# Please dont hate me!



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

But why does everyone seem to hate supernanny on this board???? I know next to nothing about this woman except shes known for making the naughty spot famous!

Is there's a PM facility? If so I would appreciate being sent any responses privately because I get the impression this might be a HOT topic and I don't want to be thought to be stirring the pot. Thanks, and sorry if this is a forbidden topic!


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

I am actually not one who 'hates' "Supernanny". I disagree with many of her theories, to be sure. But I think that she often does a lot of good in extremely troubled families. She speaks strongly against hitting children, and she encourages parents to connect with and be close to their children, and speak TO them and not AT them.

She's not an AP proponent, I don't think, but she speaks against child hitting, and speaks FOR respect, and I appreciate that.


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Ummm.... "naughty" spot?

A child does not need to be told they're naughty or bad.

-Angela


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

LOL at this post! Welcome to MDC.

I don't hate Supernanny, at least not most of her. I think she sets really good respectful boundaries with some seriously out of control children.

However, it pains me to see her eroding attachment relationships between parents and children. She makes children put themselves to bed, give up nursing, give up suckies and attachment rituals with parents. This IMO is horrible, and her downfall. Attachment relationships are the glue in families IMO, they provide a context for the boundary setting she does and help children feel loved, included, and part of a circle of people who love each other.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
Ummm.... "naughty" spot?

A child does not need to be told they're naughty or bad.

-Angela

That is British culture though. I know some Brits, my girlie's dad is British and so is my ex long term girlfriend. I don't think "Naughty Spot" in Britain is as hardcore as we would imagine, with children being shamed and berated. It's more their equivalent of a time out.


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
That is British culture though. I know some Brits, my girlie's dad is British and so is my ex long term girlfriend. I don't think "Naughty Spot" in Britain is as hardcore as we would imagine, with children being shamed and berated. It's more their equivalent of a time out.

I agree that it is probably very common place. But further shaming or not aside, I still have a problem telling a child they're naughty. They tend to live up to expectations of that sort....

-Angela


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
I agree that it is probably very common place. But further shaming or not aside, I still have a problem telling a child they're naughty. They tend to live up to expectations of that sort....

-Angela

Mebbe. I think a lot can be conveyed in tone though. I think there is a difference between telling a child they *are* naughty, vs. saying a behaviour is naughty, so when you do it you go to the naughty spot.

I wouldn't personally use it, but I don't find it so outrageously offensive as many American ppl on here seem to.


----------



## Hazelnut (Sep 14, 2005)

I haven't seen it much, but she didn't really bother me. The kids were usually um, challenging, and so I don't think reward charts and time out stools are a bad thing when you are really in dire straits. I only dislike them when they are an immediate default for any disobedience. As far as I can see she never yells and is obviously against spanking.

The one thing I didn't like was how I thought she was on a couple occasions patronizing to the parents. Was it supernanny or nanny 911 where she put down the mom for nursing the toddler? I didn't actually see it though- just the promos which were edited to be way controversial.


----------



## CaraNicole (Feb 28, 2007)

_i love the show supernanny! i do not agree w/everything she does, but i doubt i **could** agree w/anyone on **every little thing** ykwim?_


----------



## GuildJenn (Jan 10, 2007)

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

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

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

That's my answer.


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
That is British culture though. I know some Brits, my girlie's dad is British and so is my ex long term girlfriend. I don't think "Naughty Spot" in Britain is as hardcore as we would imagine, with children being shamed and berated. It's more their equivalent of a time out.


Thats about right. And actually hardly ANY of the parents I know do Naughty Spot OR "time out". So its not THAT widespread. Also its not really about telling the child THEY are naughty.... its about telling them their ACTION was nuaghty, and that actions have a consequence. For instance; "You had to sit on the naughty step because you did X" not, you had to sit on the naughty step because YOU are naughty. There is emphasis on ezplaining WHAT they did and WHY they shouldnt have done it and they are encouraged to apologize for it.


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
*However, it pains me to see her eroding attachment relationships between parents and children.* She makes children put themselves to bed, give up nursing, give up suckies and attachment rituals with parents. This IMO is horrible, and her downfall. Attachment relationships are the glue in families IMO, they provide a context for the boundary setting she does and help children feel loved, included, and part of a circle of people who love each other.


I'm curious... in what ways does she do this specifically?


----------



## Hazelnut (Sep 14, 2005)

Actually I'll take naughty over "bad" any day, which I here all the time here in the U.S. People say that young kids can't distinguish between "that action was bad" and "you are bad." Fair enough, but I think the tone used will also convey the former, and I think naughty is semantically more tied into behavior. Bad is just plain bad to the bone!


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
I'm curious... in what ways does she do this specifically?

Weaning a young toddler off a bottle. Halting co-sleeping. Having a mama wean a toddler from nursing. Stopping long bedtime rituals that involve the parents reading to the children, laying down with them, talking with them about their day.

In many shows, both the parents *and* children are upset by these things and actively protest them. But Supernanny holds firm and everyone gives in.

This is a theme with the Supernanny shows, not a one-off.


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:


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

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


I don't like reality tv shows either, partly for this reason. And that is precisely why I didn't really know much about S/nanny!!

What I did see when I saw a bit of her on tv was the way she put down the parents.... I don't like the format of shows lkike that. Desperate family/couple on the brink of despair, along comes the pro and tells them they are doing it all wrong on national TV, a little bot of common sense and one week later et voila!!!!! Erm, yeah ok. I kind of think its a bit sick that some people enjoy watching that kind of put down to be honest, it puts me right off, so I probably end up missing out on good info...


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
Weaning a young toddler off a bottle. Halting co-sleeping. Having a mama wean a toddler from nursing. Stopping long bedtime rituals that involve the parents reading to the children, laying down with them, talking with them about their day.

In many shows, both the parents *and* children are upset by these things and actively protest them. But Supernanny holds firm and everyone gives in.

This is a theme with the Supernanny shows, not a one-off.


Our parenting culture is sooooo different over here! 'i find none of those changes particularly shocking or disturbing. i suspect they were harder for the parents to implement than the kids tho.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
i suspect they were harder for the parents to implement than the kids tho.

I vehemently disagree. I think we tell ourselves that to make ourselves feel better. Watch the crying, protesting, confused children who don't understand why suddenly their attachment rituals are being denied, and tell me it is easy for them.

It's not. At least the adults have some philosophy to cling to. And they are controlling the changes. And they are... well, the adults. Not dependent children.


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
I vehemently disagree. I think we tell ourselves that to make ourselves feel better. Watch the crying, protesting, confused children who don't understand why suddenly their attachment rituals are being denied, and tell me it is easy for them.

It's not. At least the adults have some philosophy to cling to. And they are controlling the changes. And they are... well, the adults. Not dependent children.

You could be right.

I don't know though, I think if you are looking at the kids like miniature adults I believe this is a mistaken view. If an adult was doing those kinds of things you would imagine they were suffering terrible bereavement. However, I genuinely don't think children doing those things are suffering that level of distress. They simply don't HAVE the philosophy to cling to, the ability to rationalise or control or express their emotions as effectively as adults.

