A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » misc.kids » Pregnancy
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

baby in separate room from mother at night?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old April 21st 08, 11:24 PM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,293
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

Ed Augusts wrote:

Oh, I'm sorry, Ericka! The niceties of netiquette were pushed aside
for me when your friend called me a moron instead of offering any
substantial evidence.


And that surprises you after the names you called her?
Frankly, I thought her response much more restrained than your
inital post.

I'm very glad that even though you were formula-fed and not physically
that close to your mother,


Um, I didn't say I wasn't physically close to my mother.
I said we didn't co-sleep. There would be a difference.

that things turned out okay.


Better than okay, I'd say.

I'm not
trying to say anywhere near 100% of mothers who don't breastfeed and
don't keep their baby close to them at night are going to find their
kids grow up to have problems,


Really? Because that's certainly not the impression
you gave.

but since I know of so many individual
cases of exceptional children who WERE treated with special closeness
and WERE breastfed, it makes me wonder how the stats would stack-up
against each other, if doing such a study was possible!


There have been many studies done which at least touch
on some of these issues. Perhaps it might be a good idea to
look at some of them before making assertions that are darned
hard to back up?

As I said, all these kids were breastfed until they were at least two
years old! They seem to be well-adjusted, mentally proficient, show
creative abilities including musical and artistic and literary
abilities, and I haven't seen any of them display any physical or
mental problems of any kind. I am wondering if these kids are the
exception, or the rule! Can anyone add to this list with kids whom
they know who have also been breast fed?


I know plenty of kids who've been breastfed and plenty
who haven't. I know geniuses and challenged kids in both groups.
Studies have found small (on the order of a few IQ points) but
statistically significant differences in some situations (not
always replicable). I know talented and not-so-talented kids
in each group. I know successful and unsuccessful kids in each
group. I know healthy and not so healthy kids in each group,
although here again there seem to be very small but detectable
differences in favor of the breastfed child. Personally, my
experience and the research I'm aware of suggests that broad
generalizations are unwarranted, much less insults.

Best wishes,
Ericka
  #12  
Old April 22nd 08, 07:04 PM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
Suzanne at SuzCorner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

Ericka Kammerer wrote:
Ed Augusts wrote:
...
and thus this topic of prolonged breastfeeding and
various kinds of nurturing experiences in motherhood came up, and
seemed important to me; I'm sorry if I haven't been steeped in the
history of this particular Group and thus seem like an intruder, such
was not my intention! I thought anybody could post here, and that my
efforts would be appreciated and also cause some debate. Debate isn't
bad, but I don't see debate, I see aggression aimed in my direction!


Because you started with aggression, it is not so surprising
that you received some in return. You'll find this is a group
that is generally respectful of different parenting choices,
especially from folks who don't start insulting those who don't
share their choices.

Best wishes,
Ericka


Hi Ericka and all,

I would like to introduce myself as a non-newbie, because when my
kids were young, some even still in utero, I participated in this and
related usenet groups (misc.kids and misc.kids.breastfeeding) quite a
bit, as well as a few others. In fact, that was back in the days
before there was Google dredging up old retired threads for eternal
"archives". As a matter of fact, back before there was a web. In fact,
back before there were even "emoticons".

I say this, because when my personal friend Ed told me what he'd
stepped into, all I could say was "OMG".

Ericka, I can vouch personally that Ed is one of the LEAST
aggressive people I have ever met. (We have met face to face, and had
long discussions concerning parenthood.) If you read what he said as
"aggression" I strongly believe it can only be because of the ease with
which things are mis-read and mis-interpreted on Usenet groups. That
IS the reason emoticons were invented, because there were too many
people reading anger and aggression into other people's post when there
was none.

I believe what Ed was trying to do was bounce ideas off of
experienced mothers after having heard my own opinions about my
childrearing history vs what I've witnessed in other families, some of
whom their children are turning out decidedly NOT ok. He is also
extending that with what was his own luck to observe in families at
opposite ends of the spectrum, from one close little family that was
sooo close as to almost be neurotic and distrustful of anyone (almost
like those inbred polygamists in Texas), to a family that has been so
vicious, cold, and cutthroat (for mere sport) with each other for
decades, that they drive each other to suicide attempts and stints in
mental hospitals.

Anyway, I have seen families that are loving who for whatever
reason, scheduling conflicts, breast problems, mother-self-image, bad
advice by "doctors", did not breastfeed. But personally, I would not
have a clue how to relate to a baby of mine if I could not nurse away
all the infantile boo boo's a small child encounters in life. So
please cut Ed some slack, as I'm sure his opinions are colored by my
own, and I promise to teach him how to use emoticons, so you can know
his mood while he's writing ;-)

Hey, Happy Mother's Day everyone!

