Attachment Parenting group?

[jollybaby]

I agree it's the naming and labelling that I don't like - eg. I'm an AP, doing BlW' when of course what we're talking about a spectrum of parenting behaviour. I don't know whether I'm over sensitive but I sometimes detect a hint of superiority with the use of such terms. Stupidly the one that gets me the most is 'exclusively breast fed' -bit silly when it is a valid description, but it makes me (a mum who has introduced the bottle) feel a bit inferior. I think i need some biscuits!

[Saila]

i agree re the labelling thing

i co-slept for months *and* followed the gina ford routine (which worked really well for us and i've since found out isn't 'gina ford' but just a natural routine that babies fall into anyway...)

what does that make me? Gina Fraud?

would i have been welcome to this group as a new mum?

[Saila]

Quote:

Saffron/Keef

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.

i've just reread this and TBH i'm not sure whether i've read it properly...

are you saying those mums that follow a gina ford routine are 'abusing and neglecting' their children?

[Keef]

Okay, I'll put my head on the block.

There are SOME aspects that I would call cruel, yes.

[Saila]

ok - accusations of abuse and neglect aside ..... this is where i get really really confused

i followed gina ford routine from very early on and never had to do 'controlled crying' if that's what you're talking about? In fact, there's no reference to CC in gina ford's book at all b/c you shouldn't have to do it if the baby doesn't get sleep associations (SA) that the mother can't cope with after a few months. SA = Feeding to sleep, rocking to sleep, dummy etc etc

the sad truth is the *only* people i know who have done CC are those mums who couldn't cope any more as the baby had developed sleep assocaitions and the mum was at the end of her tether.

there are so many threads about sleep problems due to SA and families in desperate need of help. They often have to embark on a really tough session of CC.... and i feel really sorry for them as it sounds bloody tough!

There were two mums in my nct group and i know of many personal friends who have resorted to CC, often when the baby's 6months or older. These mums had not done any routine, they'd taken advice to follow the baby's signals and it ended up not working out for them, sadly. However, surely the worst thing to do is accuse them of child abuse too? Surely these mums need support and help? If you've sat with a mother who's not slept for 6months you'd see how desperate it can get

*every* time i speak with a mum in the above situation (and this has been many many times) i just count my blessings

also, all these mums say next time round they'd do things very differently...

it's all up to the individual mum, they should make their own decisions and i dont' think we or anyone, can pass judgement on other people's parenting styles.

[Saffron]

Go back and reread. I think you'll find that's not what was said at all.

Re bottle feeding: In the Sears&Sears book on AP, they acknowledge that some babies are bottle fed for any of a number of valid reasons, and they offer helpful advice on how to incorporate their take on AP into a formula fed routine.

Re terminology/nomenclature: If you say that calling it 'attachment' parenting implies that other styles of parenting are 'non-attached', then you can still make the same argument for calling it 'natural' parenting... other styles of parenting are not 'natural'? They had to call it something, so *from my understanding* they called it attachment parenting b/c it does draw heavily on attachment theory. I have read the Gina Ford books, and I didn't find any attachment theory in them at all. Does that make them wrong? I wouldn't say so. Does that mean that if you follow the Ford/Ferber style your children will turn out non-attached or ambivalent? C'mon let's not be preposterous. 'Baby training' works very well for some parent-baby sets. Everyone is different afterall.

As for smugness, I've seem just as many smug Ford/Ferberites as I have AP parents. So, it looks like that's a personal problem, and not limited to a particular style of parenting! If you went to an AP group and they were horrible to you, then it's a rubbish group, not a rubbish concept. Really sorry to hear of anyone having a bad experience at any support group!

As far as people looking down on you for bottle-feeding, I now have people looking down on me for breast-feeding my nearly 1 yo daughter. People with small minds and big chips on their shoulders can find a reason to look down on anyone.

Personally if I were part of an AP group, I'd want everyone to feel welcome there.

[charlottep]

i agree, i wouldn't call it natural parenting either. i don't think it needs to be labelled anything really, i still think that it's current label is unhelpful and confusing. i think you can over-think these things a little too much - which goes back to someone saying that lots of parents don't even know that they are following an AP approach. Surely, they have simply chosen not to label it.

[Saila]

Keef Wrote:

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

> Okay, I'll put my head on the block.

>

> There are SOME aspects that I would call cruel,

> yes.

keef - i really think you need to be more careful with the use of language about these things. Personally i was very vulnerable and hormonal in the first few months post birth and comments like that can really hurt. Just concious that other equally vulnerable mums could be reading this thread.

[helena handbasket]

Since I'm many time zones behind you, I was afraid that this would have turned into a mummy war thread. I'm pleased that it hasn't.

Keef I hear what you're saying, but I think the misunderstandings come from the fact that The term Gina Ford

(and I do mean term :) has become one of those classification systems peculiar to the British: either you are Gina or AP, Guardian or Daily Mail, working class or middle class. I could go on and on but I will tell you that the thing I miss most about London is the people and I don't recall ever meeting anyone who was so one dimensional as to fit into one category. It does make sense to mix with like minded folk, and I fully support an AP group in ED. It was the language that concerned me.

As for attempting to bottle feed and AP, have a look at the advice they give. Dr. Sears is the most condescending but the International AP website is just as bad. They recommend "attending" to your baby (basically just paying attention),

eye contact, skin to skin etc. as if resorting to the bottle has rendered you too stupid to think of basic mother/child bonding rituals. Keef as a father, did someone have to tell you how to snuggle and love your daughter while you bottle fed her? Would you be offended if someone suggested that because you could not breast feed her that you would have to be taught basic parental love and nurturing?

