What do you think of Attachment Parenting?

[gailrmv]

I got on this tangent on another thread. I am curious, does anyone here practice attachment parenting? Does anyone disagree with attachment parenting? I''d love to hear other people''s perspectives on this type of parenting, while being respectful of eachother''s views.

I have not read all the AP literature, but some. I agree with some of the tenants of AP and am practicing some of them. Others do not work for my family. I do find that the AP literature seems to be very judgmental of people who use other approaches or do not follow AP to the letter. I find that offputting. The last thing moms need is more guilt!

Curious to get other perspectives...

 

[DiamanteBlu]

What is attachment parenting? [Luckily DD is 21 so my question is, hopefully, rhetorical! LOL!]

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 7/5/2009 9:13:53 PM
Author: DiamanteBlu
What is attachment parenting? [Luckily DD is 21 so my question is, hopefully, rhetorical! LOL!]

This may not be the official definition - but it is the William and Martha Sears school of thought - some of the things they advocate are baby wearing, co-sleeping, breastfeeding, and they have some thoughts about being cautious about vaccines although I do not know all the details of that. I think there are several other things they advocate but those are the main ones that come to mind.

 

[neatfreak]

I think just like anything there are some good parts and some bad...

But no I do not practice AP because I think a lot of their theories are over the top and I also don't appreciate the guilt trip either.

ETA: I should also say that I think it's dangerous to attach yourself to one "type" of parenting. I think it's best for everyone to take a bit here and a bit there and use what works for your family-which most of the time isn't EVERYTHING from one school of thought KWIM?

 

[DiamanteBlu]

Hmmm . . . just looked at the web site: www.attachmentparenting.org

On the surface pieces appear as though they might be reasonable but on closer inspection - I don''t think so . . .

If it were around when I had my DD 20+ years ago I would have ignored it.

 

[february2003bride]

I did it! Not so much now because my kids are older, but I read many Sear''s books and AP parenting was just made sense to me. I did let my daughter and DS#2 self-wean (DD nursed until 34 months, DS until 30 months old), DS#1 I had to wean in 2 days at 17 months because I had to have an unexpected amnio when preggo with DS#2, but he was already self-weaning. I did cloth diapers 100% with DD, and off and on with both of my boys. I did co-sleep with all three kids, and this I''m on the fence as to whether I would do again. Not so much because of a safety issue, but because now that my sons are 5 and 3 (almost 4) they will not go to sleep on their own. We use to do positive discipline but it so does NOT work on my kids!

I think with all parenting styles, it''s about moderation and picking and choosing what feels right for you and your baby.

 

[packrat]

Date: 7/5/2009 9:41:36 PM
Author: neatfreak
I think just like anything there are some good parts and some bad...


But no I do not practice AP because I think a lot of their theories are over the top and I also don''t appreciate the guilt trip either.


ETA: I should also say that I think it''s dangerous to attach yourself to one ''type'' of parenting. I think it''s best for everyone to take a bit here and a bit there and use what works for your family-which most of the time isn''t EVERYTHING from one school of thought KWIM?

I agree! It''s HARD to follow everything to the letter exactly all the time-and having extra guilt thrown in for good measure only makes it worse. Besides, every child is different, so what works for one, might not work for your next-and boy does that throw you for a loop! I liked having advice from different people and books, and then mixing it up to whatever recipe worked for me and my kidlets.

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 7/5/2009 9:41:36 PM
Author: neatfreak
I think just like anything there are some good parts and some bad...


But no I do not practice AP because I think a lot of their theories are over the top and I also don''t appreciate the guilt trip either.


ETA: I should also say that I think it''s dangerous to attach yourself to one ''type'' of parenting. I think it''s best for everyone to take a bit here and a bit there and use what works for your family-which most of the time isn''t EVERYTHING from one school of thought KWIM?

I completely agree, especially with your ETA. That''s what I''m trying to do, too. I read so many books at first and many made me feel guilty and inadequate. My mom said, "put away the books. you have good instincts, now follow them." That helped me feel more confident!

Part of why I started this thread is that in general, the moms of PS are thoughtful, smart and levelheaded. I was hoping to hear from someone who in real life practices AP. Like I said, I just can''t quite get a grasp of it from the reading. Some things I nod along with, and then comes the guilt trip and judgment, which just bothers me!

The things that work for my family are breastfeeding and babywearing. The things that don''t work are cosleeping and the vaccine issue (I follow my doctor''s and the AAP''s recommendations for vaccines.)