Suzanne.


--
===
Visit my fun corner of the world :-)
http://www.SuzCorner.com
  #13  
Old April 23rd 08, 12:40 AM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
Jamie Clark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 855
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

"Ed Augusts" wrote in message
...
Hi, I was giving some examples from real life people who have told me
their 'bio', which is more than you have done. One, the female
friend, went into a depression punctuated with suicidal anger when she
found out she was pregnant, and she wouldn't stand for there being any
chance that a child born to her could possibly grow up to be neglected
and unloved as she was, and thus the only thing she could think to do
was terminate the pregnancy,. I witnessed her despair, so don't be so
quick to make light of her as "proving nothing".


I wasn't making light of anyone's story. You didn't tell us her story, so
how could I have made light of it? As sad as that story is, it doesn't
*prove* anything. It's anecdotal evidence. meaning, "Based on casual
observations or indications rather than rigorous or scientific analysis."
Several sad stories does not make a scientific study, and does not prove
anything. There there are TONS of happy, successful people in the world who
were bottle fed, and slept in their own room as an infant. I can name lots
of them, but that doesn't prove my point either.

The people I've seen who were not shown the deepest love and affection
by their parents and caretakers turned out to be miserable adults.


And showing the deepest love and affection is not limited to breastfeeding
and cosleeping. I'm sure that Jack the Ripper was breastfed, and may even
have coslept, based on the times, and yet look how he turned out.

You are going 'ad hominem', in your put-down comments and disregarding
the essence of what I have said, while at the same time, you haven't
come up with ANY examples of any children that tend to show that
anything I've said doesn't point in the right direction.


As Ericka said in one of her responses to you, I didn't feel the need to
give you any examples, because your premise was so absurd.

Again, your premise was:
You either breastfeed, co-sleep and love your child, and said child will be
"well-adjusted, happy
and mentally healthy," or you bottle/formula feed, ignore your child's cries
and neglect them, and your child will be "a self-destructive self-mutilator,
or possibly an inhuman, unfeeling, monster, a child who wants to give back
to women exactly what his or her mother gave them in their childhood."

As I said before, doi.

Come on! Put up or shut up! Give us YOUR list of kids who were fed
on formula and spent the night in a room by themselves, and tell me
what kind of teenagers and adults they turned into... please!


I'd be willing to bet that several of the past US Presidents were likely
bottle fed and slept in their own rooms. While I may not agree with their
politics, they seem to have turned out okay.

Starting in the 1940's, there was a big shift from breastfeeding to bottle
feeding. "From the mid-1950s to about the mid-1960s--the height of
bottle-feeding's popularity--over 80% of mothers were feeding by bottle."*
Around the same time, more and more people began to buy their own homes --
the American Dream, so to speak, and were able to spread out and have each
family member have their own room. So you could say that most people born
between 1940-1960 were likely formula/bottle fed and slept in their own
rooms. Are you saying that pretty much everyone between the age of 48to 68
are, let's see, how did you put it, "a self-destructive self-mutilator, or
possibly an inhuman, unfeeling, monster, a child who wants to give back to
women exactly what his or her mother gave them in their childhood."? No,
that would be ridiculous, and yet, that's what you seem to be saying.

Again, your premise is absurd.

Obviously, from your icy words below, you believe in denying a baby
the comfort of being rocked and nursed and mothered, and sleeping
right next to its mother, in favor of a colder, more efficient, love-
depriving and cynical philosophy, of "toughening-up" the kid by
putting him or her in an empty rooim, that is, a room without the
presence of the mother. Shame on you! All I can do is feel sorry
for any babies that YOU have had or taken care of. So, please!


No, I don't believe in denying a baby the comfort of being rocked and
mothered and loved. I did not deprive my children of love. They are
healthy and happy and well adjusted and affectionate and wonderful.

I don't believe in "toughing up" my children. I refuse to accept your
ridiculous premise that unless I cosleep and breastfeed my babies, I cannot
really love them. That's bull****. I don't believe that you have to parent
one way in order to show love.

While I would have loved to breastfeed, it wasn't possible for me. I tried,
but since both of my children are adopted, it makes it a little harder than
for the average mother. But why I couldn't breastfeed isn't relevent to
this conversation. Your assertion that you can only love and raise a
healthy happy child if you do it your way, by breastfeeding and cosleeping
is offensive. Feeding formula from a bottle and having a child sleep in a
crib is not child abuse, or love depriving.

