Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

XemaSab

(60,212 posts)
Mon May 6, 2013, 11:56 AM May 2013

Why parents should leave their kids alone

I felt as if I were an unwilling accomplice to torture. Echoes of the victim's screams rang off the varnished walls. The door, tight shut though it was, could not block the cries of panic. A baby, alone and imprisoned in a cot.

The baby's mother was visibly disturbed, too, pale and tearful. She was a victim herself, preyed on by exponents of controlled crying, or Ferberisation – that pitiless system, cruel to them both.

Controlled. Crying. The words speak of the odious aim: a bullying system controlling the feelings of a baby. The mother had been told the situation was the reverse, that the baby was trying to force her will on the mother, but all I could see was a one-year-old demented by abandonment. One American mother wrote poignantly on the internet: "Is Ferberisation worth my heartache or am I truly torturing my child? It seems like cruel and unusual punishment."

The idea is that babies can be "taught" to stop crying by being left to cry alone. A parent will occasionally check on them, but will neither pick up nor stay with the infant. In time, the baby will learn that crying doesn't bring consolation and will cease the attempt. Parents are encouraged to schedule and limit the time they spend checking on the baby. Does the system work? Of course it does. That is hardly the question. The real issue is why would such a thing be promoted? Why would it ever be accepted? What does it reveal about modernity's priorities? And how does it suggest answers to the riddle of unhappy children?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2013/may/04/leave-them-kids-alone-griffiths?INTCMP=SRCH

(The article is slightly complicated, and the opening paragraphs won't give you an idea of what it's really saying.)

11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

winterpark

(168 posts)
1. I never felt the need to conform to Ferberisation. I didn't even know it had a name
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:04 PM
May 2013

back when I was a new young mother. I think most mothers, and I qualify that with most, have instincts about their children's cries. They know when a child is crying for attention vs needing comfort. I'd like to believe I did and so I acted accordingly. My kid is 18 and graduating at the end of this month. She's got a part time job, she's gonna start college in the fall. We're pretty affectionate with each other. I don't think she turned out too bad.

my 2 cents

Gregorian

(23,867 posts)
2. From what I've read of the article, it appears to be excellent. This is crucial for a better world.
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:04 PM
May 2013

There is no more important subject. Healthy people don't start wars. Are you listening, Barbara Bush.

MineralMan

(146,338 posts)
3. The article starts out as a diatribe against "controlled crying"
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:11 PM
May 2013

and meanders into being an article about children who are free to do as they wish. In so doing, it loses its way, somewhat.

I'm a child of the 40s and 50's. Born in 1945, I was "spock-raised." My parents, like most parents of the time, considered Dr. Spock's book as the Bible of child-rearing. I was not picked up every time I cried as an infant, but was attended to when there was a real need for that attention. I was not locked in a room and left to cry endlessly, nor was I allowed to cry endlessly. There was a mixture of closeness and a requirement that crying loudly was only to be done when in genuine distress. No child in my family was ever rewarded for crying just to be crying. If there was nothing wrong, then crying was not encouraged. I was also raised to be independent, and given plenty of space with regard to my comings and goings.

Once I was about 6 years old, limits began to be decreased, and I was able to explore my neighborhood, which quickly grew to include the entire small town I grew up in and the surrounding hills and streams.

I did not like the article much. Mostly because it cried a lot in the beginning, then strayed from its initial focus and wandered off on its own without any supervision. In a way, the article is a metaphor for itself.

 

HockeyMom

(14,337 posts)
6. My MIL used said that too
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:31 PM
May 2013

My daughter had what was called colic. Mom H. would say let her cry in her crib. She also frowned on my nursing on demand. Feed her real food, she would say.

Against all the older family members (except my own Mom), I would put her in a baby sling on me and go about my chores; watering plants, folding laundry, etc., and yap away while I was doing it. My daughter didn't cry and seemed very interested in what I was doing. Once in a while I would put on the stereo and sing and dance with her in her sling. Oh, she really liked that!!! After about an hour of all this, I would nurse her and she would fall asleep.