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 7/5/2009 10:00:38 PM
Author: packrat

Date: 7/5/2009 9:41:36 PM

Author: neatfreak

I think just like anything there are some good parts and some bad...



But no I do not practice AP because I think a lot of their theories are over the top and I also don't appreciate the guilt trip either.



ETA: I should also say that I think it's dangerous to attach yourself to one 'type' of parenting. I think it's best for everyone to take a bit here and a bit there and use what works for your family-which most of the time isn't EVERYTHING from one school of thought KWIM?

I agree! It's HARD to follow everything to the letter exactly all the time-and having extra guilt thrown in for good measure only makes it worse. Besides, every child is different, so what works for one, might not work for your next-and boy does that throw you for a loop! I liked having advice from different people and books, and then mixing it up to whatever recipe worked for me and my kidlets.

I completely agree packrat! Each baby is a little different! I think as long as the parents follow the safety regulations, for everything else they should make thoughtful, informed decisions and go with the flow.

 

[dreamer_dachsie]

I have a friend who mentioned to me that she follows this mondel. I will ask her opinion, I am curious too!

I like babywearing and breastfeeding too!

 

[packrat]

I breastfed, and applaud those that do. It''s hard but so worth it! Is babywearing where you carry them in a sling all the time? I didn''t do that..but I was (am) a big time babysnuggler!

 

[TravelingGal]

I think most of it is bupkus, but you''ll have to wait until I come back from vacation if you want to know why.

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 7/5/2009 10:38:39 PM
Author: TravelingGal
I think most of it is bupkus, but you''ll have to wait until I come back from vacation if you want to know why.

Lookin forward to it! Have a great vacation!

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 7/5/2009 10:22:00 PM
Author: packrat
I breastfed, and applaud those that do. It''s hard but so worth it! Is babywearing where you carry them in a sling all the time? I didn''t do that..but I was (am) a big time babysnuggler!

I really hadn''t thought much about babywearing before having my baby, but as it turns out, he''s fussy and it''s one of the few things that calms him. So I guess I follow this from a practical, rather than philosophical standpoint. I do really like wearing him though - I think it is good for both of us. I think the AP folks advocate doing it all the time. I don''t do that, but I tend to wear him in a front carrier when we go out to run errands (instead of pushing him in a stroller) and when I am doing things around the house (so that he is with me, but I have hands free). I love the snuggling too!!

 

[maiyavel]

Actually, We do AP with our son. He is 15 months old. I breastfed for only 4 months, mostly because I couldn''t keep up with his appetite, and I had to return to my predoc internship and couldn''t pump often enough. We did co-sleep in the beginning and we do nap together now, but that just felt really natural for me, it just felt strange to put my infant in the room down the hall... I did wear him a bit, which they say helps to regulate their heartbeat, and keeps them more relaxed, but he just really wanted to be held, so I did that. This is a really touchy subject for a lot of parents...

But anyway, just in researching for my dissertation on Attachment, I know that for the most part, attachment parenting and attachment in general helps to create a more secure and confident child who can adapt more easily to what life will throw at him/her in the future, as opposed to an adult who has difficulty in maintaining or creating healthy relationships in the future (** according to research). What I do know and believe is that FOR ME I cannot do the ''letting them cry it out'' method, mainly because the child pretty much learns that no one will respond to their needs so they eventually stop crying. While this may not be the views or opinion of another parent, this is just how I feel. My best friend ''ferberized'' her daughter and son, and it works for them, I just can''t get around they thought that my baby is laying there crying for me and I''m ignoring him, and he just stops because no one will help... ugh, makes me tear up...

THAT BEING SAID... I totally agree that every baby is different, and that every parent should do what they feel is natural or best for them...

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 7/5/2009 10:48:36 PM
Author: maiyavel
Actually, We do AP with our son. He is 15 months old. I breastfed for only 4 months, mostly because I couldn't keep up with his appetite, and I had to return to my predoc internship and couldn't pump often enough. We did co-sleep in the beginning and we do nap together now, but that just felt really natural for me, it just felt strange to put my infant in the room down the hall... I did wear him a bit, which they say helps to regulate their heartbeat, and keeps them more relaxed, but he just really wanted to be held, so I did that. This is a really touchy subject for a lot of parents...