Authority about children! Please do comment about the results you
have had with YOUR particular childcare system? Anything the matter?
How'd you do with your love-and-warmth-deprivation system? Did I
hit a bit TOO close to home, is that the reason for your angry
outburst?


My children are great. Just ask anyone.

Angry outburst? I called you a moron. That was it. If you delete that one
sentance, there is nothing else in my post that could qualify as an angry
outburst. You, on the other hand, have accused me of being cold and cynical
and of denying my children love and warmth, just because I did not
breastfeed or cosleep.

Maybe I'm the one who hit too close to home...either that, or you really are
a moron...LOL!

--

Jamie Clark
*http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0...eding-and.html






On Apr 21, 8:45 am, "Jamie Clark" wrote:
According to you, there are only two options -- you either breastfeed,
co-sleep and love your child, and said child will be "well-adjusted, happy
and mentally healthy," or you bottle/formula feed, ignore your child's
cries
and neglect them, and your child will be "a self-destructive
self-mutilator,
or possibly an inhuman, unfeeling, monster, a child who wants to give back
to women exactly what his or her mother gave them in their
childhood." Doi.

Don't forget lesbian.

You're a moron, Ed. And your "sample" of two does not prove anything.

It is possible to bottle/formula feed and have your child sleep in their
own
room in a crib without damning them to hell and a lifetime of relationship
issues and therapy.

Of course not showing love to a baby and child can damage that child, but
that has nothing to do with breast or bottle feeding, co-sleeping or crib
sleeping. Nor does it have anything to do with bio or adopted.
--

Jamie Clark

"Ed Augusts" wrote in message

...



I am thinking over the results I've seen in families where the baby
is, typically, nursed by the mother, and spends the night close to the
mother, as compared to families where the baby is immediately put on
formula and then sleeps in a room down the hall. There is this
insidious "Ferberizing" process many young parents inflict upon their
children in which they let their kids cry themselves to sleep at night
until they get used to being without Mom and sleeping alone in their
own little room. Oh, yes! Let's make the little guy 'tough' by
making him cry, and then ignore his cries until he or she gets over it
and becomes insensitive to whether they're sleeping with mom or not.
(Is that insane, or what?) This neglect often goes along with putting
these kids on formula. In my experience, it is NEVER a breastfeeding
mother who also locks her child away in a room down the hall at night
where they have to cry themselves to sleep!


Looking at the results, that is, what becomes of this unfortunate
child who is denied his or her mother's love, space, breastmilk and
also physical protection, tells an ugly story.


I know of a girl who was adopted into a very austere and Spartan
household in which love was nothing but a 4-letter word, and the
adoptive mother could not stand to be in the child's presence child
for very long. The baby's room was down the hall, I guess so she could
sometimes choose to ignore her when she cried. The adoptive mom
THOUGHT she wanted to have a baby --then changed her mind. But she
didn't give the baby to someone who would love her, she kept the baby,
but just didn't LOVE her or make the child feel loved... Well,
unfortunately for all concerned, that child no sooner got into her
teens than she got into a syndrome of self-abuse by cutting herself in
parallel lines on her arms and legs with knives and razor blades. She
did this before she was half-way through high school. That child, as
a grown woman, had at least one abortion and later became a lesbian.
She has had absolutely no contact with her adoptive mother or father
for many years now.


Here is a second case, a businessman who, for his entire life, has
hated his mother because she never told him she loved him, never, in
his memory, hugged or kissed him, and kept him in a small dingy room
down the hall throughout most of his childhood. She never breastfed
him, she told him such a thing "freaked her out", she would not want a
baby on her breast! This is a mother who STILL makes fun of her child
and enjoys telling a roomful of guests nothing but unflattering
stories about her boy. This man is now close to 50 years old, and he
confided to me that he is still a virgin. Guess what? He says he has
"issues" with his mother, and somehow ALL women seem to him to be a
little bit LIKE his mother, therefore he has never had a successful
relationship with an adult woman, not in the business world, nor in
private. Women are "things" to be "consumed" as "eye candy" at a strip
joint or sex magazine, but he cannot figure out how to get close to a
woman -- not in real life!


