Re: Re: contented little babies

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 22:31:24 -0000, " Anneliese Handley "

wrote:

>She is totally pro bf., btw.

Being pro BF and knowing what the hell you're talking about (and giving

good advice) WRT BF are two entirely different things. Most BFCs and

LCs agree that scheduled feeding can be a recipe for BF disaster (see

Sue H's post).

--

Clare Lusher.

SAHM to Ruairí (24.10.99).

NCT Member Derby & District.

www.yum.org/clare

[Guest guest]

Being pro BF and knowing what the hell you're talking about (and giving

good advice) WRT BF are two entirely different things. Most BFCs and

LCs agree that scheduled feeding can be a recipe for BF disaster (see

Sue H's post).

Clare, you took the words right out of my mouth (pooter)!!!

Sue S

[Guest guest]

The advice is basically sound - the only thing that surprises me is that

she advocates bath before tea rather than vice versa.

Does she? How ridiculous...

Clean baby, stick it in the highchair, lo and behold, mucky baby that has

washed it's hair in yoghurt.

Yoghurt gets transferred to bedding, stinks, resulting in more washing for

mummy.

Bad advice!

McVeigh

Newsletter Editor & Secretary, Leighton Buzzard & District

SAHM to (AKA Tiff Toff) DOB 19/9/97

& Caitlin (AKA Cake Tin) DOB 12/1/00

[Guest guest]

Anneliese said:

<<(athough I know a few people who reckon that the " softer " methods of sleep

training are no damn good, you need to get tough from day one, and this is

from experience). >>

Yes, my mum's of this school of thought. Very proud of the fact that she

had me trained at 6 weeks old - " You never cried, because you knew that if

you did, you'd just get put in your room and left there " . I have to say I

feel that is not fair on the baby, and that is from experience too -

although I appreciate that it works best for some families, my experience of

being a total softy has been that it is worth it.

<<whereas Ford's routines may seem overly prescriptive to the average

left wing NCT mummy, interpreted with common sense they work! >>

Crikey, I hope you don't have to be left-wing to be an NCT mummy! As a

libertarian who advocates free choice in personal *and* economic matters, I

thought that it was appropriate for me to support informed choice in

childbirth too!!

>> For those of you who feel patronised by the detail ( " clean the bottles

and put the steriliser on now " etc) just think for a moment about the level

of detailed instruction you needed to write down the first time you left

Daddy to babysit...

LOL! Good point, perhaps this could be left with dads... and I can see

that some people who really feel at a loss with a new baby would find this

very helpful. Not my cup of tea, though.

Cheers,

H.

[Guest guest]

Anneliese said:

<<(athough I know a few people who reckon that the " softer " methods of sleep

training are no damn good, you need to get tough from day one, and this is

from experience). >>

Yes, my mum's of this school of thought. Very proud of the fact that she

had me trained at 6 weeks old - " You never cried, because you knew that if

you did, you'd just get put in your room and left there " . I have to say I

feel that is not fair on the baby, and that is from experience too -

although I appreciate that it works best for some families, my experience of

being a total softy has been that it is worth it.

<<whereas Ford's routines may seem overly prescriptive to the average

left wing NCT mummy, interpreted with common sense they work! >>

Crikey, I hope you don't have to be left-wing to be an NCT mummy! As a

libertarian who advocates free choice in personal *and* economic matters, I

thought that it was appropriate for me to support informed choice in

childbirth too!!

>> For those of you who feel patronised by the detail ( " clean the bottles

and put the steriliser on now " etc) just think for a moment about the level

of detailed instruction you needed to write down the first time you left

Daddy to babysit...

LOL! Good point, perhaps this could be left with dads... and I can see

that some people who really feel at a loss with a new baby would find this

very helpful. Not my cup of tea, though.

Cheers,

H.

[Guest guest]

In article , Clare Lusher

writes

>On Fri, 8 Dec 2000 22:31:24 -0000, " Anneliese Handley "

> wrote:

>

>>She is totally pro bf., btw.

>

>Being pro BF and knowing what the hell you're talking about (and giving

>good advice) WRT BF are two entirely different things. Most BFCs and

>LCs agree that scheduled feeding can be a recipe for BF disaster (see

>Sue H's post).

