Your Thoughts On This Article Re: Attachment Parenting

[megs4413]

we consider ourselves AP parents and this quote pretty well sums up the way I feel about it:

"AP is an approach, rather than a strict set of rules. It's actually the style that many parents use instinctively. Parenting is too individual and baby too complex for there to be only one way. The important point is to get connected to your baby, and the baby B's of attachment parenting help. Once connected, stick with what is working and modify what is not. You will ultimately develop your own parenting style that helps parent and baby find a way to fit – the little word that so economically describes the relationship between parent and baby. "

And as far as the linked article goes, I think any child that grows up with warm, loving, conscientious parents, is going to turn out just fine.

[ThreeofUs]

You know, kids grow up well under all kinds of different conditions. If you look at the research, though, you'll see that kids who get in difficulties tend to be kids without someone to care for them. The correlation is clear, and has been consistently confirmed.

That's no big deal, and it's a pretty small point for this board, which seems full of folks pretty focused on raising their children well.

Are we AP? Well, who the heck knows? We wore DS and we co-sleep - not because we ever envisioned our lives this way, but because DS had such awful reflux that we were more or less boxed into this solution to preserve our collective sanity. We like being so close, sure, but I bet there are many ways of becoming close.

[Radosti]

We did attachment parenting, but not because it was a conscious decision, that just seemed to be DS's lead and I followed it. We co-slept, but only because that made it easier to nurse... heck, after a while, I slept through his nursing sessions. Plus, he daytime weaned at 9 months and we continued to nurse until 18 months. He did get moved out of our bed at 14 months, but only because he became a restless sleeper.

I carried him in slings, didn't do CIO. But again, only because I was following instinct, not a book.

DS is a loving, sweet, sensitive child. He's self-assured and didn't go through separation anxiety. However, I just think that it's partly his sweet personality (he's very laid back, just like daddy) and partly that he learned by example. I am not at all sure that attachment parenting is what's responsible for how caring and loving he is. He is shown love every day, but that can be achieved without attachment parenting. As long as kids know they are loved, that's all that matters.

[randomkid]

Oh, I dunno... maybe the insinuation that if you don't follow AP (which he defines as birth bonding, BF, babywearing, etc) you child will be a psychopath?

"Studies on troubled teens and psychopaths have shown that these persons have one abnormal feature in common: a lack of caring. They feel no remorse for what they do. They act without considering the effects of their behavior on others. Not so the children who are the product of attachment parenting. These children consider the feelings of others before they act. They care about how their actions affect other people. They have a healthy sense of guilt, feeling wrong when they act wrongly and feeling good when they should. Connected kids care. "

Or how about the bit that implies that AP kids have 'deeper' relationships?

"The AP infant is more likely to become the child who forms deep friendships with peers and the adult who enjoys deep intimacy with a mate. "

...and so on.

None of it overtly says "your child will be messed up if you don't AP", but the overall tone is there. As much as I believe that AP is a fine way to parent and that there are many benefits, I don't think that it has some magical, exclusive way to make kids so much better. He just seems to take credit for an awful lot based only on his own opinions.

[Raidra]

Oh, I dunno... maybe the insinuation that if you don't follow AP (which he defines as birth bonding, BF, babywearing, etc) you child will be a psychopath?

"Studies on troubled teens and psychopaths have shown that these persons have one abnormal feature in common: a lack of caring. They feel no remorse for what they do. They act without considering the effects of their behavior on others. Not so the children who are the product of attachment parenting. These children consider the feelings of others before they act. They care about how their actions affect other people. They have a healthy sense of guilt, feeling wrong when they act wrongly and feeling good when they should. Connected kids care. "

Kids who aren't shown love are more likely to grow up with serious issues, that much has been well documented. Kids who grow up in AP families are shown love, so the bolded statement holds true. The article doesn't say, "The only definite way to prevent your child from turning into a psychopath is to AP" - it says that by showing your child love, it's less likely.

Or how about the bit that implies that AP kids have 'deeper' relationships?

"The AP infant is more likely to become the child who forms deep friendships with peers and the adult who enjoys deep intimacy with a mate. "

And again - more likely than who? It doesn't specify. I tend to believe that the intent of the writer would be more likely than kids who aren't shown love, aren't nurtured, cared for, etc. If a child doesn't have a deep relationship with his parents, then it seems to me that he would be less likely to have the skills/interest in forming deep relationships with others.