My point is very simple, and I'm sorry if I sound like I'm "preaching
to the choir", but some of women reading this article MAY NOT be
planning to hug and kiss and breastfeed their babies, and I really
thought any such mothers-to-be out there ought to consider the
consequences of a lack of intimacy with your baby! You have the
AWESOME responsibility of raising either a well-adjusted, happy,
mentally healthy child, one whom you keep close to your breast, and in
your room... OR, participating in raising an unhappy, wretched little
child whom you put away in a dark little room down the hall, whom you
don't breastfeed, whom you make to be alone and lonesome, and who may
very well grow up to be either a self-destructive self-mutilator, or
possibly an inhuman, unfeeling, monster, a child who wants to give
back to women exactly what his or her mother gave them in their
childhood --- coldness and contempt! Remember, MOST of the contempt
is actually reserved by the neglected child FOR HIS OR HER MOTHER.
Think carefully, now, about how you decide to raise this baby!
"Ferberize" and harm them? And lose their love and respect? Or,
love them and be loved in return, both now and as long as you live!
Which will it be? Is it really all that hard to decide?


Best wishes & hoping you choose wisely, ------Ed
http://www.breastpumppedal.com- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -



  #14  
Old April 23rd 08, 12:52 AM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
Jamie Clark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 855
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

"Ed Augusts" wrote in message
...
On Apr 21, 2:29 am, "lu-lu" wrote:
"Ed Augusts" wrote in message

...



I am thinking over the results I've seen in families where the baby
is, typically, nursed by the mother, and spends the night close to the
mother, as compared to families where the baby is immediately put on
formula and then sleeps in a room down the hall. There is this
insidious "Ferberizing" process many young parents inflict upon their
children in which they let their kids cry themselves to sleep at night
until they get used to being without Mom and sleeping alone in their
own little room. Oh, yes! Let's make the little guy 'tough' by
making him cry, and then ignore his cries until he or she gets over it
and becomes insensitive to whether they're sleeping with mom or not.
(Is that insane, or what?) This neglect often goes along with putting
these kids on formula. In my experience, it is NEVER a breastfeeding
mother who also locks her child away in a room down the hall at night
where they have to cry themselves to sleep!


Looking at the results, that is, what becomes of this unfortunate
child who is denied his or her mother's love, space, breastmilk and
also physical protection, tells an ugly story.


I know of a girl who was adopted into a very austere and Spartan
household in which love was nothing but a 4-letter word, and the
adoptive mother could not stand to be in the child's presence child
for very long. The baby's room was down the hall, I guess so she could
sometimes choose to ignore her when she cried. The adoptive mom
THOUGHT she wanted to have a baby --then changed her mind. But she
didn't give the baby to someone who would love her, she kept the baby,
but just didn't LOVE her or make the child feel loved... Well,
unfortunately for all concerned, that child no sooner got into her
teens than she got into a syndrome of self-abuse by cutting herself in
parallel lines on her arms and legs with knives and razor blades. She
did this before she was half-way through high school. That child, as
a grown woman, had at least one abortion and later became a lesbian.
She has had absolutely no contact with her adoptive mother or father
for many years now.


Here is a second case, a businessman who, for his entire life, has
hated his mother because she never told him she loved him, never, in
his memory, hugged or kissed him, and kept him in a small dingy room
down the hall throughout most of his childhood. She never breastfed
him, she told him such a thing "freaked her out", she would not want a
baby on her breast! This is a mother who STILL makes fun of her child
and enjoys telling a roomful of guests nothing but unflattering
stories about her boy. This man is now close to 50 years old, and he
confided to me that he is still a virgin. Guess what? He says he has
"issues" with his mother, and somehow ALL women seem to him to be a
little bit LIKE his mother, therefore he has never had a successful
relationship with an adult woman, not in the business world, nor in
private. Women are "things" to be "consumed" as "eye candy" at a strip
joint or sex magazine, but he cannot figure out how to get close to a
woman -- not in real life!


My point is very simple, and I'm sorry if I sound like I'm "preaching
to the choir", but some of women reading this article MAY NOT be
planning to hug and kiss and breastfeed their babies, and I really
thought any such mothers-to-be out there ought to consider the
consequences of a lack of intimacy with your baby! You have the
AWESOME responsibility of raising either a well-adjusted, happy,
mentally healthy child, one whom you keep close to your breast, and in
your room... OR, participating in raising an unhappy, wretched little
child whom you put away in a dark little room down the hall, whom you
don't breastfeed, whom you make to be alone and lonesome, and who may
very well grow up to be either a self-destructive self-mutilator, or
possibly an inhuman, unfeeling, monster, a child who wants to give
back to women exactly what his or her mother gave them in their
childhood --- coldness and contempt! Remember, MOST of the contempt
is actually reserved by the neglected child FOR HIS OR HER MOTHER.
Think carefully, now, about how you decide to raise this baby!
"Ferberize" and harm them? And lose their love and respect? Or,
love them and be loved in return, both now and as long as you live!
Which will it be? Is it really all that hard to decide?


