# Your Opinion Please- AP Philosophy and Implications



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

I received this from a friend, and had some strong feelings about it and wondered if others might be thinking the same things? I have removed the email addresses to send submissions to for now, if some are seriously interested I don't mind giving them, but I figured better not for them to get a ton of angry emails perhaps?

We are seeking papers for a proposed edited
> collection, Mother Knows Best: Talking Back to Sears
> And Other Baby Trainers (working title). We are
> interested in work from a variety of
> (inter)disciplines that:
>
> *addresses the white, middle-class, and heterosexist
> bias of pregnancy, childbirth, and childrearing advice
> books;
> *challenges the way that Sears and others have placed
> most of the burden of childrearing on mothers and
> essentialized the role of mothers;
> *explores the cultural, class, and racial implications
> of importing "attachment parenting" for use among
> primarily white, middle-class, nuclear families;
> *debates the pros and cons of breastfeeding - and
> extended breastfeeding - in a feminist context;
> *defends certain aspects of baby trainers, or of
> attachment parenting more generally, again within a
> feminist context;
> *examines the tensions between extremes that set the
> stage for many of these conflicts: the current state
> of medicalization of pregnancy, childbirth, and
> breastfeeding, and the just as insistent promotion of
> "natural" mothering;
> *analyzes any other issues raised by baby trainers,
> including but not limited to mother's (and fathers')
> roles in the family, working out of the home mothers,
> stay at home mothers, daycare, babywearing, cloth
> diapering, the family bed, crying it out and other
> forms of sleep training, etc.
>
> We are interested in research/theoretical articles,
> personal narrative essays, and any combinations of the
> two. Submissions should be approximately 2,500-6,500
> words, and should be sent via email to
> (emails withheld by OP) by
> January 1, 2005. Please include the subject line,
> "book submission," and send your submission as an MS
> Word or RTF attachment. Please also include full
> contact information, institutional affiliation (if
> any), and brief biographical information.

These are some of my first thoughts on this-
I am clueless on some of the implications in this. First of all I don't consider Sears to be a "baby trainer", it simply isn't what he espouses. Second, I do consider mothers pretty essential, as in "mothering", whether done by a man or woman. Seems like that is a misnomer when the title of the book is "Mother Knows Best"?

And what does "explores the cultural, class, and racial implications of importing "attachment parenting" for use among primarily white, middle-class, nuclear families" mean? Are they saying that as white, middle class families that we should not be practicing attachment parenting? "Cons of breastfeeding and extended BF"? Okay, I know adoptive families find breastfeeding near impossible, and that pumping while working is not a piece of cake, but CONS? I don't get what their point would be.

Perhaps I am missing some huge piece here, some sort of debate out there against AP, breastfeeding, family bed, etc, etc. Anyone care to clue me in. I totally understand how some find that those things don't work for their family, but I don't get the rest of it. Certainly some of the books are heterosexist, but to be honest when reading Sears I don't find it all that bad. Just as an atheist I have to translate some of the stuff in my spirituality books, I expect a little use of Mom/Dad when I am reading a book on parenting.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

I got an interesting reply from a friend on this, and thought I might post it for discussion, I guess I really would like to explore this with others if they might be interested. I think she says some interesting things, from a different perspective.

Quote:

i think that the idea is that much of attachment parenting assumes a middle class, stay at home mom partnered with a salary earner, and thus saying that it's the best way to parent implies that those who work etc are practicing inferior parenting. breastfeeding requires exclusive time and attention of mom, and thus is limiting in some ways, so a con, esp for women with multiple children who are shouldering most of burden of caring for household, but those are the sorts of things that are usually brought up ...
My first response would be that I guess I don't see AP as being only possible from a middle class point of view. Though certainly in my own home once I was able to stay at home AP became a lot easier. I was able to work and do AP, but I had a very unique job that allowed me to work part time, bring my baby to work (MIL watched him, I fed him when needed), etc. And yeah I guess breastfeeding is limited in that for the most part only I can do it. Though I still did it (and am still doing it).


----------



## girlndocs (Mar 12, 2004)

chewing this over.


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

I think there is something inherently classist in the implication that only middle-class stay at home moms can breastfeed. I think there is something inherently racist in the assumption that as women of color are currently statistically underrepresented among breastfeeding women, that it's racist to say that breastfeeding is good.
Women of color are also disproportionately represented among smokers, is it also racist to say that smoking is bad for health?

What's racist is how formula companies unscrupulously flog their products.

It's also pretty foolish to write a book asserting that people who are in favor of bed-sharing and people who are in favor of baby sleeping training are somehow in the same category.


----------



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

chewing this over too.....


----------



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

ok. the first thing I didn't get is the Sears comment. he is against baby trainers, more than anything, advocating, IMO, child-centered parenting. I don't think Dr Sears has put a burden on mothers. I think all he has done, is make more popular something that has existed since the beginning of time. he looked back and realize, things were done differently before and now have changed so much, and he named it attachment parenting. it's been called, instinctive parenting, natural parenting, gentle parenting, whatever, so many names, but I like to call it natural parenting. because it's about doing things how nature taught us, without interventions. I think yes, mothers ARE supposed to be with their children. yes, mothers are supposed to raise their children, and IMO, I think it's the best, because it's proven the mother-child bond is by far, the strongest and most important. however, that doesn't mean that this is possible nowadays. unfortunately, mothers HAVE to work, many times, because they are either single mamas, or they need to help dh support their family, or other reasons. It may not be ideal, but no one is saying they are bad mamas for doing this. unfortunatel, it's just not possible sometimes in this day and age where everything is so expensive.
I don't know if I understood the OP very well, I'm trying here, and continuing to chew some more.. maybe later I'll bite in again once I have a better understanding of the post.

hugs,
Carmen


----------



## pugmadmama (Dec 11, 2003)

I have to think about the rest of it, but I would be interested in reading the papers on these two points, because I agree that they are a problematic:

_* addresses the white, middle-class, and heterosexist
bias of pregnancy, childbirth, and childrearing advice
books;
*challenges the way that Sears and others have placed
most of the burden of childrearing on mothers and
essentialized the role of mothers;_


----------



## daricsmami (May 18, 2004)

Confused...

Quote:

addresses the white, middle-class, and heterosexist
> bias of pregnancy, childbirth, and childrearing advice
> books
Is this talking specifically about AP? Is it specifically talking about the US?

Some aspects of AP are (were) done by the minority community and poor people, but they don't call it AP. Babywearing and co-sleeping just to name a couple. And let's not forget, when formula was introduced, it was primarily used by the white, middle-class. They act as if the white, middle class is pushing AP, when it's always been here. It's how things have naturally been. So, I take offense to the notion that white, middle class parents are doing a "new" way of parenting, when it was how I was parented and how my parents were parented, how my grandparents were parented, etc.,etc.. AP is nothing new.
If poor mothers or mother of color can't parent they way they want, that doesn't mean there's something wrong with AP; there's something wrong with society.

