Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast
Results 73 to 90 of 125

Thread: Save Our Sleep

  1. #73

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Blue Mountains
    Posts
    5,086

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shanti View Post
    I would like to add however.... you say your 2yr old doesn't have tantrums? You say this like it's a good thing? Well, it's quite NORMAL for 2yrs old's to have tantrums anyway did you know that?
    According to Dr Margot Sunderland (a well known child psychologist)..... "the too-good child who does not have tantrums may have learned early on that expressing big feelings elicits a frightening parental response, and that the price of parental love is total compliance. She explains that the too-good child misses out on vital brain sculpting, meaning that when he faces frustration in later life, he may respond with angry outbursts or struggle to be assertive.
    LOL I find it hilarious that we just can't win. We are damned if our child misbehaves and damned if they're well behaved too!

    I personally think tantruming can be a personality thing. My DS didn't tantrum as a 2yr old.. we BREEZED through the 2's with him! I know other 2yr olds who have been gentle parented (more gentle than us!) that were quite delightful and content. Turning 3 was another story tho Boy did we discover attitude! LOL. Both my kids are parented the same (well.. as in same philosophy.. definitely no CIO so can't blame the 'good' 2yo behaviour on him not feeling heard) and we've now got a tantruming 2yr old little miss LOL. I really do think personality and luck of the draw with that plays a big part.



    MantaRay - great post. I agree with what you have said re frequent waking and breastfeeding. If there is one thing I like to tell new mums.. it's that it's ok for a baby to wake and feed... for MANY months. People seem to have milestones in their heads.. like 6 weeks or 12 weeks.. that that is when their baby should be sleeping through. I like to get it out there that these babies are RARE. And yes... i agree it is very dangerous to be encouraging sleeping through (as in 12 hrs!!) for newborns. Very detrimental to breastfeeding

    One thing I remember from the ABA breastfeeding class was they said not to take breastfeeding advice from anyone who hasn't successfully breastfed. I would say it's the same for parenting... why take parenting/baby advice from anyone who hasn't ever had a baby??

  2. #74

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    North Lakes, Brisbane
    Posts
    1,590

    Default

    Issy - You have totally missed my point . My point is that there was once a time (for e.g.) that everyone thought the world was flat and then it was disproven. All I am saying is that while you read numerous supporting publications on your theories, there are probably just as many publications out there disproving them. I'm certainly not saying you're misinformed, I'm just saying that what may be fashionable now may very well be old news tomorrow. I have one word for you - Thalidomide. I wonder if those GP's prescribing Thalidomide at the time also stated "with absolute conviction" that it was safe. I think it would be incredibly naive for anyone to say anything with "absolute conviction" when it comes to child rearing which is a forever changing science.

    Shanti - I agree, all kids are different. I was referring to bedtime tantrums only. I would happily invite you to playtime at the shopping centre when it is time to go home

    MLM - Thank you!! I also chose to FF as I was turned off by BF (something else I never felt comfortable discussing on BB - thanks for your admission!!!).

    My point - OK, all I am saying is that in my experience, when I started this method my DS cried for 32 minutes the first night, 12 minutes the second night and 4 minutes the third night. On the fourth night he fell straight asleep and woke happily in the morning. Now, at 6.50pm every night and 11.50am every day, he gathers up Mickey Mouse and his blanket and happily toddles off to bed. This technique worked for my DS and I fail to see how this has affected him for life. I still get my cuddles and my kisses and my quality time with both my boys. I think the fact that Mummy/Daddy hold babies down for immunisations several times in their young life (and yes, I support immunisations) would be more detrimental to them than a couple of nights of crying. Would this be classed as gentle parenting? Just something for people to think about ......

  3. #75

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Blue Mountains
    Posts
    5,086

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MLM View Post
    Hell, there are 100's of threads on this site about "gentle parents" who havent had a full nights sleep in years.
    You and I arent one of them, and that is good enough for me
    oh... and since we're throwing backhanded little jibes around...

    Those people whose babies sleep through are missing out on soooo many cuddles and so much bonding time. I'm not one of them... that's good enough for me

    I LOVE having my kids bring themselves into our bed and snuggle up. They're welcome any time and they know it. Wouldn't give it up for the world.

