the dreaded "sleep thru night" thread

"Stephanie and Tim" wrote:

A baby can be smart enough to understand that they
are not abandoned and whether they like it or not, they have to sleep by
themselves rather than attached to mom's breast or whatever.

A "baby" understands this? How do you know that to be
factually correct?

And would that, then, mean that "seperation anxiety"
is a myth? After all, if they are so damn smart to know
that we aren't *really* leaving them......


P. Tierney

"Stephanie and Tim" wrote:

He was getting buckets of love and closeness all day
long. I never got a bit of housework done. We are still paying off the
credit cards from all our takeout.

Well, personal anecdotes can be used all day. I can contrast my
peaceful, debtless, Searsish household with the wacky Ferber one a
few streets down. But I'm not sure that it would mean anything.

One thing that never comes up in the evil cry-it-out debate is the CHILD's
need for sleep. When I was sleeping with my son, we both slept for total
****. I did not really realize that HE was also sleeping for **** until he
started sleeping for longer periods by himself. He became more cheerful
during the day and more able to play. Parents are lambasted for being so
selfish that they have to sleep at the expense of their poor crying child.
But this does not tell the whole picture.

What about the part of the picture in which children sleep
better with their parents, and are more cheerful during the day and
more able to play?


P. Tierney

P. Tierney wrote in message
What about the part of the picture in which children sleep
better with their parents, and are more cheerful during the day and
more able to play?

Not all children and that would be your first mistake. )

--
Sue (mom to three girls)
I'm Just a Raggedy Ann in a Barbie Doll World...

"Elizabeth Reid" wrote in message
om...
toto wrote in message
. ..
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 16:00:15 GMT, "Melissa"
wrote:

I'm not buying that. I know that's what Dr. Sears says, but his advice
wasn't working for us. Perhaps his children didn't wake up night after
night
every hour needing to be rocked/bounced back to sleep for 20 minutes.
Perhaps he had help so that he or Martha wasn't totally sleep deprived
and
becoming a bad parent because of lack of sleep. Perhaps he just doesn't
need
as much sleep as I do. Whatever the reason, the entire household was
getting
ugly because no one was sleeping.

My granddaughter did, though.

And she nursed back to sleep rather than being rocked.

This doesn't follow from the above. Can you expand?

I do understand that parents need sleep to function well, but I think
that using CIO techniques is generally unproductive because you
still have to listen to the crying and when it is over, you have a
child who has essentially *given up*

You have to listen to the crying for a few nights, as opposed to
losing sleep indefinitely. I had tried a lot of the techniques
in the NCSS and tried just toughing it out, but I was severely
non-functional and so, as I've mentioned, was my son. If all
we were doing was trading crying in my arms for crying in the
crib, I would agree that it was wrong to do it. As it is, we've
traded crying in my arms for sleeping in the crib, and it happened
really quickly.

As for having given up - I've read old threads debating this
issue, but is there any direct evidence of harm?


I have never seen the difference between a child who "gives up" asking for
more candy when she does not get it at the age of 2. The child has
understood the reality that mom and dad mean them to sleep thus. Those of us
who have seen it applied to the right situation for a child for whom it is
appropriate have NOT seen this big drama. Perhaps Dorothy has seen it
applied wrongly and seen responses that I have not.

I know that
children who are consistently and pervasively ignored do
'give up', stop being responsive, and fail to thrive.


This is similar to a point I was making earlier. A child who is well loved
and cared for and gets lots of attention will not suffer harm. A child who
is left to cry in his crib as part of a pattern of being ignored is in a
completely different boat.

I've
never read any actual research (as opposed to Dr. Sears'
opinions on the matter) that shows that children who are
otherwise loved and cared for have this kind of response to
CIO/sleep training/whatever you want to call it.

Anecdotally, I can affirm with conviction that putting my
son down to sleep awake, even when he's unhappy about it,
has not turned him into an apathetic lump who turns his
face to the wall when I enter the room. When he wakes up,
he almost always summons me with a confident "Mama!"
(sometimes followed by "Dada!" if I don't move quickly
enough). If the whole thing has produced a profound lack
of trust, it's not obvious.

Beth

"P. Tierney" wrote in message
news:H5Gub.186571$ao4.650086@attbi_s51...

"Stephanie and Tim" wrote:

He was getting buckets of love and closeness all day
long. I never got a bit of housework done. We are still paying off the
credit cards from all our takeout.

Well, personal anecdotes can be used all day. I can contrast my
peaceful, debtless, Searsish household with the wacky Ferber one a
few streets down. But I'm not sure that it would mean anything.

One thing that never comes up in the evil cry-it-out debate is the
CHILD's
need for sleep. When I was sleeping with my son, we both slept for total
****. I did not really realize that HE was also sleeping for **** until
he
started sleeping for longer periods by himself. He became more cheerful
during the day and more able to play. Parents are lambasted for being so
selfish that they have to sleep at the expense of their poor crying
child.
But this does not tell the whole picture.

What about the part of the picture in which children sleep
better with their parents, and are more cheerful during the day and
more able to play?


