# Can you be AP and CIO?



## MiracleMama (Sep 1, 2003)

I am not a frequent poster here but I love Mothering Magazine so I come here occassionally to read. I had a question that I wanted to get your opinions on.

My dd is 3 years old and we're ttc #2. When dd was born I had never really heard about AP, but my stepmother once bought me Mothering magazine and I've enjoyed reading about natural parenting. I just did what "felt right" and natural in parenting...I've never let dd CIO, bf her until she self-weaned at 14 months (it was hard on me, I wish she nursed longer), always picked her up when she cried, etc. I've enjoyed reading about gentle discipline because this seems to be what I practice, too, now that dd is a bit older.

Now I have a few acquaintances who claim to be AP. They cloth-diaper, wear slings, bf, natural childbirth, etc. It bothers me that they say they are AP because at least 2 of them have admitting practicing CIO! On young babies, like 7 months old. One of them even locks her toddler in his room at naptime. I just don't understand this. To me, from what I've read, AP is about listening to your baby's cues, not wearing slings and cloth diapering....so my question is, is it possible to be AP and do CIO??? Or does that sound as ridiculous to you as it does to me?

Thanks in advance for any responses.
Edited to comply with user agreement per a pm that I received.


----------



## mama24-7 (Aug 11, 2004)

I, too, know a woman who considers herself an Ap mama yet weaned dd at 12 months because: she knew that was how long she wanted to BF her, wanted to wear a regular bra, she wanted TTC #2 and sleep late on Sat while her dh had dd. She also let her dd CIO somewhere around 6 months after reading Ferber's book and syaing it made sense. This was after talking me through all the people who told me to let my dd CIO. She read Ferber after this conversation.

Well, her dd is firmly attached to her blankie, her thumb and wanted nothing to do w/ her brother when he was born when she was only 20 months old. She is a very withdrawn child from what I've seen.

I guess people figure that they can pick and choose what AP things and needs of their children they meet. Very sad. HOw many employers would keep people on the payroll if they were as choosy about doing their work tasks as they are about choosing the needs of their children to meet?

Sus


----------



## AmandaBL (Aug 3, 2004)

nope. just my opinion. ignoring a child crying because he wants you is not ap.


----------



## Evergreen (Nov 6, 2002)

I would say there is nothing "attatched" about CIO, but it would depend on the specifics. Someone who lets her baby fuss in her arms a few minutes may be able to consider herself AP and think she is doing CIO. I don't see how anyone who puts baby to bed knowing he or she will scream for the next twenty minutes without checking in every night could possibly reconcile the two.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

I will be brave and answer you first.

You are going to have strong opinions that say "absolutely not", then you are going to have people like me that say "yes".

Being AP is about meeting your child's needs. Some here believe your kid wimpers you have to go to them immediately. I've learned after three children, that cries mean different things and that crying is not a horrible thing. I posted that with my first child, I was trying to follow these strict guidelines of AP, etc. It took a great tole on me personally and with my marriage. With child no. 2. He cried all the time sometimes 6-7 hours per day. Nothing soothed him. He didn't like a sling, he didn't like co sleeping, he bucked and screamed in your arms. I was a wreck. Finally at about 5-6 months old, I would put him in his crib and night bundled up with his fleece and he would cry himself to sleep. Not wailing mind you, but crying. A few minutes later he would go to sleep (5-15min). He didn't need to be fed, he didn't need a change in diaper, he didn't care to be held, etc. No tags poked him in the back, etc etc etc. My third baby was super laid back, coslept and would fall asleep playing on the floor. Rarely cried at all.

I don't believe in letting infants cry it out, I do think that as babies get older, they want what they want and what they want is often different than what they need. By the time a child is 9m-1 years old, they have learned to manipulate you through behaviors. I do believe that a child that age CAN sleep through the night, that unless they are premature or have health problems than they can learn to self soothe, etc themselves to sleep. I think by the time a child is that age most parents can distinguish if their child's crying or persistance to nurse be held, etc at night is a want or a need.

I just read the Ferber book for my 4 year old. And nothing like the CIO described here is in his book. And it especially isn't recommend for children under 6 m old or with health issues. In fact, I really saw a lot of similarities between it and the Happiest Baby On The Block and other more AP friendly books that deal with issues on sleep. The only book I have read with newbornyoung infant crying out is the Baby Wise books.

If your child doesnt have healthy sleep habits, and you are part of that problem, then what is AP about that? AP to me is about meeting your child's needs. If you have a cranky fussy baby and toddler because they have all night nigh wakings, sleep too much during the day, or have discipline problems because of lack of sleep -- then its time to do something different. All children are different and have different needs and personalities.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama24-7*
I, too, know a woman who considers herself an Ap mama yet weaned dd at 12 months because: she knew that was how long she wanted to BF her, wanted to wear a regular bra, she wanted TTC #2 and sleep late on Sat while her dh had dd. She also let her dd CIO somewhere around 6 months after reading Ferber's book and syaing it made sense. This was after talking me through all the people who told me to let my dd CIO. She read Ferber after this conversation.

Well, her dd is firmly attached to her blankie, her thumb and wanted nothing to do w/ her brother when he was born when she was only 20 months old. She is a very withdrawn child from what I've seen.

I guess people figure that they can pick and choose what AP things and needs of their children they meet. Very sad. HOw many employers would keep people on the payroll if they were as choosy about doing their work tasks as they are about choosing the needs of their children to meet?

Sus

I have just finished reading the Ferber book. It has some great information in there about sleep. I didn't agree with all of it (like his views on cosleeping) but there is no way you are going to convince me that this child is "withdrawn" because her mother did CIO. I am just not buying it. I live in the South where mainstream parenting is common, and I know parents who do CIO starting out much younger than 6m old. These kids are perfectly attached to their parents.
Also some kids, even cosleeping children suck their thumbs or have a blankie. I would say what you have seen is typical behavior of most 20 months old with a new sibling. There is no way you are going to convince me, after parenting three children thus far, and all three somewhat differntly, that encouraging sleep at 6m old (and if she used Ferber, and took his advice, she just didn't abandon her baby) damaged her child or any child for that matter.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmandaBL*
nope. just my opinion. ignoring a child crying because he wants you is not ap.

Well lets just take my AP badge now. What about moms with multiples or really small children. Do you think they can meet all their childrens wants immediately? or even all the time? NO. I have had children close together in age, and I can tell you at times, if all they "wanted" was me, and I Was trying to feed, clothe, nurse, etc well I am sure they were "ignored". Then they had to wait. Sometimes they stopped crying, sometimes they just cried until I was able to get to them.


----------



## loraxc (Aug 14, 2003)

In all seriousness, why does it matter so much to you what other mamas do or say? Do we need to pass an exam to qualify as "AP"?

Why is it important to you to tell these mothers that they are not in the club?

By the strict definitions and popularly known tenets, no, I don't think CIO can qualify as "AP." However, I think there are many ways to meet children's needs, one of which is the need for sleep, and another of which is the need for a parent who is not about to lose her mind or crash the car from sleep deprivation.

In my opinion, Attachment Parenting is not a binary system with only one right answer.


----------



## thorn (Dec 28, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama24-7*
I guess people figure that they can pick and choose what AP things and needs of their children they meet. Very sad. HOw many employers would keep people on the payroll if they were as choosy about doing their work tasks as they are about choosing the needs of their children to meet?

of course people can pick and choose what things meet the needs of _their_ child and _their_ family. It's not a job where an employer gets to tell you what you can and cannot do. It's your life, your child, your family.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loraxc*
In all seriousness, why does it matter so much to you what other mamas do or say? Do we need to pass an exam to qualify as "AP"?

Why is it important to you to tell these mothers that they are not in the club?

yeah, what she said!! I would think, with all the emphasis on AP advocacy that the "AP club" would be a little more tolerant of diversity in other parents


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Before answering, I'm going to clarify that crying in arms is not CIO. I've heard some people here refer to it as such and it isn't. CIO is where you put the baby in the crib and leave them to cry until they fall asleep.

"Sleep training," as I usually see it called on another board I go to, is not in line with AP. The kind of CIO I read about these people doing ingores the fact that being held and being close to people is a need. They say stuff like, "the baby was fed and changed so they didn't need anything." The baby does need something. The baby needs You.

This is from Dr Sears' website:

Quote:

With most of these baby-training regimens you run the risk of becoming desensitized to the cues of your infant, especially when it comes to letting baby cry it out. Instead of helping you to figure out what baby's signals mean, these training methods tell you to ignore them. Neither you nor your baby learn anything good from this.
And two of his "Baby B's":

Quote:

5. Belief in the language value of your baby's cry. A baby's cry is a signal designed for the survival of the baby and the development of the parents. Responding sensitively to your baby's cries builds trust. Babies trust that their caregivers will be responsive to their needs. Parents gradually learn to trust in their ability to appropriately meet their baby's needs. This raises the parent-child communication level up a notch. *Tiny babies cry to communicate, not to manipulate.* (See Crying and Cry it Out)

6. Beware of baby trainers. Attachment parenting teaches you how to be discerning of advice, especially those rigid and extreme parenting styles that teach you to watch a clock or a schedule instead of your baby; you know, the cry-it-out crowd. This "convenience" parenting is a short-term gain, but a long-term loss, and is not a wise investment. These more restrained styles of parenting create a distance between you and your baby and keep you from becoming an expert in your child.
So, my opinion is, No. If you're training your baby to sleep through the night by leaving them alone in a crib to cry until they fall asleep, it's not AP. I'm not going to be all PC and go "we can all be AP in our own way." There are things that can't be considered AP and CIO is one of them.


----------



## Calidris (Apr 17, 2004)

JMO
AP is about responding to your baby, first and foremost. In almost all cases that means not doing CIO. There are a _very_ few exceptions I have heard about that might be valid.


----------



## thorn (Dec 28, 2004)

so if you spend say, 7 years meeting every need of 2 or 3 children, but that third child just won't respond to any other thing you've tried, and you let him CIO for 3 nights... you are no longer AP?

I don't _think_ I could ever do CIO. but I won't say never. my children have a need for sleep too. if it comes down to the end of the line and I have tried EVERYTHING else, then I might do it. and I don't think it would make me a cruelly unattached parent. JMHO.


----------



## vegmom (Jul 23, 2003)

Parenting is a hard job and some parents just cannot cope with night time parenting. We are night weaning my almost 5 month old daughter because she is just to wiggly and night nurses ALL night long. And I just could not night nurse her anymore and it was affecting my daytime parenting. She is still co-sleeping just not nursing. I also have a 2.5y.o. dd that I was able to night nurse till 14months. With her we slowly transitioned her out of our bed. But with both girls there were/are lots of tears. But in the end they are not harmed in any way. My dd1 does not have any emotional scars. We soothe dd2 when she cries. I feel guilty for weaning dd2 at 5 months when we went to 14months with dd1.

My point being is that there is no cookie cutter way to parent. It all has to be what works for your family. And children cry. That is just what they do. And some cry more than others. And they all cry for different reasons.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thorn*
so if you spend say, 7 years meeting every need of 2 or 3 children, but that third child just won't respond to any other thing you've tried, and you let him CIO for 3 nights... you are no longer AP?

I don't _think_ I could ever do CIO. but I won't say never. my children have a need for sleep too. if it comes down to the end of the line and I have tried EVERYTHING else, then I might do it. and I don't think it would make me a cruelly unattached parent. JMHO.

I guess then my middle child was not APed. He hated a sling, hated cosleeping, and he did CIO to sleep. That is the way he fell asleep, no matter what. The other two kids, the one before and after him, well they just don't count I guess. I am the same parent I was the first, second and third time.

Also sleep training, what do you call what Jay Gordon recommends? It is a form of sleep training. Don't fool yourselves.


----------



## chrissy (Jun 5, 2002)

phatui5.

Crying in arms is different, as is crying with mom or dad right there soothing baby. Crying for a few moments because mom or dad is on the toilet or changing a sibling's diaper or otherwise _unable_ to pick baby up is different.

But leaving a baby alone to cry to train them to fall asleep on their own is NOT what attachment parenting is about.

nak now...

Yeah, labels aren't the most important thing in the world but i get really riled up when people claim to practice ap but also cio. In my mind the two are mututally exclusive. AP is about following babies cues and responding to their needs and i just do not believe that there is a baby in the world who _wants_ to be alone to cry.

parenting is a hard job and attachment parenting is probably even more physically and sometimes emotionally difficult. we do it anyway because we believe it is the best way to raise our kids. when you decide to be a parent you are deciding to put your kids needs ahead of your own and oftentimes that means not getting as much sleep as you're used to.

so miraclemom, i agree with you.


----------



## Pynki (Aug 19, 2002)

You can practise Natural Family LIving with out being AP.. You use cloth diapers which is more natural.. You sling your child which is more natural.. You breastfeed because it is natural.. You birth naturally.. The word natural is right in that one.. You can do AAAALLL of that without being AP.. And I think that is where the confusion is.. Mothering Magazine is a NFL magazine that promotes AP tenets.. The two ideals often times over lap, but AREN'T necessarily synonimous..

You can be AP without folling all the "rules".. And OTF I've seen you really defending your "ferberization" of your 4 year old.. And 4 years is different than 4 or even 14 months.. Sleep is important.. For both parents and children.. But it's our society that is unnatural toward the rearing of chldren.. Not our children themselves.. I understand that you did what you feel is best for your family.. And that is what worked for you.. And your 4 year old is much better now, and that is great.. But again 4 isn't 4 or 14 months..

So again.. You can be AP without doing all the "right" things.. And you can be a NFL family without being AP at all..

Warm Squishy Feelings..

Dyan


----------



## vegmom (Jul 23, 2003)

Why do we feel like we should be criticizing these parents that practice AP during the day but use CIO at night. I think that encouraging AP is more effective than any criticism of each others parenting techniques.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *AmandaBL*
nope. just my opinion. ignoring a child crying because he wants you is not ap.

I have to agree with Amanda.


----------



## Leilalu (May 29, 2004)

Well, I think we should be encouraging meeting childrens needs vegmom.CIO is essentially IGNORING a child and their cries. Simple as that. You can't encourage one form of parenting while accepting things that differ from it.I think we need to give people outside the AP realm a real example of it. Leaving a baby to cry at night has far-reaching effects on the child and all of his relationships in life.It is the beginning of distrust, IMO

I beleive heeding to a baby's cry is a foundational doctrinne, if you will, of AP.I don't think you can throw that one out so easily. Sure, you can be AP the rest of the way but you are still harming the mother-child relationship at the same time.
Not meanig to sound snarky-I have a good friend who has 3 kids and did cio and is pretty AP. But her kids are so different when it comes to bedtime issues.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

I don't think you have to follow all the rules to be AP. I stopped doing cloth diapers at 10 months, had to stop slingin' around 6 months due to a bad back, and let my dd cry (next to me) to get out of all-night -nursing several times.

