Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Of the articles I've investigated, I've always been able to follow the basis to a journal. And coincidentally the articles are written by the PhD who initially published the work in whatever journal. Kanazawa is a good example. He writes up provocative, almost crazy pieces, but you can easily find and follow his publications in the literature. Citing would be best, and that would make things easier, but if I can source it on my own that's usually enough for me. Granted, this only accounts for what I have read. I don't know if this is the case across the board. That's not to say published psych work is inherently valid because it's published. I understand that it is psych after all.
Ah, sorry if I wasn't clear in my last post. Yes, the pieces all do refer to published peer-reviewed lit or are opinions that can be traced back to an article, but that doesn't make a review of a topic quality, IMO. A quality lit review takes into account discrepancies in the data, placing the current study in context, and looks at the breadth and depth of the lit to date, not just a handful of cherry-picked studies that support the author's bias, PhD or not. I would say within the field of psych, PT is not particularly highly regarded, having nothing to do with it being psych after all, and everything to do with the general lack of rigor, not in each and every piece as I obviously have not read every article in PT, but in general as a publication. PT is a magazine rather than a scholarly journal.
But I fear in trying to be quippy, I have now derailed the thread. Apologies to JJ.
Last edited by eastwesteastagain; 09-14-2012 at 09:26 PM..
Ah, sorry if I wasn't clear in my last post. Yes, the pieces all do refer to published peer-reviewed lit or are opinions that can be traced back to an article, but that doesn't make a review of a topic quality, IMO. A quality lit review takes into account discrepancies in the data, placing the current study in context, and looks at the breadth and depth of the lit to date, not just a handful of cherry-picked studies that support the author's bias, PhD or not. I would say within the field of psych, PT is not particularly highly regarded, having nothing to do with it being psych after all, and everything to do with the general lack of rigor, not in each and every piece as I obviously have not read every article in PT, but in general as a publication. PT is a magazine rather than a scholarly journal.
But I fear in trying to be quippy, I have now derailed the thread. Apologies to JJ.
No argument there. I suppose I'm just being a bit more forgiving, but I don't want to be quippy either. Aside from that I haven't heard of CIO or sleep training, etc. It's all quite new to me and I'm just trying to learn and gather information at this point. The thread has been interesting. I suppose there's disagreement in just about everything.
No argument there. I suppose I'm just being a bit more forgiving, but I don't want to be quippy either. Aside from that I haven't heard of CIO or sleep training, etc. It's all quite new to me and I'm just trying to learn and gather information at this point. The thread has been interesting. I suppose there's disagreement in just about everything.
Ha! Yes, for some reason a CIO vs co-sleeping thread pops up every six months and it is apparently a contentious topic, although I don't truly understand some people's vehement responses about how other families choose to handle sleep. My quippy had more to do with disliking dismissive and judgmental tone than with method employed. To the best of my knowledge, there are pros and cons to each method and there is no one right way. There are some good links for what CIO is and what co-sleeping is and resources for learning more about them up thread (Ferber, Weissbluth's "Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child" and Dorthy has solid links for co-sleeping) and IIRC there are links to the same in some of the older threads if you do a search. Good luck on your information quest!
I agree.
I think CIO on a tiny 3 month old baby is effed up and cruel.
Guess what?
We did nice, gentle sleep training without CIO and he's been sleeping through the night and taking his own naps for almost 3 months now.
Of course people are into CIO here...there is almost an obsession in this country with not allowing the children to inconvenience you in any way.
Babies have one way to communicate with you when they are little. Ignoring them teaches them something - no one's coming.
What type of sleep training did you use?
I find it interesting that you believe those of us who use CIO do not want to be "inconvenienced in any way". If you knew what CIO actually encompassed, you'd know that statement has no basis in reality.
I know what you're talking about.
We read the books, etc (we are always reading the books and my wife is on this baby birth month forum). At 4 months, we thought about doing it. We tried it one night and it was terrible...listening to him cry for no reason. Going in at intervals to check and reassure. The guilt was terrible. The whole just...felt wrong. You know what I mean?
People keep telling us to do things to the kid that just feel wrong. And the reason is always to make OUR lives better. That is so not what my culture/ancestry would have done (where baby is with someone at all times and not just left alone).
So we tossed that plan. The american way isn't the only way. And there is a reason that 'colic' is an almost entirely western phenomenon.
He was very amenable to us holding his hand until he fell asleep. Now you can literally put him in his crib, kiss him, and hand him his bink. He will lie down by himself and go to sleep. No muss. No fuss. My friends with similar aged children are in awe of the fact that he goes to bed at 6:30 and sleeps all the way to 5. Wakes himself up sometimes...but puts himself back to sleep.
All without having to abandon or betray him.
This kid will insist on his own milestones without us forcing them upon him.
Didn't want to sleep with us at around 3/4 months - wasn't comfortable for him.
He ditched the boob milk at 9 months. Didn't want it anymore.
Doesn't want to be held that much anymore - man is on the move now!
He doesn't need us to force milestones upon him.
Ay yi yi!
