Why
a Homebirth Couple Said No to Attachment Parenting
by
Josh Day
They
see the world in black and white. There is no room for compromise. Problems are
seldom discussed. Dissenters are pacified. You take the whole package or none
at all. Either you're with them, or against them.
No,
I'm not talking about a certain executive government administration, but the alternative
parenting style known as attachment parenting.
Let's
turn to Wikipedia to get the basics on attachment parenting.
Attachment parenting
describes a parenting approach inspired in part by attachment theory. Attachment
theory, originally proposed by John Bowlby, states that the infant has a tendency
to seek closeness to another person and feels secure when that person is present.
In comparison, Sigmund Freud proposed that attachment was a consequence of the
need to satisfy various drives. In attachment theory, children attach to their
parents because they are social beings, not just because they need other people
to satisfy drives and attachment is part of normal child development.
The
eight ideals of attachment parenting are:
1. Preparation for childbirth 2. Emotional responsiveness 3. Breastfeeding
4. Babywearing 5. Co-sleeping safely 6. Avoiding frequent and prolonged
separations between parents and a baby 7. Positive discipline 8. Maintaining
balance in family life
These
values are interpreted in a variety of ways across the movement. Many attachment
parents also choose to live a natural family living (NFL) lifestyle, such as natural
childbirth, home birth, stay-at-home parenting, homeschooling, unschooling, the
anti-circumcision movement, the anti-vaccination movement, natural health, cooperative
movements, and support of organic food. (Attachment
parenting)
On
the surface, attachment parenting sounds quite reasonable and viable. In fact,
we follow some of the eight tenets with our infant. Yet, like everything in life,
we've found a need to compromise and not swallow the entire pill.
One
of the largest reasons we were drawn to attachment parenting is because it ostensibly
seems to go hand-in-hand with our natural health lifestyle. However, the more
we interacted with attachment parents on various Internet message forums, the
more we started to question the movement.
Anything
taken to an extreme is a bad thing. This includes a style of parenting, be it
attachment parenting, the Ferber method, or one of the more zany "Christian"
parenting schools of thought. The more I learned, the more extremes I saw cropping
up.
What
disturbed me the most was the idea you had to be part of some quasi-activist movement
to be a true "Attachment parent." Many attachment parents are pushing
a cultural agenda on top of raising children -- indeed, some of the more radical
ones use their very children to reach political goals.
Examples
would be flaunting a fussy baby in a crowded restaurant or store and refusing
to take the baby outside because the parent wants to cause a scene to show how
"unfamily" general businesses are. Or breastfeeding not for the sake
of the baby but to draw attention to the act itself in the hope of raising ire
simply for "cultural awareness." Verbally lashing another mom for her
choice to bottle-feed and criticizing anyone who doesn't employ "the family
bed"--(where the entire family sleeps together like so many sardines)--are
a couple more illustrations of how extreme some attachment folks are.
While
my wife and I embrace some small aspects of attachment parenting, the underlying
"with us or against us" mentality, self-centeredness, and phony martyrdom
was more than enough to get us to coin the term "Moderation parenting,"
which is what we proudly employ as new parents. We pick and choose from the attachment
parenting style, as well as traditional family practices and even the controversial
Ferber method,* which has been so maligned in popular culture lately that very
few people even understand what it's truly about.
Personally
I can't stand attention-getters, rude people, and individuals who blindly accept
an unchanging doctrine. Unfortunately, many of the people I saw within the attachment
parenting movement were like this, while parents in the so-called "mainstream"
line of parenting were much more open to new ideas, even the ones that at first
seemed radical--like co-sleeping and refusing all vaccinations as well as skipping
the often bogus "well baby" exams.
Author's
note: As of mid May 2007, it's been two months since I wrote the above. Our
opinions on attachment parenting have changed drastically.
Now
that our baby is three months old, we have discovered that almost every aspect
of attachment parenting does not work for us. Indeed, the constant breastfeeding
(or "breastfeeding on demand," as AP practitioners call it) was in
fact causing our baby's afternoon and evening colic.