I think it's the spirit of how we do things that matters. Like, I couldn't babywear as much as I'da liked, but I still carried dd a lot,and still try to every once in a while. I switched to disposables at 10 months, but then used IPT techniques to potty train at 20 months. I put my foot down about mommy-as- pacifier nursing after 12 months, but still nursed at night till over 2.

To be fair about various baby crying to sleep things- different kids need different things. I did have a friend whose dd had day/night reversal and needed a lot of active help learning to sleep. They did use CIO- maybe around 4 months- but it worked very quickly, with very little all-out crying. Their dd still moke at night, and mom tended her, but the cio was to teach her to sleep during the dark hours. I suppose their dd responded well to coercion. As opposed to my kid, where CIO of any kind would have been a fight to the death. Granted, I would not consider these friends AP.

I think the part of CIO that is really not in keeping with my idea of AP is the idea that infants are trying to manipulate you, and could sleep if they wanted to, but are just being difficult. I think that under the age of 11-12 months wants and needs are pretty similar. After that a parent needs to help a child differentiate wants from needs. I just cannot get behind the narcissistic idea that moms have that their 6 months old spend time trying to figure out how to manipulate them.

On manipulation: I night weaned completely once I got PG, when my dd was 2 and a few months. I figured that when I night wean, she'll sleep through the night: she's only waking up because she'll *get* something. Well, she still woke up for several; more months. She'd wake up and cry, I'd pat her on the head, she'd fall back asleep. Sometimes she's just linb in next to her dad or I and fall asleep. Apparently, it wasn't all about me. Surprise, surprise,


----------



## dharmamama (Sep 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama24-7*
Well, her dd is firmly attached to her blankie, her thumb

I've practised lots of AP techniques with my daughter since she was born and she is, at 2 1/2, still firmly attached to her thumb.

Who does it benefit to pick apart these women-from-other-boards? Is that really something you want to spend your time and mental energy on? They are what they are regardless of what label they (or you) use, and debating it here won't have any impact on them.

I would never say that I am AP precisely because I wouldn't want to open myself up to being called out by others.

Namaste!


----------



## PurplePixiePooh (Aug 5, 2003)

IMO CIO is not AP. Never will be. Ignoring your babies cries because you don't feel like caring for them is heinous. There is no legitimate reason to force a baby to "self soothe". It is all about the parents. I had one super easy baby, hardly cried, slept 12 hrs sometimes plus two long naps a day because she wanted to..then I has my son who apparantly never needs to sleep. He is almost 2 and now he sleeps for me, but still not like my oldest. I remember being so tired that I couldn't think straight, I remember him being so miserable and crying, screaming and sweating in my arms...but he was in my arms. He was comforted even if not silenced.

In answer to the OP CIO is IMO the one thing that cannot be reconciled with AP - ever.


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Pynki*
But it's our society that is unnatural toward the rearing of chldren.. Not our children themselves..


----------



## dharmamama (Sep 19, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SparkleMama*
Ignoring your babies cries because you don't feel like caring for them.

We have not let our kids CIO, so I am not trying to defend CIO, but I think this a huge misconception about CIO and the parents who practice it. Very few of these parents are ignoring their kids because they don't want to be bothered. Most parents who practice CIO do it because they believe it's what's best for their children. They have been told that kids need to learn to self-sooth, and they believe it. To insinuate that they are callous and selfish is not very nice. They might be misguided, but they are not intentionally ignoring their kids so as not to be bothered by them. I don't like to see others being judged so harshly.

Namaste!


----------



## vegmom (Jul 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Leilalu*
Well, I think we should be encouraging meeting childrens needs vegmom.CIO is essentially IGNORING a child and their cries. Simple as that. You can't encourage one form of parenting while accepting things that differ from it.I think we need to give people outside the AP realm a real example of it. Leaving a baby to cry at night has far-reaching effects on the child and all of his relationships in life.It is the beginning of distrust, IMO

I totally disagree with this comment. If you are AP during the day but let your child CIO at night does not have "far-reaching effects on the child and all of his relationships in life" You gotta be kidding. There are so many aspects that contribute to a childs relationships that you can't just blame it on CIO. This is only a small fraction of time in a childs life. If the mom is attentive, caring, loving during the day and just can't handle night-time parenting because it causes her stress I would hardly call it "heinous" to let her baby CIO. You should not JUDGE and LABEL people for what they do and what WORKS for them. I encourage AP parenting but do not think that it works for everybody. I also do not criticize people for not practicing it.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Purposefully not reading responses before I respond to the OP's question:

*ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!!!*

(Now, I'll go back and read.







)


----------



## vegmom (Jul 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SparkleMama*
IMO CIO is not AP. Never will be. Ignoring your babies cries because you don't feel like caring for them is heinous. There is no legitimate reason to force a baby to "self soothe". It is all about the parents.

Of course its all about the parents. Feelings of depression, frustration, resentment, anger, can all stem from parents who want to AP but can't during do it on a 24 HOUR BASIS. Give these moms a break.


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)

IMO, parents are parents 24/7/365, not just when it is is convenient or non-stressful. There is a great sticky at the top of the Family Bed and Nighttime Parenting forum about the harmful effects of CIO to both baby and parent.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Leilalu*
Well, I think we should be encouraging meeting childrens needs vegmom.CIO is essentially IGNORING a child and their cries. Simple as that. You can't encourage one form of parenting while accepting things that differ from it.I think we need to give people outside the AP realm a real example of it. Leaving a baby to cry at night has far-reaching effects on the child and all of his relationships in life.It is the beginning of distrust, IMO

I beleive heeding to a baby's cry is a foundational doctrinne, if you will, of AP.I don't think you can throw that one out so easily. Sure, you can be AP the rest of the way but you are still harming the mother-child relationship at the same time.
Not meanig to sound snarky-I have a good friend who has 3 kids and did cio and is pretty AP. But her kids are so different when it comes to bedtime issues.

There is no way you are going to convince me that sleep training is damaging to a mother child relationship or that its the beginning of distrust. Nope not going to buy into that. I think what could be more harmful, is older babies/toddler/chidlren having learning and behavioral problems because they are not getting enough sleep. That sleep deprived parents are not going to meet their own or their children's needs effectively during the day.
To be honest with you I have seen more unhealthy relationships among mother and child with AP families than I have with mainstream families. Some "AP" families become martyrs to their children and often fail to realize normal, healthy boundaries which IMO are far more harmful than sleep training, night weaning, etc. Sometimes babies just cry. Its not necessarily unhealthy. Also when babies get older and head into toddler hood, crying can be a part of manipulating and can be a discipline issue. I don't think anyone here is saying let newborns cio, or abandoning a crying a baby, but a few nights of crying and sleep training for an older baby I seriously doubt is emotionally harmful. I have been around far too many children whose parents did use CIO that are normal, healthy attached children. I think have detatched, damaged mother/child relationships comes from over all parenting, not just whether or not you sleep trained or not.


----------



## LongLiveLife (Nov 5, 2004)

meeOW!

Okay, I must be a masochist to want to throw my 2 cents into this, but here goes:

Is CIO AP? Of course not.

Can you rightly call yourself an AP parent if you practice CIO? You can call yourself whatever you want, but remember that you are representing something that is sacred to many people (presumably to you, too).

Are labels damaging? Well, sometimes people use them to feel like part of an elite, and sometimes people use them for clarity.

I wouldn't feel comfortable telling anyone which label to wear, but I would like to get the message out that if you are going to label yourself, you should represent the cause. Otherwise, the meaning gets diluted. More and more mainstream practices creep in.

Personally, I'm not the crunchiest mama and sometimes for my own sanity I end up compromising my parenting standards... too much TV, junk food, et cetera... but I am very aware that this stuff isn't part of my NFL philosophy. In fact it's contradictory.
So if I were to practice AP in the day and CIO at night, I would want to be honest with myself and to those around me who might be curious about the way I'm raising my children. I would say, I practice attachment parenting for the most part, but CIO is not AP.


----------



## Quindin (Aug 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
By the time a child is 9m-1 years old, they have learned to manipulate you through behaviors.

I could not disagree more!
In fact, this idea is something I heard for the first time when I moved to the US. Back home in Denmark ALL Drs., psychologists and nurses advise very strongly against inputing adult intentions into your baby's behaviors. It is essential for the emotional and social development of the baby that his parents respond to his cries right away.

Edited to add:
Even toddlers should not be treated as little manipulating beings. I learnt that the hard way... When I was a new mom and listenedd too much to other people's advice I assumed my toddlers had their little manipulating plans in their heads and I disciplined accordingly








I have grown and learnt since then, and now know that my toddler is innocent, does not know better and needs to be constantly guided rather than left alone to cry or in a time-out at age 2!!!! He just would not understand what was going on if I locked him in his room anyways...
I have a MUCH easier time dealing with DS#2 than I had with DS#1 and I attribute that solely to the fact DH and I have since embraced AP fully.
I only wish I knew that when DD and DS#1 were toddlers though...


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Pynki*
You can practise Natural Family LIving with out being AP........... The two ideals often times over lap, but AREN'T necessarily synonimous..

ITA!!

NAK...

For me, CIO is a deal breaker in AP, even if you cloth diaper and are vegan and never bought a "baby bucket". I firmly believe you cannot be AP and CIO, period.
I'm not talking about letting your older child cry because they want to stay up later or they want another cookie before bed. If it's 9 c'clock on a Saturday and my 7yo wants to stay up until 9:30 and I leave the room while he screams in his bed, that is not CIO, that's ignoring him while he throws a tantrum.
I'm also not talking about putting a screaming baby down for a moment to recenter yourself. If your 4 month old has been crying for an hour and you need to put her in the crib for a minute or two while you go in the hall and take a couple deep breaths, that is not CIO. Shaken Baby Syndrome is not AP either.

CIO is where you make a conscious decision that, at 8:30, the baby's getting a clean diaper and then going to the crib until he falls asleep and you sit in the living room while he cries. The difference for me is the ability for your child to understand. If you can tell your child "sweetie, it's time to go to sleep now. You've had water and a story and now I'm going to leave the room so you can go to sleep, but I'll be right in the other room and I'll leave the door open...." at that point, cries from the room can be manipulative. Your child knows you haven't abandoned her and understands what "bed time" means.

My 4mo doesn't understand "bedtime" or "I'm right in the other room" - if I don't respond to his cries, he thinks I've abandoned him and he gets scared. If I inflict that feeling on him on purpose for my own convenience, that's not AP. It's the opposite of AP, in my opinion.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Firstly, I wanted to second Dharmamomma's comment that critisizing other people's parenting gets us nowhere. I'd add that this is especially true as we can never know the whole story of another family's situation.

Next- I wanted to reiterate and join in the chorus that babies/toddlers don't spend time trying to manipulate parents. They certainly want what they want, and they'll try to get it. But as parents we do things to adjust our kids' behavior to our own desires all the time- is that manipulation? Or just trying to meet our needs and/or desires? Parenting is a 2 way street with parents and kids bot trying to get their needs and wants met, not about kids trying to "manipulate" us and us having to fight back. I feel that way of thinking leads to poor child/parent vibes.

Finally, it's hard to judge what's best for kids, but I have followed a lot of AP practices because it feels right for me. I know labels can be tough, but it's nice to have an "official" parenting method to refer to when I describe my feelings.

I get sick to my stomach and panicky when I see a crib standing alone in a dark room. It's a deep physical memory/reaction for me and it informs my behavior as a parent. It's nice to feel that I can listen to my heart about it- whether or not it helps my child in the long run.


----------



## Quindin (Aug 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma*
CIO is where you make a conscious decision that, at 8:30, the baby's getting a clean diaper and then going to the crib until he falls asleep and you sit in the living room while he cries. The difference for me is the ability for your child to understand. If you can tell your child "sweetie, it's time to go to sleep now. You've had water and a story and now I'm going to leave the room so you can go to sleep, but I'll be right in the other room and I'll leave the door open...." at that point, cries from the room can be manipulative. Your child knows you haven't abandoned her and understands what "bed time" means.

My 4mo doesn't understand "bedtime" or "I'm right in the other room" - if I don't respond to his cries, he thinks I've abandoned him and he gets scared. If I inflict that feeling on him on purpose for my own convenience, that's not AP. It's the opposite of AP, in my opinion.

Thanks







I could not have said it better!!


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *polihaupt*
I could not disagree more!
In fact, this idea is something I heard for the first time when I moved to the US. Back home in Denmark ALL Drs., psychologists and nurses advise very strongly against inputing adult intentions into your baby's behaviors. It is essential for the emotional and social development of the baby that his parents respond to their his cries right away.


Thats great for the folks in Denmark, but yes, older babies and toddler manipulate you. I have three children, all with different temperments and they definitely manipulate us for what they want. Children, even small ones, need boundaries and discipline. I've seen all my children as toddler throw fits and tantrum for things, and turn on the tears just for the sheer hell of it to get our attention or get what they want. Maybe my kids are just WAY advanced tho, but I seriously doubt it.


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *vegmom*
If you are AP during the day but let your child CIO at night does not have "far-reaching effects on the child and all of his relationships in life" You gotta be kidding. There are so many aspects that contribute to a childs relationships that you can't just blame it on CIO. This is only a small fraction of time in a childs life. If the mom is attentive, caring, loving during the day and just can't handle night-time parenting because it causes her stress I would hardly call it "heinous" to let her baby CIO. You should not JUDGE and LABEL people for what they do and what WORKS for them. I encourage AP parenting but do not think that it works for everybody. I also do not criticize people for not practicing it.

I just wanted to add that I don't think all parents who do CIO are bad parents. I've heard so many moms talk about how they sat in hall outside their baby's door and cried along with their child. They thought it was best, but it's not AP. I don't think you can "be AP all day, but do CIO at night" just like you can't practice GD all day and then spank a child for not going to sleep.


----------



## Quindin (Aug 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
Thats great for the folks in Denmark, but yes, older babies and toddler manipulate you. I have three children, all with different temperments and they definitely manipulate us for what they want. Children, even small ones, need boundaries and discipline. I've seen all my children as toddler throw fits and tantrum for things, and turn on the tears just for the sheer hell of it to get our attention or get what they want. Maybe my kids are just WAY advanced tho, but I seriously doubt it.

So we must agree to disagree.









All I know is that since we changed our parenting style, our kids' behaviors have improved dramatically (and our little toddler is more harmonious than our first two), everyone is much happier and our home more peaceful. This is just my experience.

And truly, it is not only in Denmark that CIO does not exist. In most countries in the world, CIO is unheard of...


