Baby Lead Movement

[ladybirdflies]

Hi Everyone!
I just wanted to share my experience with our 10month old baby. We made a conscious decision before she was born to only put her in positions she could take up for herself. Our reasoning behind this is rather long winded, but the idea is that babies learn to roll, sit, walk etc without being put in that position by us. At times this has been challenging. There are things like the carseat that cannot be avoided, but other then that she is always popped on the floor on her back, we don't stand her on her legs, and have only in the past few weeks sat her on our knee (we lay her back on our body and she can sit from there but we haven't 'sat' her up)
Watching her exercise and move her body has been astounding, she does things that I have never seen babies do before. Since birth she has been doing baby sit ups and uses her muscles and neck to get her head to look at things across the room. She is just about to be able to pull herself to sitting from laying down, she is so close and we are all watching her every new posture as this milestone gets closer. She can roll easily, commando crawl and pull herself to sitting up in her pram and a baby crib (this is where she eats until sitting up then to highchair) Her determination is strong and at times she needs loving support from her cheer squad family as she shifts through each new position. But mostly she is happy laying down and choosing how she would like to be rather then me choosing for her whether she will sit etc.
Since we began this journey we have now come across a movement of body workers (chiro/osteo etc) that are now educating parents to not sit babies up until they can do this for themselves to help with their body and long term affects.
Mostly with this being my third child, I have loved sitting back and watching her come to things instead of me wanting her to sit or take up a gesture that she is not ready for yet.
I wanted to know if anyone else has done this or heard of this before?
This post is judging what you are doing with your baby and their body positions, I am just interested to see what others think. The response IRL has been amazing we have been so supported!
Thanks for reading!

[V-love]

Wow- that sounds really interesting! I've never heard of it before.

Much like Baby-led Weaning, it makes a lot of sense...waiting until baby is ready and trusting that they'll take the next step when their bodies are ready..

So I guess you didn't do the recommended daily 'tummy time' from birth, then?

Out of interest, at what age were your baby's 'milestones' eg rolling, sitting, crawling?
I'm just wondering if the average ages for these published in books etc are a natural result or a result of encouraging your baby to do it...IYKWIM?

[MrsBexie]

ooh I really like this idea!!! Did you do it from birth? Could you start it at a later date, like if we wanted to start with our 6 week old DD?

[ladybirdflies]

@ V-love, she rolled at four months, rolled back within the next few weeks after that. She started using rolling as a way of getting round at about 8 months. She has been doing stomach crunches since about three months. Currently, she rolls to her side and half sits up from there, she can pull to sitting when laid in the pram or anything with sides on it. The amazing thing is she can slowly lower herself back down (those abs!) She has been commando crawling forwards for about a week and in currently playing on her knees. In the bath she lays on her tummy and plays and rolls never once dipping her face in, it's amazing! She is very aware of her body space and quite often will roll right to the edge of the bed and just teeter on the edge perfectly balanced and then laugh and roll back. Blows me away.
No to tummy time from birth
@ Mrs Bexie,
Of course it is not too late at all. Start now if you like. We only held her laying in our arms for three months, and about then we still laid her in the Madonna hold but a little more raised IYKWIM. THe tricky thing has been asking people who snuggle her not to sit her, prop her or stand her on her legs without offending them. There is a good book called 'A warm and Gentle Welcome. Nurturing Children from birth to three' Part of the gateways series five. This has a little about it. The rest has been from my work and study to do with Rudolf Steiner and developing the physical body in the first 7 years. If you have any other questions, feel free to ask!

[Yeddi]

Sorry, I've got to ask it, but how is being put on their back any more of a naturally applied position than being put on their tummy? Babies lie on their back because we put them there as much as they would lie on the tummy by us putting them there... To be honest, a babies favourite position is usually hanging them upside down like they are in the womb. I know my son LOVED being upside down when he went to see the osteo post birth. Not exactly practical or healthy though to be doing all the time, and of course they can't put themselves into that position.

My DS does all this too (the rolling, commando crawling, baby bending) despite us putting him into positions like on his tummy and helping he stand (because he loves that position too even if he can't get into it himself), and I'm not trying to be competitive, but he's been doing it since 5 months (he's only just hit 6 months this week and rocking on his knees). He first rolled both ways at 2 months (from tummy to back and back to tummy again). People have always commented on how strong DS is, because he's built like a brick S'House and could hold his head as steady as a 3 month old on his first day of life, and everything else has gone from there. My DD however didn't even crawl until 17 months and we never consciously put her into any position but her back, but she had low-tone issues. Couldn't it just be the personality and physical strength of the individual child?

And while I understand some of the logic behind some Osteo's telling people to not sit a baby before they are ready, I'm a little bit confused about how that relates to putting the baby on their back only. In fact my Osteo explicitly said to make sure I didn't always stick baby on his back, and to rotate between tummy, right side, back, left side.

