# Will CIO ever been considered abuse



## Rainbow Brite (Nov 2, 2004)

And I don't mean by many here, as most already consider it abuse. But legally child abuse? Spanking used to be the norm, I'm sure all dr's encouraged it as did neighbours, grandparents ect. And now it is borderline child abuse, if not illegal in some places. Do you ever think CIO will be? I honestly believe it is abuse, and really hope that some day our selfish society will agree and make it illegal.


----------



## aira (Jun 16, 2004)

I sure hope so, but I'm skeptical... maybe even just cynnical. But you bring up a good point about the trend of spanking. It's sad that so many still persist to this day, despite all the evidence that both practices are so harmful...


----------



## Kathryn (Oct 19, 2004)

God, I hope so. I don't think it will ever happen though. People for some reason will forever want to abuse their children. I don't know why. Maybe after a few hundred years the bad dna will phase out.


----------



## aira (Jun 16, 2004)

I think Alice ****** offers a very likely theory as to "why"... I don't know how as a species we'll overcome it, though.


----------



## BrandyX3 (Dec 9, 2004)

I have no idea. Good question, though. But, how would they monitor it? It is done in the privacy of the home, kwim? I personally think it is cruel and consider it abuse, but I don't think it will ever be illegal according to manuals.


----------



## Vicitoria (Dec 17, 2004)

That's sounds a little far fetched to me. How would you define the reason a child is crying? Children cry for all kinds of reason. Being passionate about what you belive in is great but forcing the whole world to belive what you do is asking for nothing but trouble.


----------



## mama24-7 (Aug 11, 2004)

I've often wondered this myself. I think about it b/c I am sure it would be considered abuse if a person left their child alone, crying in their crib, possibly for hours, during the day.

I've said it before and will keep saying it: people are not going to change until children are valued more in this society and around the world. BF rates won't change significantly and other more child-friendly parenting practices aren't going to change until this fundimental shift occurs, if it ever does.

Sus


----------



## TranscendentalMom (Jun 28, 2002)

But maybe if it was considered abuse legally...it would become less common. I was at the park with my friend & our kids the other day and there was this woman chasing around her 3 year old while her 2 month old screamed by himself in a stroller with a blanket over it. She actually was talking to us nonchalantly (i'd met her once before at the gym) and making small talk while her infant son was 50 feet away SCREAMING. She said "He'll go to sleep when we get back it the car." My friend I was with was postpartum and started crying herself.

I can't help but think our culture must be WAY too accepting that this behavior is the norm if someone could be THAT unashamed of letting her kid CIO.

If not abuse, it should at least fall under neglect.


----------



## kiahnsmum (Oct 22, 2004)

I agree with the pp about neglect, its just so hard to monitor something like that. I think with the spanking thing because its such a physical thing it is easier to define because cio is more of an emotional thing its easier to ignore. I feel that empathy is being bred out of society as our mothers mother used cio, i think that its becoming more the norm in my community which is sad and scary!


----------



## Vicitoria (Dec 17, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TranscendentalMom*
her infant son was 50 feet away SCREAMING. She said "He'll go to sleep when we get back it the car."

there is so much truth to this though. I was walking in the park with my son and a friend and her daughter. He was so fussy and overtired. I had been trying to get him to sleep before my friend got there because strolling will often induce a really good sleep. We stopped once to try and calm him down but it didn't last. Finally we just made the decision to keep on walking and he would eventually fall asleep and he did. It's just like people who can't get collicy babies to fall asleep or stop crying. They take them in the car and drive them around until they fall asleep. This has been going on for years. Parents who truly love their children are doing this. Each parent knows their child and deals with that child accordingly. Sometimes you really do have to just let them cry. I would hope their parent would be standing by while they cry but the point is babies cry. Holding them does not always stop the crying. They are done crying when they are good and ready.


----------



## MsMoMpls (Oct 22, 2002)

I don't want the police or judges involved in families any more than absolutely necessary. They aren't good for families. They don't understand. They aren't helping any kids who get spanked, they aren't even able to help kids that get beat. This isn't something we want the government handling. Why would we trust them with this when we work against their push for vaxing? I am shocked by this thread. Wow! We need to treat AP like a religion we share through love and teaching, not something we impose through fear and power.