  4. #76

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    522

    Default

    liz - ahahaha...love it! Soooo true!

    DD- Im not missing your point - i hear you loud and clear!!!! But I have to correct you, they are not just 'popular' or 'fashionable' right now (unlike the 'fashionable' Tizzie Hall) and not all are simply theories! Please, this is behavioural science, the science of the human brain and behaviour. Im not going to continue this argument, particularly if you have not spent 6 years studying child development and behavioural science!

    I can say with absolute conviction that her methods go against all child development theories - HER METHODS go against all CHILD DEVELOPMENT THEORIES!!!!!! It is what it is....

    And Im sorry, Im not getting into the whole breastfeeding/bottle feeding argument here, but DD and MLM those comments you made, make me so sad...is it all about what you need? what you want? whats best for you? you were turned off by bf? you couldnt stand it? I think TH is probably just the ticket for you both, since parenting seems to be about pleasing YOU!

    Im not saying you are a bad mother for not breastfeeding your babies, its just the way you put it, and your reasoning behind it seems so cold. So many mothers try so hard to breastfeed their babies, and for whatever reasons, are not successful and have no choice. But to choose bottlefeeding because you were turned off by it...or just couldnt stand it...I just cant understand that. Sorry.

  5. #77

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Perth
    Posts
    3,299

    Default

    I've been reading this thread with great interest but haven't posted because I have not read SOS, neither have I read Pinky or Pantley or any other parenting book. So I can't comment on that aspect.

    But, I just wanted to put out there, there is a reason babies don't come with a manual. Trust your instincts. They will always be better than what's written in a book.

  6. #78

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Gold Coast
    Posts
    1,153

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by issy02 View Post

    And Im sorry, Im not getting into the whole breastfeeding/bottle feeding argument here, but DD and MLM those comments you made, make me so sad...is it all about what you need? what you want? whats best for you? you were turned off by bf? you couldnt stand it? I think TH is probably just the ticket for you both, since parenting seems to be about pleasing YOU!

    Im not saying you are a bad mother for not breastfeeding your babies, its just the way you put it, and your reasoning behind it seems so cold. So many mothers try so hard to breastfeed their babies, and for whatever reasons, are not successful and have no choice. But to choose bottlefeeding because you were turned off by it...or just couldnt stand it...I just cant understand that. Sorry.
    Issy, with all due respect, dont feel sorry for me, I dont.
    I am not asking you to understand me. I just get sick of keeping my mouth shut because my choices dont fit in with the majority here. (although II suspect I am not the only one by a long way, but anyhoo)

    I just dont understand the foot stomping and table bashing that goes on everytime this book comes up. If are confident in your parenting decisions, why do you feel the need to beat the crap out of any method that doesnt agree with your ideology?
    Hell, I could have posted in so many threads where people have had sleeping issues, but I have chosen not to, because I understand that TH isnt for them and I respect their right to do it the way that they are most comfortable.

    My DS gets cuddles, he comes into bed with us in the morning, and I always get up to him if he cries in the night, because if he is upset, I KNOW there is something wrong, otherwise he just settles himself straight back to sleep.

    FWIW, I didnt start SOS until DS was 4 months, I tried the gentle way,and my instincts told me that it wasnt working for us, so I tried a different way

  7. #79

    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    in the garden
    Posts
    3,767

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eluned View Post
    I've been reading this thread with great interest but haven't posted because I have not read SOS, neither have I read Pinky or Pantley or any other parenting book. So I can't comment on that aspect.

    But, I just wanted to put out there, there is a reason babies don't come with a manual. Trust your instincts. They will always be better than what's written in a book.
    Well said, Eluned!

    I have been reading with intrest also. I haven't read SOS, (but I am however reading The Science of Parenting).

    Just wondering (purely out of curiosity) - it seems to me that a lot of you who read SOS & didn't like it went on to read other parenting books.

    Just wondering if those of you who liked SOS & used it ever read (for example) Science of Parenting or anything else similar?

