"He'll get used to it" - Parenting

[SustainableHappiness]

With a 5 month old baby, unsolicited advice comes from almost all (parents and non-parents alike) people you meet. Well, I'd like to solicit some advice on unsolicited advice.

Often when a topic of parenting comes up like sleep and feeding (the two most prominent for babies), there is always at least 1 person in the group who says something like, "Oh just do harsh method X, he'll get used to it". For example, Ferberizing or the cry it out method of sleep training. Generally this is accompanied by a middle to senior age and typically at least 1 child. From people in my millenial age demographic this typically comes from people with no children.

Anyways, DW and I are on different sides of the spectrum of this argument. We've come to a compromise that both extremes can be detrimental to a child's emotional development specifically (helicopter parenting vs tough love), however I would rather dunk the kid in cold-ish water at the swimming pool than hang out in the warm pool all the time, since cold pools are much more common than warm pools.

What we both agree on is that babies (let's say under the age of 1 and specifically under the age of 6 months) abide by different rules and should be given as much direct love, comfort, etc. as possible because they don't understand the world beyond their own head very well.

I am wondering, where do you stand on this issue? For those with older children, is there an age where "she'll get used to it" becomes more useful as a development tool?

Based on the ERE book, adaptation typically is superior to technological solutions up to a certain point (keeping warm through changing your body versus large heating bills comes to mind), which is definitely in the "she'll get used to it" camp, but what about when kids come into the picture?

[EdithKeeler]

I don’t have children, but my thought is that a tiny baby is a fragile thing and he’s got the rest of his life to “get used to” the cold hard realities of life. I don’t see that it’s possible to “spoil” a child that small, and I have to think it’s more frustrating for a parent to listen to him “cry it out” than to get him up and cuddle him and stop the crying. I’m pretty sure I’d be one of those “attachment parents.”

My only experience is with puppies, but it works with them.

[cmonkey]

+1 to above.

I think the tough love crowd is pretty cruel. A crying baby is generally trying to tell you that it needs something, and at that age (especially under 6 months) all they need is a clean diaper, food and lots of love. They don't cry in the sense of a spoiled 3 year old crying, who might have learned he can get lots of cookies by crying about it. Tough love would be a lack of love and wouldn't accomplish anything at that age. The 3 year old? Sure let em cry it out because they'll soon realize they are miserable and will stop.

[jennypenny]

I wasn't a helicopter parent, I leaned more towards being a cruel parent , but my kids all ended up as good sleepers by 6 months so if you go by my experience, tough love works.

That said, recent studies show that the babies who get the most skin to skin contact (24/7) during the first three years of life are less likely to suffer from a host of ailments down the road, from allergies to ADHD. They don't think tough love causes the ailments, rather that the excessive skin to skin contact boosts the immune system and helps head off developing issues. Cosleeping is dangerous for children though. Kids should sleep near you, or be held while resting in a recliner, but never placed in a bed with adults. You can place a basinet or crib right next to the bed and have a cut out so you can slip your arm in to rest on the baby's tummy while sleeping.

Recent studies also show that when you aren't holding your baby/toddler, you should put them down on the ground -- no seat, stroller, bouncy thing, etc. It improves their motor function and promotes healthy lifelong weight. Think of how non-consumer cultures deal with their kids physically ... they carry them most of the time but when they aren't carrying them, the kids are free to roam, move, get dirty, etc. That seems to be the best way to let kids develop physically because it improves their immune system, microbiome, and motor skills.

Letting your kids roam free when not being held also makes them more tired, which then helps with sleeping. I never understand parents who have their kids inside all day in some sort of contraption who then wonder why their kid won't sleep at night. Get them out. Let them move. Don't be afraid to let them feel the cold or make themselves tired. And when their schedule is screwed up, use jet lag tricks like taking them out in the afternoon sun to help reset their internal clock. I tried to get them out every late afternoon regardless for that reason.

[conwy]

I was coddled, so I'm biased, but I think lots of completely unobstructed free time for play and basically doing nothing puts a child enormously ahead of the game. Just having time and space to think leads to all kinds of creativity and mental energy, which can absolutely super-boost one's career and one's whole life. Even as an adult I try to regularly schedule large blocks of unstructured time to do nothing.

I recently heard about research that indicates that lots of free-time doing absolutely no mental work at all, but accompanied by some kind of mild, repetitive physical labour, like walking, cooking, cleaning, can be shown to positively affect intelligence and mental energy. (Though I get that these 'research experiments' can get a bit dicey when they're too reliant on stats.)

BIG CAVEAT: I never raised kids.

[suomalainen]

With apologies, pay ZERO attention to people who don’t have children. Like, seriously, yawn and ignore them and move on to another topic. As to other parents, take what they say with a giant grain of salt. Anecdotes do not equal data. That said, here’s my $.02!

Know that you’re not only training them at this young age. They are also training you. So, decide how responsive/subservient you are going to be to your little prince or princess and then enjoy being at that level of subservience for the REST. OF. YOUR. LIFE.

As you may surmise, I fell/fall on the “asshole parent” side of the spectrum. I put up with very little bullshit. But, I talk to them about why I am the way I am. Kinda like doing Dead Poets Society as we go. Can’t tell you how it works out. The experiment is ongoing. But, they’ll have stuff to talk to their therapists about either way, so my take is that life can’t be too easy for them, so I don’t ask “how high?” When they say “jump”. I know many, many parents that do. Everything from food (if they’re hungry, they’ll eat. If they skip a meal, they won’t die. I have a dozen or so times offered them what is on their plate that they think is disgusting or air. “Choose. You have 5 seconds. I care not what your choice is.”) to phones (not a fucking chance in the world I give them a free phone).