Quote:

explores the cultural, class, and racial implications
> of importing "attachment parenting" for use among
> primarily white, middle-class, nuclear families;
What does this mean? Implication towards whom?

Quote:

examines the tensions between extremes that set the
> stage for many of these conflicts: the current state
> of medicalization of pregnancy, childbirth, and
> breastfeeding, and the just as insistent promotion of
> "natural" mothering
I totally understand this. Although, I still believe the medical community is much worse in promoting it's "belief".

I considered myself a feminist. But I still don't understand the big deal about mothers playing a special role in childrearing. Most people have a different relationship with their mother and father. I just can't see how you can blame fathers not taking care of their kids (that basically what it boils down to) on AP. Fathers are AP parents, too. Breastfeeding is only a small part of it. No matter what type of parenting you follow, more than likely the woman is going to get stuck with more than half of the parenting. Just like, no matter how progressive your partner is, the female (in a hetero relationship) is probably going to get stuck with most of the chores. Again, that's not an AP problem, that's how society is.


----------



## PurpleBasil (Jan 28, 2004)

Sears stinks. The sooner he is recognized as a fraud, the better.

Someday Sears won't look as great as people make him out to be. I honestly think people don't realize how much they edit out his words (like instructions on how to spank) or whitewash it to make sure Guru Sears is shiny and bright ('oh, he's just giving the option for those who spank/won't even try breastfeeding/circ without anesthetic/don't know there is a soft crib/vaccinate all at once').

The man is a peddler and a major player in the STUFF generation. Got to have the stuff.

I'm ready for the anti-Sears revolution to begin.


----------



## alliwenk (Nov 6, 2003)

brain, child magazine had a story many months ago called something like "Why I hate Dr. Sears" - it was written from a more "casual" perspective, but I'll go dig through my huge stack of magazines...I seem to remember it having some similar points. I thought the article had some good points...but I'm the kind of person with NO sacred cows...I'll be back later.

Allison

eta: oooohhhh playdoh don't do the sacred cow thing either. I think I love her







...


----------



## daricsmami (May 18, 2004)

This made me laugh...

Quote:

essentialized the role of mothers










I would think mothers are kinda essential...

Quote:

Sears stinks. The sooner he is recognized as a fraud, the better.
Ya know... I've never read anything he's written. I have no idea what he looks like. I don't even know what his books are actually about.

Off to GOOGLE...


----------



## Meiri (Aug 31, 2002)

I was breastfeeding and babywearing DS before I ever heard of Sears. I have to wonder though why he seems to be such a target.

A good chunk of AP concepts are inspired by how other cultures raise their children. I would think if racism was involved, the cultures inspiring things like babywearing and co-sleeping would be ignored...

Quote:

*debates the pros and cons of breastfeeding - and
> extended breastfeeding - in a feminist context;
Yes, it's so much more empowering to completely turn your baby's feeding over to some male-run corporation.


----------



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

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Meiri*
I was breastfeeding and babywearing DS before I ever heard of Sears. I have to wonder though why he seems to be such a target.

exactly, me too. I don't know why people think dr. Sears introduced this "new concept" to parents. he didn't. he just described something he way, he's also a man with his own point of view, so I would never love or hate him, I like certain things he says, but I would never swear by him or anything. I will never agree 100% with anyone that is a so-called "parenting expert" *I* am my parenting expert. my teachers are my children and I've been learning since I was pg for the first time.


----------



## srain (Nov 26, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal*
Second, I do consider mothers pretty essential, as in "mothering", whether done by a man or woman.

I found Sears's books to make a lot of sexist assumptions about the mother being the primary parenter. And I do consider the term "mothering" to be sexist- would a woman ever say she "fathers" her child?


----------



## Viola (Feb 1, 2002)

At the risk of sounding like a conspiracy theorist, my opinion is that the formula companies are getting even more insidious in their attempts to capture market share. Let's really make it a feminist issue--that daddy needs to bond by feeding the baby thing just wasn't cutting it. The breast vs. bottle debate? Ludicrous

Also, I reject the idea that AP gurus are the baby trainers. The well known baby trainers are not supporters of attachment parenting in my experience.

And the concept of Sears putting the burden of parenting on the mother--what does this mean? Dr. Sears is just not that influential. If he does put forth the idea that the mother does most of the work, it is because he is drawing on tradition, nature or his religious beliefs. It's not like he created this or is responsible for the fact that women _often_ do more of the parenting. In my experience, even in homes with two working parents who have never heard of natural family living, the mother comes home and does a lot more of the housework and child rearing. This has been talk show and book fodder for years.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal*
> *explores the cultural, class, and racial implications
> of importing "attachment parenting" for use among
> primarily white, middle-class, nuclear families;

At the risk of sounding insensitive-Oh good gravy!







There is nothing new under the sun. If I carry a baby in a sling or sleep in my bed with her and there are groups who want to accuse me of somehow co-opting their culture, go right ahead. It's not like I have to pay royalties on every idea that comes down the pike. A lot of these things have arisen independently and have been around for ages. Sheesh.

OK, so that is basically my response.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *daricsmami*
I would think mothers are kinda essential...

So two gay men raising a child is a bad thing? I think that's part of the implication in the book. To say that mothers are essential means that two men cannot and should not raise a child. Not what I believe at all, even though I would also say that mothers are essential. I have just changed it to say that mothering is essential, whether done by a man or a woman. Of course two men can rarely breastfeed. I say that because I know some gay parents who have gotten breastmilk from the surrogate mom. But then most adoptive parents dont breastfeed either.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *loving-my-babies*
but I would never swear by him or anything. I will never agree 100% with anyone that is a so-called "parenting expert" *I* am my parenting expert. my teachers are my children and I've been learning since I was pg for the first time.

Perhaps thats the point of the book? I mean the title is "Mother's know Best". Just throwing it out there, I am not writing the book, all I have to go on is what is in the email. But I thought the ideas were interesting to talk about in this forum. I mean I totally AP our child (with no father mind you) and I do read Dr. Sears, it's the major source of information I had in learning about it. I certainly have expanded by understanding and I don't always agree with what he says, but I certainly don't like the so called "baby trainers". I also am pretty pissed off at society and how it makes it so difficult imo to parent "better" (not correctly, as I would say there is no one correct way to parent).

More coming...........


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *srain*
I found Sears's books to make a lot of sexist assumptions about the mother being the primary parenter. And I do consider the term "mothering" to be sexist- would a woman ever say she "fathers" her child?