    ETA:
    I just dont understand the foot stomping and table bashing that goes on everytime this book comes up.
    MLM, I agree we should be able to discuss differrent routines & choices respectfully.
    I think it's just that people who feel strongly about this feel a responsibility to let other parents, especially new parents, know that there are other ways that may be more suited to them.
    For example - if you read of a mother who was leaving her child alone in the car while she shopped, you would let her know it's not ideal, right? (I'm not comparing TH to leaving your child in a car - just making an example).
    As someone who tried CIO and similar methods with my older children because I was told to by all the 'experts & professionals' I spoke to - and it didn't work for us - I wish there had been a book like TSOP for someone to steer me to. It would have saved me a lot of angst back then.
    This is what I think Trillian & issy are getting at. (apologies, ladies if I've got you wrong )

  8. #80

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    522

    Default

    MLM - its is not YOU i feel sorry for.

    Jasp - good point. And I love your daughters name...i may have to steal that one and pop it onto my girls names list...

  9. #81

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    North Lakes, Brisbane
    Posts
    1,590

    Default

    issy02 - OMG, for someone who has studied behvioural science you of all people should know that science is a displine that is extremely subjective. Science is a discipline that is based on not proving a theory is right, it is a discipline based on disproving all other theories. Until techniques such as SOS are definitively linked to leading to some life long crisis for a child, then they will remain subjective. Six years of studying what someone else has told you (and filtered to meet their beliefs) to study certainly does not make you an expert. Perhaps it even makes your views a little more biased then others. If behavioural science was so definitive then they would have one text book on how to raise a child and that would be accepted by all. Can you tell me the name of such a book?

    MLM - You go girl! Your thoughts reflect mine perfectly.

    To the poor girl who started this thread, can I share with you a piece of advice my paedetricaian gave to me. This doctor was in his mid-thirties and had 4 children under 5, so I like to think he was both book smart and had the experience to back what he was saying up. His advice went a little something like this:

    "If you think you turned out OK, then do what your parents and grandparents did. There is no subsitute for first hand experience"

    In my opinion, there is no right or wrong way here. Child rearing is a process of trial and error. You need to do what is right for your child and what is right for you. If you are suffering you can't possibily give your child your best. Remember, no two children have been raised the same, yet there is more than one person in the world who is normal! Read up, listen to your family and make the decision that is best for you and your baby!

  10. #82

    Default

    I haven't read TH or Pinky, mainly because I haven't given birth yet - but I will be attending a Pinky seminar in the next month.

    I bought The Science of Parenting and thought it was fantastic before I finished the first chapter. DH has a habit of reading whatever is lying around, so one day he picked this up and hasn't put it down - he's now raving about it. He's already been able to identify some of his own upbringing that has had an impact on his emotional development (my DH's Mum was very ill when DH was only 2, and spent considerable time in hospital - this has had a huge impact on my DH, who's attachment to her was obviously severely affected). Anyway, Science is a fantastic book.

    I've picked up TH's book SOS and flicked through it. I don't like what it values - sleeping through, "well-behaved" children, etc...these are not my priorities for my infant. I don't doubt that SOS works for many parents, but I don't think "working" makes it "good."

    I recently re-watched the BBC "Bringing up Baby" series (which showed three different parenting methods - based on the Continuum Concept, Dr Spock, and the Truby King method (controlled crying, 4-hourly feeds, etc). The mantra of the Truby King style was that it "worked." Nobody doubted that - but again, just because something works, doesn't mean it is the best thing for a baby.

    Anyway, I've hijacked the thread, which I know is primarily about TH's SOS. But I think that in itself opens up the debate about other parenting theories anyway. I've given my (still open to ideas) 2 cents.

    (And here's my other 2 cents):
    I note that some of the parents who like SOS and have found it to work become very defensive when it is criticised. Why is that? If it works for you, great. If you have nothing to hide, then why so defensive? I don't think anyone is being judged for using SOS, but critics of it are entitled to present contrary information so that everyone can become more informed - and vice-versa.

  11. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Liz View Post
    LOL I find it hilarious that we just can't win. We are damned if our child misbehaves and damned if they're well behaved too!