But anyway, just in researching for my dissertation on Attachment, I know that for the most part, attachment parenting and attachment in general helps to create a more secure and confident child who can adapt more easily to what life will throw at him/her in the future, as opposed to an adult who has difficulty in maintaining or creating healthy relationships in the future (** according to research). What I do know and believe is that FOR ME I cannot do the 'letting them cry it out' method, mainly because the child pretty much learns that no one will respond to their needs so they eventually stop crying. While this may not be the views or opinion of another parent, this is just how I feel. My best friend 'ferberized' her daughter and son, and it works for them, I just can't get around they thought that my baby is laying there crying for me and I'm ignoring him, and he just stops because no one will help... ugh, makes me tear up...


THAT BEING SAID... I totally agree that every baby is different, and that every parent should do what they feel is natural or best for them...

I feel the same way you do about CIO at this age. My son is almost 4 months. I may feel differently when he is older but for now, I always respond to him within a minute or two (sooner if I can) when he cries - I figure he needs me, either for food or for comfort, and I am happy to respond to him. Happier in the daytime, however.

I agree this is a touchy subject for many parents and thank you very much for sharing your experience!

So it sounds like you are doing your dissertation on attachment? If I may ask, what specifically are you researching? Also, is there any article in particular you recommend that evaluates the benefits of AP you discussed above? (I have access to the academic journals and it would be really interesting to read the academic literature on this - that is, if I can carve out any time!)

 

[purrfectpear]

I think it''s important for both parents and children to learn and teach the difference between "wants" and "needs", and I think attachment parenting is an impediment to that learning.

Just because a baby cries when it''s put down for sleep does not mean it "needs" to be picked up. If you know that the baby is not sick, hungry, or wet, and it''s truly bed time then the baby is strictly crying because it "wants" it''s own way. It wants mom or dad, or attention period, and it intends to make noise (cry) until it gets someone to comply. Refuse to let the baby cry and you have a baby that is training you. You are teaching the baby that it''s every "want" is going to be met. Maybe that''s the parenting that you are comfortable with.

For myself, I made sure that all of my son''s needs were met, and his wants were met when it was convenient for me. The rest of the world isn''t going to meet his every want, and there''s no reason that he should grow up believing that his parents world revolved around him. I did stay home with him for the first year and breastfed, so he was held almost all day, but at night he slept on my schedule.

 

[gailrmv]

Date: 7/5/2009 11:11:12 PM
Author: purrfectpear
I think it's important for both parents and children to learn and teach the difference between 'wants' and 'needs', and I think attachment parenting is an impediment to that learning.


Just because a baby cries when it's put down for sleep does not mean it 'needs' to be picked up. If you know that the baby is not sick, hungry, or wet, and it's truly bed time then the baby is strictly crying because it 'wants' it's own way. It wants mom or dad, or attention period, and it intends to make noise (cry) until it gets someone to comply. Refuse to let the baby cry and you have a baby that is training you. You are teaching the baby that it's every 'want' is going to be met. Maybe that's the parenting that you are comfortable with.


For myself, I made sure that all of my son's needs were met, and his wants were met when it was convenient for me. The rest of the world isn't going to meet his every want, and there's no reason that he should grow up believing that his parents world revolved around him. I did stay home with him for the first year and breastfed, so he was held almost all day, but at night he slept on my schedule.

I don't know. At my son's age now (almost 4 months), sometimes I have trouble discerning his needs and his wants. In fact, by and large I think his needs ARE his wants, at this age. For example tonight, he breastfed for a very long time, and I thought he was satisfied, however I could not get him to settle down for bed. We tried nursing again and he continued to fuss - I was out of milk. Finally I offered him a bottle of pumped milk that was in the fridge, and he took 3 oz (almost a full meal for him). He was hungry! If I had let him CIO, he would have eventually given up and slept (or maybe not, my boy is stubborn!) but I was able to satisfy his legit need by feeding him.

Sometimes it's much harder to figure out why he is crying, but just in this small example, I am very glad that I did not attempt CIO.

When he is older, I certainly do not want him thinking the world revolves around him, but for now, it kind of does

 

[kennedy]

Dr Sears coined the term "attachment parenting", but it's actually based on the the work of John Bowlby. Attachment theory, as described by Bowlby, is based on the idea that having a secure attachment to one's caregivers in infancy and childhood is critical to a person's short-term and long-term emotional, social, and cognitive development. Events that interfere with attachment, such as an abrupt separation or the consistent inability of parents to be sensitive and attuned to their child's needs, might result in developmental difficulties later in life.