Best wishes & hoping you choose wisely, ------Ed
http://www.breastpumppedal.com


So, Ed, how many kids do you have? I'm assuming you must have some in
order
to 'preach', Or that you must have lived with these families you speak
of?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


I don't mean to 'preach', but I'm 59 years old which is plenty old
enough to see the results of all kinds of various systems of raising
children.


You did mean to preach, which is what got you into trouble. That and the
fact that your whole post was a veiled attempt to be a part of this group so
you could continue to push your "friend's" website. Rather transparent,
which is part of the reason you got the reception you did -- that, and the
offensive content of your post.

So how many children do you have?

I like to give information about definite cases, definite
individuals, so I'm puzzled why I get anti-Ed remarks, "Who are YOU to
preach, buddy?" instead of someone saying "I've known such-and-so-many
children who were all raised on formula and whose moms didn't show
them much warmth, and they've all grown up just fine!"


As I already pointed out, while your individual cases may be interesting,
they are not useful in proving anything. Ericka already mentioned some
actual studies, in which the answers between formula and breastfeeding are
much less clear cut than you seem to think. Perhaps if your post had not
been so in your face rude, and offended so many people in the process, you
might have been able to engage in a civil discussion. Instead, you
basically bash strangers and insult their mothering, by telling us that
unless we colseep and breasrfeed, our children will end up with emotional
problems and fail in life. And you wonder why we didn't receive you with
open arms.

I don't see
those kinds of remarks because I think the truth is, children who are
deprived of affection by their mothers or other caretakers, which
includes nursing them, DO NOT grow up as successfully as very much
LOVED children do.


Bull****. Stop equating breastfeeding and cosleeping to love. You are
offensive and rude. Are you saying that father's aren't capable of loving
their children, because they can't breastfeed them? Lordy.

Of course children who are neglected and deprived of love will likely have
emotional problems, but that has nothing to do with how they are fed and
where they slept. Millions and millions of children were bottle fed and
slept in their own rooms and were incredibly loved and cherished and adored
and grew up to be happy successful people.

If anyone is shamed or embarrassed that they DID
NOT love their children enough when they were babies and tots, and
realizes now that personality deficits and behavior problems, stunted
emotional and physical development, etc., may very well be due to not
"being there" for their baby, well, I'm sorry about that, I really
am! Perhaps it is more politically correct to not talk about this
issue at all? Is that what you folks are saying? Don't rock the boat
of public opinion that states "go ahead and abandon your baby in an
empty room at night, their crying, their loneliness, doesn't
matter!"


I'm resisting the urge to tell you to "F" off here, Ed. Really I am.

Yes, I have indeed lived with the families I mention, although that
was on another USENET group where I listed five children who had been
breastfed for 2 years or longer, and who slept very close to their
mothers; and reported on their particular, individual, scientific,
musical, artistic, and literary talents, which were often
exceptional; also on the fact they never had to take any medications
to control any behavior problems, nor did they display any signs of
ill-health. What I was HOPING was that someone would jump in with
additional support from their own experiences raising children, and if
they want to posit a contrary point of view, that they would do so
using evidence of X-number of children who were formula-fed and slept
in a different room from their mom. But so far, aside from a few
snippy remarks, nobody has stepped forward with any evidence! THAT
surprises me!


You walk into a room claiming the sky is lime green, ranting and raving
about it, and are suprised that no one is stepping forward with any evidence
that the sky is NOT lime green? My dad taught me years ago, you never argue
with crazy.
--

Jamie Clark


  #15  
Old April 23rd 08, 05:12 AM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
Ericka Kammerer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,293
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

Suzanne at SuzCorner wrote:

Anyway, I have seen families that are loving who for whatever reason,
scheduling conflicts, breast problems, mother-self-image, bad advice by
"doctors", did not breastfeed. But personally, I would not have a clue
how to relate to a baby of mine if I could not nurse away all the
infantile boo boo's a small child encounters in life. So please cut Ed
some slack, as I'm sure his opinions are colored by my own, and I
promise to teach him how to use emoticons, so you can know his mood
while he's writing ;-)


Sure, everyone can be misunderstood, but honestly, I don't
see how an emoticon can soften the blow of the things he said in
his original post. If anyone called out any of the parenting
practices you've used and called them the things he called parents
who don't breastfeed or co-sleep, you'd be up in arms. Even you
just said above that you don't see how mothers relate to their
kids without breastfeeding! Do you truly mean to imply that
moms who don't breastfeed can't relate to their kids? Or at
least can't relate to them in the special way you relate to your
kids? I'm sorry, but that's just plain arrogant and hurtful.
Mothers who didn't breastfeed for whatever reasons still manage
to love and nurture and relate to their babies, and it's insulting
to imply otherwise, whether you stick a smiley on the end or not.
I'm glad I breastfed my babies, but I would never in a million years
look down that way on women who didn't. You won't find a stronger
proponent of homebirth either, but I don't go around telling folks
that if they didn't give birth at home without any drugs or
interventions, I couldn't possibly imagine how they bonded properly
with their babies.