----------



## sistermama (May 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Vicitoria*
Parents who truly love their children are doing this. Each parent knows their child and deals with that child accordingly. Sometimes you really do have to just let them cry. I would hope their parent would be standing by while they cry but the point is babies cry. Holding them does not always stop the crying. They are done crying when they are good and ready.

First, people who "truly love" their children sometimes hit them and that doesn't make it right. Second, holding might not always stop the crying, but babies deserve to be held anyway. As an adult, I don't stop crying till I'm good and ready, but if I were crying in close distance to people who love me and I was just left to cry without anyone offering me help, I would wonder if they actually cared about me. No baby should be left wailing in a stroller with a blanket over its head and the thought of that being done makes me sick to my stomach. I'd scream my head off too.

I can't remember where, but I once read something that had a big impact on me. The jist of it was that small babies have no concept of time and therefore no concept of past and future. All they know is NOW and if they are crying and miserable it feels infinitely long to them. If a baby's cries aren't routinely responded to, they learn that you don't care about meeting their needs. Jaded babies, yay.


----------



## Aeriane (Apr 4, 2005)

You know, if a mom left her children unattended at home, crying their eyes out she'd be brought up on neglect charges but if Mom is in another room not attending to the needs of a screaming baby it's just overlooked! It is so odd.

I have had a child make noise in the attempts to bring me back and though it sounds hard-hearted you sometimes have to help them bring themselves to sleep but CIO is just heartless, to me anyway. Kitty


----------



## KnitterMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Quote:

mama24-7 :
I've said it before and will keep saying it: people are not going to change until children are valued more in this society and around the world. BF rates won't change significantly and other more child-friendly parenting practices aren't going to change until this fundimental shift occurs, if it ever does.

Sus








Thank you for pointing that out!









I think we are definitely on the right track in that we choose not to parent in a detached or borderline abusive manner. However, so much could change if views of children's "place" changed. This comes up a lot when I'm discussing breastfeeding in public.







Even ardent supporters of breastfeeding in public will tell me over and over again that I have no right to take my son to class with me (or work for that matter) because it is "inconvenient", "disruptive", or "disrepectful". I believe that this attitude which bars babies and children from many activities is precisely what makes breastfeeding in public, and parenting in general more difficult or uncomfortable than it has to be. Furthermore, it's sexist to exclude women from bringing their children with them, because women tend to be primary caregivers. Welcoming children is welcoming Mama, banning children bans Mama.

Sorry for the slightly OT rant.


----------



## KnitterMama (Mar 31, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TranscendentalMom*
But maybe if it was considered abuse legally...it would become less common. I was at the park with my friend & our kids the other day and there was this woman chasing around her 3 year old while her 2 month old screamed by himself in a stroller with a blanket over it. She actually was talking to us nonchalantly (i'd met her once before at the gym) and making small talk while her infant son was 50 feet away SCREAMING. She said "He'll go to sleep when we get back it the car." My friend I was with was postpartum and started crying herself.












How? How? How can someone do that???


----------



## moondiapers (Apr 14, 2002)

sistermama said:


> First, people who "truly love" their children sometimes hit them and that doesn't make it right. Second, holding might not always stop the crying, but babies deserve to be held anyway. As an adult, I don't stop crying till I'm good and ready, but if I were crying in close distance to people who love me and I was just left to cry without anyone offering me help, I would wonder if they actually cared about me. No baby should be left wailing in a stroller with a blanket over its head and the thought of that being done makes me sick to my stomach. I'd scream my head off too.
> 
> 
> > My son would cry harder, louder, more desperately if I tried to hold him when he felt the need to cry. He'd even claw and scratch at my face, he was only 2 months old. Some people want to be left alone to cry, he's 5 and he's still like that. It took me a long time to accept it, a long time of literally forcing myself on him when he was upset, only to have it make him feel worse....did he deserve to be held against his will?


----------



## sistermama (May 6, 2003)

Moondiapers - I don't think that the example given, of a mother nonchalantly chatting away while her tiny baby wailed, ignored, in a covered stroller is the same as your experience. I have know babies that sound like yours. But, did you leave him to cry in a room alone? Or did you put him down and stay by his side so that he knew you were there? I wasn't trying to say that babies _should_ be held if that isn't what they want, my intent was to say that babies should know that aid is available if they are distressed. And they can't know that if there is a blanket between them and the world or if they are crying in a room alone.