Hmm, interesting way of looking at it. I guess that's part of the problem like I said above. People sometimes flip out that we are raising our child without a father. I personally have no problem with it based on all the research I have done (before we had a child) on how children raised in same sex households come out. I don't consider any specific thing to be of one "gende" in parenting. I would basically say that the only thing I cannot teach my child that a father could would be what it feels like to have a penis. Perhaps there are a few more, but I havn't obsessed about it to be honest. My partner and I have skills, talents, abilities, traits that run the gamut, each of having something that society might consider to be of the male gender. I certainly don't see it that way. Like I said the only thing I think I can do that a man cannot is nurse with a breast.


----------



## daricsmami (May 18, 2004)

Quote:

So two gay men raising a child is a bad thing?
Whoa! Slow your horses!

I was speaking of the most basic definition of a mother ie. a member of the human race that has a uterus and vagina, which are essential in creating and birthing a baby human, and gives birth to said baby human. That's all. I'm not talking about adopted mothers, or homosexual parents, etc. Heterosexuals are the default. When I speak of a couple, most people think hetero. Right or wrong, that's what we do. So, when I read the quote that's I was speaking of. Two married, middle class, run of the mill, probably white, hetero people. I don't even fit the default, but that's what I think of. But in that situation, I would say that the mother is essential. You can't give birth to a baby without a vagina...

And no, two gay men raising a baby is definitely not a bad thing.


----------



## daricsmami (May 18, 2004)

Quote:

And I do consider the term "mothering" to be sexist- would a woman ever say she "fathers" her child?
I've heard single mothers use the term a lot, ie. "I had to be a mother and a father to my child."

Why do you consider the term sexist? Why even use the word mother or father, ever. Since, they have sexist connotation to them (I do agree with you in a way), why don't children just call us by our first name?

J,

I feel the total opposite. I'm a single mom and I worry all the time about my son growing up without a father. Not because I think fathers are so essential, that without one my son is going to be some horrible human being, but because I feel they are somethings that I can't relate to him about. I seriously think about it all the time. Hopefully, one day, I can be as confident in my parenting as you are.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *daricsmami*
You can't give birth to a baby without a vagina...

And no, two gay men raising a baby is definitely not a bad thing.









Thanks, I wasn't meaning to attack you at all. And yeah, I think vaginas are important, having babies and all, lol.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *daricsmami*
J,
I feel the total opposite. I'm a single mom and I worry all the time about my son growing up without a father. Not because I think fathers are so essential, that without one my son is going to be some horrible human being, but because I feel they are somethings that I can't relate to him about. I seriously think about it all the time. Hopefully, one day, I can be as confident in my parenting as you are.

Interesting. What I would say to you is that there are always things we cannot relate well to our children about, there is always something like that you know? I know I won't be all things to my child all of the time, that is a given to me. I will try my best, hope my partner fills in on some of it, and the rest we will either find others to fill that part of our son's life or make do. He won't get everything from us or our friends and family, that I know.

As for being confident, thanks, I think I have worked hard to feel this way (though I certainly am not that way all the time). Spent my whole life working with children in different contexts, spent too long a time trying to get pregnant, and years on my font of wisdom I call the Lesbian Mom's List (on Queernet.org if anyone is interested). It's a list of several hundred women from all over the world who have taught me most of what I know about parenting, and are there when I might not know something.

JoAnne, partner to Mary, mothers to Ryan


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:

To say that mothers are essential means that two men cannot and should not raise a child.
I'll say it. Mothers are essential. So are fathers. For as much as it stinks to say it, when you raise a child without either a mother or a father, they are missing out on what the opposite gendered parent has to offer. Tine Thevin (sp?) who wrote The Family Bed also wrote a good book called Mothering and Fathering that addresses the different things mothers and fathers offer and why kids need them.


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *srain*
I found Sears's books to make a lot of sexist assumptions about the mother being the primary parenter. And I do consider the term "mothering" to be sexist- would a woman ever say she "fathers" her child?

***The fact of the matter is that mothers ARE mostly the primary parenters. Most people who SAH are moms; most parent-child activities assume that the "parent" is the woman -- and it's generally a correct assumption. To be offended by this perplexes me; it's like being angry about the fact that most popcorn is yellow.

As far as the term "mothering," it is sexist only in that it is attached to a specific function of a specific sex, just like "penis" is sexist, I suppose, because it can't really be applied to women (well, it CAN be applied to women...that's how most of them become mothers. But you get my point.) The term's connotation implies nurturing, caring, rearing a child, whereas "fathering" only really implies insemination. If anything, "fathering" is the more perjorative of the two "sexist" terms because it implies that insemination is the only/primary role a father takes in parenting his child. Really, I am sorry to be ignorant here, but in what way is "mothering" sexist?


----------



## srain (Nov 26, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Charles Baudelaire*
The fact of the matter is that mothers ARE mostly the primary parenters. ... To be offended by this perplexes me; it's like being angry about the fact that most popcorn is yellow.

As far as the term "mothering," it is sexist only in that it is attached to a specific function of a specific sex, just like "penis" is sexist, I suppose, because it can't really be applied to women (well, it CAN be applied to women...that's how most of them become mothers. But you get my point.)

I quoted a previous poster who said "Second, I do consider mothers pretty essential, as in "mothering", whether done by a man or woman." Many people feel the term is inclusive of men and women; I do not. I agree that the word itself when referring to a woman is nonsexist.

I believe it is sexist to assume the mother is the primary caregiver; I am sensitive to this because my husband was one for a long time, and now we are equal caregivers. There is no NEED to refer to mothers, fathers, partners in different ways unless specifically discussing the birth process or breastfeeding; the English language has terms that encompass all with little awkwardness. Just because the majority of an audience looks a certain way doesn't mean other kinds of families should be overtly or subtly excluded. I'd consider it sexist if my son's baseball team referred to fathers in most of their paperwork, even though most of the parents involved in the activity are men. I also feel that toddler-play classes run by our town called "Play with me, Mommy" are sexist.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *phathui5*
I'll say it. Mothers are essential. So are fathers. For as much as it stinks to say it, when you raise a child without either a mother or a father, they are missing out on what the opposite gendered parent has to offer. Tine Thevin (sp?) who wrote The Family Bed also wrote a good book called Mothering and Fathering that addresses the different things mothers and fathers offer and why kids need them.

Well since I don't have the book, why don't you tell us what an opposite gendered parent has to offer? What can a father give a child that a mother cannot, and vice versa?


----------



## chicagomom (Dec 24, 2002)

This sounds like another of those 'exploding the myth' attacks on attachment parenting that came out, most recently with the rise of the book _The Mommy Myth_. Like the _Real Simple_ suggestion last August that included in one of its '10 ways to simplify your life' to not breastfeed, because it doesn't really matter all that much anyway...