That being said, our home is Steiner-based (to a degree), and therefore a texture banquet where it wasn't before, maybe that has something more to do with advanced development. The motivation of exploration... Although, I don't see what the big deal about our kids doing things faster than other kids is anyway. They'll all do it in their own time, and that time will be what is right for them.

[StrawberryMumma]

Hi

Thanks for sharing your experiences!
Just wondering if you can give a little more detail as to what you mean by long term effects?

Thanks!

[ladybirdflies]

THanks for the reply Yeddi, yes all children are different and develop at different rates. And from the sound and strength of your little one chances are he would have developed just as quick with the hands off approach. Sounds like your daughter was a little different as you said with low muscle tone. In the USA where there is a study being done, the children left to move freely did in fact reach miles stones a little later then others who where introduced to positions, yet the groups all reached the milestone around the same age, which I found interesting. If you are familiar with some of Steiner you may know that children learn from imitation, so all children will eventually take up their body. The muscles grow and develop perfectly for this happen. When they are placed in sitting or standing, the body has to catch up with this. No doubt all children love it.
And the question that I have only for my family is, is it good for them? There is a destiny and a reason why children are with the parents they are with, because that parent can bring them the best conditions for this life, I do believe in my experience, that allowing a child to come into their body out of their own freedom has beneficial affects, not only physically, but also their ability to learn and meet life.


Lee, apparently a chiropractor has released a handbook on the benefits of free movement, perhaps you might find one in your local practice. All body movement is related to how our children learn, reading writing maths etc, and often when a child is having learning difficulties they will practice not the maths/reading but physically take the child back through milestones to check for retained reflexes or missed milestones to see if that shifts how the child is learning.

[helle]

Sorry, I've got to ask it, but how is being put on their back any more of a naturally applied position than being put on their tummy? Babies lie on their back because we put them there as much as they would lie on the tummy by us putting them there... To be honest, a babies favourite position is usually hanging them upside down like they are in the womb. I know my son LOVED being upside down when he went to see the osteo post birth. Not exactly practical or healthy though to be doing all the time, and of course they can't put themselves into that position.

My DS does all this too (the rolling, commando crawling, baby bending) despite us putting him into positions like on his tummy and helping he stand (because he loves that position too even if he can't get into it himself), and I'm not trying to be competitive, but he's been doing it since 5 months (he's only just hit 6 months this week and rocking on his knees). He first rolled both ways at 2 months (from tummy to back and back to tummy again). People have always commented on how strong DS is, because he's built like a brick S'House and could hold his head as steady as a 3 month old on his first day of life, and everything else has gone from there. My DD however didn't even crawl until 17 months and we never consciously put her into any position but her back, but she had low-tone issues. Couldn't it just be the personality and physical strength of the individual child?

And while I understand some of the logic behind some Osteo's telling people to not sit a baby before they are ready, I'm a little bit confused about how that relates to putting the baby on their back only. In fact my Osteo explicitly said to make sure I didn't always stick baby on his back, and to rotate between tummy, right side, back, left side.

That being said, our home is Steiner-based (to a degree), and therefore a texture banquet where it wasn't before, maybe that has something more to do with advanced development. The motivation of exploration... Although, I don't see what the big deal about our kids doing things faster than other kids is anyway. They'll all do it in their own time, and that time will be what is right for them.

:yeahthat:

Interesting tho.

[Heaven]

Sorry, I've got to ask it, but how is being put on their back any more of a naturally applied position than being put on their tummy? Babies lie on their back because we put them there as much as they would lie on the tummy by us putting them there...

That's what I was thinking too?? Actually, I'd think they'd prefer to be on their tummy where they can be all curled up like in the womb iykwim.

[helle]

That's what I was thinking too?? Actually, I'd think they'd prefer to be on their tummy where they can be all curled up like in the womb iykwim.

My CHN said something about sleeping longer on their bellies as it's a natural position for most newborns.

[ladybirdflies]

yes, our baby spent time on her tummy when self attaching to the breast for the first 6 weeks. And it's not so much belly position as much as sitting/propping and weight bearing on their legs. the thread is about free movement, not whether tummy time is good or not.

[Yeddi]

THanks for the reply Yeddi, yes all children are different and develop at different rates. And from the sound and strength of your little one chances are he would have developed just as quick with the hands off approach. Sounds like your daughter was a little different as you said with low muscle tone. In the USA where there is a study being done, the children left to move freely did in fact reach miles stones a little later then others who where introduced to positions, yet the groups all reached the milestone around the same age, which I found interesting. If you are familiar with some of Steiner you may know that children learn from imitation, so all children will eventually take up their body. The muscles grow and develop perfectly for this happen. When they are placed in sitting or standing, the body has to catch up with this. No doubt all children love it.
And the question that I have only for my family is, is it good for them? There is a destiny and a reason why children are with the parents they are with, because that parent can bring them the best conditions for this life, I do believe in my experience, that allowing a child to come into their body out of their own freedom has beneficial affects, not only physically, but also their ability to learn and meet life.