I distinctly remember the first time I was left at playgroup I thought I would NEVER see my mum again. I wailed and wailed and threw the biggest tantrum of my life. Do you know within 5 minutes I was making hand prints and painting with the rest of the children, all tears gone. No it WASN'T easy. No it wasn't nice. But life isn't! At what point do you learn that? IMO kids can be more reslilient and adaptable than many people give them credit for.


----------



## Janelovesmax (Feb 17, 2006)

There was one episode that I hated. I think you all know which one I'm talking about, where she told a mother not to nurse her 14months old on demand especially when those two were not connected as is.
In general, there are some situations where Supernanny does good, but in general she is not pro AP.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
If an adult was doing those kinds of things you would imagine they were suffering terrible bereavement. However, I genuinely don't think children doing those things are suffering that level of distress. They simply don't HAVE the philosophy to cling to, the ability to rationalise or control or express their emotions as effectively as adults.

What does this mean? Children still have emotions. They still have feelings. Attachment relationships are essential to children's emotional growth and development. This is an attachment parenting site, that belief is kind of core to the ideology here.

Quote:

No it WASN'T easy. No it wasn't nice. But life isn't! At what point do you learn that? IMO kids can be more reslilient and adaptable than many people give them credit for.
I don't believe that "Well life is not fair" is an appropriate rationalization for disrespectful parenting strategies that undermine attachment relationships.

I don't think "life isn't nice" is a factual statement. And I don't think it is parents' responsibility to teach that subjective lesson. In many ways, life is what you make it, kwim? And the things we cannot control are... well, things we cannot control.

I don't go banging my head into walls because life includes pain. And I do not harm my children in the name of "well life isn't nice anyway, children are resillient." There is enough for them to bounce back from that we cannot control. Let's not impose more trauma.


----------



## Kay11 (Aug 30, 2006)

I'm in the UK and I think our parenting culture is very similar to the mums in the US. However, we're talking mainstream, popular parenting approaches, which you're not going to find here. I find those changes very disturbing because I can imagine the effect they'd have on my children if I enforced them. Gently weaning off nursing or co-sleeping or bottles or whatever is one thing (though I wouldn't do it personally), but forcing it in the short period of time that supernanny does it is cruel imo. So the kids will live, yes. They'll be fine, debatable.

I think that people in the UK are on the whole just as interested in forcing independence before they children are ready. I think children are adaptable because we all have to be to survive, but it doesn't mean it doesn't affect them somehow. It might not be immediately apparent, but for a child for whom bf or co-sleeping or a bottle or having mum or day lay down with them to help them fall asleep is important, there will be an effect eventually.


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Janelovesmax* 
There was one episode that I hated. I think you all know which one I'm talking about, where she told a mother not to nurse her 14months old on demand especially when those two were not connected as is.
In general, there are some situations where Supernanny does good, but in general she is not pro AP.









:

Sure, kid survive all sorts of things and turn out pretty okay. Doesn't make those things right.

-Angela


----------



## alegna (Jan 14, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
What does this mean? Children still have emotions. They still have feelings. Attachment relationships are essential to children's emotional growth and development. This is an attachment parenting site, that belief is kind of core to the ideology here.

I don't believe that "Well life is not fair" is an appropriate rationalization for disrespectful parenting strategies that undermine attachment relationships.

I don't think "life isn't nice" is a factual statement. And I don't think it is parents' responsibility to teach that subjective lesson. In many ways, life is what you make it, kwim? And the things we cannot control are... well, things we cannot control.

I don't go banging my head into walls because life includes pain. And I do not harm my children in the name of "well life isn't nice anyway, children are resillient." There is enough for them to bounce back from that we cannot control. Let's not impose more trauma.











-Angela


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
Our parenting culture is sooooo different over here! 'i find none of those changes particularly shocking or disturbing. i suspect they were harder for the parents to implement than the kids tho.

I could not disagree more.


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

I think you misunderstand the essence of my post which was that when kids make a scene I really believe that its not as bad as it looks! That's not to say they don't have feelings. Just that they can't control or express themselves as we do. However I'm not going back and picking apart the post to explain myself more thoroughly because I don't enjoy banging my head against a brick wall either, which is what I suspect this thread would turn into!

I do agree though that I wouldnt be happy "pulling the plaster off quick" either. Gradually does it IMO. I'm no fan of Ferber!!

Life isn't NICE is NOT what I meant - life isn't EASY - I should read back what I type more carefully. I'm not saying make your kids life difficult on purpose to teach them this. I'm saying that we can overcomplicate things and worry too much. If nothing else, kids pick up on this. I'm speculating that if the parents on the tv show were more relaxed and confident about the change in the household, the kids would follow suit. But I admit it IS just specualtion.


----------



## nabigus (Sep 23, 2004)

I've only seen it once or twice, and I agree with the pp who criticized the "weekend fix-it" mentality. I also disagree vehemently with the non-cosleeping, non-nursing, CIO-esque approach she seems to favor. On the other hand, the situations that they televise are designed to be out of control, over the top, and a couple of the things I saw that I liked were her emphasis on consistency and her get-down-at-their-level approach to talking with kids.


----------



## NaomiMcC (Mar 22, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
You could be right.

I don't know though, I think if you are looking at the kids like miniature adults I believe this is a mistaken view. If an adult was doing those kinds of things you would imagine they were suffering terrible bereavement. However, I genuinely don't think children doing those things are suffering that level of distress. They simply don't HAVE the philosophy to cling to, the ability to rationalise or control or express their emotions as effectively as adults.

I distinctly remember the first time I was left at playgroup I thought I would NEVER see my mum again. I wailed and wailed and threw the biggest tantrum of my life. Do you know within 5 minutes I was making hand prints and painting with the rest of the children, all tears gone. No it WASN'T easy. No it wasn't nice. But life isn't! At what point do you learn that? IMO kids can be more reslilient and adaptable than many people give them credit for.

Manfa...I TOTALLY agree...which is why I like the Supernanny. While I may not agree with every single thing she does...I find it the same way with this board. (no offense people) so I take the information I like and what works for me and continue on.


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 

I don't go banging my head into walls because life includes pain. And *I do not harm my children in the name of "well life isn't nice anyway, children are resillient."* There is enough for them to bounce back from that we cannot control. Let's not impose more trauma.


I'm not sure I like the subtle implication that I would do this (emboldened). I'm starting to get the feeling that the general air on this thread is turning to "Look here comes a "mainstream parenter"! Close ranks!" I'd like to know what "mainstream parenting" is so that I'm not nervous about posting in future for fear of being flamed.

WRT "trauma" - that is what I am questioning - whether or not it is truly traumatic for the children to undergo these changes. I'm not saying it ISN'T as I am not sure myself. I'm sitting on the fence and I could go either way. I'm saying I'm questioning it. It's definately given me food for thought anyway.


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
I'm not sure I like the subtle implication that I would do this (emboldened). I'm starting to get the feeling that the general air on this thread is turning to "Look here comes a "mainstream parenter"! Close ranks!" I'd like to know what "mainstream parenting" is so that I'm not nervous about posting in future for fear of being flamed.

It is not about mainstream as a non-specific trigger word. I haven't seen that word used at all, and I am often at odds with GDers on this forum, so I am not closing ranks against you.