I do think our culture has been obsessed with 'good parenting' for a time (I preferred the history _Raising America_ to _Mommy Myth_, which was mostly anecdote). But that includes going overboard on both ends: calling people child abusers if they don't cloth diaper, and leaving their three-week old infant with nanny for two weeks because they just need to get away to the spa and reconnect with their husbands.

Somewhere in there, is balance. But we do live in complicated times, and I think some of the obsessiveness the public may see in AP moms is just mothers trying to educate themselves, for which they sometimes get slammed. *And not all parenting choices are equal* - some *are* better. To me this essay solicitation is just one more example of the 'whatever works for you is ok, it won't *really* hurt your kid' excuse.

When Stanley Greenspan and T Berry Brazelton published their thin little _The Irreducible Needs of Children_, they said 0-3 kids _need_ a primary (not group) caregiver, they _do_ suffer if the pc is away from them, and laid it all out. The response? Deafening silence. Our country, for the most part, just doesn't want to hear about it. So instead, we'll get busy picking apart those crazy AP-ers and their shrill complaints about mercury in fish and child-carrying, and make ourselves feel a whole lot better.

Was that too harsh?


----------



## slov_mom (Jul 22, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chicagomom*
When Stanley Greenspan and T Berry Brazelton published their thin little _The Irreducible Needs of Children_, they said 0-3 kids _need_ a primary (not group) caregiver, they _do_ suffer if the pc is away from them, and laid it all out. The response? Deafening silence. Our country, for the most part, just doesn't want to hear about it. So instead, we'll get busy picking apart those crazy AP-ers and their shrill complaints about mercury in fish and child-carrying, and make ourselves feel a whole lot better.

chicagomom, ITA with this.


----------



## Meiri (Aug 31, 2002)

Quote:

Well since I don't have the book, why don't you tell us what an opposite gendered parent has to offer? What can a father give a child that a mother cannot, and vice versa?
What a father can give is a male perspective, but then I think any close family friend or uncle can do the same.

What it seems to me a child needs, ideally, is 2 parents, of whatever gender, so that the entire job of raising the child(ren) doesn't fall onto one person alone. With 2, they can spell each other with the colicky baby. With 2, if one is having a rough time, the other can be helpful, supportive, take over for a bit, and vice versa. Note well that that can be done by 2 women, 2 men, or 1 of each.









If a family doesn't have that ideal of 2 parents, then I hope the single parents have friends and family who lovingly help out. We are all only human.


----------



## Sonna (Jul 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *daricsmami*
Some aspects of AP are (were) done by the minority community and poor people, but they don't call it AP. Babywearing and co-sleeping just to name a couple. And let's not forget, when formula was introduced, it was primarily used by the white, middle-class. They act as if the white, middle class is pushing AP, when it's always been here. It's how things have naturally been. So, I take offense to the notion that white, middle class parents are doing a "new" way of parenting, when it was how I was parented and how my parents were parented, how my grandparents were parented, etc.,etc.. AP is nothing new.

I have a response. Formula may have been introduced to the white middle class but it is now pushed on the lower classes.

Also,

I think that the white middle class is pushing AP. The aspectes of AP (babywearing, co-sleeping, tcs...) didn't have a name because they were natrual. they were just how it was done. But not in my culture. I was not raised that way, nor my mother and most likly not my grandmother either. For the white middle class AP is new. They gave a name to all these actions that they saw other cultures practicing because they knew that it was right. It feels right. To WMC AP is new.


----------



## Sonna (Jul 12, 2004)

Oh my this is a great thred. So entertaining.







:

I have Dr. Sears Baby Book and it was very helpfull, yet I do see what others do, how he could be viewed as sexist and all. But the fact that he is christian must be taken into account. I think that Dr. Sears is doing a great good in introducing AP to families who otherwise may never understand. Families who would put their childeren in a bared bed and sit on the sofa at night in serious emotional pain as their child screams because this is what their mom did to them, and thier mom's mom. Our childeren check out books from the library that have cribs and bottles and strolers. Not giant familiy beds, boobs and slings. (There are books out there like the second book I listed, but I have to look long and hard.) When a three year old child is reading books with bottles and cribs, bottles and cribs are going to be her reality. Dr. Sears is attempting to reach these mothers and I think it is a good thing. I don't agree with all he says, but I dout I would agree with all anyone says. I am greatfull for the good he does.

I also want to say that I think that anyone can mother, even a father can mother.


----------



## chicagomom (Dec 24, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal*
Well since I don't have the book, why don't you tell us what an opposite gendered parent has to offer? What can a father give a child that a mother cannot, and vice versa?

It's only partly opposite gender. It's also got a lot to do w/who is the primary caregiver. Whoever is the pc will get the primary attachment. To a 0-3 y.o., this person is an extension of themselves, and they look to this person for constant reassurances, encouragements and perspectives on the world. The pc relates the world to the child, makes the world make sense, gives language to the world.

The partner (usually the dad) is typically seen as the model of the first outside relationship, the child's first true social interaction. The partner does some of what the pc does, and reinforces what the pc does, but has the added role of being the prototype for self-other interactions. So, their role is also tremendously important. Kids who grow up with only one parent tend to have more social difficulties unless there is a constant other presence (grandparent, aunt, neighbor) to fill that role.


----------



## heartmama (Nov 27, 2001)

Ap is such a marginalized style of parenting, I can't get my head around the premise that it's taken up a reflection of white middle class culture. It's not even popular among that group.

And ap doesn't come from white culture. It comes from anything but white middle class culture, and is used all over the world to make parenting easier for those who live in closer communion with one another and the planet.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

I feel a lot of the AP lifestyle assumes you are middle-income and partnered. You stay home (or perhaps you work part-time while your child is with your dh) and your husband works at some job that can provide enough for all of you to live comfortably with a decent-sized house, car, health insurance, Waldorf school, etc.

Telling these mothers "quit your job and stay home for a few years - you'll save money on travel and dry cleaning" might make sense, but tell that to a 16-year-old with two children on welfare who is forced into some lame work program. This mother might not even be able to breastfeed, since any job she gets is not likely to give pumping breaks. She will have to leave her children in the most child-unfriendly daycare center in town, for 10 to 12 hours a day, and centers like that usually refuse to have anything to do with cloth diapers. So it won't do any good to tell this mother that she "only has to spend $200 to get started cloth diapering." Where is she going to get that money, and why bother, when she could only use cloth at home and would still have to buy sposies? What if she doesn't have laundry facilities or a car?

One article in Mothering mentioned that Waldorf schools "try to make their tuition as affordable as possible" to all families.