----------



## mandalamama (Sep 1, 2004)

i'm not sure it could ever be regulated. even in states where spanking is legal, it's abuse "if you leave a mark." meaning dr's offices and hospitals have the authority to report it.

in a perfect world, it'd be illegal. so would telling your kid "stop crying or i'll give you something to cry about."







i won't get on my soapbox, i'll just say i'd make a LOT of things illegal in my perfect world.

now, living in an IMperfect world







i think it's up to moms to self-police among ourselves. if more of us set a good example, it really does make a difference. i mean, on my mainstream board, i inspired one woman to try natural childbirth with a doula, and she did it!! and i'm always cheering on the moms who are still breastfeeding. whenever i encounter CIO stories, i tell MY story ... that my daughter has never had to cry at night, because we co-sleep. and i post links to relevant articles, yada yada. anyway, i know i can't change the world but i know i've changed a few minds here and there and i just have to hope there are other people out there doing the same.


----------



## Black Orchid (Mar 28, 2005)

YIKES! I hope not!

I'm sure that some people here would consider what we have gone through with my DD CIO... but I assure you that it is not! We tried just about everything and spent lots of money while she had colic to try and stop the crying and nothing did. If you were outside our home, you might never have guessed that we were with her every moment, but everything we did was useless.

Now my DD has SID and still cries alot. Again, never alone, unless she truly needs it (example, she will close the door to her room on us sometimes and I'm not going to force her to be with us) but if you were our neighbor, you might think we were leaving her to CIO.

It is scary, to me, to think about someone who has no context coming into our home and making assumptions about our parenting choices.


----------



## moondiapers (Apr 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sistermama*
Moondiapers - I don't think that the example given, of a mother nonchalantly chatting away while her tiny baby wailed, ignored, in a covered stroller is the same as your experience. I have know babies that sound like yours. But, did you leave him to cry in a room alone? Or did you put him down and stay by his side so that he knew you were there? I wasn't trying to say that babies _should_ be held if that isn't what they want, my intent was to say that babies should know that aid is available if they are distressed. And they can't know that if there is a blanket between them and the world or if they are crying in a room alone.


But this thread is about making CIO illegal as child abuse.....how are my neighbors that call CPS on me going to know if my son is crying allone or not? I sure HOPE it's NOT made illegal, it would be a nightmare for many GOOD parents.

-Heather

edited to add: yes my son did sometimes cry allone, because it's better to walk away and close the door than to scream at your baby to shut up. The crying grates on your nerves and sometimes you just have no choice but to step outside for a little while so that you don't go insane and commit hari kari.


----------



## mandalamama (Sep 1, 2004)

Moondiapers ... my daughter sometimes cries harder if i try to soothe her, so you're not alone! after i've ruled out everything she could possible need/want, if she's still crying and fighting to get out of my arms, i just hang out next to her. if even the sight of me seems to upset her, i turn my back to her and pretend to read, for some reason that calms her quite a bit. i think she just likes to know that i'm near. now that she's starting to teethe, i'm noticing that she likes to lie next to me while i read or paint, rather than be held. what i mean to say is, kudos to you for understanding that your baby doesn't necessarily want to be held! it means you're paying attention


----------



## moondiapers (Apr 14, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mellybean*
Moondiapers ... my daughter sometimes cries harder if i try to soothe her, so you're not alone! after i've ruled out everything she could possible need/want, if she's still crying and fighting to get out of my arms, i just hang out next to her. if even the sight of me seems to upset her, i turn my back to her and pretend to read, for some reason that calms her quite a bit. i think she just likes to know that i'm near. now that she's starting to teethe, i'm noticing that she likes to lie next to me while i read or paint, rather than be held. what i mean to say is, kudos to you for understanding that your baby doesn't necessarily want to be held! it means you're paying attention










Thankyou so much, my son's collicky time was so difficult for me. I just wanted to pick him up and rock him and he'd have none of it. I had to step outside sometimes and just stand there and cry myself. Luckily it only lasted 3 or 4 weeks. He'd do it every night at 7pm sharp. I tried diet changes, room changes, vacuum cleaner worked once in a while, but not always







He wasn't a baby that wanted to be held very much when he was happy either. It was a complete change from my daughter who slept ON me for 2 years. Luckily I nursed him, or I think I would have been really sad. He was a real snuggler when getting his mother's milk.


