Does happy mum REALLY equal happy baby?

[Ca Plane Pour Moi]

This is really tough because I sort of agree with everyone!

Lulu, I agree with you that a mum needs more than being alone with the children. That might be going out every now and then with friends or her DH (and leaving the children with a known, loved babysitter) or it may mean coffee mornings or whatever. Being a SAHM where you SAH and don't go out to see friends is VERY detrimental.

Maya, I agree that you can be intellectually stimulated and have a child. TBH I think Liebs is a bit too stimulated because I love learning and sharing that learning; DS is learning degree standard science but I figure that the more words he hears the better at this stage!

It's not bad to want a portion of your old life back. I do sometimes. I would LOVE to just book a hair appointment and not think about childcare. I'd love to get home and put my feet up with a bottle of wine. Not having to get up in the middle of the night? Pre-children sounds good to me! But I don't ignore the fact I have a child. I don't book a hair appointment and expect DS to just lump it with either sitting still in a hairdressers or have an unknown person caring for him (I do it while he's in Nursery LOL). I have a glass of wine later in the evening. I get up in the night. The person who can't make even those basic sacrifices because "my life won't change because of a baby" isn't doing the right thing, IMO, although she's a happy mummy.

Anyway. I see all sides of the argument and I think we're all sort of making the same point. A Mum makes sacrifices but still needs to be fulfilled. A Mum can still yearn and desire. A Mum is still a person. But so is a baby and we all respect that.

BTW, Maya, earlier posts re friendship, I see what you're getting at and I agree. I don't want to be a peer-friend to DS, as was modelled to me, but yes, I do want us to have a friendship relationship AS WELL as a parent-child relationship.

[sunshine_sieben]

Lulu, I agree with you that a mum needs more than being alone with the children. That might be going out every now and then with friends or her DH (and leaving the children with a known, loved babysitter) or it may mean coffee mornings or whatever. Being a SAHM where you SAH and don't go out to see friends is VERY detrimental.

So so true. I think especially in the early days/months I would have lost my marbles if I hadn't been able to go out (with my baby) to meet other people. Not because I needed stimulation, I needed support and understanding and advice. I actually think that if you have a young child, it is not good for them if they're stuck in the house with mummy all day either. going out on playdates and walks is much more stimulating for them, too.

Saša

[Schmickers]

I'd just like to add to to Trillian's polite request. This is an important topic, and one that deserves to be discussed, but we'd rather not have to close this thread because it degenerates into a fight. Please, put forward your ideas and opinions and let them stand for themselves, without having to attack other people.

[Smoke Jaguar]

I didn't really venture out on my own much when DS was little - I took him with me to visit my friends, booby club, my horse. With my horse, it WAS a sacrifice I made - I couldn't ride for a while because DP refused to come with me. But at least I got to see my horse (I agist). Nowadays DS can actually have a ride and will play in the sand arena whilst I have a ride, too (I go when no-one else is there, so he won't get run over by other arena users).
I never really felt the itch to do something without DS. In fact, I was at pains to incorporate him into my things. There wasn't anything I was doing in the lead up to DS's birth that was exclusive of children, which I'm grateful for. I'd long given up clubbing and pubbing and getting blind drunk. I was pretty ready for him, even though I doubted myself just before the birth

[Danni]

Do you REALLY think this is an interesting topic? Something so controversial where every single mother is so different ?

Not to mention every single child too.

[Schmickers]

Do you REALLY think this is an interesting topic? Something so controversial where every single mother is so different ?

Ummm ... yes? I do? It has certainly attracted plenty of discussion, that in itself makes it worthy of continuing. Politely and respectfully, of course.

[Trillian]

Yes I do think it's an interesting thing to discuss - just like anything. It's not about different parents or different kids, it's a discussion about a saying that's overused and meaningless. You do realise that you don't have to contribute anything at all if you don't happen to find it interesting yourself.

