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.
Printable View
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.
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.
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".
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).:
she DID say that the most important thing was the bond between DD and I and that had to be paramount
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!
Yes! That. :p:
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".
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.
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.
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.
Ummm ... yes? I do? It has certainly attracted plenty of discussion, that in itself makes it worthy of continuing. Politely and respectfully, of course.:
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.
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?:
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."
Liz,
it wasn't an insinuation. I'm saying that there ARE outlets for SAHMs to find intellectual stimulation - BB is one of them. It was for me, and obviously IS for many of you, because, let's face it, posting on BB really isn't a joint activity between mum and child.
I agree with you there. Again, it's another way to find balance, and perhaps fulfilment. Being a mother isn't necessarily something you have to be exclusively.:
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 also didn't insinuate that being a SAHM couldn't be fulfilling. I said that I didn't find it fulfilling. In fact I stated that if someone does find it fulfilling, it's fabulous for them. What I DID say (rather than insinuate) is that many SAHMs will (and do) look to stimulate their intellect in other ways that have nothing to do with their kids - and BellyBelly is one such way - to find whatever balance they need to be fulfilled.
Is that clearer? I am not of the sort of opinion that you've attributed to me. If my position is NOT clear after this post though, please feel free to PM me and we can discuss this between us.
Yep Sush, much clearer :) As in your other post you said that if most of us looked deeper, we'd admit it too. Which did sound like if we all looked deeper we'd find that being a sahm isn't enough.
And I do agree.. it's how you spend your time at home. Just coz we're at home doesn't mean we're playing games and cooking all day. There's time to do our own reading, participate in forums, visit with other adults/parents etc. It certainly doesn't have to be unfulfilling.
Perhaps I should have worded my post better. :) I meant that without some sort of outlet (that has nothing to do with the kids) it can often be that you may not be fulfilled as a mum (Stay at Home or not).
I've removed/edited a few posts that were not on topic and were an exchange between two members that has nothing to do with the rest of the discussion.
We've always had a policy that says that disagreements between members need to be dealt with OFF the boards, and not in the public forums. Please adhere to this policy. All further to and fros between members on a personal level will be removed without further notice.
I'm sorry to see some posters taking offence here. I also am glad to see different opinions and thank those that have contributed.
Reading through it all, and realising that the conversation has gone somewhat off topic, I really see a lot of common ground, however.
I often agree with the sentiment behind the phrase when I see it used, I just think, as Liz says, that it may be more helpful for some people posting for advice/support to get a differently worded response. Or maybe not - I guess I can only really speak for myself here. In a way this really just underlines the problems with relying on an online forum for help in the first place (don't want to criticize BB at all, but the internet does have limitations).
I typed a big response yesterday but the PC ate it because i'd been logged off (time-out). :rolleyes:
Basically i said that no, being a SAHM in the pure sense (as in what DD NEEDS me to do) isn't intellectually challenging, but i am not un-stimulated because i write wiki, i am learning to use Joomla! online and i have a variety of people i can nut out tough intellectual topics with online, IRL, or over the phone.
Fulfillment isn't handed to anyone, we have to find it. Yes, i could find it by going back to work, but i'd rather be where i believe i'm needed most and find ways to meet my needs round the edges. Intellectual stimulation is actually one of the easiest things to find and fit around a kid to me. I have to get up at 6am to fit running in before DD wakes up. I have to wait weeks to get childcare to go out drinking and dancing. But i can think my own thoughts, plan articles and research all day long if i want. There are opportunities to learn everywhere, you just have to look for them.
When i worked my intellectual challenges were handed to me from on high by the boss, now i have to find them myself. Why WOULD having a child meet all your needs? Did being at work meet our needs to be mothers? No, or we wouldn't have had kids. And just as it's possible to be a parent who works, it's possible to be a SAHP who is intellectually stimulated. My DP doesn't know a lot about pregnancy or childbirth, but i'm not having an affair with an Ob, i come and talk to you lot about it! I don't EXPECT DP to meet all my needs, nor do i expect DD to. *I* have to meet my needs. And it can be done without sacrificing DD's needs.
But then, don't we all have different ideas of what our babies "need"? Those of us who have or do SAH believe that's what's best for our babies, but i've heard lots of women say they need to put 6 months olds into nursery full-time to "get them some proper stimulation". I would be devastated if i had to use FF again, but many women use formula from the start without issue, regret or problems. We all have different boundaries. To me HM=HB is only sad when it is used about a clearly miserable mum, who is not at ALL convinced her parenting is enough to keep her baby happy.
Bx
This is how I feel about the saying, and like Liz says, is what she thinks she wants to hear, but leaves her neither here nor there, in reality. It IS better to provide more in depth acknowledgment of her predicament. It IS better to say, "I hear that you don't feel stimulated enough, how do you think you would be better stimulated and how would that fit in with your bond with your child?", than to give that overused and tired line of HM=HB. Like someone else said, this means anything you want it to at the time!:
To me HM=HB is only sad when it is used about a clearly miserable mum, who is not at ALL convinced her parenting is enough to keep her baby happy.
I find stimulation in caring for DS, probably because I'm studying psychology and I love the tie-in with attachment parenting and how that is validated every day for us. I come here and flesh out my own theories, or use the uni database for articles and like Bec, find my own stimulation and fulfilment.
Ha! you would not BELIEVE how much i have learned about hypothyroidism in pre and early pregnancy while i've been posting on this thread ;):
Bx
Maybe it's a throw-away comment but I think that sometimes it can be helpful. Sometimes we need validation of our decisions. We can say that we feel secure enough in our decisions, but I think that's often a falsehood - because we are all here nutting out our parenting issues and seeking in some way or another to validate the choices we've made. (By either arguing against someone or agreeing with them.) I don't much like cliches, but I catch myself using them sometimes if I think it is something someone wants/needs to hear and I agree enough with it to give it to them. I don't see the harm in validating someone's choice when they need it. And if a cliche is enough to validate it, fine. (I'll also acknowledge here that there are some situations where the cliche is not enough. Then as a community we should be challenged to say more and be more supportive.)
If we are confessing to overused phrases we dislike I'll admit that I get really shirty when I read, 'this too shall pass'. And I read it on here heaps. Personally, it doesn't give me any comfort whatsoever.
So I guess we're all different in the type of validation we need.