----------



## TranscendentalMom (Jun 28, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Vicitoria*
there is so much truth to this though. I was walking in the park with my son and a friend and her daughter. He was so fussy and overtired. I had been trying to get him to sleep before my friend got there because strolling will often induce a really good sleep. We stopped once to try and calm him down but it didn't last. Finally we just made the decision to keep on walking and he would eventually fall asleep and he did. It's just like people who can't get collicy babies to fall asleep or stop crying. They take them in the car and drive them around until they fall asleep. This has been going on for years. Parents who truly love their children are doing this. Each parent knows their child and deals with that child accordingly. Sometimes you really do have to just let them cry. I would hope their parent would be standing by while they cry but the point is babies cry. Holding them does not always stop the crying. They are done crying when they are good and ready.

I know where you are coming from and I definitely did some car rides when my son was colicky but I assure you...this was something entirely different. First of all, she wasn't even pushing the stroller...it was just sitting in the corner of the playground with a blanket over it while her baby screamed. Secondly, she made NO attempt to hurry things along and get her kids back in the car. She was sitting there chit chatting with us and waved her hand casually saying "that's my 2 month old over there screaming" The sound of this babies cry was very upsetting. It sounded desperate. I don't see why she would go over and hold him until they got back in their car at least. Anyway, just wanted to clarify.


----------



## Rainbow Brite (Nov 2, 2004)

I will admit I don't think it could ever happen. And I do agree that the gov't ect is too involved in many aspects of one's life.

However, I still believe it to be abuse, and at the very least, I hope one day society will see it as such. I see it hard to govern spanking as illegal as well. Maybe a better analogy for the way I see it, is if a pregnant woman was smoking (no, I do not think they are of the same magnatitude)- it isn't illegal for a pregnant woman to smoke, even though it is very likely she is harming her baby. Society discourages this, and many see it as harmful- I guess I'm hoping one day cio will be frowned upon as well (again, they are def not near the same, just using it as an example of how, in my perfect world, society would view cio). People used to be told never to pick up their baby, never to look him/her in the eye, only to feed 4-6 hours ect. Many of these ideas have changed, so I hope the way we relate to children changes as well.

I do not think an inconsolable child is the same as cio. To me, cio is babytraining in the cruelest sense- the mother/father wants the baby on their schedule, and sets him/her in the crib at x time- and lets the baby scream and cry for hours. I actually read on another site of a mom who would let her baby cry for over two hours straight without even checking on him, and then was surprised one day the crib wasn't covered in puke, as it ususally was.

Quote:

We need to treat AP like a religion we share through love and teaching, not something we impose through fear and power.
Umm, what religion doesn't use fear, violence and power? Totally








Maybe there are some, but I'd think it's the exception not the rule.


----------



## pfamilygal (Feb 28, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rainbow Brite*
And I don't mean by many here, as most already consider it abuse. But legally child abuse? Spanking used to be the norm, I'm sure all dr's encouraged it as did neighbours, grandparents ect. And now it is borderline child abuse, if not illegal in some places. Do you ever think CIO will be? I honestly believe it is abuse, and really hope that some day our selfish society will agree and make it illegal.

How exactly would you enforce that? Some sort of cry-o-meter in a person's house? Neglect is criminal, letting your baby fuss a bit is not. My kids were all CIO babies, I guess, though they rarely fussed more than 5 minutes. Literally, 5 minutes. I know it felt really long to me, but I always timed it so I could check on them. I never let them fuss more than 15 minutes. I have a lot of friends who use babywise (I know that's considered borderline criminal around here







) and none of them let their kids "scream for hours" as many here allege. Most of our babies will cry for 3-5 minutes occasionally, when put down. The only reason my little one cries longer is if I have kept her up (out doing errands or whatnot) and she is overtired. Then I have to let her cry a bit to settle down. Holding her only makes her more upset.

I put them down drowsy and let them fall asleep. Now they go to sleep with no crying. I snuggle with them a lot, and wear the littlest one several hours a day. But they do sleep in their cribs. At night I get up and tend to them if they fuss, but a do wait a minute or two. Sometimes they wake up and withing 30 seconds or so the thumb is right back in the mouth and they are conked out.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