: Since when can "all families" afford a few thousand dollars for education?

So I often feel left out of the AP circle because even though I do most of the "stuff" we are not this typical family. We are two poor students who have to take out loan after loan to live on and even when we both get jobs, we aren't going to be that well off. The only way my kids will go to a decent school is if I beg - which I plan on doing because I don't buy into this idea that OTHER kids get to go to good schools and MY kids get to go to substandard schools.

So that's the main beef I have with Mothering, Sears, etc. (Actually there is a lot more I don't like about Sears. His stand on formula, circ, Ritalin, and discipline, for starters.)

I see very few AP articles written for those non-normal families. What if you are homeless? A single or teen parent by choice? Developmentally disabled and parenting? Although, to be fair, most pregnancy and parenting books assume you are part of a "regular" family, not only the AP stuff.

But I don't believe breastfeeding is a feminist issue. What is so empowering about withholding something from your baby just because you can?







:


----------



## *Erin* (Mar 18, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chicagomom*
This sounds like another of those 'exploding the myth' attacks on attachment parenting that came out, most recently with the rise of the book _The Mommy Myth_. Like the _Real Simple_ suggestion last August that included in one of its '10 ways to simplify your life' to not breastfeed, because it doesn't really matter all that much anyway...

I do think our culture has been obsessed with 'good parenting' for a time (I preferred the history _Raising America_ to _Mommy Myth_, which was mostly anecdote). But that includes going overboard on both ends: calling people child abusers if they don't cloth diaper, and leaving their three-week old infant with nanny for two weeks because they just need to get away to the spa and reconnect with their husbands.

Somewhere in there, is balance. But we do live in complicated times, and I think some of the obsessiveness the public may see in AP moms is just mothers trying to educate themselves, for which they sometimes get slammed. *And not all parenting choices are equal* - some *are* better. To me this essay solicitation is just one more example of the 'whatever works for you is ok, it won't *really* hurt your kid' excuse.

When Stanley Greenspan and T Berry Brazelton published their thin little _The Irreducible Needs of Children_, they said 0-3 kids _need_ a primary (not group) caregiver, they _do_ suffer if the pc is away from them, and laid it all out. The response? Deafening silence. Our country, for the most part, just doesn't want to hear about it. So instead, we'll get busy picking apart those crazy AP-ers and their shrill complaints about mercury in fish and child-carrying, and make ourselves feel a whole lot better.

Was that too harsh?









not too harsh for my ears. i totally agree with everything you said.


----------



## MamaE (May 1, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chicagomom*
To me this essay solicitation is just one more example of the 'whatever works for you is ok, it won't *really* hurt your kid' excuse.

To me too. This book will certainly capture a VERY large market of women who have made sub-par parenting choices but want/need/and will PAY to be told that it's OK to regularly put their own needs before their childrens', that sacrifice really isn't necessary in parenting, that a baby/toddler should mold to his parents' schedule, and that the easy way is the better way.

As for all this negativity about Sears - he may be a marketer as well, but at least he's marketing the good stuff - AP philosophy! Funny, I always found his stuff to insist that Dad help out - he talks about father-nursing, etc. I never found him sexist at all.


----------



## griffin2004 (Sep 25, 2003)

Greaseball, I second your comments and applaud your eloquence. Thanks for stating the case of so many of us "non-traditionals"!

And on a slight detour I couldn't let slip by unremarked upon:

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chicagomom*
Kids who grow up with only one parent tend to have more social difficulties unless there is a constant other presence (grandparent, aunt, neighbor) to fill that role.

Any chance you might want to take another run at this completely unsubstantiated and totally incorrect bash at all the single moms and dads out there killing themselves to do right by their kids?

--Trish


----------



## springbabes (Aug 23, 2003)

Hmm, I think the book sounds very interesting and I can't wait to read it







. I have been interested for a while in the "why" behind AP. And I don't mean the direct benefits (because I could give plenty of my own reasons for why it works for me), but why the AP movement has come about, more specifically, what in our culture has driven women to seek an alternative to the accepted norm?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal*
> *addresses the white, middle-class, and heterosexist
> bias of pregnancy, childbirth, and childrearing advice
> books;

This is totally true, and I don't think they're thinking just of AP books either. The "What to Expect" books come to mind.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal*
> *explores the cultural, class, and racial implications
> of importing "attachment parenting" for use among
> primarily white, middle-class, nuclear families;

When they say they want to address the implications of AP, what they are saying is that they will examinie who practices AP, how it fits in the wider the culture, where the idea comes from, what it means to those outside the subculture, how it works for families that practice it, etc.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Jwebbal*
> *examines the tensions between extremes that set the
> stage for many of these conflicts: the current state
> of medicalization of pregnancy, childbirth, and
> breastfeeding, and the just as insistent promotion of
> "natural" mothering;

I have long considered the AP movement to be a backlash against the medicalization of pregnancy and childrearing, etc. in that it does go to extremes--as if the pendulum has swung all the way in the opposite direction.

My concern would be if they don't allow for both viewpoints to be expressed. I hope it's not going to be an attack on AP, but instead a scholarly look at what's happening within parenting today. So my suggestion. . .everyone, get writing!









And as for the popularity of Dr. Sears--it's not very surprising to me. In my experience I have had pediatricians tell me there is no benefit to BFing past a year, that my baby needs to be sleeping through the night, and that I'm endangering my baby by having a homebirth. So it's refreshing to pick up a book written by a pediatrician who is in favor of BFing and homebirht and against CIO--he gives people something to hold up against the authority of their doctors.

BTW, what is a baby trainer anyway?


----------



## simonee (Nov 21, 2001)

I find AP to be very deterministic biologically, and, as others have said too, dr Sears' balls in promoting the good stuff and saying no to whatever makes corporations rich and naive parents poor seem to be about the size of itty bitty beads. But, at least he's out there telling the what to expect parents that bf-ing and cosleeping are OPTIONS, and that's more than most other mainstream doctors do.

I think AP goes well with a middle class lifestyle, otherwise it requires a radical brand of feminist thinking to not slip into the essentialism of roles as defined in traditional nuclear families.

And the discussion of the verb fathering is interesting. Fathering lasts a few seconds, iykwim, but mothering lasts a lifetime. Men can mother too ~ but women can't father.


----------



## Viola (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greaseball*
Telling these mothers "quit your job and stay home for a few years - you'll save money on travel and dry cleaning"

Yeah, I think that is not particularly useful information for many. I was making $10 an hour at my last job, and I would have had to pay something near that in childcare in the area where I lived. So that was the argument that worked for me. But my sister has always had to work, regardless of how much money she was making. She just had to leave her children home alone when they shouldn't have after she divorced her first husband.