----------



## LongLiveLife (Nov 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
Thats great for the folks in Denmark, but yes, older babies and toddler manipulate you. I have three children, all with different temperments and they definitely manipulate us for what they want. Children, even small ones, need boundaries and discipline. I've seen all my children as toddler throw fits and tantrum for things, and turn on the tears just for the sheer hell of it to get our attention or get what they want. Maybe my kids are just WAY advanced tho, but I seriously doubt it.


I don't think that crying to get your attention is manipulation. It seems like pretty cut and dried communication, to me. They want attention, they cry for attention. A child doesn't want to be alone to sleep, the child cries. How is that manipulative? It may not be the most sophisticated form of communication, but these are toddlers we're talking about.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *polihaupt*
So we must agree to disagree.









All I know is that since we changed our parenting style, our kids' behaviors have improved dramatically (and our little toddler is more harmonious than our first two), everyone is much happier and our home more peaceful. This is just my experience.

And truly, it is not only in Denmark that CIO does not exist. In most countries in the world, CIO is unheard of...

I think in a lot of countries people don't have the luxury of spearate bedrooms and cribs.

For this reason alone I've always thought infant sleep training was kinda unnatural. But then again, so is the kind of parental isolation we face in this country.


----------



## MiracleMama (Sep 1, 2003)

Thank you for your responses. For the record, one of the women I am referring to used the Weissbluth method (Not sure if I spelled that right, but he wrote a book entitled "Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Baby" or something to that effect), which as I understand it is definitely sleep training. The way she described leaving her baby to cry was almost evil, and I felt really bad for her baby.

I do not want to pick these women apart, I was simply looking for opinions from more AP-minded women. I do not label myself, as I said above I just did what felt right for ME, but these women do...and I just don't understand how one can leave a 7 month old baby to cry in a room for an hour, or lock a toddler in his room at naptime, and still call themselves AP. I agree that natural parenting would be a more accurate "label" if you will.


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LongLiveLife*
I don't think that crying to get your attention is manipulation. It seems like pretty cut and dried communication, to me. They want attention, they cry for attention. A child doesn't want to be alone to sleep, the child cries. How is that manipulative? It may not be the most sophisticated form of communication, but these are toddlers we're talking about.


I agree. If your toddler is thinking "I could go to sleep right now if I wanted to, but I think I'll cry for Mom for a while just to see how many times I can get her to come back in here...." then she's light years ahead of most kids. Communicating what you need is not manipulating, even if crying is your form of communication.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Although this is very contravercial on these boards, I believe that you can be AP and let your child CIO.

We let our first DD CIO (meaning to cry alone in her crib) at 4 months when it became clear that THIS is what she needed to have her needs met.

She would cry for hours in our arms no matter what we did.

she would wake up screaming in our bed if we touched her during co-sleeping.

When we finally let her cry in her crib she cried for about 20 min the first time and then fell asleep.

After that we would sometimes try to soothe her in arms but it quickly became clear that she would cry less and less if we just laid her down in her cirb and let her be.

To me this was meeting her needs and thus the only thing that would have been AP for her.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma*
I agree. If your toddler is thinking "I could go to sleep right now if I wanted to, but I think I'll cry for Mom for a while just to see how many times I can get her to come back in here...." then she's light years ahead of most kids. Communicating what you need is not manipulating, even if crying is your form of communication.

I think people may have different ideas about what "manipulation" is. To me, manipulation occurs when I have that weird sense that I am being controlled, then I think back and realize a sneaky comment or seemingly meaningless action that was secretly meant to de-stabilize me. We're talking grown-up behavior here.

When my toddler cries because she's sad, throws a tantrum due to anger, etc. it is pretty clear what her motivation is. I don't consider this manipulation.


----------



## Vicitoria (Dec 17, 2004)

I think you really do have to just look out for the specific needs of your child. I had every intention of breast feeding for 2 years. I didn't produce more than a tblsp of milk at a time so he is on formula. I just had to give up wearing him because he's almost 25 lbs and he's only 6 months old. I simply can't carry him anymore. I need to see a Chiropractor! My husband and I love to co-sleep but it just isn't working anymore. None of us were getting any sleep. We had to put him in his crib and yes, we had to let him cry. Not forever, but a little and certainly not to sleep by himself. Yesterday was night three and he slept through the night! For the very first time ever.

I think of it this way. He's started crawling and is gaining his own independence. He's also ready to have ground rules put down and to have them enforced.







All this really does not make be AP at all. But I love my child and am doing what is best for him.


----------



## mommyofshmoo (Oct 25, 2004)

Was just thinking-

You can do whatever you want and call yourself whatever you want, but not everybody is going to aggree with you- on this or any other board.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Wow some of these posts have me floored.







I feel like I've gone to BabyCenter by accident. I wish I had the energy to respond to each one but I don't b.c I'm 37 weeks pregnant and just spent an hour snuggling with dd and ds (instead of napping myself) because they were really wound up about something, seemed upset, and wouldn't fall asleep (a rarity but something I felt I needed to respond to and respect nonetheless).

I can't believe there is a thread on this board where people are defending letting a baby lie alone in their room and cry themselves to sleep.









Quote:

All this really does not make me AP at all.
You got that much right.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LongLiveLife*
I don't think that crying to get your attention is manipulation. It seems like pretty cut and dried communication, to me. They want attention, they cry for attention. A child doesn't want to be alone to sleep, the child cries. How is that manipulative? It may not be the most sophisticated form of communication, but these are toddlers we're talking about.

I am of the opinion that my children don't always need my attention, even if they want it. Yes it can be a form of communication, but it can also be manipulation. I can't tell you how many times a child has cried to get attention from a parent when its inappropriate, rude, or its just not the time. This is when it is a boundary and discipline issues, one that toddlers cross all the time. So if a child is crying for attention, it maybe something want but not need. They may be doing it when they know they should be sleeping, or when they see mom or dad doing something else. There is nothing wrong with a parent saying "Not right now" or even ignoring crying when its inappropriate -- even from toddlers.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma*
I agree. If your toddler is thinking "I could go to sleep right now if I wanted to, but I think I'll cry for Mom for a while just to see how many times I can get her to come back in here...." then she's light years ahead of most kids. Communicating what you need is not manipulating, even if crying is your form of communication.

Actually toddlers do do that. I've read enough child development books and done enough observation to see older babies do this. Again it comes down to needs and wants, boundaries and discipline.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya43*
Although this is very contravercial on these boards, I believe that you can be AP and let your child CIO.

We let our first DD CIO (meaning to cry alone in her crib) at 4 months when it became clear that THIS is what she needed to have her needs met.

She would cry for hours in our arms no matter what we did.

she would wake up screaming in our bed if we touched her during co-sleeping.

When we finally let her cry in her crib she cried for about 20 min the first time and then fell asleep.

After that we would sometimes try to soothe her in arms but it quickly became clear that she would cry less and less if we just laid her down in her cirb and let her be.

To me this was meeting her needs and thus the only thing that would have been AP for her.

BINGO. This was the way it was with our middle son. Its just the way he was.


----------



## mombh (May 6, 2003)

there is a big difference in a toddler crying because mama is tending to baby or getting dressed etc; you can show them that you are doing something and will be with them shortly and tell them in a soothing voice and touch them, closing them in a room to cry is not AP it is not putting a childs needs first. some babies cry no matter what I have had a few very close in age, and my baby has severe food allergies with one of the symptoms being not sleeping very well at night even now on a clean diet at 20 months of age. parents don't always know what's bothering the baby and young babies crave being in contact with their parents even if they still cry. I recomend everyone read the book by Dr. Jay Gordon, Good NIghts(the happy parents' guide to the family bed and a peaceful night's sleep!) Parenting does'nt stop just because it's 1am and you are tired so baby has to cio, we don't train our childeren to walk or sit or crawl and if we are so concerned that they will not learn to soothe/fall asleep by themselves that we need to let them cio while we "sleep train " them then perhaps we should start potty training them in infancy to because by letting them use a diaper would make them to dependant and never potty train!!! sounds ridiculous does'nt it. btw I have 7 childeren the oldest is 16, and I have learnt that some babies/childeren are needier and some will take longer to sleep all night or potty train. they are babies for such a short time and the investment is well worth it in the long run.no-one say's Ap will guarentee a calm peaceful child but it will produce children that know they are loved and have a chance to be the best they can be!!!!


----------



## nikirj (Oct 1, 2002)

LongLiveLife

To the OP - in a word, NO. I am not talking about the 1:100000 exception who finds their child needs crying-alone-time at night (although I'm inclined to beleive that they really just need alone-time, the crying not being the important part, just incidental to their developmental level at the time), I am talking about the average person sitting at their computer and posting about how wonderfully AP they are.

CIO is not an AP practice. AP people and AP practices are two very different things, sometimes we forget that. We need to be supporting AP practices and discouraging non-AP ones, this is a separate issue from supporting a parents themselves.


----------



## sagewinna (Nov 19, 2001)

AP doesn't mean attached only during the day. I would say it's not AP.


----------



## Mama2Xander (Jul 3, 2004)

OK, I usually stay out of these discussions, but here goes...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *woobysma*
For me, CIO is a deal breaker in AP, even if you cloth diaper and are vegan and never bought a "baby bucket". I firmly believe you cannot be AP and CIO, period.
I'm not talking about letting your older child cry because they want to stay up later or they want another cookie before bed. If it's 9 c'clock on a Saturday and my 7yo wants to stay up until 9:30 and I leave the room while he screams in his bed, that is not CIO, that's ignoring him while he throws a tantrum.
I'm also not talking about putting a screaming baby down for a moment to recenter yourself. If your 4 month old has been crying for an hour and you need to put her in the crib for a minute or two while you go in the hall and take a couple deep breaths, that is not CIO. Shaken Baby Syndrome is not AP either.

CIO is where you make a conscious decision that, at 8:30, the baby's getting a clean diaper and then going to the crib until he falls asleep and you sit in the living room while he cries. The difference for me is the ability for your child to understand. If you can tell your child "sweetie, it's time to go to sleep now. You've had water and a story and now I'm going to leave the room so you can go to sleep, but I'll be right in the other room and I'll leave the door open...." at that point, cries from the room can be manipulative. Your child knows you haven't abandoned her and understands what "bed time" means.

My 4mo doesn't understand "bedtime" or "I'm right in the other room" - if I don't respond to his cries, he thinks I've abandoned him and he gets scared. If I inflict that feeling on him on purpose for my own convenience, that's not AP. It's the opposite of AP, in my opinion.

ITA. I think it's all about the intent. Yes, babies cry, and no, it's not our job to *always* stop them from crying. But there is a HUGE difference in the above example re: Shaken Baby Syndrome, or putting your baby down in a safe place for a minute b/c you need to take something out of the oven, or whatever, versus DECIDING that they are going to stay in their crib, alone, to cry for as long as it takes, with the purpose of "teaching" them to fall asleep. That is never okay in my book. And definitely not AP. And no, it doesn't matter how nice you are to them in the daytime, it's still not ok. Actually maybe that's worse in a way b/c then they never know if they can trust you or not. Are they going to get the responsive mommy this time, or the ignoring mommy? It is also not age related to me. You can't say that you will respond to their cries and then at an arbitrary age decide that they have to CIO. I don't think at X age they are suddenly "manipulating" you b/c they want something, but don't really need it. If you stop responding to them via CIO, all you are doing is breaking the trust that you (hopefully) previously established. It's not teaching them not to manipulate (which I think is a very adult concept which we should not project onto babies and small children, personally). Of course there comes a time when you will have to say no to your kids for some reason or other (eg. of course you can't buy them every toy they want) but attending to a young child's nighttime needs is very different.

OT - I think there should be a lot more information out there about how it is NORMAL for babies and young children to wake up at night, and yes, they need to be parented at night too. This whole sleep training business really comes from our weird cultural attitudes and expectations of babies which are not biologically appropriate. Keep in mind that the vast majority of the world thinks CIO is abusive.

OK, go ahead and flame me now


----------



## vegmom (Jul 23, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mombh*
Parenting does'nt stop just because it's 1am and you are tired so baby has to cio, we don't train our childeren to walk or sit or crawl and if we are so concerned that they will not learn to soothe/fall asleep by themselves that we need to let them cio while we "sleep train " them then perhaps we should start potty training them in infancy to because by letting them use a diaper would make them to dependant and never potty train!!!











Just wanted to let you know that some people do start "potty training" from infancy. We practice this with both my dds. It is very much AP as it makes the parents tune into their babies elimination needs and rythms. Just like babies can communicate to their mums that they are hungry, they can also communicate their need eliminate.

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...ad.php?t=46432


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

I wanted to practice attachment parenting because I wanted my children to be attached to me and to reap the benefits of that attachment. Initially, I tried to follow all the "rules" and hoped to see the expected end result. When I didn't get it I was very frustrated, confused, angry, resentful, thought I must be a bad mom, etc. It was detrimental to us, my baby and myself, for me to totally self sacrifice, in order for her to never, never, cry in bed alone. I don't believe that it is impossible to promote attachment unless you martyr yourself. It took me a long time, but I finally figured out that I had to do what was right for us as a family, not just follow the rules in a book. Parenting by the seat of my pants, following my own intuition, and reading books, all combined. has been what works best. Sometimes meeting my child's needs, balancing our needs as individuals and a family, as well as trying to satisfy wants when appropriate has meant, at times, for us, "breaking the AP rules." And that's okay. CIO, defined as leaving an infant to cry alone in another room, whilst being studiously ignored by the parent in order to teach him or her to self soothe and sleep, is not AP. However, in order to meet everyone's needs, sometimes the wants of older babies/toddlers/childrens will need to be thwarted. And we can only decide that each for ourselves. As a single, working full time outside the home momma who relied on family members for child care, there were things I needed to do a little differently than another family might have. Personally, I think six months is too young for a baby to understand, but they do begin to have wants that are not needs at about that age, generally. My 9-12 month olds *could* understand that it was bedtime and that I was right in the next room. In fact, a promise of leaving the door open is all my 22 month old needs to settle down and go to sleep at night. It also has a ton to do with personality and individual "wiring."

Older babies absolutely can manipulate. If Ellie can cry and get me to come lie down with her, because that's what she'd infinitely prefer, then darn-tooting she'll do it! But, if I say no, Momma needs to go in the other room and do _________, I'll see you in a little bit. I'll come to bed later" then she'll settle down and go to sleep. Unless she really does need me, then she'll let me know. And I can tell. Because we are attached. It's the baby as barometer that Dr. Sears talks about it in The Baby Book.


----------



## bamamom (Dec 9, 2004)

sometimes my dd would cry regardless of what we did. It sucked.