I am referring very concretely to you stating that you think Supernanny getting families to desert attachment rituals is not a big deal, because children are not like adults and life is not nice. Or life is not easy. Which is pretty much what you said, verbatim, in this thread.

I disagree with you about the importance of attachment relationships for children. If you are sensing disagreement from most people here, well that is probably because you are at an attachment parenting site. If nothing else, most people here are probably going to be in general agreement about this issue.


----------



## eviesingleton (Jan 18, 2007)

Aside from the criticisms of her approach that I agree with, I think what bothers me about this show is that it takes issues of childcare/discipline in the lives of real people and edits it down to 22 or 45 (depending on the length of the show...something that I am not certain of) minutes and creates a product whose sole function is entertainment. It's a product, made to sell and act as a vehicle to see other products. I find it exploitative (in the larger, cultural sense) and not at all useful.

This is not the same thing as interviewing an expert on television or having families come on and discuss their issues. And I am not a proponent of daytime talk, but I find, from a structural perspective, Dr. Phil, Oprah, and others to be far less problematic.

Could you imagine an AP reality show?


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

this mama: Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I don't recall saying that those things weren't important to children though. I think what I was trying to get across (and probably completely failing) is that how difficult (traumatic) it IS for the child when, for whatever reason, the parents DO decide to make those changes, is dependant on the parents themselves to a large degree. Being confident and relaxed is, I suspect, a key part of ANY successful parenting style.... no?

I mean, take the toddler who falls down and bumps his knee. We make a small thing of it right? Make a big deal and he will start wailing! A casual and cheerful; "oops a daisyy, up you get!" He thinks about crying and then he moves on. That is not to say that we don't CARE that he has fallen and bumped himself. And its not to say that we should SHOVE him over on purpose to teach him to get used to it!

Take it further. Child falls and bumps his knee and DOES start wailing. An adult making that amount of fuss would have a dislocated limb or similar. Often the child simply has a graze. That doesn't mean they don't have feelings or that we shouldn't care. We just know that the child HASN'T broken or dislocated a leg, it really ISN'T so bad as all that and we casually and cheerfully move on.... and so do they.

ETA: eviesingleton - WRT the exploitative nature of this kind of programme I couldn't agree with you more.


----------



## NaomiMcC (Mar 22, 2007)

I know what you mean Manfa...


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 

Take it further. Child falls and bumps his knee and DOES start wailing. An adult making that amount of fuss would have a dislocated limb or similar. Often the child simply has a graze. That doesn't mean they don't have feelings or that we shouldn't care. We just know that the child HASN'T broken or dislocated a leg, it really ISN'T so bad as all that and we casually and cheerfully move on.... and so do they.

Okay, I get that. Although it's not what I do, I pick up my child and commisserate about the sore knee, but different things work for different children.

The problem with the analogy is that you are likening the abrupt loss of a nursing relationship, and co-sleeping, and bedtime rituals, to... a skinned knee?

I do not think these things compare to a scraped knee, and I don't think you will find much support on this site for the position that they do.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
this mama: Thanks for clearing that up for me.

I don't recall saying that those things weren't important to children though. I think what I was trying to get across (and probably completely failing) is that how difficult (traumatic) it IS for the child when, for whatever reason, the parents DO decide to make those changes, is dependant on the parents themselves to a large degree. Being confident and relaxed is, I suspect, a key part of ANY successful parenting style.... no?

I mean, take the toddler who falls down and bumps his knee. We make a small thing of it right? Make a big deal and he will start wailing! A casual and cheerful; "oops a daisyy, up you get!" He thinks about crying and then he moves on. That is not to say that we don't CARE that he has fallen and bumped himself. And its not to say that we should SHOVE him over on purpose to teach him to get used to it!

Take it further. Child falls and bumps his knee and DOES start wailing. An adult making that amount of fuss would have a dislocated limb or similar. Often the child simply has a graze. That doesn't mean they don't have feelings or that we shouldn't care. We just know that the child HASN'T broken or dislocated a leg, it really ISN'T so bad as all that and we casually and cheerfully move on.... and so do they.

ETA: eviesingleton - WRT the exploitative nature of this kind of programme I couldn't agree with you more.









I usually *want* to wail and scream. I just have the experience and emotional control to stick to explatives and hopping around







The pain, anger, and embarrassment are all still there. I have just done it enough times, being an adult and all, that I know it will pass, I will heal, and life will go on. My dd did not always know that and I had no problem empathizing with her on whatever level she needed at the time.

As to Supernanny..... I have never seen the show.....to not have TV. But I can say that the number one reason I dislike the show is that almost every_single_time I take dd to the park, some parent makes the steps to the play structure into the "naughty step" and I have to explain to dd what the heck that means. Not to mention all of the questions that come after that. One woman actually asked my dd to stay away from the steps until her dd was done being "naughty". Um.....no way lady. That show has become the how-to manual for half the parents I run into. Ick.


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

Just because it isn't a big deal to YOU doesn't mean it's not a big deal to the child. Children's feelings are just as important as big peoples' feelings and deserve respect.

As it is, when I stub my toe I really WANT to fling myself to the ground and scream and wail, so there.


----------



## ladonnaken (Jan 1, 2007)

I did watch the one episode about the baby girl being forced into weaning (the 14m old). I watched and was thinking, "Hey, that toddler is trying to get mom's attention." Why couldn't the Supernanny teach that mama some creative ways to include her into the busy day? I bet if the mom had added some one-on-one time with the daughter (say, while the older chrn were napping), she'd see an amazing difference. Teaching her how to sling her and taking them all on a walk would help the baby girl have more mommy touch time and I bet the constant nursing would decrease dramatically.

And when she had the mama hold a bottle in the baby girl's mouth in the BED for a nap, I literally started jumping up and down! Doesn't she know that's bad for teeth, that increases ear infections---NOT TO MENTION creating a bond between object and baby instead of mommy and baby. Personally, I want my children to be attached to people, not objects. Why does Jo (Supernanny) think a bottle full of cow's milk is better for a toddler than human milk with lots of cuddles?

I could go on and on.......


----------



## Aeress (Jan 25, 2005)

And because of Super Nanny I hear parents say "super nanny said to do xyz and it worked for that family."

*ugh* Seriously, learning how to parent and being there for our children is a life long learning process that can't be edited into a 30minute show.

I like Alfie Kohn's take on the super nanny and shows similiar to it. www.alfiekohn.com

Yes, there are some tools and training that parents can learn that will help them parent, but shows like Super Nanny don't look deeper into why a parent disciplines the way the way they do, what the child needs and how to make the situation work so that all the family gains something from working through a problem.

And I have to agree with Kohn's statement that what Super Nanny peddles is "behaviorism."


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
I'm not sure I like the subtle implication that I would do this (emboldened). I'm starting to get the feeling that the general air on this thread is turning to "Look here comes a "mainstream parenter"! Close ranks!" *I'd like to know what "mainstream parenting" is so that I'm not nervous about posting in future for fear of being flamed*.

WRT "trauma" - that is what I am questioning - whether or not it is truly traumatic for the children to undergo these changes. I'm not saying it ISN'T as I am not sure myself. I'm sitting on the fence and I could go either way. I'm saying I'm questioning it. It's definately given me food for thought anyway.