It always kind of irritates me when people assume that working mothers can't come to LLL day meetings. Maybe moms who work M-F days, but a lot of working moms do shift work and can make it to daytime meetings more easily than evening meetings.


----------



## srain (Nov 26, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *MamaE*
Funny, I always found his stuff to insist that Dad help out - he talks about father-nursing, etc. I never found him sexist at all.

"Insisting that dad help out" is sexist. Expecting that fathers will work to fulfill their family's needs is not. (How often have you heard a man say, "my wife is really great; she helps out with the kids all the time?" How often have you heard a woman say that about her male partner?)


----------



## Charles Baudelaire (Apr 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *srain*
I quoted a previous poster who said "Second, I do consider mothers pretty essential, as in "mothering", whether done by a man or woman." Many people feel the term is inclusive of men and women; I do not. I agree that the word itself when referring to a woman is nonsexist.

I believe it is sexist to assume the mother is the primary caregiver; I am sensitive to this because my husband was one for a long time, and now we are equal caregivers. There is no NEED to refer to mothers, fathers, partners in different ways unless specifically discussing the birth process or breastfeeding; the English language has terms that encompass all with little awkwardness. Just because the majority of an audience looks a certain way doesn't mean other kinds of families should be overtly or subtly excluded. I'd consider it sexist if my son's baseball team referred to fathers in most of their paperwork, even though most of the parents involved in the activity are men. I also feel that toddler-play classes run by our town called "Play with me, Mommy" are sexist.

***My husband is the primary caregiver too, but I still don't consider the term sexist. "Parenting" seems a good compromise.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Another thing I can't relate to is the assumption that most families have several choices when it comes to selecting doctors, preschools, daycare, etc. The reality for a lot of families is that you see the one doctor in town who is willing to have anything to do with you, you put your dc in the daycare that "they" tell you to put him in, and you choose your preschool based on cost and not the educational opportunities it offers your child. So I can't relate to something that tells me "If you feel you do not mesh with your pediatrician, it may be necessary for you to switch" or "Be sure the daycare center you choose has a staff-to-child ratio of 1:3." Yeah right! I would be laughed at if I made those requests.

(Fortunately we love our doctor, even though she was assigned to us, and we have never had to pay for childcare yet!)

Oh yeah, and IKWYM about saying "My dh is great with the kids." I think I may have been guilty of this, but only when people ask. I also love bragging that when I was in labor, he remembered to take out the trash and do laundry, and didn't fall asleep or watch TV, but should I have expected anything less? What is "normal" there?

My dh gets pissed when people say he is "babysitting" when he takes the kids somewhere.


----------



## pugmadmama (Dec 11, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *srain*
"Insisting that dad help out" is sexist. Expecting that fathers will work to fulfill their family's needs is not. (How often have you heard a man say, "my wife is really great; she helps out with the kids all the time?" How often have you heard a woman say that about her male partner?)


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Greaseball*
My dh gets pissed when people say he is "babysitting" when he takes the kids somewhere.

LOL, yeah one time my partner said during an argument that she "babysat" our child the other day when I went to get my haircut (we were arguing about childcare duties, and my point was that she came home from working and expected a break, I asked, when is my break?). I laughed my butt off at that comment, saying "you cannot babysit your OWN child!".

See, even us lesbian moms can find that we need to work on ensuring that we each take responsibility for caring for our child. I do have to say I find our situation a bit better than the common hetero situation (not to say that hetero couples cannot have more egalitarian roles in their families) though. She does quite a bit, sometimes a bit more than even I do, and I don't work outside the home.


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:

And the discussion of the verb fathering is interesting. Fathering lasts a few seconds, iykwim, but mothering lasts a lifetime. Men can mother too ~ but women can't father.
Wow. That's just well, wrong. Fathers are just as important as we are. Why don't you go post that over in the Dads forum?


----------



## daricsmami (May 18, 2004)

Quote:

"Insisting that dad help out" is sexist. Expecting that fathers will work to fulfill their family's needs is not. (How often have you heard a man say, "my wife is really great; she helps out with the kids all the time?" How often have you heard a woman say that about her male partner?)
That's not a problem with Dr. Sears, that's a problem with our society. All women (and men) say that, no matter what parenting advice they follow. Our society stills says women are primary caregivers, and men are just a supplement.

I find "dad helping out" and "daddy's babysitting" to be extremely insulting and sexist, and I would expect more from a man that promotes AP, but he's not any different from billions of other people that think the same way.


----------



## IdentityCrisisMama (May 12, 2003)

Just jumping in to say that I think the questions are fine – I’d like to see the conclusions, YK? Now…off to read the thread.


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

I believe Sears introduced the concepts of AP parenting as a response to the masculinazition of the inherently feminine art of mothering.

The (male oriented) scientists and behaviorists of the turn of the past century were advocating artificial feeding, strict scheduling, and behavior modification of the Behaviorists.

These practices were in the name of the advancement of science and rational thought. They were ver dismissive of mothering and the arts of parenting children that were generally passed down from mother to daughter. At the same time these scientific minds were "revolutionizing" childbirth giving us sterrups, forceps, and drugs to "ease the pain of childbirth".

White upper and middle-class mothers bought into this philosophy hook line, and sinker.

Mothers sat at the bottom of their stairs weeping while ignoring their crying baby because some arrogant male doctor said that mothers ruin their babies by coddling them and answering their cries.

Sears was a balancing of these idelogies that attempted to turn an inherently feminine art into a cold heartless science.

Before Sears there was Selma Fraiburg. I read her books way back in the late '70's (along with Helen Weissel)

To idealize that which is inherently masculine (lineal thinking, cold scientific theory) at the expense (and as a substitution of) that which is inherently feminine actually degrades women and the sublime feminine.

This is (IMHO) the difference between equity and gender feminism.

I think as the philosophy of AP advances non-traditional families' needs should be addressed. I don't think AP is inherently white upper middle class heterosexual I believe that scoialeconomic group was greatly influenced by the behaviorist philosphy about one century ago and it "trickled down" to other groups. It only makes sense that Sears would address that group more directly. Sears (et. al) takes a lot of cues from other cultures for ideas like baby wearing and doulas.

I, for one, am glad to see AP being discussed in more diverse groups (such as within the gay community)

Debra Baker


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

Well a friend has just informed me of something I was not aware of. She says that Dr. Sears advocates for a very strict interpretation of gender roles in the family in his Christian Parenting books. That of father as Breadwinner and head of household and mother as caregiver and in charge of parenting decisions. As you could guess I really don't like that, and will have to look at my Dr. Sears books with a little more critical eye.


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

Quote:

Any chance you might want to take another run at this completely unsubstantiated and totally incorrect bash at all the single moms and dads out there killing themselves to do right by their kids?
* Children without fathers are five times more likely to be poor and twice as likely to drop out of school.