----------



## annakiss (Apr 4, 2003)

MDC does not support or condone CIO. Please see: http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=179657 for further information.


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)

Wow, where to start.... It disturbs me to see infants and toddlers being accused of adult-like manipulation because they cry. If a baby is crying "just to get attention," then I think that child's need in that instance is pretty cut and dry. She (or he) needs the parent's attention and comfort. Period. Infants and toddlers have no concept of it being rude or inappropiate to interrupt a conversation, phone call, or meal. That is an abstract adult concept. And a child who cries when they are not allowed to have something--such as my 9 month old's obsession w/ plastic bags--is not crying out of malicious manipulation. She is crying b/c she is frustrated. She has a natural, instinctual desire to explore, and the neat object that she was looking at was taken away. She has no idea that some objects are ok to explore and others aren't. And that frustration may be heightened because of hunger, sleepiness, overstimulation, or lack of attention on my part. In that instance, I need distract or redirect her, comfort her, and make her feel safe and loved, not put her alone somewhere to cry in order to teach her when it's appropriate to cry.


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamomma*
Older babies absolutely can manipulate. If Ellie can cry and get me to come lie down with her, because that's what she'd infinitely prefer, then darn-tooting she'll do it! But, if I say no, Momma needs to go in the other room and do _________, I'll see you in a little bit. I'll come to bed later" then she'll settle down and go to sleep. Unless she really does need me, then she'll let me know. And I can tell. Because we are attached. It's the baby as barometer that Dr. Sears talks about it in The Baby Book.

This is a great example, just to clarify my post earlier about manipulation, I think when you reach this level of communication, then CIO is no longer an issue - at this point, you're into the whole bed-time discipline, routine, are you scared of the dark?, etc arena and I'm definitely not going there this late on a sunday







And while ds will always be "my baby", when we get to this point, I think he's no longer really a "baby" - I think of CIO as something parents do to babies/ infants


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Jennissee, heh heh, wait 'til she's two and you want to talk on the phone! Nobody is accusing these babies of adult or malicious manipulation. Yes, they are exploring, not just their environment, but the bounds of relationships, the one with mom in particular. When an older baby or toddler is crying while Mom is on the phone or having a conversation they are frustrated and want her attention. I think they may be worried whether she is still there for them, but it is up to Mom to teach the little one what is acceptable. They don't like it, but I begin teaching my toddlers about conversational etiquette pretty young. First of all, I really limit my phone, computer, etc. time to when they are sleeping, but if I do need to talk to another adult for a few minutes we talk about taking turns and waiting quietly and patiently for your turn. I don't expect them to get it right away, but I definitely start teaching it. And tears with these kind of frustrations while they are learning are, of course, inevitable. You can't prevent all of them. I think it is the same with bedtime and going to sleep. You start teaching some nighttime manners. And I agree with what Wooby'smom said about reaching a certain level of communication. An attached mom who's used to reading baby's cues will know when this is.

I just want to point out that when CIO is strongly condemned in any form and for any reason at any age we are doing a grave disservice to new moms who trying figure out how they want to parent. I think it is wrong to say you cannot CIO and be AP unless you are very specific about what CIO is. I would venture to guess that all of us agree that it is damaging to very young babies to try to train them to go to sleep on their own. The article that was in Mothering not too long ago is very convincing of this. It gets to be more of a gray area with differing opinions as they get to be about a year or more. There also needs to be allowances for temperaments.


----------



## Raven67 (Apr 20, 2002)

Wow! OTF...I love your posts on this thread. A total voice of reason. Yes, yes, yes to everything you've said. There are so many people here who live absolutely miserable lives trying to do every conceivable AP thing. As you said, every baby is different, and you need to adjust to the needs of your baby and family....there are some kids who need to wimper/fuss themselves to sleep. Toddlers don't NEED to be up all night nursing. Etc., Etc., Gotta run, but thank you for being such a breath of fresh air.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
I have just finished reading the Ferber book. It has some great information in there about sleep. I didn't agree with all of it (like his views on cosleeping) but there is no way you are going to convince me that this child is "withdrawn" because her mother did CIO. I am just not buying it. I live in the South where mainstream parenting is common, and I know parents who do CIO starting out much younger than 6m old. These kids are perfectly attached to their parents.
Also some kids, even cosleeping children suck their thumbs or have a blankie. I would say what you have seen is typical behavior of most 20 months old with a new sibling. There is no way you are going to convince me, after parenting three children thus far, and all three somewhat differntly, that encouraging sleep at 6m old (and if she used Ferber, and took his advice, she just didn't abandon her baby) damaged her child or any child for that matter.


----------



## merrick (Dec 8, 2003)

Wow, OTF. Your posts don't sound like those of my interpretation of AP parents at all. In fact, they sound like the opposite. What does AP mean to you, exactly, just to clarify?


----------



## Quindin (Aug 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Raven67*
Wow! OTF...I love your posts on this thread. A total voice of reason. Yes, yes, yes to everything you've said. There are so many people here who live absolutely miserable lives trying to do every conceivable AP thing.

The thing is that what you call "miserable lives", most of us find wonderful.

Maybe for some, there will be more "voice of reason" in places like Baby Center - where parents apparently are not living miserable lives because they let their kids CIO...

Don't be surprised that so many people here are against CIO 'cause NO, MDC does not support CIO - and neither do most of the moms here.


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

If your life is wonderful she is not talking about you. There *are* people on here who are miserable because they are stretching themselves too thin trying to live up to their interpretation of AP standards. A voice of reason *is* sometimes needed when a mom is way out of balance because she is self sacrificing waaaaayy too much in the name of AP. AP is about meeting the needs of your child and in order to do that the Mom's basic needs have to be met to a certain extent too or she is going to burn out and or fall apart at the seams. I have not seen a single person on here suggest that CIO of a small infant simply for the convenience of the parent or so the infant will learn to go to sleep on his or her own or self soothe. Anyone who has mentioned alternatives to always going to a crying *older* baby, toddler, or child has done so in regard to the mental and emotional health and well being of the whole family. I think it is possible to still be AP and do this. In fact meeting the needs of an older baby/toddler sometimes involves *not* responding to every little whimper! That can be unhealthy as well, just as it is healthy and important to consistently respond to a tiny baby in order to build trust.

I realize that Dr. Sears is not the be all end all of AP, but even he does say in his books promoting AP that it is not about self sacrifice that leads to mother burnout and that older babies begin to learn how to handle some frustration as the need for balancing the needs of other family members comes into play.


----------



## chrissy (Jun 5, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *polihaupt*
The thing is that what you call "miserable lives", most of us find wonderful.

ITA! It can be hard at times but the rewards are worth it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamomma*
A voice of reason *is* sometimes needed when a mom is way out of balance because she is self sacrificing waaaaayy too much in the name of AP.

But CIO *isn't* a voice of reason, that's the whole point. Yes, nighttime parenting can be hard but it's your job. I'm not talking about becoming a martyr to AP, I'm just talking about CIO and I don't think you should ever ever do it.


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Once again, no one has said anything about adult or malicious manipulation, no has said CIO is the voice of reason. No one is saying that. We all *agree* that CIO, defined as forcing tiny babies to cry themselves to sleep all alone is *not* a part of being an attached parent. No one is advocating that.

No one has said that nighttime parenting is not their job or that it shouldn't be hard. Threads like this come up from time to time, because there is a gray area and there are moms on here who will staunchly argue that no child of any age, or for any reason, should ever be allowed to cry 'alone.' There are those of us who are trying to practice attachment parenting that do not agree with this rigid position when it is detrimental to the mother and therefore to the child, because the mother is no longer capable of doing her job well. It is to these parents that we (well, I guess I should speak for myself, but that is what I'm hearing form OTF and others) want to send the message that it is okay to begin to teach older babies some nighttime manners and how to be a member of a family.

I see that you are saying that being AP is not about being a martyr and on that we agree. I'm not sure, though, that everyone agrees on the definition of CIO. Sometimes I think the definition gets extended so far that it creates problems for people who are trying to "follow the rules." AP is an ancient parenting method, but many in this culture got so far away from it that it is actually "new", and we don't necessarily know how to do it. We are also doing it in a modern world that is not conduicive to it, so we may need to be more creative and we may need support. Perhaps all a burnt out mom needs is to hear "It's okay. It's hard right now, but you'll get through it. This too shall pass." Or maybe she's gonna wind up in a padded room or taking out anger on her little one if she doesn't hear that it is okay for a toddler to fuss for awhile before going to sleep. That toddler wants no longer equal needs as they do when they are little babies.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *merrick*
Wow, OTF. Your posts don't sound like those of my interpretation of AP parents at all. In fact, they sound like the opposite. What does AP mean to you, exactly, just to clarify?

To me attachment parenting is about meeting my children's needs, listening to my children, and developing relationships with them that encourage bonding and attachement and trust. I have relied heavily on instincts and education to guide me on my parenting, not to mention my spiritual beliefs.

With my first child, I wanted to be "perfect". When I didn't get my ideal birth,, but the exact opposite and found out that natural childbirth would never be a part of my life, I was determined to do everything right. I breastfed, I coslept, I wore my baby, I did infant massage, the list goes on and on. My first child rarely slept and nursed every 2hrs. By the time she was 8 weeks old I was probably in a situation where I should have been hospitalized. I was depressed, hallucinating, hardly bathing, hardly eating -- I was a mess. I trudge on, because I wasn't going to be like those other mothers. You know those ones who had babies in swings, had pacifiers in their mouth, --you get the idea. I made it through my daughters babyhood, but not without putting a huge strain on my marriage, personal relationships, and above all else myself. I was so convinced in the "rightness" of a certain style of mothering, that I failed to enjoy a baby I had longed to have, and I failed to see that at times, it wasn't working to mine or my babies benefit.

With child number two, hard lessons to learn. My judgement of other mothers quickly starting to diminish. I had a baby that didn't like the normal "attachment parenting" things I had done before. Holding a crying, writhing baby for hours on end just about landed me in the insane assylum, but "it was the right thing to do". I didn't want to leave a poor helpless baby to cry alone, that was cruel, he would be damaged for life. All the stuff I have read here in this thread. I tried to make him cosleep, I tried carrying him in a sling, I tried this and that and none of it worked, and then someone said "swaddle him up, put him in his crib, and let him wind down". I didn't want to do it. I was going to be one of those evil mothers, but I wasnt exactly being a good mother at this point either, so what the heck. My husband, said, lets do it. So I swaddled him up in a fleece blanket, I put him in his crib and he cried -- I checked on him, I made sure he was okay, and he just wound down and went to sleep. He wasnt all panicked or heart broken, his cry was no different in the crib than it was in our arms, at least in the crib he wasn't writhing and arching his back and his arms and legs werent flying everywhere. And he slept. All night. And everynight he cried, and every nap time he cried, this winding down type of cry. If you held him, the crying was far worse but he moment you wrapped him up and laid him down he would just cry onto sleep, not frantically at all. I am sure there were and still are all kinds of judgements about what we did. But it was obvious, that the things we were doing were not beneficial to our son, they were not beneficial to building healthy relationships or attachment, but the exact opposite. I was trying to make my child fit into a set of ideals, that just didn't apply to him. And what is good about that?

My third child, he happily coslept with me, nursed, and rarely cried. He was a very easy tempered baby who fell asleep often playing or watching a mobile dance at nap time. (he slept in a crib at nap times) He had a pleasant personality that easily went with the flow of things, and was happy just about anywhere and with anyone. Sometimes at night he would spend part of the night in a crib and part of it the bed with us. (About 4m on) When he would wake at night, he often would not even cry but just kind of look around and make smacking noises with his mouth and I wuold get him and pull him into bed besides me. He'd nurse and often I would be asleep before him. And I enjoyed his babyhood. I also set up boundaries and had routines with this baby. I did things to promote his contentness by watching his cues, and determining what was urgent and what was not. I utilized a baby swing, and let him have floor time with the other children. I didn't always stick a boob in his mouth, but looked for other things to satisfy him. I put him in the crib during the day when I saw he was tired or would fall asleep so I didn't have to always be laying with him.

I see so many new mothers, young mothers trying to achieve this certain ideal and they are unhappy, exhausted, women. They are not enjoying babyhood, and while at times they believe they are building attachment with their babies, sometimes they aren't at all, in fact the opposite. As I said, you are not going to convince me that sleep training an older baby or toddler is detrimental to attachment or bonding or trust and that it goes against attachment parenting if a mother needs to do this or her baby needs this to take place. I don't think in any post thus far I have recommended or endorsed, abandoning a crying baby -- as I said the only book I have read that suggests that is BabyWise. For some of mothers and babies, there has to be some middle ground, some grey area to walk in -- if judgement is going to be set as this way and no other way then a lot of mothers, who do want to nurse, carrying their babies, cosleep, etc. are going to be turned off, there will be no room for them in the eyes of that kind of perfection.


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamomma*
We all *agree* that CIO, defined as forcing tiny babies to cry themselves to sleep all alone is *not* a part of being an attached parent. No one is advocating that. No one has said that nighttime parenting is not their job or that it shouldn't be hard.

Are we reading the same thread? Here's a mere smattering of quotes that call into serious question your assertions...

Quote:

As you said, every baby is different, and you need to adjust to the needs of your baby and family....there are some kids who need to wimper/fuss themselves to sleep.

Quote:

I also had one of those kids who was done with cosleeping at less than 6 months of age, hated the sling, and was a five minute nurser. DId this make me any less AP? I
hope not..those things were out of my control. However, she always wanted to be put down to go to sleep, and that involved crying almost always. We would go in
often and reassure her, but she only got worse when we intervened. This went on forever!! And yes she did cry at bedtime, but we eventually felt that this was her way
of winding down and defusing herself. Did we plan on CIO ?? No, I don't remember it ever being an option. But it is what she did.

Quote:

There are so many aspects that contribute to a childs relationships that you can't just blame it on CIO. This is only a small fraction of time in a childs life. If the mom is attentive, caring, loving during the day and just can't handle night-time parenting because it causes her stress I would hardly call it "heinous" to let her baby CIO.

Quote:

A few nights of crying and sleep training for an older baby I seriously doubt is emotionally harmful.
And my personal favorite...

Quote:

We let our first DD CIO (meaning to cry alone in her crib) at 4 months when it became clear that THIS is what she needed to have her needs met.
These quotes lead me to believe that some people ARE saying it's okay to let a baby CIO... ya know, alone and all.







Or that it's okay to "sleep train" a young baby if it's just a few nights of crying. Ummm... yeah... that's what Ferber and Ezzo say... just a couple of nights of crying and you're on easy street... future attachment issues be damned.









