tonight on C5

"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
yeah, but I guess they are meaning using a sling when you are not actually
going anywhere, but again you've often got to do something and sling is
often much easier than balancing the baby on the hip in the same
situation,
it's as if cooking dinner with baby balanced on one hip is fine, but
sticking them in a sling of carrier on your back isn't!

Actually putting them on the floor to explore their surroundings is easier.
;o)
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

Sue wrote:
"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
yeah, but I guess they are meaning using a sling when you are not actually
going anywhere, but again you've often got to do something and sling is
often much easier than balancing the baby on the hip in the same
situation,
it's as if cooking dinner with baby balanced on one hip is fine, but
sticking them in a sling of carrier on your back isn't!

Actually putting them on the floor to explore their surroundings is easier.
;o)
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

Not if they are howling to be picked up!

Mary Ann

From the RT blurb it looks as though the programme may be discussing
claims that AP ("attached parenting", as they call it), is superior to
other forms, and discussing whether it actually is. That could
potentially be interesting, but I do hope they treat it as "Is one method
of parenting actually any better than any other?" rather than "Which one
is the best?"

Come on, this is Channel 5. Do you really expect them to produce a piece of
un-biased, non-sensationalist tv which examines the issues in an intelligent
manner? It'll be another "OMG look at the bf freaks" programme.

Morag

Morag in Oxford wrote:
From the RT blurb it looks as though the programme may be discussing
claims that AP ("attached parenting", as they call it), is superior to
other forms, and discussing whether it actually is. That could
potentially be interesting, but I do hope they treat it as "Is one method
of parenting actually any better than any other?" rather than "Which one
is the best?"

Come on, this is Channel 5. Do you really expect them to produce a piece of
un-biased, non-sensationalist tv which examines the issues in an intelligent
manner? It'll be another "OMG look at the bf freaks" programme.

Morag

Well, the series is described as "probing into the lives of some of the
world's most intriguing people and exploring the challenges that they
face on a daily basis." It makes no claim to be unbiased or
non-sensationalist.
It it were Panorama or Horizon I would expect something different.

Mary Ann

"Mary Ann" wrote in message
Not if they are howling to be picked up!

Probably because they are so used to being held all the time. Mine were more
interested in exploring and/or sitting in the high chair with something
interesting than being in my arms all the time. Sure, they were held a fair
amount, but I believe more in free-range babies. )
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

Sue wrote:
"Mary Ann" wrote in message
Not if they are howling to be picked up!

Probably because they are so used to being held all the time. Mine were more
interested in exploring and/or sitting in the high chair with something
interesting than being in my arms all the time. Sure, they were held a fair
amount, but I believe more in free-range babies. )

It's not an exact thing I think.
Yes, a baby who likes to be held but isn't will soon learn to entertain
themselves, but many parents choose not to go through that learning
phase and just hold the baby until they are happy to be left.
Some babies are happy to be left (like yours it seems) and so don't
*need* to be held perhaps.
AP to you would be allowing your "happy to explore" baby to do so and
AP to me was holding my son because he was unhappy otherwise.

Mary Ann

Actually putting them on the floor to explore their surroundings is
easier.

hmm, most dinner times that is what happens to start off with, but for some
reason she finds dinner prep time a time to start getting grouchy and
pulling at your legs, I prefer not to automatically shove her in a carrier,
but it ends up that way 6 times out of 7.

Anne

Probably because they are so used to being held all the time. Mine were
more
interested in exploring and/or sitting in the high chair with something
interesting than being in my arms all the time. Sure, they were held a
fair
amount, but I believe more in free-range babies. )

I disagree, Ada is a very free range baby, she gets carried quite a lot at
the moment because she's started being awkward at going down for naps and
sleep, so DH ends up putting her on his back. For some reason she plays
happily for hours on end when you are not stood in the kitchen, but as soon
as either of us stands in the kitchen, she's there, wanting to be picked up.
But in general she spends a lot lot more time exploring than she does being
carried.

Anne

What on earth could be considered wrong about carrying a child in a
sling past walking age?

Not wrong, just unusual.

I'm not sure it's actually particularly unusual, I see a good number of
children who are likely to be walking using back carriers, ok so 95% of
people would use a pushchair in that context, but I think enough are using
back packs for carrying to not be unusual. Though I agree that slings etc I
unusual, I suspect if people started using them and realising that for a
toddler they are usually more comfortable than back packs that more toddlers
would be carried.

Anne

"Anne Rogers" wrote in message
hmm, most dinner times that is what happens to start off with, but for
some
reason she finds dinner prep time a time to start getting grouchy and
pulling at your legs, I prefer not to automatically shove her in a
carrier,
but it ends up that way 6 times out of 7.

That's called the witching hour and a horrible hour at that. )
--
Sue (mom to three girls)