Please dont hate me! - Page 3

[Liam's Mum]

Originally Posted by GuildJenn

I can tell you why I don't like these "reality" shows in general (includes home deco/reno).

Even though we all know they are fantasy, I think they still give the impression that problems can be solved in a weekend, or a week. Supernanny comes in and she changes three things and suddenly the family is blissfully happy! In 48 hours you can redo a kitchen!

The thing is that it really is fantasy. Real change, real parenting, real home ownership even, is more complicated than that - full of ups and downs and quite often without such clear cut solutions or easy fixes. I think when we fill our minds with these shows we often start to judge ourselves or others overly harshly. And then we feel out of control and we are not free to really apply our energy to - fully living, which is complex, full of starts and stops and steps forwards and backwards, and messy. MESSY I tell you!

That's my answer.

Yes, exactly, and it's all in the editing and it's all about ratings. We don't know how they've manipulated things to make the family appear out of control, we don't know those scenes of blissful well-behaved children at the end weren't in fact filmed at any point in the production, because the kids are in fact actually sometimes happy and calm, and other times not. And who knows what is going on behind the scenes e.g. in the one where the mother was discouraged from nursing her toddler. And let's not forget, the families that would go on these shows may ham it up, after all, most people who do this kind of thing want to be famous/noticed (if I needed help in my home, I would not want to be the subject of a TV show to get it.)

[Manfa]

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?

Umm, no. Of course the former is harder than the latter. But the same principal applies (IMO) that how the parents deal with the trauma (however great or small that may be) affects how well the children deal with it. IMO this is the most important teaching tool we have for our children: leading primarily by example. So shoot me if I am wrong.

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.

Of course its a "big deal" to me if my child is hurt! But that does not alter that fact that how *you* react to a tumble affects how your childs reacts to a tumble [edit: or any difficulty]. Am I totally on my own on this point?

Erm, I don't "like" Supernanny! I don't dislike her her particularly either! I dont know enough about her to care one way or another. I opened the thread in a genuine spirit of enquiry. The debate about the use of the word naughty and what not were somewhat OT and not the reason I opened the thread... but I'm new to parenting and appreciate all ideas and advice as I fumble my way forward so it's all good to me.

As for the reasons why people dislike Supernanny.... I for the most part agree with them. I'm sorry if I have unintentionally lead anyone to believe otherwise and thus offended them. It is totally new to me that Supernanny advocates crying-it-out... this puts me off her straight away TBH, although I did see some things on todays show that I agreed with quite strongly.... wrt to speaking to the child with respect and not speaking to them in anger.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Manfa

Umm, no. Of course the former is harder than the latter. But the same principal applies (IMO) that how the parents deal with the trauma (however great or small that may be) affects how well the children deal with it. IMO this is the most important teaching tool we have for our children: leading primarily by example. So shoot me if I am wrong.

Okay. Yes how parents deal with trauma affects how children deal with it.

But my argument is that it is unnecessary and even cruel to *cause* the trauma in the first place. A loose analogy would be spanking your child and then distracting them. Well... don't spank them!

Make sense?

[2bluefish]

I bought her book : She has some ideas I like and some I don't like. But she does have Mothering mag and the website in her list of references!

[blsilva]

Originally Posted by Manfa

As for the reasons why people dislike Supernanny.... I for the most part agree with them. I'm sorry if I have unintentionally lead anyone to believe otherwise and thus offended them. It is totally new to me that Supernanny advocates crying-it-out... this puts me off her straight away TBH, although I did see some things on todays show that I agreed with quite strongly.... wrt to speaking to the child with respect and not speaking to them in anger.

I can see this. In fact, there have been episodes where I think she has done some good, leading parents away from spanking and yelling, which, IMHO, is always a good step.
However, she has also taken a lot away from parents and children WRT breastfeeding and cosleeping when it was neither necessary nor beneficial to that family's well-being. And done so with some very cruel tactics.
After watching these, I refuse to watch her anymore. I can't- I cry right along with these moms, and have been known to throw things at the tv. :

[*LoveBugMama*]

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.

Norway isn`t UK, but pretty close. And I very much disagree with your statement here.

[emma_goldman]

Originally Posted by 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.

Totally. I used to love this show. Then I realized that it was getting me really stressed out about what it would be like when my (only) DS grew out of infanthood. Luckily I read critiques on MDC of SuperNanny and the rest is history. I moved on to Alfie Kohn and the Playful Parenting book. Thank goddess. I've read Continuum Concept and I frequent the GD threads for inspiration. Marshall B. Rosenberg, author of Nonviolent Communication has a book out about parenting that I'm trying to get ahold of...

SuperNanny! I do like that she tries to help reduce tension between parents and tries to help them come up with ways to support each other's parenting...

[MammaKoz]

Besides her rather anti attachment views on raising children (I'm not going to restate what almost everyone else has said, just a big "yeah that" to all the reasons why people don't like her), in general I don't trust anyone who is dishing out parenting advice who has never actually been a parent themselves.