If you are allowing yourself to believe that CIO is okay provided you're not talking about "teeny" "tiny" "newborn" babies, as in, hey, it's fair game with a 6 month old, I think you are fooling yourself into thinking that's AP (or that it's okay for that matter).

As others have already said, CIO (whether at 12 days or 12 weeks or 12 months) is most defiitely NOT AP, and just because you pop in the room every now and again or are "crying right outside his door along with him" doesn't make it any less disrespectful of your baby.


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *polihaupt*
The thing is that what you call "miserable lives", most of us find wonderful.

Maybe for some, there will be more "voice of reason" in places like Baby Center - where parents apparently are not living miserable lives because they let their kids CIO...

Don't be surprised that so many people here are against CIO 'cause NO, MDC does not support CIO - and neither do most of the moms here.

I lurk on several forums here. And there are lots of sad, depressed, or exhausted mothers posting to these forums trying to do everything right. They are at the end of their ropes, and some people keep encouraging them to dig deeper and deeper, and there is nothing else to give. If someone comes along with some reasonable advice, they get blasted because its too mainstream. Like night weaning and pumping is horrible, or using a pacifier is going to cause serios detriment to the nursing relationship. I often don't understand this line of thinking and judgement. Again no one here has suggested abandoning a young baby to cry it out. No one.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Jumping in pretty late.. but I have been lurking and I wanted to say that I totally think CIO harms children. If not, *why* again, do most of us, moms, not do this? Because if it did not harm my child, it was only "3 night of crying" and it gave me a future of full nights of sleep, heck yeah! I'd be the first to do it! But it's not that simple. I don't need to read studies to know that it is wrong.. I just have to read MY body language when my son cries to realize that crying makes me UPSET because it's my body's way of reacting to my son's form of communication. Biologically, I *KNOW* that I am supposed to NOT let my son cry. I can't shut off my mother insticts like that (some mothers do, definetely) because I am so in tune with my body and my son, that it feels wrong in my gut. no matter how tired I may be. I know CIO babies are damaged, I know it. It can't be that easy, to let an innocent child to cry himself to sleep and get away with it just like that. I think nature doesn't work that way.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

and for what it's worth.. I got a total of 1 hour of sleep last night. Dh was upset, I am tired as he!!, but you know what? This too shall pass. My son will remember nursing to sleep as a wonderful and comforting time. I'd rather sacrifice my sleep, to have a child that has wonderful memories of mommy nursing him all night long


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Here's my two cents. No one here is the AP Police. And, no parent here has been in every situation conceivable with their children.

I think that saying, "NO! Under NO circumstances is CIO compatible with AP" is the same as saying "There is no way that formula-feeding is compatible with AP". And then you end up leaving out the fringe mamas (like myself, since I have to formula feed) who, through circumstances that they did not choose, end up having to do things they don't prefer but feel are necessary.

I feel that CIO can be damaging permanently if it's in conjunction with a combination of other factors. However, it sure seems unlikely that just that one factor can make a whole society of people distant and un-intimate. If a mama is a good, loving mom, and she loves the crap out of her DC, but feels forced to CIO for one reason or another, her baby is probably not going to be permanently damaged. There certainly isn't any concrete evidence that that's the case, anyway.

Here at MDC I notice a lot of people who just discard mom's needs. You know how we distinguish between a toddler's wants and needs? Well, a mom has wants and needs and frequently she ignores even her base needs for her children. But sometimes in order to remain the center of the family, the giver of love, the organizer, the caretaker, the healer, and all of the other roles a mom has to play, something has to give. God knows no one else in the family is going to step in and play those other roles for her, most times.

I am totally against any form of CIO for myself. I actually don't think I'm physically capable of it. But I have heard many personal stories from moms here who had to use a limited form of it in order to keep functioning. To automatically judge them is incredibly harsh.

Just my $.02.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

but.. what cases would make CIO ok? I really, truly want to know.. out of sincere curiosity. I just can't imagine a case where the mom would absolutely NEED to let her baby CIO, but I'd love to hear from you guys if there are such cases.


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Periwinkle, I would ask you the same thing. Are we reading the same thread? Are you reading and trying to understand what these moms are saying? We are not talking about Babywise. Every single one of the posts you quote are about moms who are reading the cues of a baby whose temperament is such that meeting their needs involves letting them cry themselves to sleep alone. I put the word 'alone' in quotation marks earlier, because there are different types of alone. There is wanting to be alone because that is what you need and there is being forced to be alone and feeling abandoned. The latter is what is damaging and destroys a trusting relationship. I would wager a guess that it is probably pretty damaging to force a babe to be in arms who needs to be put down. The parent is not listening to and responding the baby's cues in that instance. The parent is trying to live up to an ideal, when there is a real baby right there telling them what he or she needs. That is really the heart of attachment parenting, not which of the B's you put into practice. Those things are meant to promote attachment, which is the goal. If you have a baby that needs to be swaddled and have some space, then you will promote attachment and trust when you let him know that you will respond to his needs by giving him that time and space to settle down and go to sleep. We need to use some wisdom and sort things out on an individual basis. I had a high needs baby the first time who thrived on babywearing, breastfeeding, co-sleeping and so on. The second one, though, *hated* the sling, screamed, arched her back, wanted nothing to do with it. I tried to force her cuz how else was she going to get attached to me. Well, we figured it out, without using the sling. Instead, she was carried in arms, in a Baby Bjorn, or placed in the bouncer, or wherever she was happiest. It required a little trial and error and some creativity, but she wasn't a sling baby and I couldn't make her be.

I'm not only talking about newborns. It really isn't a good idea to put an exact age on it, because babies develop at different rates. It's up to the mama (or dad) to figure it out for themselves. As you can see, from some of the posts you quoted, it could be four month olds. Generally, I'd say six months is about when they start to figure out cause and effect, and 8-9 months tends to be the beginning of separation anxiety, and 12-14 months the end of that, but those are averages and every baby is different. You've got to play it by ear.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*
but.. what cases would make CIO ok? I really, truly want to know.. out of sincere curiosity. I just can't imagine a case where the mom would absolutely NEED to let her baby CIO, but I'd love to hear from you guys if there are such cases.

Well, I work FT and am going to school, and I have a really bad sleeper (due to teething, is my theory) on my hands. I have been able to swing it, but I've heard from other moms who started falling asleep in their cars on the way to work, they were so tired. If someone has tried everything they can think of, and are still in that boat, I could see desperate measures being called for.

That's one example I can think of, but I'm sure there are others. I think it's the exception rather than the rule, but that's just my personal opinion.

There are a whole lot of moms out there who don't believe in CIO as a matter of course, but they're trying to do toooooo much and don't have anyone to support them - like their DH doesn't agree that it's not good to CIO, stuff like that. So, where do they turn?


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Okay, loving-my-babies, I'll give you an example. When dd1 was 13 months she started waking every 1/2 hour to an hour *all* night long. I would go in nurse her back to sleep and she'd pop right back up. She wanted me there with her, which is perfectly fine and understandable, but she didn't need me there. At the time, my sister was living with us and she was my child care provider. It was hard on her as well, to not have any time in the evenings when she was caring for dd (I worked swing shift four nights a week). It was wearing everybody very thin. I felt resentful and angry toward my child and was just a zombie during the day. It was not safe for my patients, it was not safe for me (I nearly wrecked the car) and not safe or good for dd, it was not good for my sister. Also, I felt better about having dd with a family member than in a child care setting. There were many, many factors that went into my decision. I had also read in The Baby Book about night weaning and using the baby as a barometer. So, I set out to help dd sleep from her bedtime to mine. Then, much later to sleep from my bedtime til it was light out, and finally all night. And actually, that last I don't think I had anything to do with. She dropped it naturally. Anyway, I'd do our bedtime routine, nurse her to sleep (or my sister gave her a bottle) and the next time she woke up and every time after that until one of us went to bed, we'd go in, pick her up, pat her back, tell her we loved her, tell she was okay, it was time for her to sleep, not our bedtime, etc. then lay her back down and remind her one of us was right in the next room and she was safe. Sometimes, she'd go right back to sleep, sometimes she'd cry and fuss a little all the while winding down and eventually (within a few minutes) falling back to sleep and other times she would escalate and get more and more upset. It was at those times that we went ahead and lay down with her because that is what she needed. Pretty soon, she was sleeping for those 4-5 hours most of the time and everyone was happier and better off for it. And during the day, she showed no signs of distress, distrust, or feeling insecurely attached. If she had, I would have stopped, but I knew in my gut that we must all get more sleep and something had to change. I was stretched too thin.


----------



## polka hop (Dec 23, 2003)

*


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Yes I agree with you. But like you said, that is not applicable to sleep training.

What would be, though?

ETA- I just saw that I got more replies answering my ? so don't worry about it







it's a tough situation...


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*
but.. what cases would make CIO ok? I really, truly want to know.. out of sincere curiosity. I just can't imagine a case where the mom would absolutely NEED to let her baby CIO, but I'd love to hear from you guys if there are such cases.

Ok here it is.
Some babies with SID may need to cry it out. That was the case with my son. Holding him all the time, while he cried was actually HURTING HIM. Of course I had to hear it from a developmental pediatrician when he was much older that was part of the reason he cried all the time. We were giving him way too much stimulation by holding him all the time and trying to soothe him. We were just making the poor baby worse. In very simple terms the reason he was crying, was he wanted us to stop doing what we were doing.

Babies who have alcohol exposure or been exposed to drugs in utero may need to cry it out to sleep. I know foster mothers from all over the country with crack babies, and if you think holding these babies is the answer to soothe them to sleep, or rocking them or cosleeping with them is going to benefit them, you would be dead wrong. They just cant handle it. They also SCREAM/CRY just because there little brains are messed up.

When lack of sleep at night effects normal development, creates behavioral difficulties, etc for older babies and toddlers, its time to do something that will benefit them, rather than continue to try to forse a concept on them that hurts them in the long run. Children as young as a year old can have behavioral and learning difficulties from lack of sleep. Often parents, when cosleeping actually interrupt their child's sleep patterns (often common with toddlers). To me, in these instances, sleep training is beneficial to the child.

And btw, I don't think a mother can be at her full potential on an hour of sleep. People have accidently killed their children, set homes on fire, and done various other things from lack of sleep. Sleep deprivation can cause seriuos mental problems and physical ailments. I've been there and done that.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Periwinkle said:


> These quotes lead me to believe that some people ARE saying it's okay to let a baby CIO... ya know, alone and all.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## chrissy (Jun 5, 2002)

But see, this thread is about CIO, which is leaving a child alone crying to train them to sleep on their own. And I just don't think that is ever a good thing. Ever.

Per your example, Sofiamomma, who are you to say that your baby didn't "need" you? If my baby cries, even my 13 month old baby I think it's because she needs me to feel safe. Maybe she doesn't need you in the physical survival sense, but doesn't she still need you?

To the mamas who are about to be hospitalized, I think you need to see a therapist. Seriously. I am not trying to be flippant, but I really do. It sounds like PPD, which can't be cured by sleep training your baby. Yes, we all have moments when our babies (even infants) make us angry. I think it is a fact of life for most new parents that they are going to have times when they resent their infants. I know I did. Becoming a parent is life-altering. You have never ever ever given more of yourself. And when you are having these thoughts sometimes you need to put your baby somewhere safe and leave the room until you cool off. But if these are more than moments then I think you have a problem that needs to be addressed by a professional.

I really don't mean to discount anybody's difficult babies. My first child was a tough baby. I am glad my second is easier.

But I get upset when people say things to the tune of: "My baby was waking several times a night to nurse. I was so tired and it was making me a bad parent during the day so I had to CIO." It's a pretty well established fact that babies wake a lot. I'm pretty sure the rumor has gotten out that babies wake a lot and new parents don't get much sleep. If parents can't control their emotions then that is their problem they need to address- it's not the babies fault and the baby shouldn't be the one to have to change.

About the whole AP checklist, AP martyrdom thing, I think that is a totally different issue. I don't subscribe to that belief and feel that pacifiers, length of nursing relationship, wearing baby, where baby sleeps... are negotiable. Those are the kinds of things you have to follow babies cues on. And your own. I don't think a pacifier is cruel. I think if baby is happy without being worn all day then don't wear him all day. If baby is ready to wean earlier than you had hoped, well what can you do- though I'd certainly encourage him to continue nursing at the very least until he was 12 mos. If baby isn't happy in your bed, then by all means find out where he is happiest. But as another poster put it, in my mind CIO is the deal-breaker. I just don't think you can claim that CIO has any place in Attachment Parenting.

I don't think age has much to do with it, though it breaks my heart to a higher degree the younger the baby. My son is 3 and I still would not let him cry it out. Again this doesn't mean the child never cries. It means that I am not going to leave him alone in bed to cry for the purpose of training him to put himself to sleep.

No time to proofread, hope this makes sense.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
I don't think a mother can be at her full potential on an hour of sleep.

ok.. so you have any ideas for me? just so you know, I will not let my child cry -ever- but if you have any suggestions so I can get some sleep without getting my ds to cry, they are certainly welcome


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

maya43 said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> Originally Posted by *Periwinkle*
> ...


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

I agree with you Chrissy.. 100%.


----------



## bamamom (Dec 9, 2004)

First of all, thank you KristiMetz for your understanding and support. I hope that everyone realizes that what we are talking about here is not putting a newbie in a crib a la Ezzo and listening to them scream until they wear themselves out just because we don't want to deal with it. From what I see, most of these posts are dealing with parents who have tried everything, natural AP things first, and then after weeks or months of misery on the babies part and parents part, fallen back on CIO because they didn't know what else to do. We've seen the examples of babies whose crying escalated into true screaming when loving well meaning parents tried to do Cry in Arms. So should we flame them? I think not!!!







I can't help that my daughter didn't want some of the things I had planned to do for her for years and years...it's just her personality. These parent's have "loved the crap out of their kids" and for some of them this is what happened. I would never go tell an ignorant new mom who was soaking up everybody's advice to go buy Ezzo and do it. I say "You do what works for your family and your baby. If he only sleeps if he's next to you, then let him be next to you." No I don't think that those who have had to resort to CIO should be automatically thrown out of the AP camp. Just MHO...


----------



## willowsmom (Oct 28, 2004)

Wow. It's wonderful to see so many strong women.









As MY answer to the OP...No. In our house, CIO is not AP.


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Who am I to say? I'm her mother. I made sure to get to know her really well so I could be a good one to her. More than she needed me to stay in bed with her for twelve hours every night she needed me to able to work in order to feed, clothe, and shelter her, as well as have time to take care of the home, tend to things like bill-paying and meet my needs so I'd have something left to give. I also felt it in her best interest to have only one more person to form an attachment with, who was a relative I trusted, than to go to daycare and share attachments with other babies and CCPs. She also is better off if I'm *alive* and not dead off the side of the road because I fell asleep at the wheel. By your standards I should never have become a mother in the first place. And I guess you are entitled to your opinion, but dd's matters more to me.