Dr. Sears talks a lot about "attachment promoting behaviors" (and I think this is where he loses a lot of people because he gets very focused on the behaviors themselves rather than the principles driving the behaviors) such as breastfeeding, babywearing, and co-sleeping, but I do think it's possible to be an attachment parent without following to the letter Dr. Sears' prescriptions. I happen to believe very strongly in the tenets of attachment theory and engage in many of the behaviors associated with attachment parenting -- namely, co-sleeping and extended breastfeeding (my daughter is 2.5 and we're still at it) -- but I don't do it because I think I'm supposed to; I do it because it makes intuitive sense to me and it works for my family. I guess you could say I'm a mother who believes in the critical importance of a secure attachment (and I parent with that in mind), but that I don't think there is only one way to get there.

ETA: As far as I know, Dr. Sears is not at all opposed to vaccines. His son, Dr. Jim Sears, wrote a book about vaccines in which he suggests an alternate schedule, but I don't believe either is actually opposed to vaccines. I think it is true, however, that a fair number of self-proclaimed attachment parents probably don't vaccinate, so maybe that's where the confusion lies. Or perhaps Dr. Sears has recently changed his stance??

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 7/5/2009 10:48:36 PM
Author: maiyavel
But anyway, just in researching for my dissertation on Attachment, I know that for the most part, attachment parenting and attachment in general helps to create a more secure and confident child who can adapt more easily to what life will throw at him/her in the future, as opposed to an adult who has difficulty in maintaining or creating healthy relationships in the future (** according to research).

I very much would love to see real long term research that supports this that was not done by Dr. Sears or his cronies...have any article names or links? I also have access to the academic journals so I''d love to see articles from there rather than Dr. Sears''s website.

 

[packrat]

One thing that''s hard about babies is they cry for everything. Hungry, bored, tired, overstimulated etc, and I found it hard to figure out which in the list related to why my kids were crying. Sometimes it''s exhausting running the gamut of reasons and not finding the answer. I figured out that sometimes there isn''t a reason..babies just cry.

When Trapper was younger, if I put him down for his nap and he cried and I left him..sometimes he''d cry/scream non stop for 2 hours. That tested me a bit in the CIO front..but that''s how I did it w/London, and it worked. She was waaaay easier to control-and still is. Trapper just required different things-a way earlier bedtime than his sister, for one. Once that was figured out, things shaped up in no time.

Babies do need to learn to self soothe, and not have mom run in all the time and get them. That being said, purrfectpear, we need to take Trapper''s pacifier away SOON, so...maybe you could come over for a couple nights? Maybe give me a stern eyebrow raise and finger point when I want to run in there?

 

[kennedy]

Date: 7/5/2009 11:17:53 PM
Author: TanDogMom

Date: 7/5/2009 11:11:12 PM

Author: purrfectpear

I think it's important for both parents and children to learn and teach the difference between 'wants' and 'needs', and I think attachment parenting is an impediment to that learning.



Just because a baby cries when it's put down for sleep does not mean it 'needs' to be picked up. If you know that the baby is not sick, hungry, or wet, and it's truly bed time then the baby is strictly crying because it 'wants' it's own way. It wants mom or dad, or attention period, and it intends to make noise (cry) until it gets someone to comply. Refuse to let the baby cry and you have a baby that is training you. You are teaching the baby that it's every 'want' is going to be met. Maybe that's the parenting that you are comfortable with.



For myself, I made sure that all of my son's needs were met, and his wants were met when it was convenient for me. The rest of the world isn't going to meet his every want, and there's no reason that he should grow up believing that his parents world revolved around him. I did stay home with him for the first year and breastfed, so he was held almost all day, but at night he slept on my schedule.

I don't know. At my son's age now (almost 4 months), sometimes I have trouble discerning his needs and his wants. In fact, by and large I think his needs ARE his wants, at this age. For example tonight, he breastfed for a very long time, and I thought he was satisfied, however I could not get him to settle down for bed. We tried nursing again and he continued to fuss - I was out of milk. Finally I offered him a bottle of pumped milk that was in the fridge, and he took 3 oz (almost a full meal for him). He was hungry! If I had let him CIO, he would have eventually given up and slept (or maybe not, my boy is stubborn!) but I was able to satisfy his legit need by feeding him.


Sometimes it's much harder to figure out why he is crying, but just in this small example, I am very glad that I did not attempt CIO.


