Attachment Parenting group?

[sophiechristophy]

Hi everyone,

Hope you have all been cosy in this cold weather! I was just wondering if there is a group of attachment parenting types getting together? So far I have only been able to find a group in west London.

Anyone know?

Thanks!! Sophie x

[LeilahB]

I'd be interested in that as well - do let me know if you manage to track one down! Thanks, L

[womanofdulwich]

i did not know this phrase- thank you- but now i have googled it- isn't this what everyone does anyway? how does it differ- or is it just " normal parenting" anyway with a different name?

[Saffron]

Attachment parenting is the opposite end of the spectrum from Gina-Ford type parenting. Jean Liedloff's book 'The Continuum Concept' is the basis for what is now known as attachment parenting. You are welcome to borrow it from me.

I don't know of any groups specifically for attachement parenting, but I would also be interested.

xx

[Ann]

I'm with womanofdulwich on this one. I thought attachment was a psychological process in normal child development not a style of parenting, will have to google it myself.

I'm not against books on parenting at all but surely instincts are the best guide? Sorry I'm probably sounding a bit old fashioned, but attachment parenting group almost implies that other parents are non-attached?

[Keef]

My wife would be interested, if you set anything up.

[Saffron]

Ann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I'm with womanofdulwich on this one. I thought

> attachment was a psychological process in normal

> child development not a style of parenting, will

> have to google it myself.

>

> I'm not against books on parenting at all but

> surely instincts are the best guide? Sorry I'm

> probably sounding a bit old fashioned, but

> attachment parenting group almost implies that

> other parents are non-attached?

Attachment is a psychological process with three generally recognised outcomes: attached, non-attached, ambivalent. Following on from Jean Liedloff's theory of the continuum concept, attachment parenting as a style seeks the best ways to build a trusting and lasting bond between each parent and child as individuals. In general, AP encourages breastfeeding, babywearing, co-sleeping, and learning to read your baby's cues (belief in baby's cries). For many modern parents, my impression is that insticts get diverted among our hectic lives. AP is an approach to raising children which seeks to help parents tune into this; it is not about 'baby training'. It is not a strict set of rules. Many parents do practice elements of the AP style w/o even knowing it.

(Also, Jean Leidloff's book is not a book on parenting. It is a dissertation of her personal observations in sociology.)

[womanofdulwich]

I think attachment parenting is what many of us would call natural parenting. I didn't read Gina ford,but I expect whereas I reached a point where " enough is enough" and I thought my relationship with my partner was worth putting the baby in another room - means I departed from attachment parenting. Otherwise it sounds good to me.(tu)

[hanstands]

If there isn't a group then perhaps we could start one? There seems to be enough keen on here to start one...

[sophiechristophy]

I think it would be great to start one!

[charlottep]

Not a particularly helpful nomenclature as it seems to imply that if you don't exclusively breastfeed or co-sleep, or if you follow a routine, you and your baby are less likely to form an attachment. Although I'm sure that's not the intention.

[helena handbasket]

Actually Gina Ford and attachment parenting are at the same end of the spectrum. These both include versions of mothers who take their role seriously and work to provide the best start for their child, regardless of abstract value assumptions.

The opposite end of the spectrum is severe neglect and/or mental illness.

I just thought it was important to clarify this for the new moms out there who are having trouble breast feeding or co-sleeping and terrified that they will have babies with ambivalent attachment.

Please be careful how you chose your words.

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Attachment parenting is the opposite end of the

> spectrum from Gina-Ford type parenting. Jean

> Liedloff's book 'The Continuum Concept' is the

> basis for what is now known as attachment

> parenting. You are welcome to borrow it from me.

>

> I don't know of any groups specifically for

> attachement parenting, but I would also be

> interested.

>

> xx

[charlottep]

Yes, I'm with Helena on this. That makes perfect common sense to me

[sillywoman]

Different spectrums though. Saffron's is a spectrum of parenting approaches, you describe a much broader spectrum of 'what makes a good parent'. Not the same thing.

You did make me LOL though by describing Gina and attachment parenting as "the same end of the spectrum". I suspect both camps will have choked on their lattes reading that.

[sophiechristophy]

agree with sillywoman - HH you are talking about a different kind of spectrum. And as I understand it, attachment parenting doesn't demand "exclusive" anything, but is more an approach/style. you can still follow attachment parenting principles even if you aren't co-sleeping, breastfeeding etc, through other expressions of parenting.

[helena handbasket]

SW I think only the attachment people will care about the comparison TBH

I'm not one, but I think the Gina people just want a bit of sleep, from what I can tell.