I'm only going to say this one more time. There are new, young, mothers out there that need to know that they do not need to martyr themselves in order for their babies to be attached, healthy, and have their needs met. And it is very nice for you to sit at your computer and tell moms to get to a therapist, but how practical/realistic is that in every situation? We cannot all live an ideal, perfect life. Sometimes we must make do and that is OKAY!


----------



## *LoveBugMama* (Aug 2, 2003)

Yeah, what Chrissy said!


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

OK,

I have a question for all of you NEVER EVER CIO people.

This example is true and comes from my oldest dd.

Your child does not like being held to begin with. The only way she will tolerate being held is with your arms outstreached from your body. She does not even want to be touched (except where absolutely nec) when bf'iing.

When you child is tired she will scream when in your arms. Nothing you can do will soothe her. Then one day, you put her down, because you have tried everything else, she stops crying in 10 minutes and finally sleeps well (i.e. more than 40 minutes at a time). For the first time in her life she wakes up cooing instead of crying.

The next day you put her down when she starts to cry and after 20 minutes of LIGHT crying she sleeps again and coos again.

The next day you see if you can help her go to sleep by bfing and rocking, but again your efforts result in hours and hours of misery after which she sleeps for only 20 min and then wakes again MISERABLE.

SO DO YOU:

1. Force your child to remain in arms where she will cry herself to sleep only after hours and hours and is absolutely miserable

2. Let her cry "alone" for a short period of time.

I of course opted for choice 2. After a few weeks she didn't even cry when I put her down. She was soooo much happier when awake.

If you chose Number 1, how do you believe you would be meeting her needs????


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya43*

SO DO YOU:

1. Force your child to remain in arms where she will cry herself to sleep only after hours and hours and is absolutely miserable

2. Let her cry "alone" for a short period of time.

I of course opted for choice 2. After a few weeks she didn't even cry when I put her down. She was soooo much happier when awake.

If you chose Number 1, how do you believe you would be meeting her needs????

I would OFCOURSE choose number 1! you made it SO clear for me.. I'd rather have my baby cry longer time in my arms, because maybe she NEEDS to cry, but she just needs me to be there to hear her cry. Have you read "Crying for Comfort" I definetely recommend you read that article. It was in the Jan/Feb 2004 issue of Mothering magazine, and it explains how some of us, AP parents, want to avoid all crying, when sometimes, crying is ok, but IN ARMS. So obviously, your baby will cry less time if she's in a crib, because she has no one to hear her cry. Am I the only one that feels #1 is a definite choice??


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*
I would OFCOURSE choose number 1! you made it SO clear for me.. I'd rather have my baby cry longer time in my arms, because maybe she NEEDS to cry, but she just needs me to be there to hear her cry. Have you read "Crying for Comfort" I definetely recommend you read that article. It was in the Jan/Feb 2004 issue of Mothering magazine, and it explains how some of us, AP parents, want to avoid all crying, when sometimes, crying is ok, but IN ARMS. So obviously, your baby will cry less time if she's in a crib, because she has no one to hear her cry. Am I the only one that feels #1 is a definite choice??










Yes, I have read the article. My dd was not crying for comfort but because she did NOT WANT TO BE TOUCHED!!!!!!''

She was not lying comfortably in my arms, but was writhing desperate to be put down. Is this "normal?" NO most humans crave touch. Unfortunately she is not one of them. Should I fail to meet her needs because she is not like everyone else?????????????????????

Why is this so hard to understand?


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

well, I don't know. I think it's very rare for a baby to not want to be touched, and I've never heard of it, but if that's the case, then sure. I just can't imagine a baby crying for you to leave them in the crib to cry. I just can't.


----------



## Pynki (Aug 19, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chrissy*
But see, this thread is about CIO, which is leaving a child alone crying to train them to sleep on their own. And I just don't think that is ever a good thing. Ever.

Per your example, Sofiamomma, who are you to say that your baby didn't "need" you? If my baby cries, even my 13 month old baby I think it's because she needs me to feel safe. Maybe she doesn't need you in the physical survival sense, but doesn't she still need you?

(bold mine)
*To the mamas who are about to be hospitalized, I think you need to see a therapist. Seriously. I am not trying to be flippant, but I really do. It sounds like PPD, which can't be cured by sleep training your baby. Yes, we all have moments when our babies (even infants) make us angry. I think it is a fact of life for most new parents that they are going to have times when they resent their infants. I know I did. Becoming a parent is life-altering. You have never ever ever given more of yourself. And when you are having these thoughts sometimes you need to put your baby somewhere safe and leave the room until you cool off. But if these are more than moments then I think you have a problem that needs to be addressed by a professional.*

I really don't mean to discount anybody's difficult babies. My first child was a tough baby. I am glad my second is easier.

But I get upset when people say things to the tune of: "My baby was waking several times a night to nurse. I was so tired and it was making me a bad parent during the day so I had to CIO." It's a pretty well established fact that babies wake a lot. I'm pretty sure the rumor has gotten out that babies wake a lot and new parents don't get much sleep. If parents can't control their emotions then that is their problem they need to address- it's not the babies fault and the baby shouldn't be the one to have to change.

About the whole AP checklist, AP martyrdom thing, I think that is a totally different issue. I don't subscribe to that belief and feel that pacifiers, length of nursing relationship, wearing baby, where baby sleeps... are negotiable. Those are the kinds of things you have to follow babies cues on. And your own. I don't think a pacifier is cruel. I think if baby is happy without being worn all day then don't wear him all day. If baby is ready to wean earlier than you had hoped, well what can you do- though I'd certainly encourage him to continue nursing at the very least until he was 12 mos. If baby isn't happy in your bed, then by all means find out where he is happiest. But as another poster put it, in my mind CIO is the deal-breaker. I just don't think you can claim that CIO has any place in Attachment Parenting.

I don't think age has much to do with it, though it breaks my heart to a higher degree the younger the baby. My son is 3 and I still would not let him cry it out. Again this doesn't mean the child never cries. It means that I am not going to leave him alone in bed to cry for the purpose of training him to put himself to sleep.

No time to proofread, hope this makes sense.

This isn't neccesarily true.. PPD CAN be brought on by lack of sleep.. And once it gets to that point you should probably seek psychiatric help to help stabilize your chemistry.. That said.. What if PPD could be warded off by a bit of gentle sleep training.. Staying with you child, developing a nightly routine, but setting limits on when you nursed.. When it was time to get out of the crib.. Things such as that..

I've never been to a point where *I NEEDED* to have that happen in order to parent well during the day.. But I do know mothers a helluva lot more AP than I am who have.. None of it with newborns or small infants, but infants and toddlers none the less.. None of them leave 'em in the crib and leave the room type sleep training ie CIO, but sleep training none the less..

It's easy to judge when you haven't been there..

Warm Squishy Feelings..
Dyan


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Sigh, that really is the problem here, with communicating with each other. Inability to imagine a different scenario. I'm not knocking you personally LMB, it's just that it is frustrating to try to explain your situation and have someone be belittling, condescending and totally misinterpret what you are trying to say and then tell you need professional help because you have PPD and no self control. Yeah, uh huh, 13 months after a beautiful birth I have PPD and that is my problem, not the fact that I am a single mom, working swing shift, and so sleep deprived I'm falling asleep at the wheel, and still trying so hard to do what is best for my dd that I agonize over every teeny tiny little decision I have to make for her. Why didn't I see it before? Oh, yeah, I was depressed and unable to control my emotions.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Pynki... what is "gentle sleep training"?? You say you know AP mamas that do sleep training without crying, what kind is that? (just curious)


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Kara.. where did I say you needed a psychiatrist, and that you have PPD?


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Not you, Chrissy


----------



## OnTheFence (Feb 15, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*
ok.. so you have any ideas for me? just so you know, I will not let my child cry -ever- but if you have any suggestions so I can get some sleep without getting my ds to cry, they are certainly welcome










Actually I wouldnt bother, and thats not to be rude, its just that I think based on your posts you want to claim martydom to your child and your parenting. I think that is unhealthy. If you really think that what you are doing is healthy, go for it, but evidence based research on sleep says that its not healthy. What you choose to do about it, well is up to you.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chrissy*
To the mamas who are about to be hospitalized, I think you need to see a therapist. Seriously. I am not trying to be flippant, but I really do. It sounds like PPD, which can't be cured by sleep training your baby.

Wow, so all a mom has to do is see a therapist and everything becomes ok? Maybe you're oversimplifying just a tad. Does discarding these women's feelings by telling them how screwed up they are changes anything or helps anything?

Which begs the question - most of the ladies here were describing situations where they were severely sleep-deprived, and/or dealing with a child who cries non-stop. Does that equal PPD to you? Because, it does not to me.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chrissy*
And when you are having these thoughts sometimes you need to put your baby somewhere safe and leave the room until you cool off. But if these are more than moments then I think you have a problem that needs to be addressed by a professional.

Who said it was more than moments? So, are you in fact acknowledging that for some parents if their child is crying to the point that they can't take anymore, it's ok to leave the child for a few moments?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chrissy*
But I get upset when people say things to the tune of: "My baby was waking several times a night to nurse. I was so tired and it was making me a bad parent during the day so I had to CIO." It's a pretty well established fact that babies wake a lot. I'm pretty sure the rumor has gotten out that babies wake a lot and new parents don't get much sleep. If parents can't control their emotions then that is their problem they need to address- it's not the babies fault and the baby shouldn't be the one to have to change.

You're not offering any solutions or, really, anything constructive. And, you seem to be overlooking the fact that some of the moms who posted here weren't having trouble "controlling their emotions", they were about to endanger themselves from sleep deprivation, and/or had children that sincerely needed to be put down due to sensory issues. In fact, I can't remember reading any posts in this thread from women who said that they couldn't control their emotions and thusly let their children CIO.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

no, Kim.. not at all, I am seriously asking you, if you have better ideas. Because in my situation, I'd be doing it so I would get more sleep, and from where I stand, there is no magic solution to get babies to sleep through the night at 11 months, at least not in my book. So If I'm missing out on solutions, believe me, I REALLY wanna know!


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)

Sofiamommy, you changed your tune. First you said...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamommy*
We all *agree* that CIO, defined as forcing tiny babies to cry themselves to sleep all alone is *not* a part of being an attached parent. No one is advocating that.

To which I provided several quotes in direct opposition to that opinion, the most clear cut being...

Quote:

We let our first DD CIO (meaning to cry alone in her crib) at 4 months when it became clear that THIS is what she needed to have her needs met.
But just now you said...

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamommy*
Every single one of the posts you quote are about moms who are reading the cues of a baby whose temperament is such that meeting their needs involves letting them cry themselves to sleep alone. I put the word 'alone' in quotation marks earlier, because there are different types of alone.

So which is it? Allowing a tiny baby to CIO alone is something "no one" on this thread is advocating of course because we all know how terrible that is... or that allowing a tiny baby to CIO alone in a crib is OK _provided you're "reading her cues"?_









And regardless of what YOUR opinion is about whether the latter is okay, it is clearly NOT A.P. which I believe was the original question. There may be more than one way to skin a cat, but they're not all A.P. Just because a quick spanking works wonders for the mother of a 3 year-old fit-thrower or CIO helps a bedraggled mother get some much-needed sleep or choosing not to breastfeed allows a new mother the ease of other people helping with feedings does NOT make any of these things A.P. I wholeheartedly agree that it doesn't mean it's OK to *judge* women for the choices they make, but a question was asked... a simple one.... "can you be A.P. and let a baby CIO?" The answer I think is still a resounding NO regardless of whether you or anyone else has found alternative approaches that work for you or your child.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle*
it is clearly NOT A.P. which I believe was the original question. There may be more than one way to skin a cat, but they're not all A.P. Just because a quick spanking works wonders for the mother of a 3 year-old fit-thrower or CIO helps a bedraggled mother get some much-needed sleep or choosing not to breastfeed allows a new mother the ease of other people helping with feedings does NOT make any of these things A.P. I wholeheartedly agree that it doesn't mean it's OK to *judge* women for the choices they make, but a question was asked... a simple one.... "can you be A.P. and let a baby CIO?" The answer I think is still a resounding NO regardless of whether you or anyone else has found alternative approaches that work for you or your child.











right on, sista!


----------



## LongLiveLife (Nov 5, 2004)

I wonder if the reason that peoples' reactions in this thread are so extreme is b/c the discussion has wandered away from the OP?

The OP said nothing about mamas who are close to losing their sanity, who fear losing their tempers and shaking their babies, who are so sleep deprived that they are not functioning as proper mamas during the day.
In these cases, leaving the room to let baby cry is probably the ONLY short term solution, but when the moment has passed, mama needs to find a REAL solution. I agree with everything Chrissy wrote.
Adopting CIO for these reasons is like treating a serious injury with pain meds.
It may be what you need right now, but it's not the long-term answer.

Now that we've all addressed these extreme cases, and cases with SID where babies reject all forms of mama-comfort (as hard as it is for me to wrap my mind around the idea of a little one PREFERRING to CIO, I'll defer to the mamas of these babes) we're back to where we started. Sensory Integration Dysfunction is out of my scope of experience, as it is for most of us.
This discussion has turned to really extreme cases.

In your typical AP family, I don't think that CIO has any place. The OP was referring to sleep training, which is definitively not AP.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle*
or that allowing a tiny baby to CIO alone in a crib is OK _provided you're "reading her cues"?_









And regardless of what YOUR opinion is about whether the latter is okay, it is clearly NOT A.P.


Why not? Why is meeting a child's needs not AP????

I thought AP was ALL about meeting a child's particular needs. Doing what they were telling you they needed?

You could try to claim that no child wants/ needs to be left alone so that they can sleep (although I believe this to be wrong).

But you can't claim that if you accept that some children want and NEED to be left alone when they sleep, it is AP to ignore those needs.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Periwinkle*
And regardless of what YOUR opinion is about whether the latter is okay, it is clearly NOT A.P. which I believe was the original question. There may be more than one way to skin a cat, but they're not all A.P. Just because a quick spanking works wonders for the mother of a 3 year-old fit-thrower or CIO helps a bedraggled mother get some much-needed sleep or choosing not to breastfeed allows a new mother the ease of other people helping with feedings does NOT make any of these things A.P. I wholeheartedly agree that it doesn't mean it's OK to *judge* women for the choices they make, but a question was asked... a simple one.... "can you be A.P. and let a baby CIO?" The answer I think is still a resounding NO regardless of whether you or anyone else has found alternative approaches that work for you or your child.