I gotta chime in here that my neighbor uses Babywise and she *does* let her baby cry for extended periods of time. It happens every, single time I'm over there at baby's bed time - *every, single time!* She puts her dd to bed and her dd then proceeds to cry until I leave, which is usually about 30 minutes later. I'd like to stay longer normally, but I can't bear to listen to her cry, so I leave. She has never once stopped crying *before* I leave - never. My sister also uses CIO and her daughter, now 17 months *still* cries for *at least* 30 minutes every night. I've heard her cry for over 90. Furthermore, for me personally, I don't care if it's 5 minutes or 5 hours, I'm not going to leave my baby to cry alone. There is nothing so pressing in my life that I have to leave my baby to cry herself to sleep, rather than taking the time to help her fall asleep in more gentle ways. I haven't seen a study yet that said CIO wasn't harmful as long as the baby only cried for X amount of minutes. I know some people do let their babies "fuss" as long as they don't cry and I guess that's different. I really don't know, but I am much more comfortable being with my baby when she shows *any* signs of distress, rather than leaving her to deal with it on her own. (Unless, of course, that's what she wants.)

I totally agree that some babies do just want some time and space to cry in order to release tension. I also totally agree that sometimes when a baby is colicy and a parent is about to lose it, it is much better to take a time out than to risk shaking your baby or yelling at them. But neither one of those things is the same as deciding that it's easier for the parent to put them in bed alone and let them cry themselves to sleep. I haven't found any aspect of parenting to be particularly convenient and I wouldn't expect sleep to be any different than the rest of it in that regard.


----------



## Rainbow Brite (Nov 2, 2004)

To me, cio isn't about a baby crying. Babies do cry. To me, it's about *doing NOTHING to console a crying baby, or tending to a distressed baby* when something such as holding the baby would make like for that baby so much better.

Quote:

How exactly would you enforce that? Some sort of cry-o-meter in a person's house?

What an interesting thought







Although, I wouldn't think it's necessary for people who admit they do cio- they admit it. I'd be interested in the people who say they *only* let their baby cry/fuss for 5, 10, 15 or x amount of time. If someone will do that, it makes me wonder if they have not desensitized themselves to do 3x, 4x, 5x that amount and just do cio, but not want to admit it. Of course, I'm probably way off base there


----------



## Momtwice (Nov 21, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rainbow Brite*
To me, cio isn't about a baby crying. Babies do cry. To me, it's about *doing NOTHING to console a crying baby, or tending to a distressed baby* when something such as holding the baby would make like for that baby so much better.


To me one of the main problems is our media's fascination with "sleep training" in the USA. Even as a casual, occasional TV watcher I have seen many pediatricians and authors and news anchor people tell viewers to CIO.
When these people start speaking out against CIO instead of for it, I'll know the culture is really healing and improving.


----------



## Rainbow Brite (Nov 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Momtwice*
To me one of the main problems is our media's fascination with "sleep training" in the USA. Even as a casual, occasional TV watcher I have seen many pediatricians and authors and news anchor people tell viewers to CIO.
When these people start speaking out against CIO instead of for it, I'll know the culture is really healing and improving.









ITA. To me it isn't about a baby who does not want to be held, or who is colicky. It's about the parents who at x o'clock, set the baby in the crib, wide awake, and leave. The baby cries, screams, even vomits (I was part of a parenting site, and a mom did post about this almost daily







) and they think this is good. They think babies are something to be trained. I think it's very very sad.

Of course, I don't actually believe it will ever be illegal, I'm actually surprised that some places are making spanking illegal. I do hope it will not be endorsed though, and even frowned upon some day.


----------



## TranscendentalMom (Jun 28, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Momtwice*
To me one of the main problems is our media's fascination with "sleep training" in the USA. Even as a casual, occasional TV watcher I have seen many pediatricians and authors and news anchor people tell viewers to CIO.
When these people start speaking out against CIO instead of for it, I'll know the culture is really healing and improving.

Ditto again...its not that I want to see people arrested or their children taken away...its that it is shocking how acceptable the public views something that in reality is clearly harmful to kids. I think anything that can help to change this public perception should be done. Flip through the latest Parents magazine and it has intructions on there on how to CIO. Most people who let their kids CIO, THINK THEY ARE DOING SOMETHING GOOD FOR THEIR KIDS! At least if the AAP had some kind of formal statement against it or something it might make people question it a little more.


----------



## Icequeen_in_ak (Mar 6, 2004)

To my knowledge, spanking with a bare hand is still legal in every state







So until that is addressed, CIO certainly won't be.