Anyway my point is that people who have never heard of either will read that, and based on Saffron' s explanations will interpret a pretty obvious good/bad bias which is not accurate and unfair. If you are going to talk about spectrums then a bit of clarifying is in order. My background is in child psychology and I feel compelled to reassure parents that attachment theory (not to be confused with the movement called attachment parenting) is much more concerned with attention, care, and love than wether or not your baby has a bottle of formula or goes to bed at 7:00.

I fully understand the theory of attachment parenting (more than many who live it I suspect). I have no opinion either way and I obviously can't fault the intentions. But I wonder why it seems to come loaded with value statements? I felt that the explanations that were given to Ann and womaofdulwich were misleading. I am not even a little bit interested in getting into a parenting debate. I hope your group comes together for you. Good luck!

[echo]

I would love to attend any group that is set up. I have used a lot of the 'attachment' parenting methods and I had difficulties at times. So peer support, would be great.

[bluesuperted]

Very interested too Sophie!

Lucy x

[Smiler]

Don't get the appeal of deliberately meeting up with people with (possibly) similar approaches to parenting, rather than just other parents in general.

Prefer the "I like biscuits" approach.

[reren]

Im a very new parent and following no method at all in the early fug of parenting. Im surprised that this innocuous post on the usually good natured family room has elicited such strong feelings. Surely everyone is just desperately trying to find something that suits them and their child. Not surprising that people might want to meet others who are drawn to the same type of thing they are. Its so easy to feel alone as a parent and quite hard if everyone you know is parenting very differently from you.

[Saffron]

charlottep, helena, et al, there is no value judgement, real or implied. Attachment parenting (different from attachment theory, as you correctly point out) is a flexible style of parent-child interaction that does allow for the incorporation of other parenting styles (eg, bottle feeding, non-cosleeping). It doesn't have to be an all-or-nothing approach. In fact, some of the AP books give good tips on how to incorporate others practices into AP.

I would still personally consider AP to be the opposite end of the spectrum from 'baby training' (eg Ford or Ferber) *as a parenting style* b/c abuse and neglect are not parenting styles, IMHO.

Smiler, I think everyone would be welcome to an AP group, no? But sometimes it's nice to be supported by other people with similar ideas... and if their approaches are (possibly) different, maybe we learn something new from each other?

Anyone been to the group in W London to see what it's like?

[helena handbasket]

Well, as someone who once dared to show up at one and *gasp* bottle fed my son (long story, none of their business really), I can tell you that I became invisible in the amount of time it takes to whisper "horrible mother". I tried two more meetings but it was clear that nobody thought I belonged there. Sometimes you just know. Not good for the PND, but that's another thread.

Judging by the thread on self esteem, mothers don't need an excuse to feel bad about themselves. All I was asking is that you use care and clarity in your descriptions. When you mention the range of outcomes as attached, non-attached and ambivalent and then describe the spectrum as AP at one end and Gina Ford at the other, can you really not see how some people who are not familiar with these terms might make assumptions?

I came on here asking for sensitivity for struggling new moms, and the response is "I'm surprised that this innocuous post on the usually good natured family room has elicited such strong feelings".

[charlottep]

Sorry, ladies, absolutely not meaning to make judgement. Reren, no strong feeling on my part, i'm just genuinely confused by the term and am seeking to understand it better. I would have thought that "attachment parenting" is just "loving" parenting focused on bringing up a well-rounded, secure and contented child, especially if it is flexible in style or approach. And if it is flexible in style or approach, why is it at the opposite end of the routine spectrum, i.e. couldn't you do all those things that mark "attachment parenting" within a routine?

[womanofdulwich]

i think this thread is really about finding a positive group of people to support each other in natural babyled parenting. I think this is what 75% of parents do, and probably even more in those that live in Dulwich.

I know there are some childcare books that are more of the imposing a routine on your baby- not sure who wrote them- but they might give you support as a parent to steer you through this difficult time- some people can take a lot of solace in a strict book ( which covers every eventuality) compared to all the conflicting advice you can get from family, friends and media. I don't have any strong feelings about this, but I think this group if started would support parents to "do" attachment parenting.I have learnt a lot from following this thread.

[Keef]

Well, as someone who once dared to show up at one and *gasp* bottle fed my son (long story, none of their business really), I can tell you that I became invisible in the amount of time it takes to whisper "horrible mother".

For the record, anyone who thinks that giving a baby a bottle is bad, is a fcking idiot.

I do think that a group for people following a similar style is a good thing though. It's peer support, nothing sinister about it.

The "I like biscuits" thing is for general use, which is great, it doesn't have to be an us and them thing. But if people have made a particular choice as to how they want to approach parenting, why shouldn't they meet with like minded parents, to support each other?

I would still personally consider AP to be the opposite end of the spectrum from 'baby training' (eg Ford or Ferber) *as a parenting style* b/c abuse and neglect are not parenting styles, IMHO.

Controversial, but I find I have to agree when it comes to certain aspects.