Obviously the writer of the article (I'm not clear on whether it's Dr. Sears or Martha, because I'm pretty sure there was a comment in there from Martha's point of view) thinks AP is great. But I think the main idea behind the article is not, "If you follow the 'rules' of AP, your child would be great" but rather, "If you show your child love and respect, and attend to their needs, your child is more likely to be well-adjusted."

Also - there are other articles on their website that say the 'Baby B's' are not required, but the intent/attitude is. From everything I've read from Dr. Sears, it seems more like they advocate the use of their techniques as a way to form a deep attachment, though they know there are other ways to form that connection.

[kijip]

I think it is like an article by Ann Coulter on Democrats, or an article by Mary Eberstadt on working mothers, or an article in Mothering about vaccines, or an article in The Nation about George W Bush, or the Babywise authors on co-sleeping. While some things may be valid and others not valid, you have to always consider the source. Clearly much is an opinion and the facts are often carefully selected to support that opinion. Or as in the case of much of this article, just not cited at all.

I rarely meet parents that are not trying to connect with, love and nurture their children. The few I do meet are usually very, very messed up people with drug or other addiction issues. Whatever combination of AP and other styles a loving parent uses mostly results in a good outcome.

[tnrnchick74]

I echo the sentiments of most posters here - love your children, respect your children.

Every child is different and I don't believe that one specific way of raising a child will work in every situation. You do the best you can, what feels right, and what appears to work for THAT particular child.

I come from a relatively large family - 6 kids. What worked for me, didn't work for my brothers.

[o_mom]

Kids who aren't shown love are more likely to grow up with serious issues, that much has been well documented. Kids who grow up in AP families are shown love, so the bolded statement holds true. The article doesn't say, "The only definite way to prevent your child from turning into a psychopath is to AP" - it says that by showing your child love, it's less likely...

You can take the words at face value and say that because he never says it explicitly that he didn't mean it. I on the other hand look at the entire article and the overall tone and come away with the message that the only way to get these things is through AP. Clearly I am not the only one who gets that message.

All the little disclaimers in the world can't change the overall message being sent. Kind of like the tiny print on ads for tobacco or alcohol - as if that little message in the corner saying you could get lung cancer is going to negate the pictures of people partying while smoking.

ETA; I guess what I'm saying is that if he wanted to say that kids who are loved and have involved parents turn out better, he could have. Instead, he says kids who are raised AP turn out better. While both similar statements, the latter implies that only AP does this.

[egoldber]

love your children, respect your children

And to me that is what defines attachment parenting, not a checklist of particular parenting tools that may or may not work for any individual family.

I think part of the problem with this discussion on this board is that in essence this board is the choir. There are likely very few disengaged, unattached (in the clinical sense, not the Sears sense) parents posting on this board.

But in the wider world at large, there are plenty of detached parents. I've seen enough just in my own family with the poor outcomes to prove it.

And there are lots of people who are given helpful "advice" that they shouldn't hold their babies too much or they will be "spoiled", etc. For many of these people in can be both a relief and helpful parenting advice to give them some concrete tools that can help a parent who might otherwise be detached, to develop an attachment.

[brittone2]

And to me that is what defines attachment parenting, not a checklist of particular parenting tools that may or may not work for any individual family.

I think part of the problem with this discussion on this board is that in essence this board is the choir. There are likely very few disengaged, unattached (in the clinical sense, not the Sears sense) parents posting on this board.

But in the wider world at large, there are plenty of detached parents. I've seen enough just in my own family with the poor outcomes to prove it.

And there are lots of people who are given helpful "advice" that they shouldn't hold their babies too much or they will be "spoiled", etc. For many of these people in can be both a relief and helpful parenting advice to give them some concrete tools that can help a parent who might otherwise be detached, to develop an attachment.

Agreeing w/ this. I consider us AP, but I do not think there is a checklist that makes you AP or not AP. It is about respecting your child's needs and meeting them.

I also agree w/ Beth's statement that this board is the choir. Even those who don't see themselves as AP are probably *more* that way than a lot of people if you look at the broad continuum of parenting. Even if you don't think of your family as AP, you most likely meet your child's needs and surround them with love and adequate time and attention. My time spent in early intervention with families has made me highly aware of how many children do not have their basic needs met.