    I personally think tantruming can be a personality thing. My DS didn't tantrum as a 2yr old.. we BREEZED through the 2's with him! I know other 2yr olds who have been gentle parented (more gentle than us!) that were quite delightful and content. Turning 3 was another story tho Boy did we discover attitude! LOL. Both my kids are parented the same (well.. as in same philosophy.. definitely no CIO so can't blame the 'good' 2yo behaviour on him not feeling heard) and we've now got a tantruming 2yr old little miss LOL. I really do think personality and luck of the draw with that plays a big part.
    Liz, I agree with you. It can depend on personality also. Perhaps that quote should say 2yr-3yr old's instead?
    That quote makes perfect sense though to me. Yes it can be personality but it can ALSO be the other.

  12. #84

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    522

    Default

    DD - I can see this argument is totally pointless with you. You have no idea what im trying to say, and have your mind set. I am no expert...certainly not, not even close, but I am well read, I have researched may many scientist, both psychological and pedagogical...and I know alot about childrens development, because its part of my profession. I have read many books on parenting, and many are the same. TH is awful. What I am saying is, theory or not, disproven in the future or not, popular right now or not, TH methods are not compatible with CURRENT understandings of child development. What are methods based on? How can she justify her methods? What has guided her? Is she well researched? If she cant even base her methods on current research...WHAT WE KNOW RIGHT NOW AND SO FAR...I wouldnt trust it, not at all.

    And to the doctor who said, if you think you turned out ok, then do what your parents and grandparents did...very interesting. My parents smacked me, I turned out ok, but I know there are other ways to discipline a child, so I do otherwise. My parents smoked around me, I turned out ok, but I choose not to smoke around my children. There are loads of people in the world who 'turned out ok', who didnt have good parents, so really...it means bugger all! WHEN YOU KNOW BETTER, YOU DO BETTER!

    But I do agree that parenting is trial and error, you need to do what is RIGHT for your child. And I do agree, that one should read up, just not TH!

  13. #85

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    North Lakes, Brisbane
    Posts
    1,590

    Default

    Issy - Yes it is pointless. But it seems you have FINALLY got my point. It is CURRENT findings only. Your earlier posts with terms like "absolute conviction" and "ALL child development theories" suggested that these findings were the be all and end all of child rearing and people will still be using them in 10-20 years time just because you studied them for 6 years - a very naive view from a scientist. My point is that they WILL change and probably a lot sooner than your highly educated mind would care for. Any scientist will agree with this and yes, both my husband and I are scientists. MY husband is now over my shoulder addicted to this thread because he cannot believe some of the comments being made here. P.S. Smoking around children is NOT part of child rearing so that was a silly example to use.

    MantaRay - Sorry, I missed your post earlier. I didnt encourage DS2 to sleep through from 4 weeks old. I tought him self settling right from hospital (by patting him on the tummy until he fell asleep, not allowing him to scream like most people think TH is all about) and by 4 weeks old he started sleeping through the night. I wasnt going to wake him through the night for feeds as he was gaining weight well and my instincts told me he was fine. So, to the new Mum's out there, if your bubs do this, please do not stress over it. It does NOT mean that there is something wrong with your baby unless they are also listless during the day or they are not gaining weight.

    Anyway, what I probably should have pointed out earlier is that I only follow TH's methods on sleeptime routine. I have my own routine that I follow through the day, I dont allow my kids to scream if they hungry just because it isnt meal time, I dont wake them if they sleep past 6.45am etc etc etc. In other words, there are a lot of TH methods which either didnt work for us or I wasnt willing to try so we only use the one method and that is the only method I recommend to people. My children also come into our bed with us in the morning (my favourite time of day) and they get lots of playtime with us and cuddles. I'm also a full-time stay at home Mum so I get lots of kisses and cuddles during the day (while most Mum's go to work) to make up for the ones I'm so selfishly depriving my children of at night.

    Anyway, it is Sunday, it is a family day and I'm going to spend it with my kids and husband......
    Last edited by Deltadawn; March 7th, 2010 at 08:33 AM.

  14. #86

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    summer street
    Posts
    2,708

    Default

    FWIW I have read SOS and gleaned a few titbits of useful info. I also discarded a lot of what she said. I think we all do this as we read.