Yeah. Total asshole.

[Campitor]

A baby spends almost an entire year of life inside a water filled cavity inside their mother. The amniotic fluid amplifies all the bodily sound inside the mother including all the vocalizing she does - it's a nonstop techno-dance rave of sound. Suddenly the baby is born and it's supposed to find a quiet room normal while it lies in a crib alone? I think this is torture for a newborn and it responds by crying. There is nothing wrong with checking on a baby that's starts to cry within his or her 1st year outside the womb in my humble opinion. I have 2 kids - adults now - and I always picked them up when they cried at night - they grew up to be normal and well adjusted.

[suomalainen]

@camp reminded me of a nuance I should make clear in full disclosure: when they were super young, I would certainly pick them up most every time, but I would wait 5 or 10 minutes. Both to give them a chance to learn to self-soothe as well as to avoid becoming a trained seal.

I still struggle with what’s the right balance, but overall I’m happy with my generally “tough love” approach. My wife balances me out but can be pretty damn tough herself from time to time.

[EdithKeeler]

All I know for sure is: these parents did it wrong:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/pa ... li=BBnb7Kz

[7Wannabe5]

I'm a soft touch, but I have my limits, so when I was still having to walk the floor back and forth with my breast-fed to cherubic obesity (he's a very slender adult-lol) son every night, I decided to try the let him cry it out method. He was still too young to stand or walk independently, but somehow he managed to grasp the top bar of the crib, climb up the rails with his sticky toes, and throw himself up and over on to the thinly carpeted floor. I opened the door and he was just sitting there on the floor with a shit-faced grin on his face, so I just had to start laughing. Baby-1/Mom-0 in that go-round.

In other battles I stuck to my guns a bit better. For instance, I packed all sorts of weird leftover combinations in their lunch-bags and never listened to their complaints, and I gave my daughter a strict limit of 2 activities/week such as Girl Scouts, cheer-leading, or soccer.

This Xmas I gave each of them a copy of "The Knowledge" with instructions that I expected them to memorize the contents in case I am in my 80s and decrepit when the SHTF, and my DD26 said "Thanks for the most depressing present ever!", but then she started laughing and gave me a hug.

[Peanut]

Well, babies can get used to a lot of things: being driven in the car for long periods of time, spending their days at daycare, conforming to an adult schedule, etc. And if that's what the parents need to do so be it.

If you're more into the evolutionary parenting style, you conform to the baby's preferences. There's a great "womb vs world" schematic out there that points out how drastically different things are for the newborn (constant nutrition, temperature, and holding--vs--hunger, hot and cold, much less holding). So from the moment of birth there's already a lot to get used to. You can do a lot to ease the transition.

How much do you do? That's a matter of figuring out how much you can take, because at some point baby will break you unless your baby is an easy one. For example, the breastfeeding recommendation is to wait until a year to sleeptrain. That's a looong time for a mother to go without an uninterrupted night of sleep. Believe me, I know.

For about nine months I emulated the NBA star Russell Westbrook. He's a maniac on the court from opening tip to final buzzer and when asked once if he gets tired, he said, "No. I just decide not to." That was my mantra until baby decided waking every three hours was child's play and upped it to every hour. Then I decided separate sleeping quarters and *some* crying was in order. Close to her first birthday, she still gets soothed a couple of times a night but since getting a second wind I figure I can wait six more months to sleep.

[stand@desk]

We have a 2.3 year old and in my opinion I think it's better to be dovish than hawkish in raising your child (in the earlier stages). Especially the younger they are. I think at some point you can tell when they are crying out to manipulate you instead of being in real anguish and that is when you can turn more hawkish. When they are capable of understanding and learning then it's time to move more to the right. But when they are crying uncontrollably then I believe you need to be more dovish. It's not good for the child or the parent for the child to be in a fit of crying and the parent just ignoring the child. It needs to be soothed to get it out of the unhelpful mental state.

[SustainableHappiness]

Cool feedback (and thank you), I am happy to see a blend of all styles in the answers, as it confirms my implicit, most parenting styles work (success in this case = allow child to reach independence) as long as there is underlying love and understanding.

How much do you do? That's a matter of figuring out how much you can take

This, combined with some of Jennypenny's comments on not strapping child into device X for long period (although I don't agree with JP on co-sleeping as long as both parents aren't smokers, drunk or weird sleepers), are how I would tie this back to ERE style savings/spendings... financial backing (traded in for more time of course) ups “how much you can take”.

After being off for the past 5-ish months with our newborn, my wife and I have periodically reflected on possible differences in our parenting day-to-day with only one of us home AND the necessity of both parents going back to work at the end of the maternity/paternity leaves. Here is a few examples, after writing it out I noticed almost all of them are changes towards the dovish-ness Stand@Desk mentioned:

- Very little “swing-time”. Without the distraction of the swing or other devices, with our baby (highly active, I’ve met other babies that are more chill) unless the baby is sleeping you have very little time to do things around the house or showering or internet errands, etc. therefore DW would’ve likely relied more heavily on it

- Co-sleeping, whether or not you agree with it, there is no way I could sleep in the same bed as a baby who is waking up regularly to feed (breastfed) while working 50 hours a week and still be content for a long period -> Dad would be on the fouton, OR baby would be in a crib (which we never actually bought…)

- Sleep training in general, we probably would have heavily invested our time into trying various methods, or been more upset over bad nights and sleep regressions…Instead, we drink two cups of tea or coffee instead of 1 and stare at each other with zombie eyes for a bit.

Unfortunately, we’ll have to wait 10-20 years to determine the results of the experiment.

[7Wannabe5]

Nope. Unfortunately, I must inform you that the results will never be in. So, just relax and focus on process rather than product.