[fionas]

I've been reading this thread but feel a little overwhelmed by the number and detail of responses to address the points made in those so I'll just try to answer the original question from my own experiences.

I think the phrase "happy mummy = happy baby" can sometimes be useful but can sometimes be over-used too.

It was helpful to me in the early days when I was having problems breastfeeding. For the first two weeks each feed took up to 2.5 hours (trying to attach, then expressing, then formula top-ups as advised by a Lactation Consultant). I would get a half-hour break then for it to start all over again and in that half-hour would try to feed myself. I was hating the whole thing and was extremely anxious and torn about what to do. Then I spoke to a counsellor at the ABA and while she did not say happy baby = happy mummy, she DID say that the most important thing was the bond between DD and I and that had to be paramount. Trying to BF, for me, was harmful to that bond because it was full of angst. I felt MORE bonded to DD when the feeding experience was calmer and for me that was by bottle-feeding EBM and FF. Yes, I could have sought out more support and more LCs but I didn't want to see anyone else - I'd had at least 15 different midwives pawing my breasts in the hospital and simply could not handle any more 'help'.

Did bottle-feeding rather than BFing make DD happy? Well, I don't think it made her any less happy or more happy. It has certainly not been detrimental to her health - she has had one minor illness in 17 months.

I think, when I spoke to friends about this, and they said happy mummy = happy baby what they were really trying to convey was, "Fiona, you are absolutely torturing yourself about this because you are trying to do the right thing by DD and continue BFing but it is destroying you mentally because you are so uptight and anxious so it is OK to not to it, if it means the difference between you bonding with and enjoying your DD than not." I have a history of depression and the trigger for me is anxiety and feeling like I am not doing a good job - my troubled experiences with BFing were making me very anxious and I have no doubt, that if I had perservered even more I would have have got more anxious and at risk of becoming depressed.

I think, generally, the way I think of parenting is that there has to be a balance between parents' needs and children's needs. Sometimes DD comes first, sometimes I do.

For instance, DD sleeps from about 10.30am - 2.30pm. This is not convenient for me as it's the time of the day when I would like to be out and about, buying stuff for tea, going into town, whatever. Also, we live in a very, very noisy house which means that I can't do noisy housework like loading the dishwasher, vacuuming etc. while she is asleep. But I make do with the situation and let her sleep. I don't drag her around the shops or make appointments during those times which in turn, means that A LOT of the time I feel housebound and feel useless. Hence, why I'm on BB so much early morning/early afternoon because I have few alternatives that won't involve waking her up. That makes DD a very happy baby but doesn't make me a happy mummy but the alternative is that I go and do my stuff and have a very grumpy baby which wouldn't make me happy either. So, on balance, we'll carry on doing what we are.

The inability to do things when I want/need to (even flushing the toilet can wake her up), has meant that I have returned to work part-time for my sanity. That HAS made me happy and I believe that I'm a much better mum on the days we spend together now than I was before when I was home full-time. Our situation is unusual in that DP is a shiftworker so most of the time we can work around his shifts. Most of the time, she is still looked after by either DP or I and occasionally we get an in-home carer. I'm not sure what we would have done if the only option was to put her into childcare for five days a fortnight. It would have been a very tough call but I can't say for sure that I WOULDN'T have done it.

Well, I have waffled. I guess what I'm saying is that I think happy mummy = happy baby is sometimes a very useful reality check for mums who would otherwise torture themselves in their efforts to do their very best and remind them that it's OK to not be "perfect".

[Smoke Jaguar]

she DID say that the most important thing was the bond between DD and I and that had to be paramount

Exactly, Fiona I hate when the saying is used and the bond between mother and child comes secondary to what will really only make the mummy somewhat happier (well, maybe).
To me, it shouldn't be a case of Happy Mummy first then the baby can decide if that makes happy baby, it needs to be a case of "I'm going to do something for myself that will contribute to increasing our bond", even if that means a solo outing to recharge and come back to give everything to that child that the mother has, and that the mother has support around her to give that everything.
Yep, nodding my head off about the bonding!