----------



## Aeriane (Apr 4, 2005)

Keep in mind as well that some children can't unwind without crying a bit and consolation sometimes over-stimulates making things worse. I guess there's many shades of grey and it's not all black and white. -Kitty


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

Rainbow Brite, ITA with you that CIO is not about babies crying, but parents not consoling them. I guess that's what I was trying, rather unsuccessfully, to say at the end of my post. I think every attempt should be made to comfort a crying baby. Only when it is obvious the baby does not *want* to be held should that baby be put down to cry. Even then, I don't believe a baby should ever be left all alone to cry. They should know that you're still there!

And I have an honest question. When a baby who has been left to CIO quits crying, isn't it a signal that they have given up - accepted that no one is going to come to them? So if your baby quits crying after 10 minutes, instead of, say, 60 doesn't that just mean your particular baby isn't as persistent as some? Hasn't your baby come to the same conclusion as the baby who cries for 60 minutes, only in a shorter amount of time? Why is it better to have a baby who decided in 8 minutes that you didn't care enough to come pick them up, than it is to have a baby who took 45 minutes to reach the same conclusion? In the end, haven't they both learned the same sad lesson?


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

I think part of the problem is there is no differentiation between ages. To me, using CIO on a newborn or very young baby is a very misled idea that I cannot fathom. On the other hand, I did use a form of CIO to teach my 17-month-old to sleep in a crib. (I never did figure out how to successfully share sleep when I didn't have the time or desire to sleep for every minute that she needed to.) She cried for a grand total of 7 minutes before zonking out, not the desperate shrieking of an abandoned newborn, but the whiny, pouty cry of a toddler who didn't want to go to bed but KNEW mom was right around the corner and would jump at any real need. And I felt totally sick and guilty for even trying it, precisely because of threads like this where people demonize "ever" letting a "baby" cry. I only forgave myself after it worked so beautifully and everyone was happier for it in the end. I'm sure no one would think that it is child abuse to let your 5-year-old cry alone in her room over something, so where exactly do you draw the line? And do you really want that line legislated for you, or do you want to draw it, as a parent, considering the needs of your individual child?


----------



## TranscendentalMom (Jun 28, 2002)

Well said, dubylyu!


----------



## Ruby (Jan 20, 2004)

I agree with all the poster who said we absolutely do not what the government in our homes telling us how to parent.

Quote:

It is scary, to me, to think about someone who has no context coming into our home and making assumptions about our parenting choices
THis is so true. THink about it. None of my children are fully vaxed, we don't think that milk or meat is necessary for a healthy child, we think we can educate our children better than the government, yet I have healthy, happy , bright children (I know I'm a little biased.







) There are those that would think any of these practices are not in the best interest of a child. I think it would be better to lend a hand to stressed mamas if we can. Parenting is a very hard job and there is so much conflicting information out there.


----------



## Rainbow Brite (Nov 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Ruby*
I agree with all the poster who said we absolutely do not what the government in our homes telling us how to parent.

THis is so true. THink about it. None of my children are fully vaxed, we don't think that milk or meat is necessary for a healthy child, we think we can educate our children better than the government, yet I have healthy, happy , bright children (I know I'm a little biased.







) There are those that would think any of these practices are not in the best interest of a child. I think it would be better to lend a hand to stressed mamas if we can. Parenting is a very hard job and there is so much conflicting information out there.


I *definitely* agree with all of this. I guess I just wish instead of literally being illegal, that it was something society as a whole didn't encourage. It's bad enough (in my opinion) that it is something seen as acceptable, but even worse that dr's, magazines, online sites encourage and promote







:


----------



## Vicitoria (Dec 17, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *sistermama*
I can't remember where, but I once read something that had a big impact on me. The jist of it was that small babies have no concept of time and therefore no concept of past and future. All they know is NOW ...

I can't help but respond to this _purely for the sake of debate._ If this is true,(not saying it is) then most of the "sleep training" processes would work with very little harm to the baby. If letting them CIO for 3-5 days ( not 30 minutes every night, that child is obviously very overstimulated) were all it takes to get a child to sleep through the night in the long term than 5 rough days really isn't that bad. I can't see how it would have a long term negative effects on a child if it were loved and cherished, played with, well fed, worn and allowed to grow into who they are with little resistance during the day.

Please don't come back with a million bashes. Like I said, this is purely for debate.