For
weeks all three of us suffered through the turmoil and tribulation of colic. Attachment
parenting's only answer was to hold him through the colic by "babywearing."
The answers furnished to us by attachment parenting books and websites strictly
toed the party line of staying "attached," "feeding on demand,"
and never leaving your baby alone.
Furthermore,
what was startling and slightly insulting was AP's underlying assertions we were
bad parents for having this problem and that we were doing something wrong.
Attachment
parenting offered us no real solutions.
Trying
to "embrace" the tenets of attachment parenting--being attached to a
writhing, screaming baby, no matter what--while struggling through colic was nothing
short of maniacal. Holding him to us or trying to feed him through the colic episodes
was an exercise in futility. We hated what we were doing, our baby hated what
we were doing, and it didn't take long for us to realize it was time to make
the switch.
Once
we stopped the grueling breastfeeding on demand and got the baby on a feeding
and sleeping schedule, his colic stopped immediately and has not returned.
He is much more alert and happy and he never cries like he used to during
the terrible days of "breastfeeding on demand."
In
the original version of this article, I wrote:
Please
do not misinterpret my words.There is nothing wrong with attachment parenting.
Nothing at all. Despite the smear campaign and the never-ending spew of unscientific
garbage coming out of the AMA's mouth, co-sleeping with your baby is as safe as
crib sleeping and very well be better for your child.
Unfortunately,
our experience has shown us there is indeed something wrong with attachment
parenting, especially with child-centered feeding. For some parents, it's a fact
it works wonderfully. And I'm not here to take that away from you... if the program
worked for you, fantastic! AP did not work for us; AP caused a host of problems
that we've now thankfully fixed.
To
conclude, I'd like to share a few books we've found quite helpful with having
a new baby.
A
pediatrician-turned-medical heretic gives the lowdown on the so-called well baby
exams and offers information that can help you care for your child, along with
correcting loads and loads of misinformation dumped on you by pediatricians. Written
in 1984, Mendelsohn was warning against vaccines and correlated SIDS to the DPT
shot. And this was more than two decades ago. Sadly, nothing has changed and things
have gotten much, much worse.
* I'd
just like to add a little bit of information on the Ferber method as it's so misunderstood.
The following is from an article entitled "The
Ferber Method Demystified" and discusses changes in the newest revision
of Ferber's book.
Cry it out. In the preface of the new book, Ferber takes pains to clarify his
position: "Simply leaving a child in a crib to cry for long periods alone
until he falls sleep, no matter how long it takes, is not an approach I approve
of. On the contrary, many of the approaches I recommend are designed specifically
to avoid unnecessary crying." Ferber's "progressive waiting" technique
encourages parents to frequently comfort their child during the sleep training
process.
Sleep sharing. In the original edition of the book, Ferber was firmly opposed
to the concept of parents and children sleeping together, saying, "We know
for a fact that people sleep better alone in bed," and arguing that learning
to sleep alone is an important part of a child's healthy development. In the revised
edition, Ferber is far less rigid on the subject. Children who co-sleep, he says,
"are not prevented from learning to separate, or from developing their own
sense of individuality, simply because they sleep with their parents. Whatever
you want to do, whatever you feel comfortable doing, is the right thing to do,
as long as it works."
Allow
me to reiterate Ferber's words in regards to parenting: "Whatever you
feel comfortable doing, is the right thing to do, as long as it works."
A
very cogent, practical, and moderate approach.
Hello,
my name is Leah Day. In 2007 I gave birth to my son at home naturally and without
medical intervention. With my husband Josh, we created and coined Moderation
Parenting, a new style of parenting centered around the idea that no baby
fits into a predetermined mold. If this article interested you but you're in need
of some detailed, comprehensive, and honest information from a mom who's writing
about her baby while her baby is still a baby, please click
here to learn more about the Moderation Parenting approach!
Click
Here to
share this page with your friends, website visitors, ezine readers, social followers
and other online contacts.
Disclaimer:
Throughout this website, statements are made pertaining to the properties and/or
functions of food and/or nutritional products. These statements have not been
evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration and these materials and products
are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.