Melissa Louise
-
Posts
6,743 -
Joined
-
Days Won
31
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by Melissa Louise
-
-
1 minute ago, wendyroo said:
What is the magic age?
Are we allowed to let our 6 month old know that pulling our hair hurts? Or is that "parental disapproval" of the behavior so we should suck it up and love every single thing they do no matter what?
Or what about when they bite when nursing? Conventional wisdom is to unlatch them for a few minutes. But that could seem like rejection...so would you advocate letting them bite so they don't think we disapprove?
Strap them in the car seat to take the 3 year old to school? Some babies might experience that as rejection.
Put them down so you can make yourself a quick lunch? Never worth the possibility they might think you are disciplining them.
Where does it end? And when do anyone else's wants/needs/feelings enter into the picture even a little bit?
Well, I found it was a continuum.
As children grow and develop, so does their understanding and so does the relationship.
You can parent a nine-month-old differently to a three-month-old, and a three or thirteen-year-old very differently to the nine-month-old.
Infants gradually develop more tolerance as they enter into and move through the second half of the first year.
That's why methods like controlled crying are not recommended for infants under 6 months anymore.
I think infants do experience a lot of unavoidable rejection and hurt. I think it's good to be as intentional as possible about keeping those instances as limited as possible.
-
7
-
-
3 minutes ago, Terabith said:
I never thought of by babies’ responses as a flaw. Like it would never have occurred to me to think that way. I was always super empathetic to them and I’d warn them it would be cold and “I know! It will be over in just a second.” It’s a completely normal behavior and also…the baby will be happier and everyone will experience less stress if they don’t turn into an octopus with every diaper change.
The 'everyone' is mostly the parent.
That's understandable, honestly.
None of us can perfectly parent an infant. We are always going to fall short of perfection, either because we are flawed or because we are desperate.
I just don't think that 'training' is value-neutral when it comes to infants.
-
3
-
-
4 minutes ago, Terabith said:
I mean, I personally never consciously stopped singing because of their behavior, but when @wendyroo was describing her approach, I can recognize it’s exactly what I was doing. I was doing it because I was concentrating on being safe at that moment. But a few seconds of subdued reaction just isn’t super controlling.
No, it's not super controlling.
-
1
-
-
12-week-olds can't make use of knowledge like that in service of their agency. They don't 'know' the way older children can know.
Their agentic behavior is wriggling. It possibly expresses discomfort, playfulness, delight, pleasure or frustration - a wide range of emotions that have nothing to do with knowledge.
It's fine to sing, play, whatever as a distraction technique.
Or heck, talk to them about what they are doing and may be feeling.
Narrate their experience back to them. They may not understand the words but the tone and mirroring back can be deeply soothing.
We don't need to train infants, just respond to their needs.
-
7
-
2
-
-
8 minutes ago, Terabith said:
Nobody’s describing teaching them to obey “or else” though? I mean, other than Debbie Pearl. We’re describing having a routine and being more fun and engaging when the kid is not being an octopus while changing a diaper or staying in a given area while at a sporting event where there are multiple dangers around and if that doesn’t work figuring something else out. Nobody’s saying they can’t deal; we’re just saying that teaching routine to make lives easier (including the baby’s) is one technique in the parenting arsenal.
The or-else is the communication of parental disapproval via the mechanism of 'no more song'.
I mean, that's the whole point of doing it, right?
I can totally see that some people feel the or-else is worth it.
My personal feeling is that it was never worth it with an infant.
-
2
-
1
-
-
9 minutes ago, Terabith said:
But you still have the issue of the fact that it’s harder to change the diaper of a kid who is wiggling like crazy than it is on one who is cooperating with the process. My babies were happier having some idea of about how long changing would take, and timing it to a song helped them know that in a way they could kinda understand by six months or so. Look, I chose to not have most furniture in my house because I was ALL ABOUT modifying the environment because I was not about imposing my will. We slept on a mattress on the floor so kids could jump on it at will. As my kids grew, I removed more and more books from my house because I didn’t want to clean up books removed from shelves over and over again. But there were certain things we did that I just intuitively shaped behavior on because it was safer and easier for me and ultimately less stressful for the babies themselves. Being fun and animated when a child is cooperating with a diaper change and then quieter and more subdued/ less animated for a few moments when they aren’t is teaching them but it just isn’t abuse or controlling.
They aren’t. But they are capable of learning routines and what makes you happy. And shaping behavior to make it easier to keep them safe and happy can help them in the long run. A kid who has learned at five months that diaper changing is faster and more fun if you aren’t writhing all over the place like an octopus is happier in the long run because this boring chore takes less of their time.
Babies definitely internalize the pleasure and not-pleasure of their parents from very early.
That's a fact of infant development that requires a lot of consideration, IMO.
Probably a lot more than we are culturally encouraged to give.
-
6
-
-
12 weeks is pretty tiny for instituting routines and 'teachings'.
This all sounds a lot like the dominant advice when I was a baby - getting a baby into a parent-led routine ASAP, teaching the baby she can't always have her way, letting her cry it out, etc.
It rests on a world view, conscious or otherwise, that babies need control, and that they will be morally spoiled ('endangered') in some way if they are not taught to subordinate their needs (to explore, to move, to protest, or cry).
Infancy is short. Meeting infants on their developmental level as best as one can - it's really something to aim for.
12-week-olds are still learning how secure they are in the world, through touch, tone, and satisfaction of hunger. IMO, it's really not the right time to be 'teaching' aka training.
-
7
-
-
My change table solution to dangerous rolling off was to use a portable change mat on the floor.
This would not be an option for some parents and caretakers with physical limitations, but for many of us, it is. Change the environment and the 'need for training' disappears.
-
5
-
-
15 minutes ago, maize said:
I'm very much an attachment parent, but I did keep my babies in car seats even when they didn't like it. The only way to get around in my area is by car and the only way for a baby to ride safely in a car is in a car seat.
So yeah, I forced that on them even when they screamed bloody murder over it. Can't say I liked it much more than they did, but safety and legality were both on the side of keeping the kid restrained.
That reality does make me roll my eyes just a bit when someone suggests that babies and toddlers should have bodily autonomy at all times and anything else is abusive. We all have to live with some realities we don't like--even babies.
Just to add, I think when you've been neglected and/or abused as an infant and child, you are naturally going to be quite sensitive to making sure you restrain infants the absolute bare minimum.
And you are going to respect the autonomy of babies as much as is humanly possible. Because you understand that even babies can experience trauma.
And so you are never going to see 'blanket training' as something that really fits in well with prioritizing physical attachment.
People can roll their eyes about it. That's fine.
I'm a lost cause. Training babies - no. Don't do it.
(Yes, sometimes we need to cause them suffering to avoid greater suffering. It's a tragedy of parenthood - let's not embrace it as an elective - for core needs only).
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, maize said:
I'm very much an attachment parent, but I did keep my babies in car seats even when they didn't like it. The only way to get around in my area is by car and the only way for a baby to ride safely in a car is in a car seat.
So yeah, I forced that on them even when they screamed bloody murder over it. Can't say I liked it much more than they did, but safety and legality were both on the side of keeping the kid restrained.
That reality does make me roll my eyes just a bit when someone suggests that babies and toddlers should have bodily autonomy at all times and anything else is abusive. We all have to live with some realities we don't like--even babies.
We do have to live with some limits, even for babies.
Mine were restrained for vaccinations, for example. It's horrible.
I think parents do have to very carefully weigh up the cost-benefit of infant restraint. If you had other options than car travel, you may have decided to use those. Or another family may decide to minimize car travel for a time. I know families who made these choices when these choices were available.
Having unavoidable times of restraint doesn't mean that blanket 'training' is a required feature of infant rearing.
-
3
-
-
10 minutes ago, Drama Llama said:
But that's your kids. My youngest wasn't like that. He was a super efficient breastfeeder and then he was done and wanted to get back to playing rather than snuggling.
On the other hand, my kids would repeat behaviors that made me smile at like 4 months, so even my youngest, who walked super early, was motivated to please me, or get a happy reaction from me, before walking.
Yeah, sure, but blanket 'training', a practice emerging out of fundamentalist crazy-town, which is the only context this mama, who nannied extensively before kids of her own in more than one country, has ever heard of, is not a requirement for any baby regardless of their temperament.