Best wishes,
Ericka
  #16  
Old April 23rd 08, 06:38 AM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
deja.blues[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?


"Suzanne at SuzCorner" wrote in message
m...
I believe what Ed was trying to do was bounce ideas off of experienced
mothers after having heard my own opinions about my childrearing history
vs what I've witnessed in other families, some of whom their children are
turning out decidedly NOT ok.


He wants to sell something. That's all.
So do you!


  #17  
Old April 23rd 08, 07:05 AM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
Jamie Clark
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 855
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

"Ericka Kammerer" wrote in message
. ..
Suzanne at SuzCorner wrote:

Anyway, I have seen families that are loving who for whatever reason,
scheduling conflicts, breast problems, mother-self-image, bad advice by
"doctors", did not breastfeed. But personally, I would not have a clue
how to relate to a baby of mine if I could not nurse away all the
infantile boo boo's a small child encounters in life. So please cut Ed
some slack, as I'm sure his opinions are colored by my own, and I promise
to teach him how to use emoticons, so you can know his mood while he's
writing ;-)


Sure, everyone can be misunderstood, but honestly, I don't
see how an emoticon can soften the blow of the things he said in
his original post. If anyone called out any of the parenting
practices you've used and called them the things he called parents
who don't breastfeed or co-sleep, you'd be up in arms. Even you
just said above that you don't see how mothers relate to their
kids without breastfeeding! Do you truly mean to imply that
moms who don't breastfeed can't relate to their kids? Or at
least can't relate to them in the special way you relate to your
kids? I'm sorry, but that's just plain arrogant and hurtful.
Mothers who didn't breastfeed for whatever reasons still manage
to love and nurture and relate to their babies, and it's insulting
to imply otherwise, whether you stick a smiley on the end or not.
I'm glad I breastfed my babies, but I would never in a million years
look down that way on women who didn't. You won't find a stronger
proponent of homebirth either, but I don't go around telling folks
that if they didn't give birth at home without any drugs or
interventions, I couldn't possibly imagine how they bonded properly
with their babies.

Best wishes,
Ericka


Amen, sister. Amen.

--

Jamie Clark


  #18  
Old April 23rd 08, 03:09 PM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

On Apr 21, 9:58 pm, Ed Augusts wrote:

I like to give information about definite cases, definite
individuals


And you then assume that those individual cases can be generalised.
So, you see two people who were emotionally neglected and, in the
second case, abused, and who also happened to be formula-fed and sleep
in separate rooms. And you then appear to have leaped from this
information to an assumption that *all* formula-fed babies and/or
*all* babies who sleep in separate rooms from their parents (two
groups which you appear to consider synonymous) are similarly
neglected.

This is such an elementary error of logic that it's very hard to
believe that you can't spot it. There's probably even a name for it,
though I haven't time to look it up right now.

so I'm puzzled why I get anti-Ed remarks, "Who are YOU to
preach, buddy?" instead of someone saying "I've known such-and-so-many
children who were all raised on formula and whose moms didn't show
them much warmth, and they've all grown up just fine!"


Actually, Ed, I was raised on formula and my mother showed me plenty
of warmth. I don't know whether or not I slept in the same room as
her as a baby, nor do I care - it's irrelevant. The important thing
is that my mother was extremely warm, caring, and affectionate
throughout my childhood (and adulthood). And, yes, I grew up just
fine. (If you want details; I'm a successful doctor, happily married,
and have two children.)

My sister slept in her own room as a baby, but was breastfed. Our
mother was just as warm and caring to her, and she has also turned out
just fine.

My son was breastfed until the age of sixteen months and slept in the
same room as us until he was twenty-two months. During this time he
was also sleep trained, by a method that used the basic principle of
the Ferber method (the exact details were different). The reason for
this was not to make him 'tough', but because it was the ultimately
the only way of dealing with the fact that he didn't want to go to
sleep at bedtime - keeping him up when he was tired, or sitting with
him until he went to sleep, just made him even more annoyed, and
eventually the only way to convince him that it was bedtime was to
walk out of the room and leave him alone for a bit. So that's what I
did. He is lovingly cared for full-time by myself and my husband,
with lots of hugs, affection, and attention. At the age of three,
he's happy, confident, and loves life.