IMO, there are situations where a woman is not "choosing" to CIO, just as there are situations where a woman is not "choosing" to breastfeed. That's the point I'm trying to make.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LongLiveLife*
I wonder if the reason that peoples' reactions in this thread are so extreme is b/c the discussion has wandered away from the OP?

IMO the reason that reactions are so extreme is because the OP's question was an all-or-nothing question. It left no room for the cases being discussed here.

Beware of all-or-nothing, win/lose scenarios.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
If you really think that what you are doing is healthy, go for it, but evidence based research on sleep says that its not healthy. What you choose to do about it, well is up to you.

What evidence based research on sleep are you referring to?


----------



## saritabeth (Jun 25, 2004)

I have come to hate the term Cry it out. Obviously the vast majority of people on this thread have said that they do not leave their newborn babies to cry in their crib alone. I think most reasonable mama's can agree on that. I think everyone is being pretty snippy and judgmental of oneanother when it comes to the crying. All babies cry, and it is not a bad thing for babies to cry. Im sure all of us have spent many dark nights and long days with a child crying in our arms. It is up to the individal mama to know her limits and her child's limits. It is up to her to know when it is okay to put her crying child down because it is what the situation warrents. The person who comes up with the perfect age, time, scenario of when putting a crying child down will probably become a millionare.

Mothering is challenging, and it sounds like from the posts I have read that everyone is doing their best. I know my child better than any internet stranger and will give her all that I am in the way I feel is best for her. That means lots of crying in arms, it also means putting her down sometimes while she is crying.

Is that cry it out? Not to me. I know I am doing my best and that I have not neglected her needs. That is so individual.

As long as there is someone on this board who thinks that her way is the only way for all children to be raised, there will always be hurt feelings and snippy long exchanges like this one.


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Another question for you never CIO mama's especially those who love the 'would you do this to an adult analogy"

Let's say that you suddenly develped an intense senstivity to being touched. You even had to adjust to lying in bed. Would it be Ok for your DH to insist on coming in to your room and stroking you or talking to you when this would delay the process of what you were so badly needing. Would you just want to be left alone when you would quickly feel better or would you want to be bothered in the name of someone "comforting" you even if it had just the opposite effect?


----------



## Ms. Frizzle (Jan 9, 2004)

Nope! no way, no how!


----------



## Quindin (Aug 22, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*









right on, sista!










Second that














on Perinwinkle's post


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Periwinkle, I did not change my tune. My opinion has remained the same throughout. I have tried to change my wording to make what I am saying clearer. My definition of CIO is leaving an infant alone to cry in order to get that infant to go to sleep without any help, while studiously ignoring the baby, despite the crying escalating, and for however long it takes, and when that infant needs to be held or kept company for comfort. This definition excludes older babies/toddlers and children who are capable of understanding cause and effect, whose wants and needs are not always the same, as well as babies who prefer to have some space when falling asleep. And Maya is right, babies like this (the latter) were left to die of exposure, because it was not safe to let them be alone, and it was not safe to have them loudly broadcasting their location when someone tried to keep them in arms. Fortunately we don't have to make that choice anymore.

A baby whose needs are ignored, repeatedly, and as a matter of course, will not learn to trust and will not become securely attached to the careprovider. That is what I think we all agree on. That is why CIO is not compatible with AP.

I have said repeatedly why these examples are being brought up, despite the not-extreme example of the OP.

I also think that developmental stages need to be taken into account. The vast majority of 4 month olds are not going to understand "I'm right in the next room", but many 14 month olds can, albeit with many reassurances if necessary. I practice attachment parenting, but I am not child centered. I believe it is important to meet everybody's needs, including my own, although certainly theirs eclipse mine more often. I also believe that toddlers can be taught things that help the family function. And I don't see why that can't apply to sleeping on their own, in a limited fashion, once they are past the separation anxiety stage.


----------



## Dar (Apr 12, 2002)

I think it's interesting how so many people post here about babies who prefer to CIO, who *have* to be alone and cying to fall asleep... and yet during most of human history, this would be a suicidal act for an infant. Rather than believeing that your baby is the exception to eons, it makes more sense to believe that there is an attached way to meet his needs, one that doesn't involve letting him cry alone.

If a baby doesn't want to be touched, don't touch him. Lay him down on the futon next to you (I think having a futon on the floor is a great help for many babies) and *be* with him.

When Rain was a baby I had a childproof bedroom with a futon on the floor, and I would take my shirt off and crash out and doze while she crawled around, explored, nursed, and finally slept. I'd come fully awake if she cried, but generally it worked.

There are certain kinds of touches that feel better to most people with touch issues. Swaddling can be good. Firm, pressure-type touches are better than light, fluttery touches.

Abandoning a baby to cry alone in the dark is damaging. Cortisol levels in the blood go up. The baby's body tells him he's in danger. It's biologically unhealthy (and FWIW, babies crying in arms have totoally different blood chem than babies crying alone). A baby doesn't know you're coming back, all he knows is that he's been abandoned.

Dar, who first argued about this online on the misc.kids newsgroup in 1995...


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar*
I think it's interesting how so many people post here about babies who prefer to CIO, who *have* to be alone and cying to fall asleep... and yet during most of human history, this would be a suicidal act for an infant.
If a baby doesn't want to be touched, don't touch him. Lay him down on the futon next to you (I think having a futon on the floor is a great help for many babies) and *be* with him.
Abandoning a baby to cry alone in the dark is damaging. Cortisol levels in the blood go up. The baby's body tells him he's in danger. It's biologically unhealthy (and FWIW, babies crying in arms have totoally different blood chem than babies crying alone). A baby doesn't know you're coming back, all he knows is that he's been abandoned.



Yes, I said that my child probably would have been left to die in ancient times. Unfortunately that is what happened with many SID babies. Thank God we know ennough to meet their needs today.

No, I was not going to pretend that my dd was like everyone else just because that was easier to believe. A child who did not want to be touched even when nursing clearly was a child who did not want to be touched. I accpeted that my child was unqiue.

No, I was not going to stay in the room just to end up bothering a child who was very sensitive to every sound.

And, as to your claim that cortisol rates do not rise when a baby is crying hysterically if that crying is taking place in arms can you point to this research?

Why would my child feel abandoned when she did not want to be touched in the FIRST place when she was trying to sleep???

After two weeks of laying her down when she was tired rather than bothering her with touching, rocking and holding, she became a happier baby. She would wake up cooing and smile. As long as she was not held for too long she remained happy. I could have forced holding on her, but to what end?


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *maya43*
Another question for you never CIO mama's especially those who love the 'would you do this to an adult analogy"

Let's say that you suddenly develped an intense senstivity to being touched. You even had to adjust to lying in bed. Would it be Ok for your DH to insist on coming in to your room and stroking you or talking to you when this would delay the process of what you were so badly needing. Would you just want to be left alone when you would quickly feel better or would you want to be bothered in the name of someone "comforting" you even if it had just the opposite effect?

I did develop such an aversion during labor, but while I didn't want to be touched, I didn't want to be left alone either. There were a couple of times when he asked to leave for a few minutes, but I cried and asked him to stay....so he did.









I guess if we're going to compare using CIO on babies w/ adults, there are times my DH is away overnight for work. I hate it. I hate sleeping alone, even if my DD is w/ me. I'm 26 years old, and darkness, unexplained noises, and being alone still scare me sometimes. If I knew DH were in the next room, I'd probably call for him until he came to me. There have also been times when one of us was tired before the other one, so the not-tired one would lay w/ the tired one until the tired one fell asleep.

And FWIW, I remember being left to CIO in a crib as a toddler. I'm guessing I was 2, b/c when my brother was born when I was almost 3, my parents moved me from a crib to a bed. I remember calling for my mom and not understanding why she wasn't answering, and being scared. And when she did finally come to me, I remember feeling ashamed b/c I was told I wasn't allowed to call for her. I don't want to make my DD feel that way.


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

As I find is often the case, I agree with loving-my-babies. I find it hard to imagine a situation in which I would put my crying child down and walk away. I guess I should define what CIO is, for me- it's sleep training a child, while you leave the room and do not return and pick the baby up when it cries. CIO is not a term to apply when you're teaching your toddler not to interrupt. It's not a term to apply to taking a break when you have one of those end-of-your-rope moments (or days). I think this thread has gone off on sevral different tangents that have nothing to do with the usual definition of CIO. CIO is: purposely teaching your baby that it can cry when it's put down for sleep, but no one is coming in to help, so there is no point. Maybe it works, but at what cost?

I confess, I tried CIO on my daughter once. She was maybe 6 months old. I was so, so tired of her waking all the time, and only going down when I laid with her. My sister told me "Let her cry! I did it with Megan, it only took 3 nights, crying hurts the parents way more than the baby..." blah blah blah. I didn't think it sounded right, but I was a first time mom, she had two kids, it sounded like magic. So I did it. It was _wrong._ Every mama cell in my body screamed along with my baby for an hour- this is wrong!!! Finally I picked her up and never, never did that to her again.

I don't have any experience with a child who doesn't want to be touched at all-crack baby or just oversensitive, either one. It's such a foreign concept that I guess I would say it's a special case that doesn't even belong in a discussion of whether CIO is appropriate for a normal baby. A baby who screams to be put down instead of picked up... so, if you put her in her crib, and she stopped crying, then you picked her up, she'd cry again? Anyway, even if I could determine that what she really, truly wanted was to be placed in a crib, I would still sit next to her until she went to sleep. I couldn't leave the room with my baby crying.

I hear some mamas talking about what a child needs. They keep saying she "needs" a mom who gets to sleep so she can go to work, pay bills, etc. Of course that's true, but it's an abstract concept that a baby definitely doesn't grasp. When I think "meeting a baby's needs", I think about it from the baby's point of view- what does she perceive her immediate need to be? She feels alone and needs a parent to be with her.

I don't think a mom who puts her child's needs ahead of her own is being a marytr (it clearly wasn't a compliment.) I think she's doing what comes naturally to her.


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)

Lula's Mom, what an awesome post!









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lula's Mom*
When I think "meeting a baby's needs", I think about it from the baby's point of view- what does she perceive her immediate need to be?


----------



## KoalaMama (Jan 24, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *OnTheFence*
I have just finished reading the Ferber book. It has some great information in there about sleep.

Ok, I definitely never thought I'd see this at MDC!

Regardless of whether or not there's some "great" information in there, any book that says to leave your baby to cry and if they throw up just quietly go in and clean them off is not worth the paper it's printed on. And I quote:

"Occasionally, when you are increasing the time before you respond to your child, he may cry so hard that he actually throws up. If you hear this happen you should go in even though the "time isn't up" yet. Clean him up and change the sheets and pajamas as needed. But do so quickly and matter-of-factly and then leave again. If you reward him for throwing up by staying with him, he will only learn that this is a good way for him to get what he wants. Vomiting does not hurt your child, and you do not have to feel guilty that it happened. This, like the crying, will soon stop."

We'd all be wise to remember that not everyone is capable of filtering advice, so recommending a book that undermines instinct and then telling those people to follow their instincts when using it is completely contradictory and potentially very harmful. Please consider that if you decide to offer this book up as a viable option to other unsuspecting parents.

Is CIO a part of AP philosopy? Of course not! But can parents who CIO call themselves AP? Sure, they can call themselves whatever they want. Who are we to judge?

Maya... I understand your situation, and why you would choose CIO as the right option for your daugther. I also think it's great that you're sharing your story, and if someone else finds themselves in that *rare* circumstance they may feel lifted by the memory of your posts. However, I'm assuming you wouldn't have choosen CIO if your daughter didn't have this very unique personality? I just hate to think that examples like this will be what other parents cite when they choose to let their kids scream alone just because it's easier. That's the whole falsehood of sleep-training... We're doing it for them because they "need" it. (Unless I'm misreading your posts and you really are a supporter of CIO under "normal" circumstances...)

And to people letting their children CIO because it's either that or exhaustion and danger due to sleep deprivation... I think that speaks to the bigger problem with society these days. The way we're forced to live - isolated and without support, perhaps doing too many jobs at once - doesn't lend itself to ideal parenting situations. If we were all surrounded by a village, then perhaps much of this would be moot.


----------



## loving-my-babies (Apr 2, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lula's Mom*
As I find is often the case, I agree with loving-my-babies.

aww







that gives me a squishy feeling









btw, I LOOOVE your daughter's name.. my daughter Valentina loves Maisy, especially Tallulah


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Lula's Mom*
As I find is often the case, I agree with loving-my-babies. I find it hard to imagine a situation in which I would put my crying child down and walk away. I guess I should define what CIO is, for me- it's sleep training a child, while you leave the room and do not return and pick the baby up when it cries. CIO is not a term to apply when you're teaching your toddler not to interrupt. It's not a term to apply to taking a break when you have one of those end-of-your-rope moments (or days). I think this thread has gone off on sevral different tangents that have nothing to do with the usual definition of CIO. CIO is: purposely teaching your baby that it can cry when it's put down for sleep, but no one is coming in to help, so there is no point.

Maybe we're really just arguing the finer points.

Maybe we can just all agree on this definition :

Except for some special circumstances, CIO is not right or good for babies, and since it involves teaching yourself to ignore their needs rather than respond to them, is not compatible with most attachment parenting philosophies.

** Edited to correct embarrassing spelling mistake.


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:

Originally Posted by OnTheFence
I have just finished reading the Ferber book. It has some great information in there about sleep.
Yup, and the Pearl's book has some gems in it too. (Not kidding, being serious) That doesn't mean I'd recommend their book because they also recommend hitting your baby with a stick.


----------



## LongLiveLife (Nov 5, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KoalaMama*

Is CIO a part of AP philosopy? Of course not! But can parents who CIO call themselves AP? Sure, they can call themselves whatever they want. Who are we to judge?

Maya... I understand your situation, and why you would choose CIO as the right option for your daugther. I also think it's great that you're sharing your story, and if someone else finds themselves in that *rare* circumstance they may feel lifted by the memory of your posts. However, I'm assuming you wouldn't have choosen CIO if your daughter didn't have this very unique personality? I just hate to think that examples like this will be what other parents cite when they choose to let their kids scream alone just because it's easier. That's the whole falsehood of sleep-training... We're doing it for them because they "need" it. (Unless I'm misreading your posts and you really are a supporter of CIO under "normal" circumstances...)

I think most of us here are agreeing with this. This thread has veered off into a discussion of what to do with SID in toddlers, not the OP at all.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *LongLiveLife*
I wonder if the reason that peoples' reactions in this thread are so extreme is b/c the discussion has wandered away from the OP?