----------



## MsMoMpls (Oct 22, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Rainbow Brite*
I'd be interested in the people who say they *only* let their baby cry/fuss for 5, 10, 15 or x amount of time. If someone will do that, it makes me wonder if they have not desensitized themselves to do 3x, 4x, 5x that amount and just do cio, but not want to admit it. Of course, I'm probably way off base there









_OK- Opening myself to being flamed.
_
I am sure this is true for some. But I know that my daycare provider and my dh put Zach in bed and he sometimes cries for 5-10 minutes. I know this. They don't have the boob and he can put him self to sleep. I also used a 5 minute crying period to "sleep train" Joey when he was about 18 months old and will likely use it with Zach at that age as well.

I would never leave a baby (under 18 months) to cry alone in a crib. I would never leave my children to cry for more than 5-10 minutes without making an effort to comfort them (no matter what age). But I do believe that a toddler can understand that you want them to go to sleep and that you are in the other room and that they are safe. I also think there is a huge difference between crying to exhaustion, to throwing up, to complete melt down and "fussing" because you don't really want to go to sleep.


----------



## pfamilygal (Feb 28, 2005)

I have a question. Someone here (not sure who) said that ANY CIO is harmful to a child. Okay... Say I'm in the shower, or going potty, or changing my other child's diaper (or any number of necessary things) and my baby wakes up and begins to howl. If it is true that leaving a cry unattended for any length of time is going to harm the child, then all our children are damaged goods. That makes no sense to me. Of course, sometimes our children/babies will cry and we will not be able to get to it right that second. Heck, we live in a 2 story house, so it may take me a couple minutes to get there! I think there is a huge difference between not attending your crying child for 5 minutes and letting them scream for hours. I thing it's silly to imply that there's not.


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

*I* said that I believe any and all forms of CIO negatively impact children and I absolutely, 100% stand by and believe that. CIO isn't delaying your response to a crying baby. CIO is a decision by the parent that it's time for your kid to sleep, so you're going to leave that kid in bed until they do it. When parents CIO, they let the baby cry for however long, then go in the room and *do not comfort the baby*. A pat on the back for a crying baby, then leaving the room again to let them cry some more is NOT the same as taking 5 minutes to get to the baby and then comforting them. How can the two even be compared? If you're in the bathroom and your baby starts crying, when you're finished, you go out and *pick the baby up*. You don't go out, pat the baby on the back and then leave them there to cry some more. THAT is CIO.

I would like to add that I think the word "demonize" is totally out of context in this discussion. To demonize someone is to accuse them of being a horrible person. I haven't seen that happen in this conversation. Yes, I may believe CIO is unequivocally wrong, without exception, but that does not in any way mean that I think parents who use CIO are bad parents or bad people. I know many parents who use CIO and I know that every single one of them has the best intentions when they do so. They love their children and they are good parents. *I just disagree with them!* I can do that without deciding they're bad people or "demonizing" them! I don't go around telling them they're wrong. It never even comes up in discussion - EVER! However, it *does* come up in discussion here on MDC and I will *not* pretend I think something is okay just to be PC. There are all kinds of things I do that people here would think were wrong (I drive an SUV, I eat meat, sometimes I buy things at Wal-Mart) but if people say those things are wrong, I don't feel "demonized" and I don't take it personally. I don't believe it means they hate me or think they're better than me. That's life. People will disagree about things. I don't expect people to lie or change their message just to keep from offending me and I would hope I could be extended the same courtesy.


----------



## Vicitoria (Dec 17, 2004)

Yet a new thought....I'm enjoying this thread....A good case for couples having to take a class and get a license or something before having children. In a fantasy world making sure parents know the best ways to raise children and have to prove they understand and can carry it out before they are allowed to conceive. Yes, very 1984 but I can dream out loud. We would have to assume CIO would be illegal at this time!


----------



## Plummeting (Dec 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Vicitoria*
Yet a new thought....I'm enjoying this thread....A good case for couples having to take a class and get a license or something before having children. In a fantasy world making sure parents know the best ways to raise children and have to prove they understand and can carry it out before they are allowed to conceive. Yes, very 1984 but I can dream out loud. We would have to assume CIO would be illegal at this time!

:LOL

Oh, and as far as CIO being illegal...however much I disagree with it, I agree with all the PPs who said it could not and should not be regulated by law for all the reasons already mentioned.


----------



## aira (Jun 16, 2004)

I haven't been online for a while... and WOW!

I certainly don't think it's an enforcable thing. However, I do feel it's quite naive to think that all people are good on the honor system alone. And as was mentioned about making AP a religion... yikes! I can think of no better example of coersion and fear-mongering than religion!