[Nelle]

I guess what I'm saying is that I think happy mummy = happy baby is sometimes a very useful reality check for mums who would otherwise torture themselves in their efforts to do their very best and remind them that it's OK to not be "perfect".

Yes! That.

ETA: Danni, if you've been victimised or judged, please report it, so we can act. Or PM the person involved to clarify, it may be a misunderstanding.

[sushee]

I actually agree with LuluHB to an extent. I know she's decided to leave the thread, but wanted to agree with some of what she had to say.

I stayed home for two years with my very much wanted son. I went back to work even though I honestly didn't want to, but now I'm back and currently in a job I absolutely love, I cannot imagine going back to being a SAHM. I have an amazing, challenging, exciting job working with people who I enjoy spending time with. And because I feel challenged and fulfilled doing what I'm doing right now, I think I'm a better mum for it. Could my son be happier if he was at home all day with me still? Probably. But it won't make ME happy.

I do feel that while I was at home with my son, the sacrifices I made for him meant that, in my own personal circumstances, I wasn't the happiest mum but it meant that I had a happy, secure child. So as I said in a pervious post, I don't believe happy mum=happy baby necessarily.

I will admit that if not for BB, I would have felt incredibly intellectually stifled as well during my two years at home. I think if most of you would look deeper, you would admit the same thing, otherwise why get involved in these contentious topics over and over again? Isn't it about exercising your brain? Does it mean you love your child any less? I don't think so at all. I know I still love my son with a fierceness I cannot begin to explain.

Yet I will admit that in hindsight, being a SAHM wasn't fulfilling me. I did it anyway though, because I love my son, and his needs, back then, came first. I would do it again if I were faced with the same decision. But it doesn't mean I shouldn't be able to admit that I quite like NOT being a SAHM mum either. If you do, and it fulfills you, fabulous for you. But we're not all the same, and I think everyone needs to respect that. He's now almost 3, and you know what? His needs don't necessarily come first anymore - we compromise now, just as most people do.

And personally I don't think for a second it makes me less of a good mother than anyone else in this thread. Not that anyone has said that, mind you, I just think that when you're happy with the decisions you've made, for your family and yourself, there is no need to be defensive, or allow anyone to make you feel bad about yourself.

[Lulu]

Anyhoo - FWIW, I didn't know that admitting that being a mum isn't the be-all and end-all of your life was going against the grain.
Yes I believe the stupid catch-phrase is over used. I have seen it time and time again and it annoys me.

[Liz]

I will admit that if not for BB, I would have felt incredibly intellectually stifled as well during my two years at home. I think if most of you would look deeper, you would admit the same thing, otherwise why get involved in these contentious topics over and over again? Isn't it about exercising your brain?

That's a pretty huge assumption to make that if most SAHM's really looked at their situation that they'd find they're not REALLY intellectually fulfilled.

SAHM doesn't stand for Stuck At Home Mum. There's plenty of adult company to be had if you get out and about, and the beauty of it is you take your baby with you.

I think it's a bit rough to insinuate that SAHM's are kidding themselves and that really if they look deep enough they'll find it's not what they really need to be -really- happy.

But this isn't what the thread was about anyway. It's not about what one mum does vs what another mum does, it's more about a saying that has become popular, which I don't believe is really a supportive thing to say, that's all.

I think, when I spoke to friends about this, and they said happy mummy = happy baby what they were really trying to convey was, "Fiona, you are absolutely torturing yourself about this because you are trying to do the right thing by DD and continue BFing but it is destroying you mentally because you are so uptight and anxious so it is OK to not to it, if it means the difference between you bonding with and enjoying your DD than not."

And my point is.. why on earth couldn't they have said THAT to you instead of palming it off with a happy mummy = happy baby. Why not reassure you and validate how you were feeling properly, instead of leaving you to read whatever you wanted to in that phrase?