I also had colic as a baby in 1948, but my own Mom was not a fan of Dr. Spock. Mom used to say that Rach didn't like being a baby and was BORED. Mom said that once she was able to move around on her own, and amuse herself, the crying would stop. I guess Mom learned this from me as a baby, and it was also true for her Granddaughter.

MineralMan

(146,338 posts)
10. No, it's not, but the lead-in is, and that's the
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:58 PM
May 2013

mistake. As I said, it wanders off on its own after that. Just poor writing strategy.

 

KittyWampus

(55,894 posts)
4. this mentions cultures where mothers don't work outside their home environment.
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:25 PM
May 2013

But its absurd talking about indigenous modes of child-rearing in the context of our industrial society.

Unless one parent or the other (or other adult family member) decides to stay home to tend to their offspring until that offspring is adjusted to school.

There would certainly be a huge number of more jobs.

But its absurd talking about indigenous modes of child-rearing in the context of our industrial society.

Allowing children to roam freely? That sounds ideal and perhaps still viable in rural and suburban neighborhoods. But as young as 8?

"In the Amazon, I've seen five-year-olds wielding machetes with deftness and precision. In Igloolik, in the Arctic, I've seen an eight-year-old take a knife and carve up a frozen caribou without accident"

And this mentions children wanting to go outside and play/ Perhaps. But many now voluntarily stay indoors on their computers.

tblue

(16,350 posts)
5. Anytime anyone is crying
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:25 PM
May 2013

I can't resist the urge to help them. Nor do I ever want to.

I have been a pretty soft-hearted mother. Even during my kid's terrible 2s, I'd say, 'When you calm down and stop screaming, we can talk about it.' Worked every time and soon there were no more tantrums. And my kid has turned out to be the most considerate, wholesome, sincere, and loving person I have ever known. Amazes me on a daily basis.

Love your kids and let it show!

PDJane

(10,103 posts)
9. I hate it. Hate Ferberization.
Mon May 6, 2013, 12:56 PM
May 2013

Hate letting kids cry too long, hate the regimented feeding.....Why? Had to intervene in a situation with a neighbour. Child was a boy, premature. Premies need demand feeding. Their stomachs are two small, and feeding every couple of hours is not uncommon. Boys left to cry too long and too hard end up with hernias. Spoke to the mother, who told the girl she didn't need a visiting nurse since SHE was there, got the nurse, educated both of them. Yes, I'm an interfering old bitch sometimes. Not often.

hunter

(38,337 posts)
11. Me and my siblings were amost feral children.
Mon May 6, 2013, 02:42 PM
May 2013

We often made our own meals, did our own laundry (or not), etc., starting from an early age.

A few of my siblings ran away from home as teenagers, but they were escaping the chaos, not the abuse of any sort of authority.

My wife and I never left our kids to cry. They slept with us as long as they wanted to, from infancy until they sought their own independence as toddlers. My mom had bought us a nice crib but we didn't use it much.

When our kids were still nursing I'd usually take them to my wife's work when they were hungry. We didn't live far from her work.

I had a very flexible schedule, I worked when my wife was at home, she worked when I was home. Our kids never had daycare and the only babysitters they ever had were family and close family friends.

My arms were very strong because I'd simply pick them up and carry them with me whenever they were fussy or getting into some kind of trouble.

Unlike my childhood, there was some structure to the rules of our house, for the most part having to do with safety. Stay in the car seat! Hold my hand in the parking lot. Things like that. As parents we were unyielding about some things. We had expectations of them as teenagers too. Our kids avoided many troubles me and my siblings got into as teenagers.

My wife grew up with a lot of structure in her family and had something to rebel against as a teenager. I had nothing to rebel against but the troubles my wife and I both got into, and the hard lessons learned, were similar. I think as parents we found a sweet spot somewhere between; enough structure that our children felt secure but not so rigid that destructive teenage rebellion seemed reasonable to adolescent minds.

Our kids are very fine young adults now. They were straight-A honor students throughout high school and got some pretty good scholarships for excellent universities. Our oldest graduated last year, found a good job, and is now living on his own.

It's an anecdote of course, but I think we chose a pretty good path.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why parents should leave ...