Where to start? No, of course the American way isn't the only way. Colic does not DOES NOT come from doing CIO since colic usually starts when the baby is a newborn. Most people don't try to sleep train a newborn.
When we did CIO, it felt right to us. So whose gut feeling is correct? Yours or mine? Maybe both?
I never abandoned or betrayed my children. I always find it curiously telling when people choose to use inflammatory rhetoric in their statements against certain parenting techniques.
Some children need very little guidance in reaching milestones, others do. Guidance is not forcing for heaven's sake.
Where to start? No, of course the American way isn't the only way. Colic does not DOES NOT come from doing CIO since colic usually starts when the baby is a newborn. Most people don't try to sleep train a newborn.
When we did CIO, it felt right to us. So whose gut feeling is correct? Yours or mine? Maybe both?
I never abandoned or betrayed my children. I always find it curiously telling when people choose to use inflammatory rhetoric in their statements against certain parenting techniques.
Some children need very little guidance in reaching milestones, others do. Guidance is not forcing for heaven's sake.
Yeah, I don't understand the colic comment. My first was colicky but it was due to a dairy intolerance that took some some time to figure out and had absolutely nothing to do with how she was cared for, well, other then me consuming dairy products and then breastfeeding.
I also wanted to say that all kids are different. If I had tried CIO with my first she would have screamed bloody murder and would not have been consolable at all. She would have probably gotten so worked up that she would have thrown up. My second child has a different temperament.I think she would probably cry for a bit, not scream but cry and then calm down and fall asleep. I haven't done CIO because I like co-sleeping and just don't feel like it's a good fit for me but I could see how people might view CIO differently depending on their own children's temperaments.
I know what you're talking about.
We read the books, etc (we are always reading the books and my wife is on this baby birth month forum). At 4 months, we thought about doing it. We tried it one night and it was terrible...listening to him cry for no reason. Going in at intervals to check and reassure. The guilt was terrible. The whole just...felt wrong. You know what I mean?
People keep telling us to do things to the kid that just feel wrong. And the reason is always to make OUR lives better. That is so not what my culture/ancestry would have done (where baby is with someone at all times and not just left alone).
So we tossed that plan. The american way isn't the only way. And there is a reason that 'colic' is an almost entirely western phenomenon.
He was very amenable to us holding his hand until he fell asleep. Now you can literally put him in his crib, kiss him, and hand him his bink. He will lie down by himself and go to sleep. No muss. No fuss. My friends with similar aged children are in awe of the fact that he goes to bed at 6:30 and sleeps all the way to 5. Wakes himself up sometimes...but puts himself back to sleep.
All without having to abandon or betray him.
This kid will insist on his own milestones without us forcing them upon him.
Didn't want to sleep with us at around 3/4 months - wasn't comfortable for him.
He ditched the boob milk at 9 months. Didn't want it anymore.
Doesn't want to be held that much anymore - man is on the move now!
He doesn't need us to force milestones upon him.
You know -- I wonder when you said "the American way isn't the only way", maybe letting babies lay there and cry until they give up on anyone caring enough to console them has to do with the incredible rate of depression and drug use in this country.
I think the idea of "training" an infant is unreasonable. "Training" requires a certain mental and emotional development but they will become exhausted and stop crying at some point. Even when my kids could walk, they were never put in cages so they could have gotten up out of their own beds and come to our bed on their own. Parenting can be a 24 hour day but with everyone sleeping and no one crying.
The american way isn't the only way. And there is a reason that 'colic' is an almost entirely western phenomenon.
What's the reason for colic then, in your opinion. Is it because babies aren't held enough or is it because they are expected to learn how to self soothe? I'm curious because I held my first all. of. the. time. and I breastfed on demand and I always responded to her cries and I co-slept and I didn't push any milestones, etc. and guess what, she was still colicky. So do tell, what western thing did I do to cause her colic? I'm thinking it was dairy but I'm really curious as to what you think causes colic.
What's the reason for colic then, in your opinion. Is it because babies aren't held enough or is it because they are expected to learn how to self soothe? I'm curious because I held my first all. of. the. time. and I breastfed on demand and I always responded to her cries and I co-slept and I didn't push any milestones, etc. and guess what, she was still colicky. So do tell, what western thing did I do to cause her colic? I'm thinking it was dairy but I'm really curious as to what you think causes colic.
Often a baby will appear to wake up and fuss or cry a little. Sometimes I think parents think the baby is a wake and then actually wakes them. instead of soothing them back to sleep. The baby is then over tired and cries a lot. At least this is the case sometimes.
Often a baby will appear to wake up and fuss or cry a little. Sometimes I think parents think the baby is a wake and then actually wakes them. instead of soothing them back to sleep. The baby is then over tired and cries a lot. At least this is the case sometimes.
When she woke up, I was already right next to her and she'd just nurse right back to sleep so no, it wasn't a case of not getting enough sleep. She was actually a much better night sleeper then her sister who was not colicky at all. I actually know that dd1's colic was related to a food intolerance. I'm just asking Stan to elaborate on the colic being a result of western parenting comment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