When he is older, I certainly do not want him thinking the world revolves around him, but for now, it kind of does

TanDog -- I agree with you 1000%!!! At that age, I absolutely believe that your baby's wants and needs ARE the same thing. Not until my daughter was closer to 18 months did it feel right to start making those distinctions. Your baby depends on you for his survival and his only means of communication is to cry. I can't imagine not trying to figure out what's wrong because it's "inconvenient" for me to do so or because he needs to learn that the world doesn't revolve around him. He doesn't even have the concept of self and other! Moreover, there are MANY legitimate needs other than "sick, hungry, or wet". What about if your baby is feeling scared, lonely, or sad? I have never understood people who think that infants know how to be manipulative. And, if they do have to resort to manipulation to get what they NEED, that's a very sad state of affairs!!

 

[cara]

Date: 7/5/2009 11:33:01 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 7/5/2009 10:48:36 PM

Author: maiyavel

But anyway, just in researching for my dissertation on Attachment, I know that for the most part, attachment parenting and attachment in general helps to create a more secure and confident child who can adapt more easily to what life will throw at him/her in the future, as opposed to an adult who has difficulty in maintaining or creating healthy relationships in the future (** according to research).

I very much would love to see real long term research that supports this that was not done by Dr. Sears or his cronies...have any article names or links? I also have access to the academic journals so I''d love to see articles from there rather than Dr. Sears''s website.

Heck, just tell me how one would hypothetically conduct a well controlled study on the subject! What would you do - put out an ad for parents of newborns that want to subject their brand new kid to a experiment that will entirely determine how they are raised and substitute the instructions from the study for any of their parental judgments? What would the instructions be for the "control" parents, and how would you separate out confounding effects like if the control parents didn''t breastfeed (are you measuring a breastfeeding effect) or were given such rigid instructions that they couldn''t exercise their judgment about when an attachment-style technique was needed and when it wasn''t.

On the attachment issue, I don''t know much about newborns. But I distinctly remember my parents and my little brother at about 3ish yrs, and thinking that the toddler was training the adults. And certainly not in a good way for anyone involved, the parents, toddler, or older kids that watched their household bend to the whims and manipulation of a little kid. So in the attachment parenting theory, I''m wondering when (if ever) there is a transition between the newborn stage of meeting every need/want/cry of the little one and the little kid stage, when you have to start setting limits and boundaries to keep from being manipulated and spoiling the kid, and also to teach the kid independence. Its one thing to let them selfwean, but what if they never want to leave the family bed? Do the parents just let them stay? This one actually I''ve heard a lot of parents complain about - one friend was having a lot of trouble with her step-daughter, a nine-year-old who couldn''t sleep without a parent in the room. Nine seems late to start teaching falling asleep on your own.

 

[neatfreak]

Date: 7/6/2009 12:04:44 AM
Author: cara

Date: 7/5/2009 11:33:01 PM

Author: neatfreak

Date: 7/5/2009 10:48:36 PM


Author: maiyavel


But anyway, just in researching for my dissertation on Attachment, I know that for the most part, attachment parenting and attachment in general helps to create a more secure and confident child who can adapt more easily to what life will throw at him/her in the future, as opposed to an adult who has difficulty in maintaining or creating healthy relationships in the future (** according to research).

I very much would love to see real long term research that supports this that was not done by Dr. Sears or his cronies...have any article names or links? I also have access to the academic journals so I'd love to see articles from there rather than Dr. Sears's website.

Heck, just tell me how one would hypothetically conduct a well controlled study on the subject! What would you do - put out an ad for parents of newborns that want to subject their brand new kid to a experiment that will entirely determine how they are raised and substitute the instructions from the study for any of their parental judgments? What would the instructions be for the 'control' parents, and how would you separate out confounding effects like if the control parents didn't breastfeed (are you measuring a breastfeeding effect) or were given such rigid instructions that they couldn't exercise their judgment about when an attachment-style technique was needed and when it wasn't.

Exactly...yet I often have heard "research studies" quoted that say attachment parenting creates more confident children, adults with better relationships, etc...

So either someone, somewhere has done these studies or Sears is feeding everyone a load of bull with the long term "effects". I know which way I lean on this...but if the research is really out there I would like to read it!

 

[cara]

Date: 7/5/2009 11:17:53 PM
Author: TanDogMom
I don't know. At my son's age now (almost 4 months), sometimes I have trouble discerning his needs and his wants. In fact, by and large I think his needs ARE his wants, at this age. For example tonight, he breastfed for a very long time, and I thought he was satisfied, however I could not get him to settle down for bed. We tried nursing again and he continued to fuss - I was out of milk. Finally I offered him a bottle of pumped milk that was in the fridge, and he took 3 oz (almost a full meal for him). He was hungry! If I had let him CIO, he would have eventually given up and slept (or maybe not, my boy is stubborn!) but I was able to satisfy his legit need by feeding him.