* Approximately 70 percent of juveniles in long-term correctional facilities did not live with their fathers growing up.

- Dr Louis Sullivan, former Secretary of Health and Human Services


----------



## daricsmami (May 18, 2004)

The quotes you provided are correct. But you can also safely say that approx. 70% of juvenile offenders ate applesauce between the ages of 2-14. And that would probably be correct. It doesn't mean applesauce made them bad.

I'm not saying that children don't need fathers (or mothers), because saying that could lead us to say that all a kid needs are a warm bed and clothes on their back. Saying that would imply that orphanages are the way to go in parenting, and we know that's not true.

But normally, if a kid grows up in a single parent household (or a gay household, or with a grandparent, etc., etc.) and they are loved and provided for and are not in want for anything, they will be okay. No worse off or better than anyone else in this world.

If you put a kid in a situation where he has no father, in conjuction with another "issue", then that's where the problem starts, IMO. I do think it's important for kids in a single parent or gay household be exposed to the sex of the parent they don't have. There are things I won't be able to talk to my son about, no matter how hard I try to be one of the guys. If his father wasn't in the picture, than I would make sure he spent times with his uncles or cousins.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

Approximately 70 percent of juveniles in long-term correctional facilities did not live with their fathers growing up.
They are also likely to have been sexually abused. Hmm, maybe it's a good thing their fathers are no longer there?

I don't think it's fair that single mothers are blamed for ruining their kids when there is usually a very good reason they are single. If the father is abusing the children, I commend the mother for kicking him out and being single.


----------



## Rhonwyn (Apr 16, 2002)

The Dr. Sears Babybook got me into AP, LLL, etc. If it wasn't for him, I don't think I would have found Mothering, family bed, baby wearing and ebfing. I went back to work after 8 weeks and Dr. Sears and LLL helped through all the pumping and freezing. We were fortunate enough to get into a nanny share situation that was cheaper than daycare.

We are white, middle class but I don't think AP is exclusive. I always think that there is this ideal with a stay at home parent, breastfeeding, family bed, etc. but I think every family has to do what is best for their family. A little AP is better than no AP in my book.

I would like to see more articles on how people with limited means can practice AP. How do they make the best of it on limited resources? I think AP can be applied to any economic situation but that it will vary. How do we make it affordable? I know many frugal moms who make it work. I am sure that they would have some inspiring stories.

I would also like to see how alternative families make it work - gays, lesbians, grandparents as primary parent, etc. I think AP is really about an attitude toward ones children rather than a set in stone practice.


----------



## Sonna (Jul 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *heartmama*
Ap is such a marginalized style of parenting, I can't get my head around the premise that it's taken up a reflection of white middle class culture. It's not even popular among that group.

And ap doesn't come from white culture. It comes from anything but white middle class culture, and is used all over the world to make parenting easier for those who live in closer communion with one another and the planet.

I don't think that Ap in anyway is a reflection of white middle class culture! If only it were so... What Dr. Sears is trying to do is introduce Ap to that culture. And they need it. White middle class culture (stereotypically- there are always exeptions) does not live in close communion with one another or the planet and I think that the loss of that connction is linked to the loss of a connection with our childeren. By practicing AP and finding that connection with our childeren, we (white middle class) may be able to find that connection with Earth and All That Is.


----------



## phathui5 (Jan 8, 2002)

this is from an article in Psychology Today:

"Preliminary research shows that a father's moral judgment and education is a strong predictor of his children's moral reasoning during early adulthood.

Based on this new study and on a comprehensive review of research conducted throughout the '90s, the family research team emphasizes that the level of a father's involvement with his family significantly impacts children's cognitive growth--including perception, judgment and memory. While fathers have historically taken a backseat in parenting, children who have both parents involved in their life have double the intellectual stimulation. "And this same stimulus causes faster movement through developmental stages," notes Kilpatrick. "


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Quote:

Preliminary research shows that a father's moral judgment and education is a strong predictor of his children's moral reasoning during early adulthood.
This must be why pedophile fathers often have children who later become pedophiles.

Since fathers like to brag about how much they matter, it would make a lot more sense for them to quit doing things that damage their children so much. The same problems that are common in people who grow up without fathers - eating disorders, substance abuse, teen pregnancy, criminal behavior, suicide - are also very common among sexual abuse victims. The coincidence seems hard to ignore.

These problems are also common among people who grow up in poverty, and when the majority of the family income is gone, poverty will result. This also explains why children from two-parent families in poverty often have problems with drug abuse and criminal behavior as well.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

I am very pro-AP... breastfeed, co-sleep, wear my baby, respond promptly to cries. I have made enormous sacrifices and gone to great creative lengths to be able to stay at home with my babe.

But I hate Dr. Sears.

Firstly he is overtly homophobic. In his book for fathers there is a paragraph called "homosexuality" in which he expresses his view that homosexuality is "aberrant" and it is up to fathers to instill "proper" gender role behaviour in their children.







My gay male co-parent was looking for useful fathering books and before I got wise to Sears I was going to suggest his fathering book. Glad I didn't.

Also, there is zero class analysis in his books, and very little discussion about the extra challenges AP brings for mothers. I had no idea how much breastfeeding would impact on the amount of care my co-parent is able to directly provide for our child, and how much the balance would be skewed in my direction. I would have liked to see discussion about this, and advocacy for how essential it is that non-nursing, non-primary caregiving parents during infancy to provide for the needs of the mother, and that this is their contribution to caring for their child during this time. Not just a sub-section about how nice it is for fathers to 'help out'.

I would like to also see him advocate for greater social support for mothers/babies so that AP can be possible for more people. I heard that in the US, mat leave is something like 6 weeks, and it's unpaid??? That is incredible to me. In Canada we receive 50 weeks at approx 55% of your gross pay, but that is only if you have had a full time job for long enough before you give birth. My own official mat leave ended when my babe was 4 mos and still attached to my boob most of the time.









Babies do need to be with their mothers/parents. Mothering is an essential role, and at least in my experience is particular to being female/being the one who nurses. For my babe, I am her main person, and her interest in her father has just been sparked recently. She is definitely not ready to be left with someone else while I go to work for 8 hours/day.

Where Sears falls down in my opinion is in giving mothers a trip about doing everything and doing it perfectly, instead of looking at what barriers mothers face to mothering well and addressing him.

He leaves a crap-o-licious taste in my mouth.


----------



## MamaMonica (Sep 22, 2002)

I read his books and thought they were OK- had probelms with some of it- such as his saying homebirth is dangerous and should not be attempted especially for first babies. I certainly didn't take his advice on that and had great homebirths.

