Gina Ford's new book - new mums & sex

[sophiechristophy]

Re: breastfeeding and GF - while she might describe a BF routine in her book, breast feeding to a routine itself can compromise a mother's milk supply as by not feeding on demand, the mother's body might not be responding to the babies actual needs and producing milk accordingly. This might prompt her to stop breastfeeding and switch to formula. Also, the expressing/formula feeding aspect might again confuse the baby/mothers' supply/create stress, complicating the establishment of BFing. Basically, breastfeeding on demand, the most straight forward way of establishing breastfeeding, is not possible in her routine.

[sophiechristophy]

Furthermore, her routine perpetuates the misconception that babies need to feed only every four hours - therefore if a baby needs to feed more frequently than this, the breastfeeding mum might think that her milk isn't enough to satisfy her baby/that she has a 'hungry' baby, when in fact it is perfectly NORMAL for a baby to need to feed more frequently than 4 hours. As a result she may switch to formula.

[Pickle]

I don't really want to get into a GF debate, however must say that nowhere in her book does it say to not feed your baby if he/she seems hungry. I followed her routines with my first 2 children, both were BF, and in my daughter's case she never took a bottle so was exclusively BF until 15 months. So it's not all doom and gloom for breastfeeding if you have babies in a routine :)

[Saila]

I keep getting the impression a lot of criticism of GF is from those who've not read her book 'Contented Little Baby'

I dont know about anyone else, but when my baby son was hungry, i had about 3 seconds to somehow get a breast/bottle in him or the world would end. I can't imagine not feeding a hungry baby - his cry was an unbearable, urgent cry.

I think perhaps there's confusion with a strict sleep regime imposed back in the 1940s. I dont know what it was called but it involved ignoring hungry babies. Quite shocking in retrospect. And possibly why (on this forum) following the 7am-7pm routine was called 'child abuse' by someone. I'm not sure that's what other mums need to hear, even if that's what you think.

Also lots of confusion about controlled crying. In the CLB, GF advises to leave a baby for max of 5 mins to try and settle themsevles and if they dont to go back to the baby - very similar to baby whisperer.

no one is forcing mums to read her book. If some people dont like her, then that's fine. but leave others to make their own minds up.

In terms of marketing. I think GF has a terrible reputation (which i'm still confused by). The reason that her book sells is cos it works for lots of people.

Success, and word of mouth sell that book, certinaly not marketing - her reputation is awful

[Saffron]

hellosailor Wrote:

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

> Otta and Saffron, the quote you are attributing to

> me is not actually my post but somebody else's!

> Just sayin'! xx

Yes, sorry that's confusing! Wasn't meant to be as such. I've re-edited (corectly, I hope) for the cut and paste error!!.xx

[Saffron]

Pickle Wrote:

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

> I don't really want to get into a GF debate,

> however must say that nowhere in her book does it

> say to not feed your baby if he/she seems hungry.

> I followed her routines with my first 2 children,

> both were BF, and in my daughter's case she never

> took a bottle so was exclusively BF until 15

> months. So it's not all doom and gloom for

> breastfeeding if you have babies in a routine :)

I wouldn't dispute that, and I know another mother who successfully breastfood two children using GF routines. What makes me sad are the women who fail to recognize the early signs of hunger in their children b/c they expect to feed them only as per the schedule.

[Saffron]

Belle Wrote:

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

> No, as I said I didn't mean to start a pro/anti

> Gina debate - I found elements of her book useful

> and incorporated them first time round, and I do

> agree she is maligned unfairly in some cases (if

> you read her book you see that she doesn't do the

> whole crying out thing she's often associated

> with, and in fact strongly says do not leave e.g

> an overtired child crying/ do not leave a toddler

> with fear of the dark in a dark room etc. )

Just to be clear, GF does use and promote her version of cc/cio. In her CLB book, she describes using her version of cc and cio on a 5.5 month old baby, where she describes leaving the baby alone and crying for over an hour.* This is 'cry-it-out'. Dr Christopher Green specifically designed 'controlled crying' as an alternative to cry-it-out.** His very specific method of controlled crying was tested on babies as young as 6 months, and it was not recommended for (a) babies under 6 months, or (b) for general use. It was a method to be used only when other approaches (and there are MANY) had failed.

* G. Ford (1999) The Contented Little Baby Book. {pp 134-135} Random House UK.

* C. Green (2001) New Toddler Taming. {pp 150-152} Random House UK.