Sometimes it's much harder to figure out why he is crying, but just in this small example, I am very glad that I did not attempt CIO.

When he is older, I certainly do not want him thinking the world revolves around him, but for now, it kind of does

TanDog- this is just a totally academic, threadjack question from a non-parent re: your example of your hungry son. 100 years ago there would be no extra breastmilk in the fridge - what would have happened and would your son have been harmed by it? I assume he would cry more that night, and then either get more calories in a couple of days when your supply adjusts or just miss those calories b/c of mismatch between your supply and his hunger. Is the idea just that you do what you *can* to meet his needs at any time, but if you can't (ie. no more breastmilk at that instant) then you would just try to calm him rather than cry it out because that's what you can offer?

 

[maiyavel]

Date: 7/5/2009 11:33:01 PM
Author: neatfreak

Date: 7/5/2009 10:48:36 PM

Author: maiyavel

But anyway, just in researching for my dissertation on Attachment, I know that for the most part, attachment parenting and attachment in general helps to create a more secure and confident child who can adapt more easily to what life will throw at him/her in the future, as opposed to an adult who has difficulty in maintaining or creating healthy relationships in the future (** according to research).

I very much would love to see real long term research that supports this that was not done by Dr. Sears or his cronies...have any article names or links? I also have access to the academic journals so I''d love to see articles from there rather than Dr. Sears''s website.

I''m away for another few days, but I can definitely give you a few links or at least a few articles. I am specifically writing about the attachment process and the disruptions caused by foster care placement, etc, but I have among other articles, a text called the Handbook of Attachment published by Guilford Press, that is very comprehensive. The only Sears book I have is the one on attachment parenting and that does have a bit more judgement attached to it, rather than just a text of research. I''ve flipped through it a few times.

It''s hard because I feel like an eclectic approach is somewhat better suited for me. I do think that at some point the child does try to have their ''wants'' met rather than their ''needs'' but in my opinion that doesn''t happen before the first year. But again that depends on the child. As far as vaccines go, we are following the regular schedule...

 

[TravelingGal]

Date: 7/5/2009 11:39:08 PM
Author: kennedy

Date: 7/5/2009 11:17:53 PM
Author: TanDogMom

Date: 7/5/2009 11:11:12 PM

Author: purrfectpear

I think it''s important for both parents and children to learn and teach the difference between ''wants'' and ''needs'', and I think attachment parenting is an impediment to that learning.



Just because a baby cries when it''s put down for sleep does not mean it ''needs'' to be picked up. If you know that the baby is not sick, hungry, or wet, and it''s truly bed time then the baby is strictly crying because it ''wants'' it''s own way. It wants mom or dad, or attention period, and it intends to make noise (cry) until it gets someone to comply. Refuse to let the baby cry and you have a baby that is training you. You are teaching the baby that it''s every ''want'' is going to be met. Maybe that''s the parenting that you are comfortable with.



For myself, I made sure that all of my son''s needs were met, and his wants were met when it was convenient for me. The rest of the world isn''t going to meet his every want, and there''s no reason that he should grow up believing that his parents world revolved around him. I did stay home with him for the first year and breastfed, so he was held almost all day, but at night he slept on my schedule.

I don''t know. At my son''s age now (almost 4 months), sometimes I have trouble discerning his needs and his wants. In fact, by and large I think his needs ARE his wants, at this age. For example tonight, he breastfed for a very long time, and I thought he was satisfied, however I could not get him to settle down for bed. We tried nursing again and he continued to fuss - I was out of milk. Finally I offered him a bottle of pumped milk that was in the fridge, and he took 3 oz (almost a full meal for him). He was hungry! If I had let him CIO, he would have eventually given up and slept (or maybe not, my boy is stubborn!) but I was able to satisfy his legit need by feeding him.


Sometimes it''s much harder to figure out why he is crying, but just in this small example, I am very glad that I did not attempt CIO.


When he is older, I certainly do not want him thinking the world revolves around him, but for now, it kind of does

TanDog -- I agree with you 1000%!!! At that age, I absolutely believe that your baby''s wants and needs ARE the same thing. Not until my daughter was closer to 18 months did it feel right to start making those distinctions. Your baby depends on you for his survival and his only means of communication is to cry. I can''t imagine not trying to figure out what''s wrong because it''s ''inconvenient'' for me to do so or because he needs to learn that the world doesn''t revolve around him. He doesn''t even have the concept of self and other! Moreover, there are MANY legitimate needs other than ''sick, hungry, or wet''. What about if your baby is feeling scared, lonely, or sad? I have never understood people who think that infants know how to be manipulative. And, if they do have to resort to manipulation to get what they NEED, that''s a very sad state of affairs!!