I thought he didn't go far enough and was fairly mainstream/traditional on many things. But that appeals to the mainstream American culture- who would be more likely to find these ideas as new!

I also agree with whoever said Dr. Sears does NOT represent white middle class America- I see white middle class America using disposable diapers, having cribs and fededing formula every day.

There is a subset of white middle class America doing AP- but not most of it, from what I've seen.


----------



## girlndocs (Mar 12, 2004)

I've been practically applauding reading your posts on this thread, Greaseball! I too think I know exactly what's meant by AP becoming a middle-class practice. I'm luckier than I might be in that I have a good relationship with a supportive DH whose wages are enough to pay the rent. But we have no savings, no cushion, and I can imagine what some future financial disaster might mean for us. People only have choice in how they raise their children if they have money to pay for those choices.

Does anyone here think that the teenage moms at crisis pregnancy centers have the option of Bradley classes, waterbirths or doulas? When you have to use donated diapers, can you simply say, "No, thank you, I'd prefer cloth"? Does a medical coupon pay for chiropractic or naturopathic care? Would you have the energy to sling your babe for hours after working a full shift on your feet? When you can't make rent, will you get financial assistance if you refuse "gainful employment" to stay home with your 18-month-old? Those who can practice AP (and I count myself in that number, thank gourd) are those who are privileged enough to have the option of AP choices open to them. I am thankful fpr my options every day because I've stared down the barrel of losing them.


----------



## Greaseball (Feb 1, 2002)

Also, since when did AP become so much about the STUFF? I know that most AP people would say it doesn't matter whether you buy the stuff or not, but when mainstreamers think of AP they have told me they think it's some kind of elitist fad. I mean, there's the Burley bike trailer, $50 diaper covers, Ergo backpack (and a lot of people have a few different slings in addition), handmade leather baby shoes, Moses basket, etc. I've read posts from people who say they feel prejudiced against because they use pins and plastic pants and don't buy all sorts of expensive baby gear. Why should the stuff matter so much? I have nothing against anyone who chooses to buy all this stuff, and I do buy some of it myself, but I think it's not the most important thing.

Quote:

Does anyone here think that the teenage moms at crisis pregnancy centers have the option of Bradley classes, waterbirths or doulas? When you have to use donated diapers, can you simply say, "No, thank you, I'd prefer cloth"? Does a medical coupon pay for chiropractic or naturopathic care? Would you have the energy to sling your babe for hours after working a full shift on your feet? When you can't make rent, will you get financial assistance if you refuse "gainful employment" to stay home with your 18-month-old?
These are all very good points, and I have read things from AP types who seem to think that only "certain people" should get to do the AP stuff - like, if you have a dh who can earn a lot, you should stay home, but if you are single and poor you should leave your baby in full time daycare (while using cloth diapers at home, of course







) and while you're at it, you should also feel ashamed of yourself for even having a child in the first place.


----------



## MamaMonica (Sep 22, 2002)

grlindics, I have to disagree with you on a few points. My midwives (before they stopped delivering babies because of the cost of malpractice insurance- that's another story...) had a LOT of low-income/young mothers in their practice. In fact, that was the majority of their practice!

It was cheaper for many lower-income mothers to go the naturopathic and home birth route. (Note: insurance in our state covers this- but many (I'm guessing most) were not insured).

Both midwives were they were NDs not MDs and delivered at home but also would go with you to the hospital.

Most of the well-off moms I know chose the hospital birth routine. We're not poor and people thought we were crazy to want a home birth, to breastfeed and not have all the "baby stuff."


----------



## DebraBaker (Jan 9, 2002)

When I had my firstborn I was a dirt poor teenaged mom.

I had a horrible hospital experience but adopted many ap practices. Being poor helped me to not get caught up in the trappings of a more restrained parenting style.

I have been dirt poor most of my adult life. I had two more progressive hospital births with my second and third. After the fourth I had birth center or home births attended by midwives.

I was pretty earthey crunchey as a more prosperous almost 40 year old mom to my last (exactly 20 years and one week after my first)

I think many ap practices are compatible with poverty.

Debra Baker


----------



## TiredX2 (Jan 7, 2002)

While I don't read or actively follow Dr. Sears at this point in time, I am extreamly grateful for his books.

I read "The Baby Book" while pg and it advocated for completely different things than I had ever before even realized existed. It was totally different, but rang true to me. I don't know where I would be *now* w/out Sears (if my own instincts would have got me here or not) but it was definately reassuring in my early days of parenthood to *know* I wasn't alone.

I was surprised someone called him anti-homebirth, since he had homebirths w/his wife.







I think he is perhaps *anti-homebirth-midwife*, though, I just don't remember.

That said, I also recognize his "failings" (in my eyes). He is pro-vac (one of his sons is not), he is much stricter than I, he is a very conservative Christian... in short, he is *much* older than I am and has a completely different world view. But, I do think he brought AP to a number of people who would otherwise be unexposed (myself included) and for that I am grateful.

I consider the term mothering sexist in the implication that all the "softer" emotions are inheirantly feminine. DH, in addition, does NOT babysit. Sometimes I worry I don't give him enough credit because he would get more in a different household. I just expect him to be as good a partner, as good a parent as *me* and we ARE partners (I don't gush because he helps around the house or takes the kids somewhere... its his house and they are his kids, too).

AP as middle class. In that it is VERY hard for a poor/working class family to swing an at home parent, perhaps. But, AP is very low cost and you can AP while at home (and hope for the best w/your daycare provider if it comes to that). No crib. Delayed solids. No formula. Whole foods. Etc...

I have been following this thread all along, just decided to chime in today.


----------



## Jwebbal (May 31, 2004)

One thing that has struck me in this thread is the sense that certain things are needed in order to be considered AP. I don't think a SAHP is required to be AP, nor CD, nor anti vax, anti circumcision, etc, etc. The 8 ideals of AP, as posted on the AP website allow for many different paths. I think those many different paths to AP are important, not that if you don't buy each and every thing hook line and sinker you aren't APing. I think many parents who work can successfully AP their children. It certainly isn't easy, and our society makes it difficult, but it can be done.


----------



## Missinnyc (Aug 21, 2003)

Quote-

"Well a friend has just informed me of something I was not aware of. She says that Dr. Sears advocates for a very strict interpretation of gender roles in the family in his Christian Parenting books. That of father as Breadwinner and head of household and mother as caregiver and in charge of parenting decisions. As you could guess I really don't like that, and will have to look at my Dr. Sears books with a little more critical eye."

Well, I think if he's writing that book with regards to a Christian audience, it's to be expected that he talk more about his beliefs, etc. I don't really agree with his beliefs, but he does tend to keep that stuff out of non-religiously based books, as I remember.


----------