But back to the OP's topic, just wondering how GF would help new mums with sex? Would she for example make date charts for jiggy time, and expect you to put a star on them???? I'm actually curious to read her book, but slightly repulsed by what a waste of time it would be. I mean, I could be reading an acutal newspaper instead, such a rare treat these days. Can't even remember when I last sat down with a real Sunday paper and no one climbing on my head. If I wait long enough she might come out with a book for that too. 'GF: How to read a newspaper'... I don't know how to change the oil in my car either. Maybe I'll check with GF, she probably owns a car. ;-)

[Belle]

Hmm my memory was she talks about 'crying down' i.e a wind down cry if the baby is tired for a few minutes or so after being put down, which is what we did with my first son - v different to an 'i need something cry' - will have to check back to my book as I am sure I remember her being v clear about not leaving a child crying.

Re feeding 4 hourly, again that's a bit of a myth - she addresses this too near the start of the book if I recall correctly. She does graduate the routines towards that but not much - e.g. she's v keen on the 'split feed' so having fed at 2ish you might do a half feed at 5ish then another after bath. As everyone says with GF though, you do tend to pick and choose the bits you like.

[Saila]

i do remember she runs through examples of various problems people had at the back of the book (hence page 134 in your reference)? i assume that's where you found that CC quote. Her routines and the advice she gives in the book doesn't talk about CC or the need for it.

I absolutely left my son for the 5 mins she talks about in the 7am-7pm routine which she outlines in the main section of her book, and if he was tired, he never cried more than a max of 5. If he cried for 5 mins it was because there was something wrong - i.e. cold or he'd got himself in a funny position etc.

The case studies at the back of the book were useful cos they gave examples of different approaches to different issues ppl had with different babies.

I think that was the only reference to cc in the whole book.

I think lots of mums do resort to cc to get through some tricky sleep issues - that's their choice. I'm lucky that i never had to do that as it sounds hard work for everyone involved. Not sure i'd criticise them of their choice however.

again - the GF 7am-7pm does not involve cc in anyway more than the 5 mins i've mentioned which is in plenty of mum help books.

anyway - ppl have very strong opinions about this - not sure why - for those who dont wanna follow a routine, then fine. No one's asking you to do it, it's just a choice you made differently to other mums.

[Saila]

P.s. In terms of 'sad cos of mums are not feeding a baby when they are hungry'. In the 7-7 routine and baby whisperer, the babies are fed as soon as they wake up. I think the idea here is to avoid sleep associations. So by getting in a routine of waking then feeding, you avoid some problems that some parents have in terms of feeding to sleep etc. If they get hungry, they'd wake, and you'd feed them.

You can't not feed a hungry baby - it's impossible, surely? They go nuts when they're hungry....

Mine did anyway, as I do :)

[Saffron]

Yes, have seen women not feeding their screaming and obviously hungry babies "because s/he isn't due a feed yet".

:( In addition, according to La Leche League, the American Academy of Pediatrics, etc, crying itself is a late sign of hunger, ie babies are hungry and should be fed before they cry.

Sorry to go off topic from the op - not wanting to debate, just wanting to be clear about what I've seen and read. My point re cc/cio was not whether or not GF was explicitely telling people to do cc/cio. My point was that she does use and endorese cc/cio, and that is why she is associated with it.

I'm not critising the choices of individual parents. (Most parents are, I suspect, just trying the best they can to do a good job without going mad.) I'm questioning the validity and applicability of the methodology itself, and the real reasons behind why experts (or so-called experts) endorse, use, or recommend it.

[Saila]

But why are you blaming GF for their approach that you disapprove of? She explicitly says always feed a hungry baby.

I've always been baffled by how judgemental mums are of other mums. The divisions are depressing. These sorts of threads just throw up an 'us and them' attitude. Shouldn't we be supporting other mums and not putting them down, or their choices down, cos it differs to yours?

The reason I posted on this thread was to try and bring some balance and put forward the other side of using a routine, cos a lot of mums use this approach and I'm sure feel a bit saddened by some of the comments written on this thread/forum.

I remember when I was on maternity leave, hormonal and depressed after a bad birth and a tough time bf due to my son being in special care, and I read about a group meeting 'for non-gf mums'.

I had no idea this sort of thing went on. It really threw me.

Very sad.

[sophiechristophy]

Saila - questioning GF isn't being judgmental of other mum's is it? I just re-read the posts, and I can't see a criticism of mums, just questioning of GF. I agree, mums need to support each other.