    I think parenting books are inherently flawed because they seem to suggest parenting can be 'taught' (maybe not all parenting books are like this, but the concept bothers me).

    Babies do not need to be 'fixed'. Babies do not need a routine and they do not have sleep problems.

    In our society though (which is not set up for attachment parenting) many parents need a solution, many parents need a routine and many parents have sleep problems (i.e. not enough!)

    The issue is actually the way we as a community and society view babies - which is not really as an individual with specific needs and desires, but rather as a collective identity 'baby' which can be trained and taught to fit into a mold of a 'good baby' (which in turn suggests we are 'good parents'). ETA: It also means there is little room for the baby who is colicky, unsettled and needs a lot of attention, and little support for the mums who have to suffer through this.

    I don't know how we can change this, but in the meantime I think we need to support all mums and bubs, because we're all just trying our best.

  15. #87

    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    South Australia
    Posts
    522

    Default

    ABSOLUTE CONVICTION - about what I know, right now, current research, all child development theories...RIGHT NOW, I never said in 10-20 years it will still be the same, you made that up to suit yourself! I will not play semantics with you!
    Dont try to convince me you are doing a good job, have made good choices, I dont really care, perhaps you are so defensive because you are not sure!

  16. #88

    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Forestville NSW
    Posts
    8,944

    Default

    Time to come in and remind our members that you are in a parenting routine forum, not the gentle parenting one. If you feel passionately for one way of parenting, perhaps it is important that you post in that area. We would not allow people to come into the gentle parenting forum and suggest CIO. Any further personal attacks or jibes will be edited out by moderators without notice.

  17. #89

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    home sweet home.
    Posts
    1,995

    Default

    For me it's simple. I'd rather a baby who wakes at night (which is totally normal and natural) then one who has a ridgid routine enforced on them which is contrary to every mothering instinct I have.

    You would have to cut off my arms and legs before I'd ignore the crys of my child. I do not see sleeping through as an acomplishmemt if it has been achieved by force.

    They are only little for such a short period. They are going to have a life ruled by the clock, let them just be babies for now.

  18. #90

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    SE suburbs of Melbourne
    Posts
    197

    Default

    From reading these posts I can see a couple of things

    This is also a lot about personality clash I think. There are those who seem to be going with what works for baby (parent adapt to child needs), and those who seem to want a baby that works for them (ie. child adapt to parent needs) and the routines are about how to achieve these goals.

    TH is all about how to get the baby to adapt to the parent's way- MINIMAL inconvenience, so as the parents can get back to their own thing (can be seen as selfish)

    Take one mother from my MG. A very strong, determined woman, saw her goals followed through, a very inspiring, Just Do It person. Inconvenience was a hurdle to be jumped. So when she had her baby and it wasn't sleeping and she was up every 2 hours, she was at her wits end as most of us are! She decided she would CIO and she did, and she was so chuffed with her accomplishment, that she came to MG with baby in pram, showed us all how it worked. X time rolls around, pop baby into sleeping quarters, no distractions so she put him in the corner, left him and he was quiet...he went to sleep! no fuss no crying...

    She was thankful she found a way...and the rest of us were in awe...as our dry, stinging, red-held up with matchsticks- eyeballs dropped out of our heads.

    At least I was until the next occasion. She changed his nappy on the blanket on the floor as we all did then, and let him be for a minute. the rest of the babies were also on the floor, including mine. I looked over at friend's baby and something in his eyes caught mine. There was a slightly vacant expression in them. As the other babies oohed and ahhed and looked around and responded to their mum's voices, this baby didn't. In an instant, I felt so shattered by his expression. To me, (and yes this is only what I speculate as i'm not the baby whisperer) this little boy looked like he just "switched off"....stopped interacting.

    I never heard of Dr. Margot Sunderland but I can imagine this is what she meant when Shanti said "Dr Margot Sunderland (a well known child psychologist)..... "the too-good child who does not have tantrums may have learned early on that expressing big feelings elicits a frightening parental response, and that the price of parental love is total compliance."


    Would love to post more but don't have the time atm. will be back.

Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 34567 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •