Cry it out is the most heartless and cruel thing you can do to a child…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get real. The only reason to CIO is to support parents’ sanity, livelihood, marital relationship, etc. It doesn’t help children sleep more or better—that’s delusion parents use to justify their choice. Happens to be the same reasoning people used when spanking kids “for their own good”. They too believed it was important for establishing boundaries, learning to self-regulate, etc.

Any infant who is on a good schedule, gets enough sunlight early and has a caregiver willing to work with the child’s clock rather than their own (yes that usually means rocking and soothing them to sleep for several months) will get enough sleep. Any outliers are ill—the last kids who should be left to cry

+1

CIO was developed as a "method" in order to facilitate the way we raise kids in the US -- dual income families, minimal family or community support. Babies are expected to get on adult schedules as quickly as possible because there is such limited accommodation for children.

In countries with sufficient parental leave and more support for young families, CIO is not a thing because it's not necessary. Even when both parents work, there is often extended family or communal support that enables the parents to work. Or families work alternate schedules. The idea that a couple will get their child STTN by month 2 or 3 so that the parents can get uninterrupted sleep without the assistance of extended family and then return to pre-baby schedules at work, is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Go ask people in other societies about Ferber or CIO or any of this. They don't know what you are talking about. Babies don't need to be "trained" to sleep. It's just in the country we train them to function as much like adults as possible to accommodate a culture that does not accommodate children or families but expects them to accommodate everyone else.

Ha! My German family recommended CIO to me before I ever considered it myself.

[Anonymous]

LOL. It did not work for DS at all, but all the attempts have not scarred him at all. He is the most cheerful 10 year old you'll ever meet.

I don't think it's cruel, but it won't work for every baby.

[Anonymous]

Humans do not need to be trained to sleep.

This is a fad that is finally seeing it’s end.

[Anonymous]

I do think CIO sleep training is both cruel and damaging until about age one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have known plenty of sleep deprived babies and toddlers. It impacts everything, just like in adults. They’re moody, quick to get upset, have difficulty training. People that let their kids go for their first most formative years in that state are misguided and doing their kids a disservice. I pity those kids, same as you probably pity mine.

Only those in daycare settings or home with lots of other kids. If you let a baby and toddler sleep when and how they want, they aren’t sleep deprived.

DP. This is a laughably ignorant statement.

Another DP, but no, it's not.

Sleep impacts everything, but you do NOT have to train babies to sleep. They are born knowing how to sleep. They sleep in utero. Do you see other mammals training their babies to sleep?

"Sleep training" is a Western creation of recent vintage designed to accommodate societal demands on parents. It has nothing to do with the needs of children whatsoever.

If you meet sleep deprived kids, it's due to environmental factors that are disrupting their natural sleep cycles. It is not due to their parents failing to teach them how to sleep at night.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get real. The only reason to CIO is to support parents’ sanity, livelihood, marital relationship, etc. It doesn’t help children sleep more or better—that’s delusion parents use to justify their choice. Happens to be the same reasoning people used when spanking kids “for their own good”. They too believed it was important for establishing boundaries, learning to self-regulate, etc.

Any infant who is on a good schedule, gets enough sunlight early and has a caregiver willing to work with the child’s clock rather than their own (yes that usually means rocking and soothing them to sleep for several months) will get enough sleep. Any outliers are ill—the last kids who should be left to cry

+1

CIO was developed as a "method" in order to facilitate the way we raise kids in the US -- dual income families, minimal family or community support. Babies are expected to get on adult schedules as quickly as possible because there is such limited accommodation for children.

In countries with sufficient parental leave and more support for young families, CIO is not a thing because it's not necessary. Even when both parents work, there is often extended family or communal support that enables the parents to work. Or families work alternate schedules. The idea that a couple will get their child STTN by month 2 or 3 so that the parents can get uninterrupted sleep without the assistance of extended family and then return to pre-baby schedules at work, is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Go ask people in other societies about Ferber or CIO or any of this. They don't know what you are talking about. Babies don't need to be "trained" to sleep. It's just in the country we train them to function as much like adults as possible to accommodate a culture that does not accommodate children or families but expects them to accommodate everyone else.

