Why I'm not CIOing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids forced to CIO simply learn that their parents will not respond to their cries. They're not learing to self-soothe. My husband and I adopted two children from Kazakhstan. We spent a month there and visited the orphanage daily. The children and babies rarely cry because they've learned that no one will respond. That's what CIO reminds me of. Dramatic? Yes, but what's the difference?

Thank you. This is my point exactly.

You don't see the difference between neglecting a child 24-7 and letting a child cry in 5 and 10 minute increments for three nights?

And you don't see the difference between a hungry or sick child who doesn't cry because no one ever comforts him and a child who isn't crying because he is asleep?

Yes, there is a big difference between an infant and a toddler. (Also a big difference between an infant and a Kindergartener who cries when dropped off at school for the first time, as another PP mentioned in defense of CIO.) The difference is the child as they get older can actually learn a lesson. A baby's brain is much more primitive. they are not learning "hey, I cried and cried and no one came, but guess what, I slept and now I feel great and everything is okay after all." That's not what's going on in there. They're just not capable of that yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids forced to CIO simply learn that their parents will not respond to their cries. They're not learing to self-soothe. My husband and I adopted two children from Kazakhstan. We spent a month there and visited the orphanage daily. The children and babies rarely cry because they've learned that no one will respond. That's what CIO reminds me of. Dramatic? Yes, but what's the difference?

The difference is NEVER having your needs met...and letting your child cry for 5 minutes or 15 minutes....if u cannot see the difference between letting a child cry within a loving attentive home environment and a child who nevers has any attention or affection...u need help

Why the bitchy response? Surely, as a grown up, you can respond without over-reacting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kids forced to CIO simply learn that their parents will not respond to their cries. They're not learing to self-soothe. My husband and I adopted two children from Kazakhstan. We spent a month there and visited the orphanage daily. The children and babies rarely cry because they've learned that no one will respond. That's what CIO reminds me of. Dramatic? Yes, but what's the difference?

Thank you. This is my point exactly.

You don't see the difference between neglecting a child 24-7 and letting a child cry in 5 and 10 minute increments for three nights?

And you don't see the difference between a hungry or sick child who doesn't cry because no one ever comforts him and a child who isn't crying because he is asleep?

Yes, there is a big difference between an infant and a toddler. (Also a big difference between an infant and a Kindergartener who cries when dropped off at school for the first time, as another PP mentioned in defense of CIO.) The difference is the child as they get older can actually learn a lesson. A baby's brain is much more primitive. they are not learning "hey, I cried and cried and no one came, but guess what, I slept and now I feel great and everything is okay after all." That's not what's going on in there. They're just not capable of that yet.

Absolutely, many proponents of CIO are comparing apples to oranges. My three year old knows how to push buttons, but an infant does not.

[Anonymous]

Absolutely, many proponents of CIO are comparing apples to oranges. My three year old knows how to push buttons, but an infant does not.

It's the anti-CIO folks who are comparing CIO to orphanage neglect.

The fact that neglect causes emotional attachment disorders does not tell you whether the amount of CIO crying counts as neglect. It just doesn't. I've seen no evidence offered here that it does. The experience of parents who CIO is that there child becomes happier and remains attached.

[Anonymous]

I think there are some relevant questions in deciding whether CIO is appropriate:
1. What age is the child? Are they more of an infant or a toddler?
2. What else have you tried? A later bedtime? Regular bedtime routine? An adult on the floor in their room in a sleeping bag? Lights on/off?
3. How long are they crying? Hours or minutes?
4. Have you checked to make sure they are not sick, wet, hungry etc.?

[Anonymous]

NP here. I feel like a lot of people are getting waaay defensive in their choices. Here is what I think. I do think CIO is not necessary and not right. It goes against our instinct to let a little baby cry. But for those parents who did it...Well, I think that you (like many) have been lead by the surge of sleep trainers and books and videos etc. That is not something you should blame yourself for. It is hard not to get persuaded. But I think having hindsight that it may not have been the best decision is ok to admit.

[Anonymous]

I think we should all publish our definitions of what we think CIO is. Sounds like most CIO people do NOT believe CIO is simply tossing a screaming baby in a crib, shutting the door, and not coming back until morning, and that most anti-CIO people do.

Btw, I am an adoptive parent and an adult adoptee and I would never advocate letting a newly adopted child, especially an older one, cry and cry. There IS a difference between children in orphanages who have emotional barriers and children in happy, healthy homes. Trying to compare children in such situations is simply a failing proposition.

[Anonymous]

NP here. People keep saying that CIO involves only leating babies cry for 15 minutes at a time, checking on them, etc. But I routinely read posts on DCUM wherein people describe letting their baby cry literally for hours with no checks (they probably use a monitor, but don't touch or talk to the baby). I guess people have different definitions of CIO, and any harmful effects could be very different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I feel like a lot of people are getting waaay defensive in their choices. Here is what I think. I do think CIO is not necessary and not right. It goes against our instinct to let a little baby cry. But for those parents who did it...Well, I think that you (like many) have been lead by the surge of sleep trainers and books and videos etc. That is not something you should blame yourself for. It is hard not to get persuaded. But I think having hindsight that it may not have been the best decision is ok to admit.