OK, I have a break after dinner here...

Babies can manipulate to get what they WANT. If a parent doesn''t think so, they are being manipulated.

I will tell you right now, my girl is 15 months and I can definitely see what she NEEDS and WANTS. She no longer wants to go down to bed at 6:30 and she cries as SOON as I start taking her over to her crib. She wants to stay up and play. I put her down, stroke her hair and when I close the door, within 10 seconds she stops. Normally within 10 minutes she is out. So I know she NEEDS sleep, but she loves to stay up and play.

I think AP has been going on for awhile and there have been some articles in the press lately how it has produced a generation of pansies who have no roots in reality.

I do, however, think that children of AP and children of independent parenting both can turn out fine. And they both can come out messed up.

The reason I why I disagree with attachment parenting is that many parts end up really not working for the PARENTS, who are later ridden with guilt and stuck on how to get out of what what they are doing. Co-sleeping is a big one. I believe for a family unit to be healthy, you must continue to work on your marriage. That means time away from the kid, and time in your own bed alone. I believe that means getting the kid down at a decent hour (which they need, by the way) in her own bed so that you and your husband can have a few hours every evening to bond with one another.
I believe it is important for the child to know that the househould does not revolve around them.

Of course, co-sleeping is only one component of AP. There might be others (as some posters mentioned) that might work for some parents regardless of parenting style. And I do believe that demonstrating love should be a core component of all parenting. What "love" is, however, I am sure could be up for debate.

 

[maiyavel]

OK, I have a break after dinner here...


Babies can manipulate to get what they WANT. If a parent doesn''t think so, they are being manipulated.

I will tell you right now, my girl is 15 months and I can definitely see what she NEEDS and WANTS. She no longer wants to go down to bed at 6:30 and she cries as SOON as I start taking her over to her crib. She wants to stay up and play. I put her down, stroke her hair and when I close the door, within 10 seconds she stops. Normally within 10 minutes she is out. So I know she NEEDS sleep, but she loves to stay up and play.


I think AP has been going on for awhile and there have been some articles in the press lately how it has produced a generation of pansies who have no roots in reality.


I do, however, think that children of AP and children of independent parenting both can turn out fine. And they both can come out messed up.


The reason I why I disagree with attachment parenting is that many parts end up really not working for the PARENTS, who are later ridden with guilt and stuck on how to get out of what what they are doing. Co-sleeping is a big one. I believe for a family unit to be healthy, you must continue to work on your marriage. That means time away from the kid, and time in your own bed alone. I believe that means getting the kid down at a decent hour (which they need, by the way) in her own bed so that you and your husband can have a few hours every evening to bond with one another.

I believe it is important for the child to know that the househould does not revolve around them.


Of course, co-sleeping is only one component of AP. There might be others (as some posters mentioned) that might work for some parents regardless of parenting style. And I do believe that demonstrating love should be a core component of all parenting. What ''love'' is, however, I am sure could be up for debate.

[/quote]

I totally agree... I just personally have a hard time letting a 6 month old cry for an hour so they can learn to sleep on their own. I think that the parents who do strict AP understand or should understand that they probably will be teaching their child to sleep on their own for a long time, as I''m sure we will be. I do agree with the intimacy part of your response. We have a very difficult time finding time alone, but our situation is different. My husband works 12 hour days and wouldn''t get to spend any play time with our son if he didn''t sleep later or nap with us. We tend to hang out during the winding down/night routine all together and play and cuddle and then put him to bed before we have an hour or so to ourselves. Not ideal, but it''s what we can do right now.

 

[LtlFirecracker]

Date: 7/5/2009 9:11:46 PM
Author:TanDogMom
I got on this tangent on another thread. I am curious, does anyone here practice attachment parenting? Does anyone disagree with attachment parenting? I'd love to hear other people's perspectives on this type of parenting, while being respectful of eachother's views.


I have not read all the AP literature, but some. I agree with some of the tenants of AP and am practicing some of them. Others do not work for my family. I do find that the AP literature seems to be very judgmental of people who use other approaches or do not follow AP to the letter. I find that offputting. The last thing moms need is more guilt!


Curious to get other perspectives...

There is a lot of good stuff in this thread. I will adress a few points that I have formed an opinion about. I have not read the book (I don't want to support this guys income), but know some of the points in it.

