Are we really supposed to do it all by ourselves?

775 Views 5 Replies 6 Participants Last post by sparklemom, Oct 11, 2003

mamabtt

Discussion Starter · Oct 10, 2003

I am a bit confused because according to the model of Attachment Parenting (which I subscribe to) we moms are supposed to be literally physically attached to our baby/child 24/7 but according to books like "Our Babies, Ourselves" the care of babies/children is supposed to be shared by an entire family and even a whole village. I have even heard that we are not biologically "meant" to parent all on our own. What are your thoughts on this?

Save

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

puppytails

· #2 · Oct 10, 2003

I think--if we're lucky enough to know several like-minded people--that those people become our "village". I think that IMHO AP means that although the primary attachment to the mother is the most important, and the few people we share child-caring with should share our important values. After all, some of the most AP moms I know work--but they all seek out like-minded caregivers for their babies. I hope that's the response you were looking for ?!

Save

DebraBaker

· #3 · Oct 10, 2003

Strangely enough both should be true.

The "villiage" is there to support the mother-baby couple not to seperate them or interfere with their bond.

Other people hold and nurture the baby but respect the special bond between mother and baby. They respect the development of the baby and are there to take the baby when the mother needs a break but will give the baby back to the mom when the baby needs her.

I think you can see this in extended intergenerational traditional families.

Debra Baker

Save

melamama

· #4 · Oct 11, 2003

I think when mom has the village she can be there 24/7 for her baby.

I live far away from my parents, but I'm the greatest mom when we're all together. everyone's needs get met simultaneously. I've made a village of girlfriends and other moms and when I'm out of touch with them, being AP/24/7 mom is much harder.

so-no we are not supposed to do it all ourselves.

Save

Bearsmama

· #5 · Oct 11, 2003

What an interesting thread. I would say, NO, NO, NO to your question. I have this whole theory about how in the past twenty years or so we've begun to parent in isolation. Our neighborhoods have changed-there aren't the ubiquitous developments full of kids like when I was young-where moms would sit and have coffee and the kids would play. Or keep an eye out for your kids.

I am an AP momma to a 20 mo DS. And in retrospect I would have asked for more help with him-especially in the beginning. I really felt that I had to have him constantly on me (and I do mean constantly). When universe willing we have another child, I will certainly AP, but I will try very hard to set some boundaries for myself. And surround him with more people. I don't know about you all, but when we are with family& friends and the kids are running all over and someone always has an eye out for your child and you for theirs, it seems easier. And the kids are happy. W

Save

sparklemom

· #6 · Oct 11, 2003

I think the AP bond between mother and child has even greater potential when the mother has adequate support which is sorely lacking with the way our society lives-- where the husband is gone all day, neighborhoods are quiet and usually empty during the day, and families live segmented.
Parenting in isolation is unnatural!

But I guess you just take what you can get, create as much of what you need as you can, and be thankful for what you do have.
And remember that babies/children can't help it that we moms don't usually have the support we naturally need. So even when you're feeling overwhelmed/tired/short of patience/...make sure they don't get the raw end of the deal.

See less See more

Save

1 - 6 of 6 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.

Top Contributors this Month