I don't care how many years she has been working with kids, or been a nanny or whatever. Until you have actually been a parent, there is a very good chance you just don't "get it" when it comes to things like attachment, nurturing, bonding etc etc.

Like I always say, I was a huge expert on parenting too until I had my own kids.

And FWIW *before* I had kids, I was the complete antithesis of AP/GD parenting, and I loved children before I had my own, but I just honestly thought that CIO, spanking, forcing independance at a young age (ie no family bed ever) etc was what is best for the child. I would have been a huge Supernanny supporter before, I know I would have. Of course that is just a reflection of how I was raised.

But considering how strong my viewpoints on parenting were before I had kids and then considering how much they changed afterwards shows me first hand what a massive difference there is when you have actually been a parent.

Just my two cents.

[*LoveBugMama*]

I`m another mama who isn`t much of a fan of Supernanny and her like.


Cosleeping, nursing, bedtime rituals e.t.c. are times for bonding. Times for strengthening the attachemnt between parent and child. Cosleeping is the glue that keeps my family together on busy days. Attachment theory talks about the importance of having a strong and solid attachment between parent and child. And to nurse, cosleep, have long bedtime rituals etc. are tools we use to do just that.

When a stranger comes into the childs home and takes all this away, ofcourse this is traumatic for the child! How can it not be?
I bet it makes the child feel sad, scared, afraid, unsafe and extremely confused.

I saddens me so much to see the parents actually accept this. How can they think this is right?

[Manfa]

Originally Posted by thismama

Okay. Yes how parents deal with trauma affects how children deal with it.

But my argument is that it is unnecessary and even cruel to *cause* the trauma in the first place. A loose analogy would be spanking your child and then distracting them. Well... don't spank them!

Make sense?

Totally makes sense. I *think* I see where you are coming from.

There is a difference though - spanking is a form of punishment and comes about directly because of a given behaviour and as such the child can avoid being spanked. (NO - I dont agree with spanking at all!!!!) This is not the case with the changes SN implements.

I'm afraid I believe that if those parents really believed that the trauma was not necessary then they should have blatantly refused and asked SN to come up with a different tactic or please leave them to battle on alone.... and then find a professional who uses methods they feel comfortable working with. If SN came to your house I'm guessing that is what you would do. ??

I'm guessing that the parents caved because they felt they were doing the best thing for the child/ren and therefore that any trauma was temporary and necessary and in the long run in their best interests.... and therefore not cruel.... ???? At least not in their eyes. Anymore than insisting that a child sits safely strapped into their car seat is cruel, even if they hate it and scream the whole time..... I don't think I am making any sense at all.

[emma_goldman]

Originally Posted by Manfa

I'm guessing that the parents caved because they felt they were doing the best thing for the child/ren and therefore that any trauma was temporary and necessary and in the long run in their best interests.... and therefore not cruel.... ???? At least not in their eyes. Anymore than insisting that a child sits safely strapped into their car seat is cruel, even if they hate it and scream the whole time..... I don't think I am making any sense at all.

The mothers are often crying on the show or "undermining" (SN's words) the new routine put in place by SN. I don't think they DO agree all the time with SN, but she is the authority figure, and they've agreed to be on this show and get all the benefits (free vacations, etc.) so there is pressure to comply.

Most people don't know that there *is* another way. sigh. Having labels for these different approaches helps. I didn't know that what my parents did was called CIO and was mainstream until I found MDC. Now I know that there are different camps.

OT oh hell. This is an example of how most people don't know there is another way: I just talked to a woman at church who has been doing CIO with her kid and she said that it is now making him afraid of the dark and more clingy. So I said, "so did you quit doing it?" and she looked at me like I had two heads. She just thinks that everyone has to do it eventually. Time to give her a GD sleep book.

[thismama]

Originally Posted by Manfa

Totally makes sense. I *think* I see where you are coming from.

There is a difference though - spanking is a form of punishment and comes about directly because of a given behaviour and as such the child can avoid being spanked. (NO - I dont agree with spanking at all!!!!) This is not the case with the changes SN implements.

Right. Just to be clear, with my posts I am speaking about her interfering with or actually curtailing attachment rituals. I am not saying this is like spanking, but that curtailing these rituals causes suffering. Which can be avoided, by allowing the rituals to continue.

I'm afraid I believe that if those parents really believed that the trauma was not necessary then they should have blatantly refused and asked SN to come up with a different tactic or please leave them to battle on alone.... and then find a professional who uses methods they feel comfortable working with. If SN came to your house I'm guessing that is what you would do. ??

Yes. Well, I wouldn't have SN at my house in the first place. And ITA that the parents should stop her. But that doesn't change the fact that she, as an 'expert' and the host of a TV show, holds the responsibility for her actions.

[mommaof3]

Originally Posted by Manfa

I'm guessing that the parents caved because they felt they were doing the best thing for the child/ren and therefore that any trauma was temporary and necessary and in the long run in their best interests.... and therefore not cruel.... ???? At least not in their eyes. Anymore than insisting that a child sits safely strapped into their car seat is cruel, even if they hate it and scream the whole time.....