Babies can be kept safe and happy in a multitude of ways, none of which have to involve working to reinforce the (fairly unnatural for many infants) behavior of sitting away from the mother or other caretaker in a very small and defined area for a pre-determined period of time.
I am very unsure of why people are so keen to defend 'blanket training'.
Or the training of infants full stop.
But I am starting to understand why people thought I was crazy! Signed, did not really confine to high chairs, car seats, or strollers either.
-
3
-
-
10 minutes ago, Clarita said:
Actually as much as I am let babies/toddlers/kids be babies/toddlers/kids, I have very much kept my baby in a sling(actually baby backpack) when he didn't like it. He was mobile by 1 month and never really liked being held by me or the stroller or the playpen for long.
How was my baby mobile you ask? By rolling to his destinations and he could walk by 6 months. So, yes that kiddo got strapped to me when he didn't want it because there are some floors I didn't want my baby on.
I had a super early walker too. It definitely has its challenges!!
I think breastfeeding was my parenting superpower. The babies would all pretty much stay contained for milk and mom snuggles ( though the toddlers got increasingly acrobatic about it!)
I have a memory of reading aloud to my girls while ds breastfed upside down from the back of the sofa, but that can't be right ?! 😂
-
2
-
6
-
-
1 minute ago, BronzeTurtle said:
But tiny babies don't crawl. I'm so confused.
For the carrier thing I've seen plenty of moms with babies would would rather not be in their carrier with moms trying to get them to sleep or make it through a grocery store. I feel like everything I mention is like, well NO ONE EVER DOES THAT and it's so weird to me because it seems like a normal human thing around town. No one ever restrains their babies in a sling? Or anywhere? in a shopping cart? In a stroller? In a playpen? car seats? When they don't want to be there? This is a baffling revalation and I'm not being facetious. babies in public often have meltdowns and don't want to be where they are. It isn't abusive to keep them there, in fact sometimes you have to by law in the case of car seats. I'm not being pedantic here I just don't understand the responses.
Also training applies to many people so if it's just a loaded word, think of teaching instead? Helping to understand? I got training all through adulthood every time i started a new job. I am not a dog, as far as I can discern.
Babies - under 12 months or so. They can definitely move, shuffle and crawl at some point in the first year.
-
I don't think we get many young new moms here.
Gotta say though, if any are reading along - big, big fan of changing the environment and not the baby.
You can keep a crawling baby safe without blanket training.
-
6
-
-
Who keeps their baby in a sling if the baby doesn't like it? No-one.
Idk. Babies, guys. Tiny. Work with them.
(Conceding I'm sensitized to this whole training business - training is for dogs, imo, not babies).
-
3
-
-
6 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:
Oh yes, I definitely said 'spank' to him when I apologized and we discussed it. But privately, the guilt eats at me in a serious and unhealthy way and it's easier on me to say pop. It's just something I'll never let go. I hope to God the cycle has been broken completely.
I reckon being upfront with oneself is a good way to resolve the guilt.
But also - you stopped and apologized.
Plenty don't.
Good for you. It isn't easy to face up to the ways we did wrong wrt our kids.
-
1
-
-
What a weird thread.
If you ever sat your baby/sat with your baby on a blanket, that is not blanket training.
Training means you provide reinforcements (negative or positive) to shape an infant's behavior so that the behavior becomes replicable, and that it is replicable regardless of the infant's autonomous desires or needs.
-
7
-
-
Just now, Drama Llama said:
I think this is cultural. To my ear "smacking" sounds cutesy because it's not a word we use for hitting in the US. Whereas "popping" is pretty common and everyone in my area would know what it means.
Well, I took out what I wanted to say, which was 'hitting', because I didn't want wildflower to feel bad.
It's hitting your kid.
Applying punishing force to their bodies.
-
3
-
-
1 minute ago, WildflowerMom said:
Yes. I popped his butt. I did apologize to him when he was older and told him I should never in a million years have done that. He said he'd never pop his own kid and I was so grateful to hear that so hopefully it wont continue for yet another generation. (Although he's very likely to not have kids anyway, but still.)