I support CIO because I rely on evidence, and not opinions, to help me make decisions as to how to raise my child. If someone has been "duped", my dear, it is you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the OP and I wanted to thank you all who came with plausible evidence to help clarify the situation.

I have 2 friends who adopted babies from other countries and another friend who's a foster parent so I completely understand what you're talking about. Those children were taught "independence" very early on and today they have extreme difficulty to get attached to anything and anybody.

In one case, the one child who's very affectionate is extremely sensitive to loss. The poor thing cries the entire day if something breaks down, stops working or someone new in her life goes away. I remember her crying on the way out the grocery store because we were leaving and she said she didn't want to leave because she loved the cashier so much. Poor little thing!

My only wish was that we were in a society that would reward us for doing what's natural and not what's convenient. We need sleep because we have other priorities other than carrying for our children and the little ones are the main sufferers with the consequences.

They spend all day away from us and at night, when they need a little snuggle or a comfy place to fall sleep on we teach them to get attached to a piece of fabric and suck on a silicone nipple to fall asleep (so WE can get sleep).

I'm also guilty of all this but my point here is that I'm trying to stop making excuses to justify my choices. Maybe one day I'll be strong enough to make the right choice, not the one that is convenient.

Children need sleep, and it's unfair to keep them from sleeping so that you can have the satisfaction of "parenting" them all night. It sounds like it's easier for you to deal with sleep deprivation than to help your child sleep. So I guess you're taking the route that's easier for you, too. My daughter likes sucking her thumb, and hates being rocked to sleep. Should I tie her thumb down because it's not "natural" and rock her to sleep, even though that makes her cry? I feel like you and some others on this board can't wrap your heads around the fact that different babies have different needs and personalities.

[Anonymous]

Honey Badger don't care.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honey Badger don't care.

HAHAHA I love that video! Honey badger dont care...honey badger dont give a shit!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I feel like a lot of people are getting waaay defensive in their choices. Here is what I think. I do think CIO is not necessary and not right. It goes against our instinct to let a little baby cry. But for those parents who did it...Well, I think that you (like many) have been lead by the surge of sleep trainers and books and videos etc. That is not something you should blame yourself for. It is hard not to get persuaded. But I think having hindsight that it may not have been the best decision is ok to admit.

ummm nooooo, I think what many people who have used CIO are saying is that they did it, and in hindsight are glad they did it, and they REALLY don't appreciate being called selfish (from the OP's original post), because in the end they did what was best for their family. It is certainly not anyone's place to say that they are selfish, and it is presumptious of you to think they are harboring guilt because they secretly realize they didn't make a good decision.

- mom who is DAMN lucky I did not have to CIO but is understanding of all parents choices

[Anonymous]

My only wish was that we were in a society that would reward us for doing what's natural and not what's convenient. We need sleep because we have other priorities other than carrying for our children and the little ones are the main sufferers with the consequences.

They spend all day away from us and at night, when they need a little snuggle or a comfy place to fall sleep on we teach them to get attached to a piece of fabric and suck on a silicone nipple to fall asleep (so WE can get sleep).

Um, people need sleep, period. What happens when a stay at home parent whose main priority IS caring for their children doesn't get sleep? Maybe they drop their baby. Forget to close the cleaning supply cabinet. Leave a plastic bag on the floor. Get in a car accident on the way to the pediatrician. Etc. They don't magically win a "get out of sleep free" pass just because their primary role is caring for their children.

And as others have already mentioned, children need sleep too! You are doing your child no favors if you let them stay up and NOT sleep when nothing else is wrong. You can't make a child sleep, but you can take care of their actual needs, teach them good sleep habits, give them a healthy sleep environment, and then let them get themselves to sleep.

And unrelated to the above quoted post, I don't understand the folks who say you have to pick up your child to know if something is wrong. No, you don't. I had zero experience with babies before having my first, and I could tell the difference between different cries at 2 months old. There's the pain cry (needs attention), the hungry cry (needs attention), and the fear cry (needs attention). And then there's the "I'm not getting what I want" cry--if he could talk, he'd be saying "But mommy I [yawn] don't WANT to [eye rub] go to bed! [yawn]". Are you really saying I should go in there and pick him up when he's saying that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it really funny how the woman who was aggressively calling people bad parents and abusive neglectors suddenly disappeared when she got called out for not being the OP. The OP also never responded to her posts or agreed with her because she was way over the top. CIO becoming illegal...my gosh.

I posted on this thread until almost midnight I think. Then I went to bed. How bizarre that you find that "suddenly disappeared" when I "got called out." I was never trying to pretend I was the OP -- why would I care about that? There were other anti-CIO posters on this thread, too.

I think parents who choose CIO do it because they read it is acceptable. I think some day it won't be. The mechanism for CIO is the same as the mechanism for neglect and abuse. The mechanism isn't "training."

For kids who did well really fast with CIO -- that's great. But that's not what I consider CIO and that's obviously not the experience I'm talking about.

OK, how do you define CIO? For how long, at what intensity of crying? My DD screams for 30 seconds, rolls over and falls alseep. Am I breaking your law?