P. Tierney




I have absolutely NO problem with this. I was responding specifically to a
claim that a Ferber method would cause irreparable harm to the baby. If
co-sleeping is your family's bag, then rock on. I wished for this myself
when my son was small.

S

"P. Tierney" wrote in message
news:G_Fub.185293$9E1.997564@attbi_s52...

"Stephanie and Tim" wrote:

A baby can be smart enough to understand that they
are not abandoned and whether they like it or not, they have to sleep by
themselves rather than attached to mom's breast or whatever.

A "baby" understands this? How do you know that to be
factually correct?



Of course, I do not. Not any more than one knows it is factually correct
that each baby feels abandoned when left in a crib.

And would that, then, mean that "seperation anxiety"
is a myth? After all, if they are so damn smart to know
that we aren't *really* leaving them......


P. Tierney



I have no experience with this. My son never showed any signs of separation
anxiety at any age, though I find it easy to believe it is real. The Ferber
method worked like text book with no observable side effects except better
sleep for all. BUT I also have no reason to assume that being alone is bad
or that kids need or even want a person with them at all times unless
conditioned thus. I would bet that this is different by child and family.
But I do not see any reason to assume that all children always want their
mom with them. So even if the child does not know mom will be back, she may
be perfectly happy that way. For instance, my daughter just woke up. She is
gooing in her crib. She is alone. I am not there. She is not crying. I am
going to get her now though. Can't wait to see her, she is so cute.

S

"toto" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 13:43:50 GMT, "Stephanie and Tim"
wrote:

Have you never "caused" your child to endure crying in the car seat for
something so life and death as meeting a friend for lunch? (Dorothy, I am
not speaking to "you" specifically when I say "you." I am just spewing
thoughts as they come up.

Not in infancy. And by that I mean until the child is a walking
toddler. The in arms phase of infancy is simply too important
because that is when the child learns to trust.




On what is the age deliniation made?

--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:46:31 GMT, "Stephanie and Tim"
wrote:

I have no experience with this. My son never showed any
signs of separation anxiety at any age, though I find it
easy to believe it is real.

While you may think this is good, it's a sign that the baby did
not bond properly with you. While separation anxiety doesn't
have to be severe, NO signs of it ever is not a *good* thing.

Separation anziety is a sign that the baby's brain has begun
to understand that sometimes objects disappear and do not
come back. A baby who doesn't exhibit at least some, may
not have learned object permanence or may not be attached
to the parent well.

The Ferber method worked like text book with no observable
side effects except better sleep for all.

One possible side effect may be the fact that your child did
not show separation anxiety because he had given up on
believing you would rescue him from any bad situation.

BUT I also have no reason to assume that being alone is bad
or that kids need or even want a person with them at all times
unless conditioned thus.

Of course being *alone* sometimes is not a bad thing.
But for infants who cannot control anything at all in their
world, it is scary. As children become more mobile and
can get back to the presence of their parents when they
need to on their own, they want to be alone and may
amuse themselves well. But for infants who are beginning
to be mobile, mom is *home base* They will explore, but
come back to see where she is usually.

I would bet that this is different by child and family. But I
do not see any reason to assume that all children always
want their mom with them.

Infants don't have any sense that their mom is separate
from them. They are still very much self-centered and
there are reasons why that have to do with their total
helplessness. An infant cannot feed himself, or keep
himself warm without his mom being there.

So even if the child does not know mom will be back,
she may be perfectly happy that way. For instance,
my daughter just woke up. She is gooing in her crib.
She is alone. I am not there. She is not crying. I am
going to get her now though. Can't wait to see her, she
is so cute.

Many babies are fine alone for short periods if they are
not hungry or wet or in distress about something else.
That doesn't mean they won't welcome companionship.
And it is true that babies personalities are different in
how much cuddling and holding they need. You follow
the infant's lead in this.

S


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 12:46:52 GMT, "Stephanie and Tim"
wrote:

Not in infancy. And by that I mean until the child is a walking
toddler. The in arms phase of infancy is simply too important
because that is when the child learns to trust.




On what is the age deliniation made?

It may be a different age for each child. It has to do with the
independence and mobility of the child not a specific age.


--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

Ericka Kammerer wrote in message
...
My 6yo cries more now than he did as a baby ;-)
People always think I'm crazy when I say how much I
enjoy parenting babies, but I think I must just have
either really easy babies or some sort of knack for
baby parenting (or some combination). Unfortunately,
come the toddler years I'm apparently SOL ;-)

I don't know anyone that has an easy time with toddlers. At least
babies are driven only by needs and are thus somewhat logical to deal
with. Toddlers have wants and are often completely illogical or their
wants conflict with their needs. Or they want one thing then if you
give it to them they have a crying fit because they *don't* want it, or
want something else instead. E.g. the purple spoon not the red fork. I
have eight grown nieces and nephews and I always said while I was
growing up that I liked them best before they could talk. (Of course
that's no longer true
--
Cheryl S.
Mom to Julie, 2 yr., 7 mo.
And Jaden, 2 months

Cleaning the house while your children are small is like
shoveling the sidewalk while it's still snowing.