[Saffron]

If GF explicitly says always feed a hungry baby, or not, I don't know b/c I haven't read all her books. However, her CLB book does explicitly direct one to, "Follow the feeding times on the schedule,". She also explicitly states that on-demand feeding is the cause of colic, "These babies [with colic] all seem to have one thing in common: they are all being fed on demand." Taken together, some people interpret this to mean that feeding off schedule will cause colic. This is their reason for not feeding outside the scheduled times (from the people I have talked to about it).

Perhaps many people disagree with her advice, or don't like it, because it is contradictory, incomplete, and confusing. Some people do like her advice or find it useful, and that's fine for them too.

I'm not judging individuals' choices. I'm questioning the methodology as a practice in itself. Questioning is a fundamental part of growing as a parent and a person.

In addition, I think that there are many ways that we can support each other as parents and as people without always having to agree with each others' decisions. What's wrong with a group for non-GF parents, be it for baby stuff or sex/relationship stuff? I'm sure there are GF groups too. There can be as many groups as there are schools of thought on parenting and relationships. Being part of one group doesn't to me mean that I couldn't support someone from another group if she was having problems.

[sillywoman]

Saffron Wrote:

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

>

> I'm not judging individuals' choices. I'm

> questioning the methodology as a practice in

> itself. Questioning is a fundamental part of

> growing as a parent and a person.

>

> In addition, I think that there are many ways that

> we can support each other as parents and as people

> without always having to agree with each others'

> decisions. What's wrong with a group for non-GF

> parents, be it for baby stuff or sex/relationship

> stuff? I'm sure there are GF groups too. There

> can be as many groups as there are schools of

> thought on parenting and relationships. Being

> part of one group doesn't to me mean that I

> couldn't support someone from another group if she

> was having problems.

Beautifully put Saffron, couldn't agree more or add more.

SW

[Pickle]

Back to the topic at hand... Sex?! Pffffft. With 3 children I'd much rather have red wine and chocolate any day!

Might have to get the book for a giggle

[sophiechristophy]

We didn't have sex until about 6 months after our daughter was born, and that was fine for us.

[sillywoman]

" A good man can make you feel sexy, strong and able to take on the world

. . . oh sorry . . . that's wine . . . wine does that . . ."

As a wise woman once told me . . .

[sophiechristophy]

hahahaaaa sillywoman haaaa

[chantelle]

The GF bashing here is really offensive and I am not even an advocate or follower of her methods. Nannies can be very smart and insightful people so I never would dismiss their input. Our own has more than 30 years experience, and she also does maternity nursing with dozens of written recommendations from mums she helped. She is a mum of one too but it is her nanny experience that matters to me, and should matter when talking about GF.

Some of the comments here about not having sex just underline what GF is getting at - that some women avoid it and potentially harm their relationships, not because husbands are gagging for it necessarily but because intimacy is crucial to most healthy relationships.

[Otta]

She is a mum of one too but it is

her nanny experience that matters to me,

and should matter when talking about GF.

This is where you are wrong. You hire your nanny as a nanny, so obviously it is her experience as a nanny that matters.

I am sure GF could write very good books on nannying, but she hasn't. She written books on parenting.

[hellosailor]

Quite. People may or may not be interested in advice GF has gleaned in her time as a maternity nurse on sleep, weaning, nap issues, etc, but that is not what this thread is about - people are laughing at the audacity of someone who has not ever experienced the often extreme physical fallout ('fallout' being the operative word...!) of childbirth, telling mothers that they should be getting back in the saddle sexually, virtually before their stitches are healed. I have found some GF stuff on naps and weaning helpful, as one of a number of opinions on that stuff, but this is a matter she should keep very firmly schtum on.

Everyone knows that physical intimacy is important in a relationship, that is not what people are poo poohing on this thread.

[chantelle]

Ok, enjoy the one way cat fight then. But I should think a woman who has helped so many families might have also picked up a trick or two about new parents' relationships and well being.

[Otta]

Each to their own Chantelle, no one is cat fighting, you seem to be the only one getting offended.

[hellosailor]

yes thank god for Gina, without her I'd have no idea when to start shagging again after having a baby, I guess I'd just have to flounder on and go with my own instincts about my own body and relationship ;-)

p.s to clarify, I am having a little joke here, in what was clearly intended to be a humorous thread by the OP..