I have not watched Supernanny. I have read all the entries in this thread, though.

I think you are reading into people's replies more than they are reading into yours. Perhaps you should retitle your thread and see how the responses go. It seemed like the people who disliked the Supernanny show gave you really specific reasons:

1. abrupt removal of bedtime routines without explanation--specifically, bedtime routines that are part of the toolbox of attachment parenting
2. negative attitude toward toddler nursing
3. use of the word "naughty"
4. the quick fix approach to parenting in general
5. how they have seen real life parents attempt to implement the Supernanny strategies

That's pretty clear.

Have you been flamed? I haven't seen that. I think people who don't agree with you have answered the question, "Why don't you like Supernanny" and others have appeared to agree with you that they do like Supernanny.


----------



## blsilva (Jul 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *brendon* 

And I have to agree with Kohn's statement that what Super Nanny peddles is "behaviorism."

ITA. I also agree with pp's who have said that she constantly takes away from parents and children things that promote attachment- breastfeeding, cosleeping, etc. It all seems to be concerned with getting a child to act the "right" way, in her opinion, and not really teaching them long-term life skills.
Personally, I feel that all of these things are detrimental to the child.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

I watch it ALLLL the time!
















I have an endless fascination with this show!

But, I really, really, really, HUGELY disagree with most of her methods.

When Supernanny is consoling the MOTHER during a cry-it-out episode, but advises that consoling the CHILD during said episode is neither necessary nor beneficial, you gotta wonder.

I think the vast majority of her techniques involve breaking the will of the child.

Spending an hour (or two or MORE, as has been shown on the show) carrying a freaking out kid back to the "naughty" spot over and over and over again--until the child finally relents--just seems like the biggest pissing match that ever was.

I DO like how she advises people to actually interact and play with their kids. But, the rest of it seems real scary and awful to me.


----------



## Liam's Mum (Jan 9, 2007)

Quote:


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

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

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

That's my answer.









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


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:

The problem with the analogy is that you are likening the abrupt loss of a nursing relationship, and co-sleeping, and bedtime rituals, to... a skinned knee?
Umm, no. Of course the former is harder than the latter. But the same principal applies (IMO) that how the parents deal with the trauma (however great or small that may be) affects how well the children deal with it. IMO this is the most important teaching tool we have for our children: leading primarily by example. So shoot me if I am wrong.

Quote:

Just because it isn't a big deal to YOU doesn't mean it's not a big deal to the child. Children's feelings are just as important as big peoples' feelings and deserve respect.
Of course its a "big deal" to me if my child is hurt! But that does not alter that fact that how *you* react to a tumble affects how your childs reacts to a tumble [edit: or any difficulty]. Am I totally on my own on this point?

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

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


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


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

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

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

Make sense?


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

I bought her book







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


----------



## blsilva (Jul 31, 2006)

Quote:


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

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







:


----------



## *LoveBugMama* (Aug 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
Our parenting culture is sooooo different over here! 'i find none of those changes particularly shocking or disturbing. i suspect they were harder for the parents to implement than the kids tho.

Norway isn`t UK, but pretty close.







And I very much disagree with your statement here.


----------



## emma_goldman (May 18, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
I watch it ALLLL the time!
















I have an endless fascination with this show!

But, I really, really, really, HUGELY disagree with most of her methods.

When Supernanny is consoling the MOTHER during a cry-it-out episode, but advises that consoling the CHILD during said episode is neither necessary nor beneficial, you gotta wonder.

I think the vast majority of her techniques involve breaking the will of the child.

Spending an hour (or two or MORE, as has been shown on the show) carrying a freaking out kid back to the "naughty" spot over and over and over again--until the child finally relents--just seems like the biggest pissing match that ever was.

I DO like how she advises people to actually interact and play with their kids. But, the rest of it seems real scary and awful to me.

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

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


----------



## MammaKoz (Dec 9, 2003)

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

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

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

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

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

Just my two cents.


----------



## *LoveBugMama* (Aug 2, 2003)

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

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

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









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


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
Okay. Yes how parents deal with trauma affects how children deal with it.

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

Make sense?

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

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

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

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


----------



## emma_goldman (May 18, 2005)

Quote:


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

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

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

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


----------



## thismama (Mar 3, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
Totally makes sense. I *think* I see where you are coming from.

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

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

Quote:

I'm afraid I believe that if those parents really believed that the trauma was not necessary then they should have blatantly refused and asked SN to come up with a different tactic or please leave them to battle on alone.... and then find a professional who uses methods they feel comfortable working with. If SN came to your house I'm guessing that is what you would do. ??
Yes. Well, I wouldn't have SN at my house in the first place. And ITA that the parents should stop her. But that doesn't change the fact that she, as an 'expert' and the host of a TV show, holds the responsibility for her actions.


----------



## mommaof3 (Dec 11, 2001)

Quote:


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


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

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


----------



## ThreeBeans (Dec 2, 2006)

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


----------



## 2bluefish (Apr 27, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *emma_goldman* 
She just thinks that everyone has to do it eventually. Time to give her a GD sleep book.

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

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


----------



## blsilva (Jul 31, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommaof3* 
I think we really need a SuperNanny or Nanny911 show that shows a respectful, firm, kind person who can be effective without being either authoritarian OR permissive. Those are two extreme forms of parenting and one never has to choose one or the other. Parents can learn to be kind and firm and respectfully set limits without hurting children or relationships.
I'd love to see someone like Naomi Aldort counsel families IRL, or Scott Noelle, or Ingrid Bauer...

I would love to see this!


----------



## debbieh (Apr 22, 2007)

Quote:


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

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









:

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


----------



## Kailey's mom (Apr 19, 2007)

I love watching supernanny, I'm a reality show junky, along with trading spouses and wife swap







The only problem personally I have with the supernanny show is when she discourages co-sleeping, and on one episode even convinced a mom to wean her 1yr old







: that made me pretty upset. The WORST part about supernanny is the fact that my mom watches it, and if there is an episode that has to do with bedtimes, cosleeping, last week it was the little girl who's father kept running downstairs to get her different juices etc..MY mom compares me to those families and tell's me that she should call supernanny







: ANYFREEKINWAYS!


----------



## captain optimism (Jan 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *CrunchyTamara* 
Norway isn`t UK, but pretty close.







And I very much disagree with your statement here.

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


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

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

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

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


----------



## *LoveBugMama* (Aug 2, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 

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


I have seen SuperNanny, Nanny 911 and 1 another show like it. (Don`t remember the name of it.) And what strikes me, is that they use the same. technique. every. single. time.
It`s like they think naughtycorner/timeout and rewardsystems are the only thing a parent will ever need to discipline their child.









Not very impressive...


----------



## Mama Poot (Jun 12, 2006)

I've only watched the show a handful of times but I've watched, heard, seen, read enough about it that I know I don't care for it. Things I've observed on Supernanny:

Supernanny comes into a household out of control, many times dealing with people I consider to be bottom-of-the-barrel parents. The parents are so caught up in themselves, their careers, money, etc, that they've completely forgotten about their children, and consequently the children are running all over the place like wild animals and acting out because no one respects them or cares enough about them to play with them or talk to them.