The OP said nothing about mamas who are close to losing their sanity, who fear losing their tempers and shaking their babies, who are so sleep deprived that they are not functioning as proper mamas during the day.
In these cases, leaving the room to let baby cry is probably the ONLY short term solution, but when the moment has passed, mama needs to find a REAL solution. I agree with everything Chrissy wrote.
Adopting CIO for these reasons is like treating a serious injury with pain meds.
It may be what you need right now, but it's not the long-term answer.

Now that we've all addressed these extreme cases, and cases with SID where babies reject all forms of mama-comfort (as hard as it is for me to wrap my mind around the idea of a little one PREFERRING to CIO, I'll defer to the mamas of these babes) we're back to where we started. Sensory Integration Dysfunction is out of my scope of experience, as it is for most of us.
This discussion has turned to really extreme cases.

In your typical AP family, I don't think that CIO has any place. The OP was referring to sleep training, which is definitively not AP.

Quoting myself rocks!!! :LOL :LOL :LOL


----------



## maya44 (Aug 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KoalaMama*
Maya... I understand your situation, and why you would choose CIO as the right option for your daugther. I also think it's great that you're sharing your story, and if someone else finds themselves in that *rare* circumstance they may feel lifted by the memory of your posts. However, I'm assuming you wouldn't have choosen CIO if your daughter didn't have this very unique personality? .


Yes you are right. I did not have my two other dd's CIO because their needs would not have been met this way.

I did with my 3d DD let her what we called "gritch" which was make noises that did not sound totally happy to me, for about one minute. It seemed to me that this was her way of transitioning to sleep. I found that when I got her right away (as in within seconds) I seemed to be interfering with her sleep patterns. If she seemed unhapppy for more than a minute, I would pick her up again. I was in the room the whole time.


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

You know what, that looks like a great ending for this thread!!!! :LOL

ETA: DARN IT, 3 people posted at the same time and got in before me, KristiMetz! OK, carry on, then.

Carmen, I've always loved your kids' names too. I think the reason your posts resonate with me is because you too are "child-centered" (thank you to Sofiamomma for that label!)


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)




----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

Thanks, Jennisee!


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)

You're welcome, Lula's Mom. I love the term "child-centered," too!


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Yes, hear, hear to ending a thread with everyone patting themselves and each other on the back because you all agree that you don't agree with me and isn't it fun to join in with each other and put me down.


----------



## chrissy (Jun 5, 2002)

Kara,
I really don't mean to attack you and I certainly would never say you should never have had children to begin with. I am sure that you love your children and they love you. You wouldn't be here otherwise.

I would certainly agree that it is infintely better that a baby have to cry some than a mama to go crazy, or die, or be homeless. But this thread (and my responses) aren't about those rare situations, they're about the tired mother who wants their baby to be a little more civilized and let them sleep more.

And to the other mamas with extreme circumstance, like the baby with SID, you do what you have to do and if your baby really is more freaked out by you being around then the best thing would be to let the baby be by him or herself.

But again, this thread is about CIO in general and whether or not it jives with AP. My opinion is that it doesn't. That's all. It doesn't mean I think you are a horrid person or mother if you choose to let your baby CIO. It just means that I don't think CIO is a part of the AP philosophy.

Here are some more







and


----------



## Raven67 (Apr 20, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*
but.. what cases would make CIO ok? I really, truly want to know.. out of sincere curiosity. I just can't imagine a case where the mom would absolutely NEED to let her baby CIO, but I'd love to hear from you guys if there are such cases.

Maybe it's an older baby, and the mom has to work full-time at a demanding job. Since most babies can learn to sleep 8 hours straight, mom wants to tweak it so that she can work and function like a human being. Maybe she is the primary or only breadwinner, maybe she is a single parent. Maybe she has a history of health/emotional problems that would be seriously effected if she didn't get enough sleep month after month. Maybe after many sleepless nights, the mom experiments and finds that the babe sleeps better alone. Maybe she learns that 5-10 minutes of fussing doens't mean she has to pick up an exhausted baby who is trying to get back to sleep. There are many possiblities out there. Some moms just can't be a good mom when they are up all night, all the time, with a toddler who didn't learn to go to sleep on his own. If you don't mind it, great, but not everyone can handle it. It doesn't mean they are bad mothers or they shouldn't have had children.


----------



## Jennisee (Nov 15, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamomma*
Yes, hear, hear to ending a thread with everyone patting themselves and each other on the back because you all agree that you don't agree with me and isn't it fun to join in with each other and put me down.

I posted the group hug smilie for _everyone_ b/c I thought that KristiMetz had found a great place of common ground, as shown in the quote below. No matter how much I may disagree w/ someone here on MDC, I always try to debate matters respectfully and w/o personal attacks, and I do not feel that I deserved this snide comment. I am sorry if you felt overwhelmed by the amount of people who do not agree w/ you. I wish you and your family much peace and happiness.

Quote:

Maybe we're really just arguing the finer points.

Maybe we can just all agree on this definition :

Except for some special circumstances, CIO is not right or good for babies, and since it involves teaching yourself to ignore their needs rather than respond to them, is not compatible with most attachment parenting philosophies.


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

What Jen said. I too thought KristiMetz had come up with a really nice post that summed things up. So I said it was a good place to end things, with people winding down and sheathing their claws. It wasn't about you.









Oh, and there was no sarcasm when I thanked you for the "child-centered" thing. I really like it.


----------



## Pynki (Aug 19, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*
Pynki... what is "gentle sleep training"?? You say you know AP mamas that do sleep training without crying, what kind is that? (just curious)









The babies cry, but not alone.. It is at night time over a year old.. They are held, and rocked, and communicated with, but it's really night weaning.. No nursing until a parent specified time.. They aren't left to cry by themselves, and if they do wake at night they are attended to in the same way.. rocked, back rubbed, talked to soothingly, but not nursed.. In time they stop waking at night because they aren't going to be nursed.. They are not however being abandoned..

I hope that is a better explaination..

Warm Squishy Feelings..

Dyan


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamomma*
Yes, hear, hear to ending a thread with everyone patting themselves and each other on the back because you all agree that you don't agree with me and isn't it fun to join in with each other and put me down.

Well, I give up then. <shrug>


----------



## Periwinkle (Feb 27, 2003)




----------



## KermitMissesJim (Feb 12, 2004)

Well, now I know I am:

1) NFL, not AP;

and

2) possibly evil for using a sleep-training method.

However, since I have children who sleep well and thus function well during the day, as well as have a good attachment to both me and dh, I will have to deal, won't I?

I am being sarcastic here, but the labeling and judging is...unkind.


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Kristi, I did see your post as a nice way to sum up, that was not what I was talking about. You don't need to "give up" anything. I was referring to what I took as a snide comment about adopting the phrase "child centered" because I said I am not. It really chafed. I personally feel child centered isn't healthy. Baby centered is healthy for the baby, but as they grow up they begin to learn they are not the center of the universe (which they are and rightly so as babies), but hey that's a whole 'nother thread.

I felt like there were several people who were not making any effort to try to understand what I was saying. And all of the "Yeah, what she said" and "Right on sista" any time someone put my thoughts down was really getting to me. It seems odd coming from people who aspire to be gentle and understanding.

I do not feel overwhelmed by people disagreeing with me. I might as well go crawl back under my blankets and stay there if that's the case. I am a direct entry midwife working as a hospital L&D nurse, a single mom by choice, and trying raise my kids AP and living in the midwest surrounded by "spare the rod, spoil the child" types. Good grief, when I agree with someone it's a rarity. I just got disgruntled with the tone, the condescension, and the exclusion.

Edited to add: Just for the record, in case it got lost in all the quibbling, CIO is not AP

And thanks everybody for explaining yourselves.


----------



## ShadowMom (Jun 25, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Sofiamomma*
I was referring to what I took as a snide comment about adopting the phrase "child centered" because I said I am not. It really chafed. I personally feel child centered isn't healthy. Baby centered is healthy for the baby, but as they grow up they begin to learn they are not the center of the universe (which they are and rightly so as babies), but hey that's a whole 'nother thread.

I have a very similar outlook. Part of it may be just a matter of semantics, but when I first had my DS we were very child-centered, because you HAVE to be with a baby, to a certain extent, IMO. Now that he's older and maturing, we are moving more to a "family-centered" model, where the functioning and happiness of the family as a whole is the top priority.

There will be times that my son has to do things he doesn't want to do, or has to make some sacrifices, simply because it's good for the family as a whole. And, part of being good for the family means that the marriage needs to function and be in a good state, because that is the relationship that keeps everything together.

Like I said, I think it may just be mainly a semantics thing - I think some of the people who say they're child-centered may just mean that their child has a really high priority, and that they frequently end up sacrificing their needs for their children, which we probably all end up doing.

What part of the midwest are you in?? I'm in Kansas. I'm definitely the odd man out here!


----------



## Sofiamomma (Jan 4, 2002)

Missouri. Right next door.


----------



## Lula's Mom (Oct 29, 2003)

Yeah, I'm sure it's semantics. Because when you used the term child-centered, I thought, that really describes my life, and I like it that way.

Quote:

I was referring to what I took as a snide comment about adopting the phrase "child centered" because I said I am not. It really chafed. I personally feel child centered isn't healthy. Baby centered is healthy for the baby, but as they grow up they begin to learn they are not the center of the universe
I guess you meant it as catering to a child's every whim. I mean it as thinking of them first, putting their needs ahead of my own, considering the impact of any major decisions on them, etc. And, that they're my favorite subject, my favorite people!! Take Dictionary.com's definition of *self*-centered: "Engrossed in oneself and one's own affairs", and apply it to this term. I am engrossed in my kids.

Heck, they _are_ the center of MY personal universe! Now, that doesn't mean that my 3 1/2-year-old gets everything her little heart desires. I'm consistent and I say no quite a bit; she's about as far from a spoiled brat as a kid can get. It also doesn't mean that I neglect my adult relationships, especially with DP.

But he agrees that the kids come first. Their happiness is our happiness (remembering, again, that that doesn't mean giving them whatever they want all the time!) That's why I liked the term child-centered. There are other things on the periphery, but the kids are at the heart of everything we do.


----------



## mistymama (Oct 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Dar*
I think it's interesting how so many people post here about babies who prefer to CIO, who *have* to be alone and cying to fall asleep... and yet during most of human history, this would be a suicidal act for an infant. Rather than believeing that your baby is the exception to eons, it makes more sense to believe that there is an attached way to meet his needs, one that doesn't involve letting him cry alone.

If a baby doesn't want to be touched, don't touch him. Lay him down on the futon next to you (I think having a futon on the floor is a great help for many babies) and *be* with him.

When Rain was a baby I had a childproof bedroom with a futon on the floor, and I would take my shirt off and crash out and doze while she crawled around, explored, nursed, and finally slept. I'd come fully awake if she cried, but generally it worked.

There are certain kinds of touches that feel better to most people with touch issues. Swaddling can be good. Firm, pressure-type touches are better than light, fluttery touches.

Abandoning a baby to cry alone in the dark is damaging. Cortisol levels in the blood go up. The baby's body tells him he's in danger. It's biologically unhealthy (and FWIW, babies crying in arms have totoally different blood chem than babies crying alone). A baby doesn't know you're coming back, all he knows is that he's been abandoned.

Dar, who first argued about this online on the misc.kids newsgroup in 1995...

That's very well said. My ds has SID (didn't know it when he was a baby, just thought he was high needs) and there were times where he would get overwhelmed and very fussy. I never once thought "he wants to be left alone to fuss" and he DIDN'T. We would lay together in a quiet place until he calmed down, softly sing together, rock and nurse together, even putting him in his carseat and going for a drive ... there were lots of options that helped him. Sure, I'm sure leaving him alone in his crib *might* have worked ... but what would that have told him? I wanted him to know that I was there for him to help him calm down when he was unable to.

So I agree that leaving a baby to cry is never AP and there are other options, even for special needs babies. I doubt any baby wants to be left alone to "get over" it, even SID babies can be "helped" through their issues, which is what AP is all about.


----------



## PurplePixiePooh (Aug 5, 2003)

Dar







Very well said!


----------



## huggerwocky (Jun 21, 2004)

I think it depends on the situation and the age of the child and how it is done.Letting a 6 months old cry for 2 min is something different than waiting for the baby to throw up!


----------



## LongLiveLife (Nov 5, 2004)

Crying for 2 minutes is not cyring it out, unless your baby never cries for more than 2 minutes before falling asleep or giving up.


----------



## KoalaMama (Jan 24, 2004)

I'm not sure I understand the direction this conversation is going... Are you saying that if a baby only needs to cry for two minutes it's not crying it out? Or if they cry for two minutes and you go get them it isn't crying it out, but if they cry for two minutes and you don't get them it is crying it out?


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Just joining...I must confess I only read the first three pages but I will read the rest...I really will...I read one page a day.

I'm also surprised this is even a question. I see no-CIO as one of the most important parts of AP. You respond to your baby's needs, no matter what. It seems odd that so many babies apparently "need" to be left alone to scream in their cribs with no one to comfort them. I'm also suspicious of those parents who "know" their baby is just doing it to manipulate them. Exactly how do you know? When it happens half an hour after eating, is it manipulation? Is it manipulation when the baby is over a year old? Over 6 months old? Are there manipulative 4- and 5-month-olds? Is it a legitimate need when it's at 9 pm, and then does it become manipulation at midnight?

For a while, my youngest was waking up and eating every hour. She did this because she was hungry. I posted in desperation about wanting to do CIO for 10 minutes at a time, and other members let me know it would be wrong. Now I know that I knew it too; I just needed them to get me back on track. It would have been wrong. And now she's 8 months old and only up every 3 hours or so, so it is getting better.

My 3-year-old wakes at night when she hears a loud noise. She cries and NEEDS to be held and comforted.

Parenting is not supposed to be convenient, and AP is not supposed to offer some huge payoff for the parents. It's just good common sense - go to a baby when she cries. Give her what she needs. Do it again and again.


----------



## dancingmama (Dec 18, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mama24-7*
Well, her dd is firmly attached to her blankie, her thumb and wanted nothing to do w/ her brother when he was born when she was only 20 months old. She is a very withdrawn child from what I've seen.

Sus

Haven't had time to read all the responses.... just thought I'd mention that my dd is very attached to her blankie and her thumb.... and we cosleep and we are still bf'ing at 29 months! We have never used CIO and we are very attached. I guess I'm just warning about the cause-and-effect association assumed here.


----------



## woobysma (Apr 20, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greaseball*
Parenting is not supposed to be convenient, and AP is not supposed to offer some huge payoff for the parents. It's just good common sense - go to a baby when she cries. Give her what she needs. Do it again and again.

amen, amen, amen (except I think AP has given me a big reward - I get to really know my children as people because I respect them as people, always have)


----------