Funny how real people don't fit into your neat little stereotypes,
isn't it?

Perhaps it is more politically correct to not talk about this
issue at all? Is that what you folks are saying?


No, Ed. We're saying that it's factually incorrect to say the things
about it that you're saying.

From what you say, it appears that you think that if a woman is
formula feeding, or if she puts her child to sleep in a separate room,
or if she uses sleep training, then it can automatically be assumed
that a) she must be doing *all* those things, and b) she is also
neglecting and possibly abusing the child. It's the latter assumption
that is putting people's backs up.

I don't think anyone disagrees with the idea that if a parent is
emotionally neglectful and/or abusive then that is likely to cause
emotional damage in the children. What we are disagreeing with, not
to mention vehemently objecting to, is your heavy implication that all
mothers who formula-feed, or who put children to sleep in a separate
room, or who sleep train, are also being emotionally neglectful.
Rubbish.

Oh, and one last thing: Being a lesbian is not a sign of emotional
maladjustment, and does not belong on your list of Dreadful Fates
These Poor Children Suffered. Please do not make it sound that way.


Sarah
--
http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com
  #19  
Old April 23rd 08, 04:41 PM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

On Apr 22, 7:04 pm, Suzanne at SuzCorner
wrote:

I believe what Ed was trying to do was bounce ideas off of
experienced mothers after having heard my own opinions about my
childrearing history vs what I've witnessed in other families, some of
whom their children are turning out decidedly NOT ok.


If that really was what he was trying to do, then he failed dismally.
He was not offering up ideas; he was stating his theories as though
they were fact, and exhorting parents to act the way he felt they
should act, in a way that made it quite clear that he believed that
women who don't breastfeed or don't put their babies to sleep in the
same room are also being emotionally neglectful and unloving.

He is also
extending that with what was his own luck to observe in families at
opposite ends of the spectrum


Suzanne, the problem is that he doesn't seem to recognise that there
*is* a spectrum. All he sees are the opposite ends.

Anyway, I have seen families that are loving who for whatever
reason, scheduling conflicts, breast problems, mother-self-image, bad
advice by "doctors", did not breastfeed. But personally, I would not
have a clue how to relate to a baby of mine if I could not nurse away
all the infantile boo boo's a small child encounters in life.


You may feel that way now, but I strongly suspect that if you were
faced with that situation - if, for whatever reason, you had a baby
that you couldn't nurse - then you would rapidly develop other ways to
relate to that baby. In fact, I should think - and hope - that you
had plenty of other ways to relate to your baby as it was. Surely
you must have spent plenty of time touching and holding your baby even
when you weren't nursing him or her, not to mention talking to him or
her often?

However, if that really isn't the case - if being unable to nurse
really would leave you genuinely stymied as to what else you could
possibly do to show your affection and responsiveness to that child in
such a way as to build up a strong, loving relationship - then that
would make me seriously worried about your own emotional wholeness and
ability to relate to others. In the highly unlikely event that you
really are that deficient in normal maternal responsiveness, please
recognise that this is your own problem (and needs dealing with), and
do not project it into an assumption that the millions of warm,
loving, affectionate mothers who formula-feed are similarly lacking in
ability to show love.

So
please cut Ed some slack, as I'm sure his opinions are colored by my
own, and I promise to teach him how to use emoticons, so you can know
his mood while he's writing ;-)


Suzanne, don't bother. The reason Ed offended others is that he
claimed that if you don't breastfeed, or don't share a room with your
child, then that automatically means that you're spending that child's
entire childhood neglecting them and possibly abusing them. Those
views are uninformed, judgemental, arrogant, and ridiculously
inaccurate. They do not become acceptable because they were coloured
by the opinions of others, they do not become acceptable because he's
in a calm happy blissed-out mood while writing, they would not be
acceptable if you stuck a smiley on the end. What he needs is not to
use emoticons, but to realise that the word is not the black-and-white
place he paints it, and that there are millions of women out there who
formula feed and/or put their babies to sleep in separate rooms and
who maintain warm, loving, affectionate relationships with those
babies.


Sarah
--
http://www.goodenoughmummy.typepad.com

  #20  
Old April 23rd 08, 10:10 PM posted to misc.kids.pregnancy
Chris
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 223
Default baby in separate room from mother at night?