Lee, apparently a chiropractor has released a handbook on the benefits of free movement, perhaps you might find one in your local practice. All body movement is related to how our children learn, reading writing maths etc, and often when a child is having learning difficulties they will practice not the maths/reading but physically take the child back through milestones to check for retained reflexes or missed milestones to see if that shifts how the child is learning.

Yes, we have done a lot of work with Steiner, particularly Extra Lesson. I know a lot of the improvements with this type of therapy usually first involve a lot of regression in areas they had been skipped in development, currently visible in my daughter at the moment going through some three year old phases although she's just about to turn 6. So I fully understand the not pushing behaviours that children are not ready for so they don't miss important steps that they'll have to make up for later.

The thing I'm struggling to understand is how not giving them tummy time works into all this, and is contradictory to the idea of free movement. In my mind, placing a child solely on their back is just as restrictive to their movement, allowing them to only move certain muscle groups, see certain points of view, and I don't see how putting them on their tummy is forcing certain muscles, ligaments etc to work out of order because for both back and tummy the main area a baby must learn to control is their head. I also see there being a difference between pushing a milestone a child isn't ready for and stabilising a child who is attempting that milestone. As with my DS's standing, it's not like I'm picking him up and putting him into that position, he pushes with his legs from a sitting position and puts himself into that position and holds it while I steady his core by lightly holding him. I just think there is a middle ground, that's all. Each to their own, but I don't think a baby's physicality or their ability to learn and meet life will be diminished in any way by giving bubba tummy time, but they can get a nice flat head that will throw their skull and spine out of alignment if they don't get it. My nephew is a perfect example, his head is like flat-flat and effects his bowel control.

[ladybirdflies]

Hey Yeddi, like i said it's not an argument for trying to get you to come and do the same thing. It's a moment that may awaken and speak to a mother or potential mother that gets them asking questions and perhaps may be inspired to do something like this. I work with several families oz wide and there are so many scenarios as you have pointed out. Take what you want from it, and continue to do the job you have been asked to do in raising your children. I could go on, but won't. Go well

[helle]

yes, our baby spent time on her tummy when self attaching to the breast for the first 6 weeks. And it's not so much belly position as much as sitting/propping and weight bearing on their legs. the thread is about free movement, not whether tummy time is good or not.

I don't think that's what Yedi is trying to say... she's trying to understand how placing them on their back allows the Baby Lead Movement and being placed on their belly isn't. As being put on their back is a position, and one that you are putting them into, same as placing them on their stomach.

And we're not saying that tummy time is good or not, just that it could possibly be more of a natural position than on their back...

We're not telling you you're full of crap.. we just wanna know more

[Yeddi]

I'm not trying to get into an argument, I'm just asking the question of how tummy time is contradictory to the idea of free-movement. I don't see how the question in itself is combative. I can find no information on this practise whatsoever, so it's not like I can defer to other sources to ask the questions.

Thanks Helle spot on.

[ladybirdflies]

perhaps the words from an inspiring book may help here
" The infant progresses from lying on her back to slowly turning and rolling onto her belly. This does not happen all at once, but through many practice opportunities. While lying on her back, the infant stretches and flexes her muscles this way and that. She lifts her leg and crosses it over to the other side. Then, one day, she turns herself all the way over. Her arm might become caught underneath her. She will return to lying on her back and have a little rest before trying again. When she is able to roll over, in her own time, she will have already developed the skills needed to lift her head, free her arm and move her limbs while lying in the prone position."

[Yeddi]

Argh! I'm sorry, I'm just frustrated and don't know how else to phrase the question because we are obviously on different pages. To me, that quote is about the milestone of rolling, and still doesn't answer my question about why only the back. Again, I'm not trying to be combative, but I think if you are going to present something to people, being asked to explain the ins and outs of it shouldn't be considered unreasonable.

I've actually just found some info, so will have a look through.

Edit: Is the chiropractor you're talking about Dr. Paula Giusto?

[Yeddi]

Don't worry, I've answered my own question...

Free Gross Motor Development is a philosophy whose principles were developed and proven through years of research at the Emmi Pikler Institute and Children’s Home in Budapest, Hungary. Dr. Emmi Pikler explains: Moving from one movement stage to another indicates internal, neuromuscular readiness. Each movement has its own history of development. Each one is based upon the other. In other words, each milestone, such as rolling from the belly to the back, builds upon skills mastered in the previous stage (p.12).

The main idea behind this philosophy is that babies should not spend huge amounts of time physically restrained in bouncy seats, carriers, swings, and walkers, prevented from being able wiggle, squirm, and roll. In essence they should be free to move. As far as I can see, tummy time is not a contradiction to this philosophy. I think the main conflict with that idea now, is the fact that with SIDS research "tummy time" has become a "developmental activity" and that some mum's force the issue of tummy time even if their babies roll over when they're put down on their tummies instead of leaving bub to their own devices. From what I've read, I personally don't think it matters which way you put the baby down, as long as they are free to move and explore within the limits of their own physical development.

Source: "Peaceful Babies Contented Mothers" by Dr Emmi Pikler