I've just reread her chapter on establishing breastfeeding, and she does

seem to be pro-bf, and most of the advice she gives for doing so is

pretty sensible. The only problem is her fixation with feeding every

three hours, which, slightly oddly, comes on top of a standard debunking

of the old feed every four hours regime! She also appears to think that

a breast can be empty, and keeps going on about not letting a baby suck

endlessly on an empty breast as it just leads to sore nipples.

However, I did use a few of her ideas when dealing with dd2 as a newborn

- her advice not to let them sleep for too long during the day if you

want them to work out day and night and have their long sleep during the

night, for instance. Seemed perfectly sensible to me that I needed to

make sure that dd had most of her feeds during the day in order to

ensure that she wasn't waking every two hours all night to feed, so I

used to only let her sleep for 2-3 hours at a time during the day before

waking her for a feed. She did sleep through the night fairly early on,

although I don't know if that was why! Some of her other things like

regularly putting them down for a sleep during the day, and having a

good bedtime regime, I'd already worked out for myself from dealing with

dd1.

Her routines, of course, are just a joke, especially if you are dealing

with older ones too, in which case they become impossible.

Cath

[Guest guest]

Cath wrote: so I

>used to only let her sleep for 2-3 hours at a time during

>the day before

>waking her for a feed. She did sleep through the night

>fairly early on,

>although I don't know if that was why!

Wow! 2-3 hours of sleep at any time at all during day or

night would have been absolutely lovely! Calvin was more

like Cerys described: fed for 1 1/2 hours every 2 hours. He

did sleep for about 1 1/2 hours at a time at night, most

nights.

My problem with Ford, the Ezzos, and even with Ferber, etc

is that they want every baby to fit into the same mold.

Some babies survive and thrive on feeding every 3 hours and

sleep through the night easily. I think it's genetic or

something.

Others, like Calvin and many others, take a bit longer.

Calvin now (when he's not sick, at least) sleeps from 8:30

to 5, then has a feed and is back to sleep until 7 or 8.

But he's 11 and 1/2 months old and this is a VERY new

development, plus we regress every time he's sick or

teething (2 fevers and 2 teeth in the past 2 weeks. I'm a

bit sleepy...).

Any time I tried to leave him to cry at ALL before about a

month ago, he would get hysterical. I refused to play the

'Ve haff vays of making you sleep' game with a child who

has ALWAYS needed lots of carrying and comforting (couldn't

put him down without lying next to him for the 1st 2 months

of his life). Besides which, my nerves couldn't have put up

with it.

So if your child has a disposition for being more or less

calm and is one that lies there and coos, then by all means

try to convince them to sleep through the night early on.

If they are gaining weight and growing and healthy with

short, less frequent feedings, then do that. Just please

don't tell me that I'm doing it wrong. I've struggled

enough with my own horrible feelings of incompetence

without adding the burden of anyone else's judgment (oh,

the HV who told me to give him a bottle of water because he

was feeding too much springs to mind. Same HV who was

getting all alarmist about his weight gain when he was 2

weeks old. Slightly contradictory, I have since puzzled

out.).

Sorry this got long.

Phyllis

__________________________________________________

[Guest guest]

On Sat, 9 Dec 2000 20:32:52 +0000, MacLeod

wrote:

>However, I did use a few of her ideas when dealing with dd2 as a newborn

>- her advice not to let them sleep for too long during the day if you

>want them to work out day and night and have their long sleep during the

>night, for instance. Seemed perfectly sensible to me that I needed to

>make sure that dd had most of her feeds during the day in order to

>ensure that she wasn't waking every two hours all night to feed, so I

>used to only let her sleep for 2-3 hours at a time during the day before

>waking her for a feed. She did sleep through the night fairly early on,

>although I don't know if that was why!

Interesting. I found the opposite to be true with - if he didn't

get his daytime sleeps, he would be restless and less likely to sleep

for long periods at night. It was as if he got overtired, then was

unable to wind down enough at night to sleep properly. I still find he

sleeps better at night if he's had two good sleeps in the day.

I also found that feeding him a lot in the day made no difference to his

sleeping patterns at night. Some nights he fed loads, other nights just

once or twice, although I did try it because, like you, it made sense to

me that getting plenty of BM in the day should reduce his need at night.

Obviously, didn't like that theory... Maybe he's just odd ! Or

maybe all babies are individuals. :-)

--

Clare Lusher.

SAHM to Ruairí (24.10.99).

NCT Member Derby & District.

www.yum.org/clare