On Apr 21, 3:10�am, Ed Augusts wrote:
I am thinking over the results I've seen in families where the baby
is, typically, nursed by the mother, and spends the night close to the
mother, as compared to families where the baby is immediately put on
formula and then sleeps in a room down the hall. �There is this
insidious "Ferberizing" process many young parents inflict upon their
children in which they let their kids cry themselves to sleep at night
until they get used to being without Mom and sleeping alone in their
own little room. �Oh, yes! �Let's make the little guy 'tough' by
making him cry, and then ignore his cries until he or she gets over it
and becomes insensitive to whether they're sleeping with mom or not.
(Is that insane, or what?) �This neglect often goes along with putting
these kids on formula. �In my experience, it is NEVER a breastfeeding
mother who also locks her child away in a room down the hall at night
where they have to cry themselves to sleep!

Looking at the results, that is, what becomes of this unfortunate
child who is denied his or her mother's love, space, breastmilk and
also physical protection, tells an ugly story.

I know of a girl who was adopted into a very austere and Spartan
household in which love was nothing but a 4-letter word, �and the
adoptive mother could not stand to be in the child's presence child
for very long. The baby's room was down the hall, I guess so she could
sometimes choose to ignore her when she cried. �The adoptive mom
THOUGHT she wanted to have a baby --then changed her mind. �But she
didn't give the baby to someone who would love her, she kept the baby,
but just didn't LOVE her or make the child feel loved... Well,
unfortunately for all concerned, that child no sooner got into her
teens than she got into a syndrome of self-abuse by cutting herself in
parallel lines on her arms and legs with knives and razor blades. �She
did this before she was half-way through high school. �That child, as
a grown woman, had at least one abortion and later became a lesbian.
She has had absolutely no contact with her adoptive mother or father
for many years now.

Here is a second case, a businessman who, for his entire life, has
hated his mother because she never told him she loved him, never, in
his memory, hugged or kissed him, and kept him in a small dingy room
down the hall throughout most of his childhood. �She never breastfed
him, she told him such a thing "freaked her out", she would not want a
baby on her breast! �This is a mother who STILL makes fun of her child
and enjoys telling a roomful of guests nothing but unflattering
stories about her boy. �This man is now close to 50 years old, and he
confided to me that he is still a virgin. �Guess what? �He says he has
"issues" with his mother, and somehow ALL women seem to him to be a
little bit LIKE his mother, therefore he has never had a successful
relationship with an adult woman, not in the business world, nor in
private. Women are "things" to be "consumed" as "eye candy" at a strip
joint or sex magazine, but he cannot figure out how to get close to a
woman -- �not in real life!

My point is very simple, and I'm sorry if I sound like I'm "preaching
to the choir", but some of women reading this article MAY NOT be
planning to hug and kiss and breastfeed their babies, and I really
thought any such mothers-to-be out there ought to consider the
consequences of a lack of intimacy with your baby! �You have the
AWESOME responsibility of raising either a well-adjusted, happy,
mentally healthy child, one whom you keep close to your breast, and in
your room... OR, �participating in raising an unhappy, wretched little
child whom you put away in a dark little room down the hall, �whom you
don't breastfeed, whom you make to be alone and lonesome, and who may
very well grow up to be either a self-destructive self-mutilator, or
possibly an inhuman, unfeeling, monster, a child who wants to give
back to women exactly what his or her mother gave them in their
childhood --- coldness and contempt! �Remember, MOST of the contempt
is actually reserved by the neglected child FOR HIS OR HER MOTHER.
Think carefully, now, about how you decide to raise this baby!
"Ferberize" and harm them? �And lose their love and respect? � Or,
love them and be loved in return, both now and as long as you live!
Which will it be? �Is it really all that hard to decide?

Best wishes & hoping you choose wisely, �------Edhttp://www.breastpumppedal.com


It doesn't matter one bit what you want to assume every parent is
doing just because they don't cosleep, but the fact of the matter is
that many parents have their children in separate rooms and those
children don't CIO and are not left to do so and who do just fine
sleeping on their own, and yes even breastfeeding mothers have their
children sleeping in separate rooms, including myself.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Mother lived lavishly while keeping her adopted children locked inside a utility room [email protected] General 0 August 11th 07 02:40 PM
6 month old's crib in parents' room causing night waking? [email protected] General 2 January 3rd 07 02:51 PM
Night light in nursling's room [email protected] General 20 February 11th 05 02:10 PM
infant/baby room monitor John Doe Pregnancy 0 January 27th 05 08:55 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.