First - Dr. Sears - He is not well respected among the people at my training program. I know one infectious disease doctor who told me he would personally like to drive to LA and go up to him and say "What the $@#$ are you thinking writing this book, and show me your evidence"

Immunization schedule - He has no evidence to support his claims. I have seen some nice, very well done lectures with study after study refuting any benefit to spacing out the immunizations. And the immunizations in the first year of life are diseases that are in the community and can cause significant morbidity to babies.

co-bedding - I went to a death conference where I got to hear about all the kids under 18 had an unexplained death in the city over the month (pretty depressing). There were quite a few SIDS cases. A couple involved parents laying the babies on their bellies to sleep and some sort of fluffy quilt in the crib. However, most involved co-bedding. One involved co-bedding in a waterbed (which when I herd this caused my head to spin). I don't recommend co-bedding, but I know sometimes it is a cultural thing. If parents insist on doing it, I lay out a set of rules. I usually recommend either sleeping in a crib next to the parents (mainly in the first few weeks if breast feeding is being established) and than baby in own room by 6 months the latest. As many other's have said, I think that a baby needs to learn how to sleep on their own - more for the parents sake than anything.

babywearing - I am assuming this is carrying the baby with you in a soft carrier (Baby Born?). This is probably one I agree with. And I see many people in my profession doing it. They actually did a study where they took a group of parents and gave half of them a soft carrier and half a hard carrier. I am not sure of the details (I learned about this in college), but the babies in the soft carriers did show more stable signs of attachment, and better emotional development.

I will look at this closer over the week.

 

[kennedy]

Date: 7/6/2009 12:12:04 AM
Author: TravelingGal

Date: 7/5/2009 11:39:08 PM

Author: kennedy






TanDog -- I agree with you 1000%!!! At that age, I absolutely believe that your baby's wants and needs ARE the same thing. Not until my daughter was closer to 18 months did it feel right to start making those distinctions. Your baby depends on you for his survival and his only means of communication is to cry. I can't imagine not trying to figure out what's wrong because it's 'inconvenient' for me to do so or because he needs to learn that the world doesn't revolve around him. He doesn't even have the concept of self and other! Moreover, there are MANY legitimate needs other than 'sick, hungry, or wet'. What about if your baby is feeling scared, lonely, or sad? I have never understood people who think that infants know how to be manipulative. And, if they do have to resort to manipulation to get what they NEED, that's a very sad state of affairs!!

OK, I have a break after dinner here...


Babies can manipulate to get what they WANT. If a parent doesn't think so, they are being manipulated.

I will tell you right now, my girl is 15 months and I can definitely see what she NEEDS and WANTS. She no longer wants to go down to bed at 6:30 and she cries as SOON as I start taking her over to her crib. She wants to stay up and play. I put her down, stroke her hair and when I close the door, within 10 seconds she stops. Normally within 10 minutes she is out. So I know she NEEDS sleep, but she loves to stay up and play.


I think AP has been going on for awhile and there have been some articles in the press lately how it has produced a generation of pansies who have no roots in reality.


I do, however, think that children of AP and children of independent parenting both can turn out fine. And they both can come out messed up.


]

I specifically said that I didn't think that INFANTS were capable of manipulation. Do you really think a 4-month old has the cunning to manipulate its parents into giving it something it doesn't really need (not even sure what that would be at this age)? They don't even have the object permanence to distinguish between self and other.

I agree that toddlers definitely want things they don't need and it's imperative that parents set clear boundaries so that children learn some degree of frustration tolerance. I'm not sure why you think this is at odds with attachment parenting. I would be interested to read the articles you're referring to that suggest that children who were raised with attachment in mind are "pansies" and have no "roots in reality". Were they based on any research? Reason I ask is lots of people mistakenly conflate attachment parenting with being overly permissive and I'm really not sure why. Perhaps it has something to do with the misconception that co-sleeping and breastfeeding are indulgent or coddling practices that don't teach children to be independent (something our culture is obsessed with). Attachment theory posits that children will actually be more secure and independent if their needs are reliably met as very young children. And, let me add, meeting your child's needs IS NOT the same thing as giving them what they want whenever they want it (unless, of course, they're infants). In fact, often, it can be just the opposite. I really think Dr. Sears has done attachment theory a disservice by simplifying it to the point that people think that breastfeeding and co-sleeping are all one has to do to be an attachment parent.

ETA It's actually very healthy for toddlers to test (or manipulate, if you will) their parents. It's part of the separation and individuation process and needs to happen.