Parents are "exhausted" although from what I'm not sure because they don't seem to be doing much "parenting", that's why Supernanny is there, right? I saw one episode where the parents were locking their screaming children into their bedrooms at night and not even reading them stories or comforting them. Supernanny says they need to stop this. Okay, that's one good thing she did for the kids. But this gets back to my observation of sub-par parents on the show. These people don't have enough common sense to treat their own offspring with respect and dignity. How can Supernanny be expected to teach about AP when these parents are already so far gone? AP and GD would fly right over their heads. Sad but true I think....

When Supernanny forces babies to wean from breast or bottle, takes away comfort objects, and etc...I'm almost thinking that she thinks getting the children detached from EVERYTHING will make everyone's lives easier- the parents will be "relieved" and can "get a break" because their children won't want to have anything to do with them or ask them for anything, and the children will have been taught to fend for themselves and stop trusting and relying on the parents. But then they will be "good" children. I'll stop now, I feel a lump in my throat uke

If Supernanny stops people from hitting their kids, screaming at them, and locking them into their bedrooms, then that's a great thing. But I wouldn't expect any more out of this show or shows like it. I'm telling you, these parents just WON'T GET IT.


----------



## dianamerrell (Mar 15, 2006)

i have not watched alot of this, but what stuck out to me is the parenting styles. these parents need help! i do not think that the majority of parents on the show are looking to become better/more loving/respectful -they are looking to control their children.

the real sad thing IMO is that there are enough children being raised poorly (again IMO) to keep SuperNanny, Nanny 911 etc. running with stories.

a Quote, that my mama brain will not let me remember:
Children act as they are treated.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

I'm a reality show junkie, so I've seen this one a few times. What always crosses my mind when I see the parents and children interacting is what was it like for them when these children were infants? I'm sure they were nestling them under their chins, hugging them, kissing them, rocking them...I hope, anyway. I just can't understand how far south things seem to go.

But you know, I think the challenges of parenting really creep up on people and they haven't a clue what to do. They have no idea about child development and are probably repeating familial patterns.

I wish she'd talk more about developmental appropriateness, but that's not what the show is about. It does seem very repetitive...same issues, different players.

I agree with a pp that GD and AP would probably not jive with most of these families.

I've never seen the supernanny take away bottles or discourage breastfeeding. That sucks. I have seen the 911 shows where they do potty training in a day or take away binkies suddenly. That has always been very sad to me.

Anyway, I watch it because of unrelenting fascination with people and how they live. But, I agree, that most of her techniques aren't in line with my philosophy of parenting. But they are probably a big step in the right directino for a lot of these parents who are using physical force with their children.


----------



## avent (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dianamerrell* 
a Quote, that my mama brain will not let me remember:
Children act as they are treated.

I like the quote, but i find it only partially true. For example I know two brothers (now in their 30s) who were treated horribly by their father when they were young. The older son reacted by being very obedient, successful, etc. as a way to compensate for the terrible things he was told he was, and the younger one turned out to act much more like the dad. I believe they are both equally damaged, but only one acts as he was treated. Sad, really, for both of them.


----------



## avent (Mar 13, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
IBut you know, I think the challenges of parenting really creep up on people and they haven't a clue what to do. They have no idea about child development and are probably repeating familial patterns.

I agree and I attribute a large part of this problem to the relative isolation in which many people have to parent now. They have no clue, no real guidance from the village and from their more experienced family members and extended family. It may not take a village, but it sure helps.


----------



## dubfam (Nov 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Hazelnut* 
Was it supernanny or nanny 911 where she put down the mom for nursing the toddler? I didn't actually see it though- just the promos which were edited to be way controversial.

ugghh!! That was Super nanny!

The trailer for the show was showing the mom nursing the toddler, and the narrator says" Someone get that baby a bottle!" uke

I like Super Nanny...I don;t agree with a lot of what she says but I think she does have a lot of good insight. I always learn things watching it...it is interesting to see what it looks like when a parent is yelling etc
I will be like "OMG do I sound like that??!!" sometimes!

I would agree with her 100% if she would be more attachment based and quit saying Naughty so much!! You just have to take the good and leave the bad with this show IMO.


----------



## NaomiMcC (Mar 22, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *2bluefish* 
How is letting a kid cry and get worked up going to result in sleep? ...

It physically exhausts them and makes them sleepy for one and/or two, they eventually give up and go to sleep anyway because there's nothing else for them to do.


----------



## gabysmom617 (Nov 26, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NaomiMcC* 
It physically exhausts them and makes them sleepy for one and/or two, they eventually give up and go to sleep anyway because there's nothing else for them to do.

My mom let me co-sleep until I was about 4 years old, and then allowed me to cry in my bed until I went to sleep with little or no comfort. I still have darkness issues from that till this very day.

I could not disagree with allowing a child to cry himself to sleep more. It hurts them psychologically (no matter how young or old the child is) much more than simply tiring them out and making them to go sleep.


----------



## mommaof3 (Dec 11, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *gabysmom617* 
My mom let me co-sleep until I was about 4 years old, and then allowed me to cry in my bed until I went to sleep with little or no comfort. I still have darkness issues from that till this very day.

I could not disagree with allowing a child to cry himself to sleep more. It hurts them psychologically (no matter how young or old the child is) much more than simply tiring them out and making them to go sleep.


My kids all still co-sleep (well, except the teenager!), but we do gently night-wean them around 3 years old, which involves some crying in our loving arms...

There are different schools of thought around sleep, crying, etc. but IMO a loving presence from a parent is the key.

Here's an interesting GD article about sleep, and release of tensions through crying, etc. http://www.handinhandparenting.org/c...000/000029.htm obviously I don't agree with it all (as I said, my kids still co-sleep, and my 2.5 year old still nurses through the night) but it's an interesting perspective nonetheless, and may help bridge the gap here a little.


----------



## transformed (Jan 26, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 

However, it pains me to see her eroding attachment relationships between parents and children. She makes children put themselves to bed, give up nursing, give up suckies and attachment rituals with parents. This IMO is horrible, and her downfall. Attachment relationships are the glue in families IMO, they provide a context for the boundary setting she does and help children feel loved, included, and part of a circle of people who love each other.


I agree with this totally. I think we need to redefine success in our society. (Myself included) Why should it always have to be "a child that can seperate." Why is this so crazy important? I think alot of people are mistaken that we have to "teach" our kids to seperate. I think "They'll figure it out." From watching well adjusted adults behave. My 12 mo old taught herself to use a fork all by herself. I never told her how to do it, or decided at what age she should-she just did.

Jenny

PS-I like Supernannys view on togetherness and time as a unit though-that is HUGE is creating "better behavior."


----------



## bumperbee (Apr 7, 2007)

The few episodes I've seen I really like. I think most of what she says is common sense... there was one family that was riling the kids up before bed with a bug hunt, and another that didn't direct her kids with an activity while she did physical therapy with her oldest... Her bedtime methods of sitting in the room completely silent in the dark and putting kids back to bed each time they woke up made sense to me too as it gets the job done without abandonment and without adding extra unnecessary stimulation late at night. I think it's true that the shows are same story different family, but it's nice to get the basic lessons of having a routine, a set of rules or guidelines for the family to follow, and outlined consequences for breaking the rules, even if you don't agree with time outs yourself.


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

What reasons does SN give for stopping the attachment rituals???? I don't know I just don't see how they can impact so negatively on the kids behaviour..... unless it is that the parenting style is not suiting the parents and elaving them "exhausted", and a less attached style enables the adults to be better parents.....???? Don't know, just thinking aloud here.....


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

There is a huge expectation that, "YOU are the parent and YOU are in charge," from SN.

So when children are doing things "on demand," I'm quite sure she sees that as the KID is in charge.

And for things like bedtime, nursing, etc. she uses the same old tired reasons: "They've got to learn sometime." "They need to be independent." "They're old enough now." "This is more about fulfilling the mother's needs..."


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bumperbee* 
Her bedtime methods of sitting in the room completely silent in the dark and putting kids back to bed each time they woke up made sense to me too as it gets the job done without abandonment and without adding extra unnecessary stimulation late at night.

Except that those children are sobbing and trying to claw their way to the mother, while she neither speaks to them nor looks at them. If you don't think they feel abandoned I'm curious as to what you do think they're feeling?


----------



## Manfa (May 27, 2007)

I think I get it now. If the parents have a specific problem with the child that is unrelated to the attachment rituals - for example, the child isn't listening to the parents or is being violent to a sibling or what have you.....then I just don't see what that has to do with comfort items or long bedtimes... In that case I have to say I think SN is WAY off insisting on those changes, not just because of the effect it has on the kids but because she is (IMO) overstepping the mark in how much she tells the parents how to raise their kids.


----------



## bumperbee (Apr 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Except that those children are sobbing and trying to claw their way to the mother, while she neither speaks to them nor looks at them. If you don't think they feel abandoned I'm curious as to what you do think they're feeling?

I think they don't see their mother as a sympathetic ear, but they know she's right there, they can see her, she hasn't left the house or them. It would be worse if she talked and interacted, I think, just as you aren't supposed to talk and engage a baby that wakes to nurse.

If I have one complaint about the show, it's that everything is done in a way too short space of time, so the transitions are rougher than they might be... I don't know, I think it depends on the kid whether slowly weaning off the breast or slowly transitioning a new nighttime ritual is better than a more immediate change, but you don't get to see that option. I think it would be nice to show how parents can implement the tools without doing a sudden intervention.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bumperbee* 
I think they don't see their mother as a sympathetic ear, but they know she's right there, they can see her, she hasn't left the house or them. It would be worse if she talked and interacted, I think, just as you aren't supposed to talk and engage a baby that wakes to nurse.

Actually, in one of the more recent CIO episodes she had a baby CIO alone in a room with cameras videotaping her. It was horrific. The child was standing up reaching through the bars wailing for the mother. And eventually fell asleep that way. The family and SN all stood outside in the hallway. I'm pretty sure that baby felt abandoned. And I'm fairly certain that many other babies across the country suffered that same fate as a direct result of this show.

I can't fathom why it would be worse for a mother to be whispering assurances and sweet things to a child trying to go to sleep instead of not making eye contact, repeatedly *dragging* them back to the bed, or answering their begging calls in ANY way. It seems cruel and barbaric.


----------



## NaomisMommy (Jun 14, 2007)

I personally do not have a problem with SN. A lot of what she does is common sense which several of the families on the show seem to be lacking. My thing is that you have to find what works for your FAMILY. If something is "working" for the kids but not the parents, then something ELSE needs to be found. It's a balance. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.


----------



## bumperbee (Apr 7, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
Actually, in one of the more recent CIO episodes she had a baby CIO alone in a room with cameras videotaping her. It was horrific. The child was standing up reaching through the bars wailing for the mother. And eventually fell asleep that way. The family and SN all stood outside in the hallway. I'm pretty sure that baby felt abandoned. And I'm fairly certain that many other babies across the country suffered that same fate as a direct result of this show.

I can't fathom why it would be worse for a mother to be whispering assurances and sweet things to a child trying to go to sleep instead of not making eye contact, repeatedly *dragging* them back to the bed, or answering their begging calls in ANY way. It seems cruel and barbaric.

Well that's very different from the episodes I've watched where they are being put back to bed repeatedly by mom until they go to sleep. From what I've seen it's not the frantic screaming of a baby that doesn't know that it's mother exists when he cannot see her, it's the frustrated cries of an over tired child that doesn't want to go to bed and is dealing with a big change in what's expected from bedtime. I would agree that infants wouldn't benefit from CIO but I'm fine with the techniques I've seen for bedtime.


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *bumperbee* 
From what I've seen it's not the frantic screaming of a baby that doesn't know that it's mother exists when he cannot see her, it's the frustrated cries of an over tired child that doesn't want to go to bed and is dealing with a big change in what's expected from bedtime. I would agree that infants wouldn't benefit from CIO but I'm fine with the techniques I've seen for bedtime.

I'm not clear on how CIO for toddlers or older children meshes with attachment parenting.

Shutting down communication (verbally and physically--aside from hualing the child to bed) seems like the antithesis of meeting emotional needs. When a child is calling out, "Mamamamammamamamamma...." and sobbing and the mother won't look at the kid? How is that in line with AP?


----------



## NaomiMcC (Mar 22, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *NaomisMommy* 
I personally do not have a problem with SN. A lot of what she does is common sense which several of the families on the show seem to be lacking. My thing is that you have to find what works for your FAMILY. If something is "working" for the kids but not the parents, then something ELSE needs to be found. It's a balance. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.









:

BTW..great name









I also agree with BumperBee...The kids are usually overtired and stubborn with the change of rules. I don't see anything wrong with it either.


----------



## TirzhaZ (Jun 15, 2007)

Everyone has a different parenting philosophy that works for their family and may not work for someone else, which is something everyone can agree on!

Anyway, I have seen the show and I acually like it. I did see the episode where she had the mother wean her daughter because it was "disrupting the normal functions of the home" or something like that. I didn't agree with that part, but I did agree with weaning the child from the bottle (my own reasons there that I'd be happy to share, but that's for a different thread!) She does good and bad, but I think most of what she does is very constructive. In homes as chaotic as the ones she visits some of the family members are bound to be upset. She is very big on explaining WHY some actions are inappopriate rather than taking the "because I said so" approach that too many parents take these days. And when she is able to give the parents tools for bonding with their children rather than arguing, I think everyone ends up being a little better off.


----------



## melissel (Jun 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *alegna* 
Ummm.... "naughty" spot?

A child does not need to be told they're naughty or bad.

-Angela

I haven't read all the responses, but wanted to say that ITA about the naughty spot. Also, I think the naughty spot is a cop-out for times when you should be working things through with your child. JMHO. Ask me again when my challenging DD2 is older







But in my experience, there's never been anything I couldn't work through WITH my girls.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *melissel* 
I haven't read all the responses, but wanted to say that ITA about the naughty spot. Also, I think the naughty spot is a cop-out for times when you should be working things through with your child. JMHO. Ask me again when my challenging DD2 is older







But in my experience, there's never been anything I couldn't work through WITH my girls.

I think the "naughty spot" is one thing that she does that really bugs me. It's usually done in a very punitive way and seems to be a matter of breaking the child down until they realize it's totally futile to fight it and give in to sit for however long. Having said that, we have used time-outs on occassion for particularly troubling behavior (hitting) and it has worked in a short amount of time and it's over. Time out is not used as a threat and it's hardly even referred to or used in our home. It is reserved for a major offense where safety becomes an issue.

I watched a recent show and she really focused on bonding and connecting with the kids and I think that is great. I really think she probably does more to help than hurt these families. The one I saw last actually helped me with an idea...she had the mother put together a collage with a picture of her son and loving words all around it...she was to go there and look at that when she is so focused on the behavior and not the child...so that she can tap into the love for him and operate from that place. I loved that idea! I am going to put a collage together of pictures of my boy and have that to look at when his behavior is driving me nuts...I think just that reframe alone helps to view the situation from a more loving place.


----------



## melissel (Jun 30, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *swampangel* 
I think the "naughty spot" is one thing that she does that really bugs me. It's usually done in a very punitive way and seems to be a matter of breaking the child down until they realize it's totally futile to fight it and give in to sit for however long.

Yeah, this is more what I mean. One of the few shows that I watched (probably the last one, I was so bothered by it) involved a 4-ish y.o. boy (other kids too, but he was the one who got the naughty spot) who would run wild to get his mom's attention while she was cooking dinner, and SN showed the mom how to repeatedly put him in the naughty spot until he cried hysterically and finally stayed there. Um, he was DESPERATE for his mother's attention! There are a MILLION ways to keep him with you and involve him in what you're doing while you cook dinner. Ugh. Someone posted about how SN's answer to almost everything seems to be detachment, and while it may not be true for every issue (I will admit she does help most of the families, because they ARE so far gone), it bothers me so much I can't really see past it!


----------



## NaomiMcC (Mar 22, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *TirzhaZ* 
Everyone has a different parenting philosophy that works for their family and may not work for someone else, which is something everyone can agree on! ...

Pffft....not around here I find....







:


----------



## junipermuse (Nov 1, 2006)

While I enjoy watching SN, I tend to disagree with her methods, specifically time-outs and reward charts. I think there is definitely too much focus on behaviorism. It shouldn't be about making the child do what you want them to do, but about meeting their needs so they will want to behave in a socially appropriate manner. I think that often SN forgets about meeting the children's needs. Specifically there was this one episode where the family had four girls. The oldest was diabled and required a lot of attention, including mom doing therapy with her four times a day. During that time the youngest two (4yo and 6yo I think) were expected to play alone and not bother them at all. To me this was not a developmentally appropriate expectation and the children were clearly acting out as a means of getting attention. Even the second oldest daughter was exhibiting rebellious teenager behavior to get attention. Basically the house revolved around the daughter with the disabilty and never once was it suggested that the other children might need more time and attention. It really upset me. She actually did help the rebellious daughter form a closer relationship with her father, but the younger two were just given Time-out if they interuppted the mother during therapy sessions. SN never tried to find a way for the children to be involved or to get mom some extra help so that she wasn't always doing therapy and ignoring the other children.


----------



## mamazee (Jan 5, 2003)

I've seen this show and every in episode I've personally seen, the problem is not the fault of the kids. The kids might be acting out, but the original problem is:

1. Kids very closely spaced together, and often multiples or a child with a disability, so kids are having trouble getting enough attention each
2. One of the parents isn't giving enough support
3. Both parents working without adequate thought as to how to make sure kids' needs are met
4. Parents having unrealistic expectations - such as that kids will go to bed and stay in bed at 7:30 or something

So, rather than taking care of the underlying problem (which seems to be often getting more support in - having a grandparent there every day for a few hours, hiring a mother's helper and/or housecleaner, etc.) they try to train the kids to tolerate a bad situation.


----------



## junipermuse (Nov 1, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazee* 
I've seen this show and every in episode I've personally seen, the problem is not the fault of the kids. The kids might be acting out, but the original problem is:

1. Kids very closely spaced together, and often multiples or a child with a disability, so kids are having trouble getting enough attention each
2. One of the parents isn't giving enough support
3. Both parents working without adequate thought as to how to make sure kids' needs are met
4. Parents having unrealistic expectations - such as that kids will go to bed and stay in bed at 7:30 or something

So, rather than taking care of the underlying problem (which seems to be often getting more support in - having a grandparent there every day for a few hours, hiring a mother's helper and/or housecleaner, etc.) they try to train the kids to tolerate a bad situation.


yes this was exactly what I was trying to say, but you said it much better.


----------



## McMandy (May 18, 2007)

Personally, I think SuperNanny and Nanny911 are great. Why? Because they may be the first steps MANY parents take toward a more gentle approach in parenting.

I know that's how I came about looking into gentle parenting. The Nannies comfirmed what I had felt from the beginning. Spanking is not necessary. I used some of their approaches, and when some of them didn't work, I looked for other approaches.. and found GP.


----------



## swampangel (Feb 10, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *McMandy* 
Personally, I think SuperNanny and Nanny911 are great. Why? Because they may be the first steps MANY parents take toward a more gentle approach in parenting.

I know that's how I came about looking into gentle parenting. The Nannies comfirmed what I had felt from the beginning. Spanking is not necessary. I used some of their approaches, and when some of them didn't work, I looked for other approaches.. and found GP.

Yes, I think it probably gets people thinking about their parenting, which is a good thing. Everyone is moving through this journey in varying ways and I'm sure these shows are very helpful to a lot of people. Obviously they are also designed for ratings and what not, but I think folks who spank and yell probably glean a lot of good information from it.


----------



## m9m9m9 (Jun 13, 2005)

I think AislinCarys sums up the situations they show pretty well. The kids and families are mostly in too much disaray and they need to be calmed to the point where the idea of AP and gentle discpline can actually be "heard" by both the kids and the adults. Time-out doesn't need to be the end all be all solution but it is most likely needed as a starting point so that things can come under control.

Also, no one seems to remember that the families that are shown are never saying "oh we love the 3 hour bedtime drama rituals and the sleepless nights we have with the kids in our bed" The parents are asking for these things to stop. If the parents do not want to co-sleep anymore than really how much benefit is there?

Maggie


----------



## OGirlieMama (Aug 6, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *dianamerrell* 

a Quote, that my mama brain will not let me remember:
Children act as they are treated.

I think you're thinking of "Children Learn What They Live," which is the title of a poem my Mom had on a poster hanging on the back of a door in my house growing up. Here's the full text - http://www.empowermentresources.com/...g_version.html


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *m9m9m9* 
Also, no one seems to remember that the families that are shown are never saying "oh we love the 3 hour bedtime drama rituals and the sleepless nights we have with the kids in our bed" The parents are asking for these things to stop. If the parents do not want to co-sleep anymore than really how much benefit is there?

No, on Nanny 911 and Supernanny there have been a number of mothers who were not interested in disolving the family bed. And they were shamed and threatened by the nannnies.







:


----------



## Stinkerbell (Aug 11, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *thismama* 
LOL at this post! Welcome to MDC.

I don't hate Supernanny, at least not most of her. I think she sets really good respectful boundaries with some seriously out of control children.

However, it pains me to see her eroding attachment relationships between parents and children. She makes children put themselves to bed, give up nursing, give up suckies and attachment rituals with parents. This IMO is horrible, and her downfall. Attachment relationships are the glue in families IMO, they provide a context for the boundary setting she does and help children feel loved, included, and part of a circle of people who love each other.

I agree with this. I definitely respect her ability to teach parents to help guide their children in a loving way....but I also dislike her erosion of AP.

Is there a middle ground for this, though?


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Stinkerbell* 
I agree with this. I definitely respect her ability to teach parents to help guide their children in a loving way....but I also dislike her erosion of AP.

Is there a middle ground for this, though?

Well, I definitely think guiding children and setting boundaries is AP.

I think the problem arises for Supernanny, however, b/c she seems to have a basic "mistrust" of children's motives and behavior. She's not interested in discovering underlying needs by and large. So that ranges from the breastfeeding, co-sleeping infant to the lashing out 10 yr. old. Because she is focused on the behavior, that's the part she's setting out solutions for. It's almost always about curbing behavior, and rarely about finding out what is driving it or giving the child the benefit of the doubt. She doesn't trust that the child is doing the best they can or acting out some other issue.

So she might be "gentle" in that she promotes alternatives to hitting, the emotional responsiveness part of AP is hugely lacking. And honestly, given the choice betw. an unresponsive parent physically putting a child on a naughty spot over and over for hours on end, and a parent who spanks in a truly, "This is hurting me more than it hurts you," way.....I don't know....I think the former is actually worse.







:


----------



## Benji'sMom (Sep 14, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamazee* 
I've seen this show and every in episode I've personally seen, the problem is not the fault of the kids. The kids might be acting out, but the original problem is:

1. Kids very closely spaced together, and often multiples or a child with a disability, so kids are having trouble getting enough attention each
2. One of the parents isn't giving enough support
3. Both parents working without adequate thought as to how to make sure kids' needs are met
4. Parents having unrealistic expectations - such as that kids will go to bed and stay in bed at 7:30 or something

So, rather than taking care of the underlying problem (which seems to be often getting more support in - having a grandparent there every day for a few hours, hiring a mother's helper and/or housecleaner, etc.) they try to train the kids to tolerate a bad situation.

So true. And they even mention it at the beginning of the shows, like "Their dad died last month and mom is now a single mom of 5 kids." - I think something like that was on the last episode of SN - but instead of getting counseling for them or mother's helper, she sticks the kids in the naughty spot! It doesn't address the problem at all!


----------



## quelindo (May 11, 2005)

I dislike Suppernanny for all the reasons listed. But also because, before I had my son, I was a (live-out) nanny for about ten years for several different families. And let me tell you, I did a COMPLETE turnaround in my childrearing philosophy after I had my son.

As a nanny, I felt strongly that children should do as they were told just because they were told to. It's not that I wasn't loving/caring/silly with them; I just really felt that I was in charge and if I said go to sleep, they needed to go to sleep. I got this from my parents, sadly.

Now...I am so incredibly connected with my son that I try to see things from his point of view. I have more realistic expectations for him. I'm much better at finding ways for him to "help" me so I can get things done around the house but still have him feel included (I never really had this issue as a nanny). I'm just more patient and loving...even though I would have said I was patient and loving before.

You really can't understand what having a child is like until you have your own. So I bristle a bit at Supernanny acting as though she knows it all when she has no children of her own.


----------



## m9m9m9 (Jun 13, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *monkey's mom* 
No, on Nanny 911 and Supernanny there have been a number of mothers who were not interested in disolving the family bed. And they were shamed and threatened by the nannnies.







:

Co-sleeping is a very nice arrangement if it benefits the parents and the child but that is not what the situation is on these shows.

I have watched many episodes where the mom is complaining about "co-sleeping." Also, many of the families are not really co-sleeping per se. The parents are just lying down with the kids in thier kid's beds and rooms(and are uncomfortable) bc they have to and have no other methods for getting them to sleep its not a case of the parents really wanting to co- sleep.

I have seen many express sadness that "co-sleeping" is ending but I think that is probably a natural reaction. Just becuase one is sad that a phase is ending does not mean they do not want it to end or need it to end.

The families never seem to be saying at the end of the show that they have terrible regrets over it and are unhappy with the established bedtime routines. And in fact, they can all go back to their previous arrangement at the end of the week if they want after the show has done filming. Why is it so hard to understand that the family bed may need to be disolved in some situations? It just doesn't work for everyone.

Maggie


----------



## monkey's mom (Jul 25, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *m9m9m9* 
Why is it so hard to understand that the family bed may need to be disolved in some situations? It just doesn't work for everyone.

It's not hard for me to understand at all.

I was reacting to your statement that all the families express dissatisfaction with co-sleeping or their nighttime parenting arrangement. And that's just not so. There have been several families who wanted to continue their sleeping arrangements and they were told horror stories about the mother having emotional issues, the child taking over the role of the father, the children never learning to go to sleep by themselves and that if they wanted the nanny's help they must submit to her entire program of change.

And even in the cases where the families were dissatisfied with the sleeping/bedtime scenarios, to implement a plan where almost EVERY single time a mother/child pair is sobbing and/or begging for it to stop? Sorry, that's not "disolving" the family bed, that's smashing it into a million pieces in one fell swoop.

I am 100% certain that there is a better, less traumatic, more attachment-building way to move a child out of the family bed.

But, again, these nannies are not focusing on these children's needs. As long as the behavior stops, then it's a "success." I think that's a pretty dangerous message to put out there. And I think it's weird that people are defending it here.


----------



## oliversmum2000 (Oct 10, 2003)

actually i watched a fantastic episode of supernanny recently. the son was on the autism spectrum and she got an expert in her managed to get the little boy talking for the first time. she berated the mother for ignoring the children and not playing with them and not being nice enough to them. all she did was get the parents to talk to their children more and play with them more and be nicer to them. no sticker charts or naughty step or time outs, just hey you - be nicer to you kids.


----------



## mittendrin (Nov 5, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Manfa* 
But why does everyone seem to hate supernanny on this board???? I know next to nothing about this woman except shes known for making the naughty spot famous!

Is there's a PM facility? If so I would appreciate being sent any responses privately because I get the impression this might be a HOT topic and I don't want to be thought to be stirring the pot. Thanks, and sorry if this is a forbidden topic!

I didn't like a few episodes where she discouraged the family bed and talked a mom into early weaning but overall I like her. I do time outs for my kids and will tell them when their behaviour is "naughty" or bad. I do it in german, hehe, might sound cruel to some of you. I like her!


----------



## mommaof3 (Dec 11, 2001)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mittendrin* 
I do time outs for my kids and will tell them when their behaviour is "naughty" or bad. I do it in german, hehe, might sound cruel to some of you. I like her!

Have you all read Alfie Kohn's article about SuperNanny?

Very interesting.

http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/supernanny.htm


----------



## devster4fun (Jan 28, 2007)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mommaof3* 
Have you all read Alfie Kohn's article about SuperNanny?

Very interesting.

http://www.alfiekohn.org/parenting/supernanny.htm

Thank you for the link! It is very interesting.

I'm a big believer in Kohn's principals, although I have yet to see them play out in my family. (DD is 14 months) I have read two of his books and research seems sound. I am curious to see how it works with our DD.

I know I am against formal time outs for many reasons....


----------