I'm one of those that thinks it IS cruel to strap a child into a car seat and make them stay there, especially when they hate it and scream the whole time. It feels even worse to me than leaving them to cry in a crib, because they are physically restrained, and in the case of an infant seat, cannot even see their caregiver. I think we put way to much import on car travel anyway, it was totally refreshing to walk and take public transport with my kids. (I have had two car-hating babies, and for almost 2 years I took the bus, walked, biked, pulled over and waited, or didn't go anywhere that wasn't absolutely necessary.)

I think we really need a SuperNanny or Nanny911 show that shows a respectful, firm, kind person who can be effective without being either authoritarian OR permissive. Those are two extreme forms of parenting and one never has to choose one or the other. Parents can learn to be kind and firm and respectfully set limits without hurting children or relationships.
I'd love to see someone like Naomi Aldort counsel families IRL, or Scott Noelle, or Ingrid Bauer...

[ThreeBeans]

As far as what the parents *should* do when SuperNanny tells them something contrary to common sense, well, let's just say that IMO, if your house is so out of control that you feel the ONLY solution is to let a for-ratings-program take it over with a childless nanny who browbeats you into her will, then perhaps you didn't have much common sense to begin with, no?

[2bluefish]

Originally Posted by emma_goldman

She just thinks that everyone has to do it eventually. Time to give her a GD sleep book.

I just never understood CIO. I know not everyone is comfortable (physically) with extended cosleeping - I'm not - but I have never seen CIO as a solution to get kids to sleep. How is letting a kid cry and get worked up going to result in sleep? It makes no sense at all. We do a combo of soothing down and "simply insisting" when transitioning the babies to their own beds - and it's hard work (and probably not worth it for those who are happy cosleeping), but it does result in kids that will sleep on their own happily without tears.

The more recent Supernanny's with much older kids have been much more interesting. She's done alot of good work helping parents and teenagers get more attached and communicative. I'm glad they've taken the show to a new level. I got bored and stopped watching the repeated naughty seat scenes. (And after I read "1,2,3 Magic", I see alot of reasons why that particular time out strategy is less than optimal.)

[blsilva]

Originally Posted by mommaof3

I think we really need a SuperNanny or Nanny911 show that shows a respectful, firm, kind person who can be effective without being either authoritarian OR permissive. Those are two extreme forms of parenting and one never has to choose one or the other. Parents can learn to be kind and firm and respectfully set limits without hurting children or relationships.
I'd love to see someone like Naomi Aldort counsel families IRL, or Scott Noelle, or Ingrid Bauer...

I would love to see this!

[debbieh]

Originally Posted by MammaKoz

Besides her rather anti attachment views on raising children (I'm not going to restate what almost everyone else has said, just a big "yeah that" to all the reasons why people don't like her), in general I don't trust anyone who is dishing out parenting advice who has never actually been a parent themselves.

I don't care how many years she has been working with kids, or been a nanny or whatever. Until you have actually been a parent, there is a very good chance you just don't "get it" when it comes to things like attachment, nurturing, bonding etc etc.

:

I agree so much with this....unless you ARE a parent, how can you really give advice to parents? How can you understand their feelings?

[Kailey's mom]

I love watching supernanny, I'm a reality show junky, along with trading spouses and wife swap The only problem personally I have with the supernanny show is when she discourages co-sleeping, and on one episode even convinced a mom to wean her 1yr old: that made me pretty upset. The WORST part about supernanny is the fact that my mom watches it, and if there is an episode that has to do with bedtimes, cosleeping, last week it was the little girl who's father kept running downstairs to get her different juices etc..MY mom compares me to those families and tell's me that she should call supernanny: ANYFREEKINWAYS!

[captain optimism]

Originally Posted by CrunchyTamara

Norway isn`t UK, but pretty close. And I very much disagree with your statement here.

I think you have anti-spanking laws in Norway and Parliament defeated them in the UK, so it's not 100% similar.

[Manfa]

I had NO IDEA Supernanny had no kids of her own. That just puts a whole new spin on it IMO. TBH from the little I saw yesterday, the stuff I *could* agree with was basically stuff that I think nearly every parent knows anyway (or should do). Common sense stuff about respect and controlling your temper that kind of thing.

What I dont get is; if a technique that she is proposing is THAT distressing for the family, I really don't know why she doesn't come up with something else... surely she doesnt believe her way is the "only" way. Is that the only thing in her toolbox???????? If so then I'm sorry but that isn't much of an "expert" IMO. Sorry to any SN fans. Like I've said on at least one other thread, while I dont feel like I have much real advice to offer anyone the one thing I **firmly* believe in is being comfortable with the approach you are using, not least because that enables you to be consistent about it.

I don't know, the feel I get from this board and the parents that I know are very different in lots of ways.... thats why I got the feeling that the parenting culture was different. It's only my observation which is relatively small. On a bigger scale I'm probably wrong.