The reason Gina Ford doesn't mention these things, I suspect, is because she is offering advice on technique. I get the impression that she assumes you know how to love and nurture your own baby, or least she doesn't assume that one can be taught this in a book. I can respect that.

For the record, Gina Ford does not exist outside of the UK. Nobody has ever heard of her here. Yet somehow most babies I know end up on something resembling a GF routine. That's not an accident. The anti GF hysteria needs to come down a few notches I think and it needs to cease to be a a term used to describe cold or authoritarian parenting. That was what I was getting at in the beginning, and I still think that if one sat down and rationally compared parenting styles you would find that they are a lot closer than you think.

[helena handbasket]

Keef I just noticed this. Um, wow. Don't take this the wrong way because I respect your opinion, but have you actually read any of her books? WTF?;-)

Keef Wrote:

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

> Okay, I'll put my head on the block.

>

> There are SOME aspects that I would call cruel,

> yes.

[Keef]

Just for the record, I never made any accusations of abuse or neglect, and I wasn't talking about Gina Ford specifically (although I still question what qualifies her to tell people anything). I mean no offence to anyone, but I do have my opinions.

[helena handbasket]

Fair enough.

Did you catch my post previous to that? It's a bit less "Keef, why I'm shocked!".

[Keef]

Just for the record, I never made any accusations of abuse or neglect, and I wasn't talking about Gina Ford specifically (although I still question what qualifies her to tell people anything). I mean no offence to anyone, but I do have my opinions. I take on board the suggestion that the language I chose was probably inappropriate. I don't think anyone would do something that was cruel to their own child (except a few nut jobs), but I could never ever do things like CC, because it would feel cruel to me. helena, to answer your question, not all the way through. Read about a third, before deciding it wasn't for me. Also completely agree that GF has become an umbrella term.

[Keef]

Sorry, my phone is misbehaving, so that got half posted.

And Helena, you're pretty much my favourite poster in the family room, and 95 times out of 100, I totally agree with what you say. And even for the other 5, you still put your arguments across in a very sensible way, without getting over passionate ;-)

[Keef]

Read about a third, before deciding it wasn't for me.

Not that it would've made a blind bit of difference had I wanted to follow it to the letter, as Mrs Keef is totally anti GF, and she calls the shots :-S

[helena handbasket]

Aw shucks......

Well I have a sneaking suspicion that once these little critters are all in school it won't make any difference how we parented that first year anyway. It all comes out in the wash, I think. We're all just doing the best we can.

Cheers!:)-D

Keef Wrote:

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

> Sorry, my phone is misbehaving, so that got half

> posted.

>

> And Helena, you're pretty much my favourite poster

> in the family room, and 95 times out of 100, I

> totally agree with what you say. And even for the

> other 5, you still put your arguments across in a

> very sensible way, without getting over passionate

> ;-)

[Keef]

I suspect you're right. I definitely question how much lasting impression it makes.

Anyway, cheers to you too :)-D

[sophiechristophy]

Hi everyone,

Not sure what happened here. The intention of my post was to see if there were any people interested in/following attatchment parenting principles, who would like to meet up. Some people are interested specifically in this subject, that's all, and I thought it would be nice to share ideas.

To clarify - the group would be open, welcoming and supportive!

I don't see this as controversial, and would at this point ask that we draw a close to the debate.

Thanks to everyone who has expressed an interest, I thought it would be nice to have a get together at Sydenham Hill Wood (Cox's Walk entrance), perhaps next Thursday afternoon at 2? Please let any friends that you think would enjoy meeting up know.

Thanks, Sophie

[Saila]

anyway - i personally only felt it was important to comment on this thread to try and give some balance but i'm sorry if this then hyjacked the thread...

anyway - it seems pretty resolved and hopefully the OP can get some responses re meeting up in a group

just one thing - our nct group could not be more diverse. Working mums/SAHMs - Gina/baby-led - home birth/hospital but the group gets on amazingly and i dont' think anyone would want it any different. we all have our different approaches but they're one of the most unjudgemental groups of people i've ever met. We used to share tips and experiences and now we just enjoy a drink together and rarely talk about baby stuff anymore. it's great!

if i hung out with just like-minded (or different approaches as we're all pretty like-minded) people, life wouldn't be so rich.

anyway - it's 7:10pm... better get him to bed ;)

edit to say - cross post - jinx!

[sophiechristophy]

saila - my nct group sounds really similar to yours, and i love the ladies in my group and we have a great time together and have done since our babies were born 6 months ago. we meet up at least once a week, and sometimes more.

no one is suggesting that you just hang out with one group of mums all the time are they?

it's just an interest group that's all!!!

[Saila]

cool - i was kinda trying to get it back on topic and originally did get the feeling it was slightly exclusive rather than inclusive, but happily i stand corrected.

[Keef]

My wife works Thursdays unfortunately, but keep us posted.

[lucyar]

Oh no have just seen this post, but am very keen to meet up. Sophie are you planning another?

[Saffron]

>

> Thanks to everyone who has expressed an interest,

> I thought it would be nice to have a get together

> at Sydenham Hill Wood (Cox's Walk entrance),

> perhaps next Thursday afternoon at 2? Please let

> any friends that you think would enjoy meeting up

> know.

>

> Thanks, Sophie

Aw pooh, just saw this post! Did you meet up? How was it? If you want to meet in the new year, could offer my place for an afternoon, if group is not too large. We are very near pretty Hilly Fields park... nice for kids' swings etc.

xx Saff xx

[Fuschia]

i would like tro meet up, preferably at a time when it's just me and the tiniest one...