Mothers need healing in order to listen to their hearts. That's the real solution. But it will take a long while for enough women to do that, and waiting will harm many more chilren in the meantime.

The idea of making CIO illegal is not about policing any crying, but about stopping wackos like Ezzo, Ferber, and Parents magazine from influencing well-meaning, impressionable parents into harming their babes. There are no more parenting books that advocate hitting or spanking anymore, are there? If so, they are really fringe and don't get any praise in the mainstream.

I'm just about as anti-establishment as you can get and still live in society, but not many people are. If it takes parents fearing breaking a law to get terrified babies loved and held, fine with me. If those on the fence, or the ones who take mainstream advice as gospel, require laws to influence them to comfort their children, fine with me. I'm already willing to (and do) break any law that I see as a danger to my son. If most parents look to the laws to make their decisions, why not bias them to the betterment of the helpless ones?


----------



## momileigh (Oct 29, 2002)

I'm the one who used the word "demonize" and I'll stand by it.

I was influenced by a LOT of the threads I read in these forums before my dd was born, and for the most part I think that's a very good thing! But there were a lot of threads about CIO that, like this one, included posts like, "Oh, golly, I just can't believe some people would do that, what are they thinking, I could just cry my little eyes out thinking about their poor little babies, I could never, ever even imagine doing something like that to my sweet little one!" Complete with crying cartoon faces! You'd think they were talking about shaking a baby or feeding it hydrogen peroxide. Anyone who reads that is inclined to think that a person who would use CIO is a DEMON!


----------



## MsMoMpls (Oct 22, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dubylyu*
Anyone who reads that is inclined to think that a person who would use CIO is a DEMON!

I have to agree. I see spanking as something I can't support as a therapist and ask my clients to do everything they can to work to never using violence. I don't see evidence to support the same stance on CIO.


----------



## Momtwice (Nov 21, 2001)

I think CIO as described in this piece below is most definitely abuse. But I also see the point that logistically, it would be virtually impossible to enforce. So again I would say that a public health/media campaign would be the best way to go...replacing every media recommendation (print, TV, etc) for the glories of CIO with more healthy ideas.
http://www.elizabethbauchner.info/co...03/crying.html

Quote:

I read on an Internet message board for sleep training a story by a mom who thought that the only way to get her four-month-old baby to sleep was to let him cry-it-out. Night after night she sat outside his door, listening to his wails and telling herself that she was doing the right thing. Every night she would check on him once he was asleep, but this sometimes took over an hour. One night, she went in to check on him, and found him sleeping in a pool of vomit and diarrhea. Did she pick him up then, and check his temperature? Clean him up and decide that that was enough? No, she ran to her computer and asked the other mothers on the message board, "Is this normal? Should I clean him up?"

I wanted to shout, "No, dear, it's not normal. Get off the computer, clean him up and check his temperature." Amazingly, much of the advice she received that night was to sneak in and do her best to clean him without waking him, otherwise he might "learn" that his mother will come to him whenever he cries, and she'll have to start the whole process of sleep training over again. Apparently a child vomiting and in need of new diapers doesn't warrant parental attention if it's after the child's bedtime.
("Mothering Matters: Crying-It-Out Going Too Far
Published in the Ithaca Journal on April 1, 2003
© Elizabeth Bauchner, 2002)

and I would describe this as abuse as well:
http://www.nospank.net/fleiss.htm

Quote:

Many years ago, I had a neighbor who was a very intelligent, sensitive, and successful woman. She and her husband had just had a beautiful baby daughter, and, naturally, they wanted the very best for their baby. The baby's pediatrician was attached to the most prestigious, long-established, and well-respected HMO in her state. When that pediatrician warned the mother against ever picking up her baby when she cried lest she "spoil" her, and when he warned her never to feed the baby except at four-hour intervals, she followed that mistaken advice to the letter. This mother had the best of intentions toward her daughter. She wanted to do the right thing, but the advice she was given was so wrong as to achieve the exact opposite results. The poor baby spent almost all of her time screaming and crying alone in a playpen. This was what the doctor had ordered.

Her daughter survived all right, and she grew up to be very beautiful, but she also grew up to be an emotionally unstable, distant, and insecure young lady whose troubled relationship with her mother was a source of pain for them both. Sadly, this scenario is all too typical in our country.
(excerpt from the book Sweet Dreams by Paul M. Fleiss, M.D)


----------