I'm not judging you - we all have child-rearing regrets - but I just want to make a suggestion about language (as a child who was hit through childhood) - 'popping' sounds like minimizing language to me. It's very cutesy for a term that describes a parent smacking a child.
Children do break these cycles, thankfully. Despite being hit, I never hit my children. I'm sure your son appreciated the apology.
-
4
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Drama Llama said:
I did. I've said that repeatedly, and if they wandered off (or ran in the case of my youngest) I led them back and played some more. But I also watched my other child, or my niece or youngest BIL play. Sometimes, I sat on the blanket and watched the game, or walked away a minute to tie a shoe, or whatever.
OK, but that isn't training.
I too sat on blankets with my babies at the park, but I wasn't blanket-training them.
That's just - playing with the baby and then looking after/supervising the baby?
A bit confused about why that would have a name the same as the name for people who hit their kids to make them stay.
-
4
-
-
2 minutes ago, WildflowerMom said:
My biggest regret is that I popped ds when he was young. I will never forgive myself for that. It eats at me. I wish I had this board back then, too.
What is popping? Hitting?
-
6 minutes ago, Drama Llama said:
For me, I did the blanket because the times I needed them contained were usually outside. And telling my kid "stay off the baseball diamond" or "stay out of the street" would have drawn their attention to those things. So, I just said, "let's play here", or "X (trucks, snacks etc . . .) stay on the blanket". My youngest was obsessed with being tickled so we did a lot of tickling on the blanket.
With my oldest it always worked. With my youngest, it wasn't perfect, but if it meant that I had to chase him to stop him from running towards someone swinging a bat, or towards the street once an hour, rather than once every 5 minutes, then that was helpful.
And we combined it with other strategies like going to the playground for a loooong time before games, and trying to time it so he was hungry at the game so that snacks would be super reinforcing (this was not hard, my youngest likes to eat), or having toys that were just for the sidelines.
But why wouldn't you just play with the baby on the rug?
Sorry, I know I sound dense, I just don't get the effort re. training.
I feel like training a baby requires a level of independence that babies just don't have.
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, freesia said:
Yes, and I started by just doing it for one minute and built it up to probably around 10. The toys were only ones she could use on the blanket. I would just return her to the blanket and remind her that this is where we play during read aloud time. The toys went away if she wouldn’t stay. She just learned that was her place at that time. The most punitive thing I ever did when she was an older toddler and I really needed to finish a book the older kids wanted was to put her in her room with the gate up a couple of times. She really wanted to be with us and understood at that point was that that was how she got to be there. But most of the time she was fine. I fully understand that not all children would have learned so easily and gently but I thought it was worth a try and it worked. If would never have done it if it had been hard.
Balancing the needs of four kids with an eight and a half year span was a challenge. My older kids needed times I could read to them without a toddler climbing all over us or runnng around distracting us. Those were the days where I got through the day 15 minutes at a time. I nursed through spelling, put her in the bath to play while teaching my third to read, etc.
I called it blanket time. I don’t really care what it’s called. I can easily call it the time she played on her blanket.
Thanks.
So the toys and closeness to other family members were the reward?
Can I be annoying and ask another question? You don't need to answer.
Why a blanket?
Why not just baby plays in the room you're reading in and you close the door so she can't move out of sight?
-
1
-
-
Just now, freesia said:
Yes, this is how I did it. Short periods in a blanket did not in any way impact my child’s agency, curiosity, movement (varsity soccer goalie in ninth grade so she seems to have developed fine.) I was a baby wearing attachment parenting long term breastfeeding mommy. The idea that a child must be free to move wherever whenever they want or they are doomed is silly to me. No parent does that.
But how?
I mean, I can imagine one of mine being coincidentally happy to sit on a blanket because she was a sit and watch baby, but the others?
How did you train ie make it a consistent and replicable behaviour? What were the shaping mechanisms?
-
4
-
Blanket training
in The Chat Board
Posted
Maybe they need to be seen in their frustration and upset.
Maybe it's OK that they will dislike having their nappy changed. Maybe you will just be careful and empathetic and as quick as possible when you change their nappy, without seeking to 'train' them out of their feelings about it.
(Slight devil's advocate here - but only slight. I do think we can accidentally, and with the best of intentions, be coercive with regard to our infant's emotional life.)