursing would decrease dramatically.

And when she had the mama hold a bottle in the baby girl's mouth in the BED for a nap, I literally started jumping up and down! Doesn't she know that's bad for teeth, that increases ear infections---NOT TO MENTION creating a bond between object and baby instead of mommy and baby. Personally, I want my children to be attached to people, not objects. Why does Jo (Supernanny) think a bottle full of cow's milk is better for a toddler than human milk with lots of cuddles?

I could go on and on.......

[Aeress]

And because of Super Nanny I hear parents say "super nanny said to do xyz and it worked for that family."

*ugh* Seriously, learning how to parent and being there for our children is a life long learning process that can't be edited into a 30minute show.

I like Alfie Kohn's take on the super nanny and shows similiar to it. www.alfiekohn.com

Yes, there are some tools and training that parents can learn that will help them parent, but shows like Super Nanny don't look deeper into why a parent disciplines the way the way they do, what the child needs and how to make the situation work so that all the family gains something from working through a problem.

And I have to agree with Kohn's statement that what Super Nanny peddles is "behaviorism."

[captain optimism]

Originally Posted by Manfa

I'm not sure I like the subtle implication that I would do this (emboldened). I'm starting to get the feeling that the general air on this thread is turning to "Look here comes a "mainstream parenter"! Close ranks!" I'd like to know what "mainstream parenting" is so that I'm not nervous about posting in future for fear of being flamed.

WRT "trauma" - that is what I am questioning - whether or not it is truly traumatic for the children to undergo these changes. I'm not saying it ISN'T as I am not sure myself. I'm sitting on the fence and I could go either way. I'm saying I'm questioning it. It's definately given me food for thought anyway.

I have not watched Supernanny. I have read all the entries in this thread, though.

I think you are reading into people's replies more than they are reading into yours. Perhaps you should retitle your thread and see how the responses go. It seemed like the people who disliked the Supernanny show gave you really specific reasons:

1. abrupt removal of bedtime routines without explanation--specifically, bedtime routines that are part of the toolbox of attachment parenting
2. negative attitude toward toddler nursing
3. use of the word "naughty"
4. the quick fix approach to parenting in general
5. how they have seen real life parents attempt to implement the Supernanny strategies

That's pretty clear.

Have you been flamed? I haven't seen that. I think people who don't agree with you have answered the question, "Why don't you like Supernanny" and others have appeared to agree with you that they do like Supernanny.

[blsilva]

Originally Posted by brendon

And I have to agree with Kohn's statement that what Super Nanny peddles is "behaviorism."

ITA. I also agree with pp's who have said that she constantly takes away from parents and children things that promote attachment- breastfeeding, cosleeping, etc. It all seems to be concerned with getting a child to act the "right" way, in her opinion, and not really teaching them long-term life skills.
Personally, I feel that all of these things are detrimental to the child.

[monkey's mom]

I watch it ALLLL the time!

I have an endless fascination with this show!

But, I really, really, really, HUGELY disagree with most of her methods.

When Supernanny is consoling the MOTHER during a cry-it-out episode, but advises that consoling the CHILD during said episode is neither necessary nor beneficial, you gotta wonder.

I think the vast majority of her techniques involve breaking the will of the child.

Spending an hour (or two or MORE, as has been shown on the show) carrying a freaking out kid back to the "naughty" spot over and over and over again--until the child finally relents--just seems like the biggest pissing match that ever was.

I DO like how she advises people to actually interact and play with their kids. But, the rest of it seems real scary and awful to me.