Ha! My German family recommended CIO to me before I ever considered it myself.

Lots of Europeans have adopted American parenting philosophies. Not incidentally, this has happened as European countries have adopted more American-style capitalism, with fewer worker protections and more pressure on workers to be productive in a global economy. Your German family would not have recommended this 20 years ago -- they wouldn't know what it was and they would have considered it cruel and unnatural.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get real. The only reason to CIO is to support parents’ sanity, livelihood, marital relationship, etc. It doesn’t help children sleep more or better—that’s delusion parents use to justify their choice. Happens to be the same reasoning people used when spanking kids “for their own good”. They too believed it was important for establishing boundaries, learning to self-regulate, etc.

Any infant who is on a good schedule, gets enough sunlight early and has a caregiver willing to work with the child’s clock rather than their own (yes that usually means rocking and soothing them to sleep for several months) will get enough sleep. Any outliers are ill—the last kids who should be left to cry

+1

CIO was developed as a "method" in order to facilitate the way we raise kids in the US -- dual income families, minimal family or community support. Babies are expected to get on adult schedules as quickly as possible because there is such limited accommodation for children.

In countries with sufficient parental leave and more support for young families, CIO is not a thing because it's not necessary. Even when both parents work, there is often extended family or communal support that enables the parents to work. Or families work alternate schedules. The idea that a couple will get their child STTN by month 2 or 3 so that the parents can get uninterrupted sleep without the assistance of extended family and then return to pre-baby schedules at work, is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Go ask people in other societies about Ferber or CIO or any of this. They don't know what you are talking about. Babies don't need to be "trained" to sleep. It's just in the country we train them to function as much like adults as possible to accommodate a culture that does not accommodate children or families but expects them to accommodate everyone else.

Ha! My German family recommended CIO to me before I ever considered it myself.

Lots of Europeans have adopted American parenting philosophies. Not incidentally, this has happened as European countries have adopted more American-style capitalism, with fewer worker protections and more pressure on workers to be productive in a global economy. Your German family would not have recommended this 20 years ago -- they wouldn't know what it was and they would have considered it cruel and unnatural.

There’s a huge pushback against CIO sleep-training in Britain now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get real. The only reason to CIO is to support parents’ sanity, livelihood, marital relationship, etc. It doesn’t help children sleep more or better—that’s delusion parents use to justify their choice. Happens to be the same reasoning people used when spanking kids “for their own good”. They too believed it was important for establishing boundaries, learning to self-regulate, etc.

Any infant who is on a good schedule, gets enough sunlight early and has a caregiver willing to work with the child’s clock rather than their own (yes that usually means rocking and soothing them to sleep for several months) will get enough sleep. Any outliers are ill—the last kids who should be left to cry

+1

CIO was developed as a "method" in order to facilitate the way we raise kids in the US -- dual income families, minimal family or community support. Babies are expected to get on adult schedules as quickly as possible because there is such limited accommodation for children.

In countries with sufficient parental leave and more support for young families, CIO is not a thing because it's not necessary. Even when both parents work, there is often extended family or communal support that enables the parents to work. Or families work alternate schedules. The idea that a couple will get their child STTN by month 2 or 3 so that the parents can get uninterrupted sleep without the assistance of extended family and then return to pre-baby schedules at work, is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Go ask people in other societies about Ferber or CIO or any of this. They don't know what you are talking about. Babies don't need to be "trained" to sleep. It's just in the country we train them to function as much like adults as possible to accommodate a culture that does not accommodate children or families but expects them to accommodate everyone else.

Please. The parental leave in most European countries is capped at a rather low wage. The media always refers to it as “fully paid” but it’s not unless you’re a low wage worker. For example in the UK, after the initial 8 weeks it’s $250 a week.

My point is that the parental leave in these countries is just another way of taking advantage of female labor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get real. The only reason to CIO is to support parents’ sanity, livelihood, marital relationship, etc. It doesn’t help children sleep more or better—that’s delusion parents use to justify their choice. Happens to be the same reasoning people used when spanking kids “for their own good”. They too believed it was important for establishing boundaries, learning to self-regulate, etc.

Any infant who is on a good schedule, gets enough sunlight early and has a caregiver willing to work with the child’s clock rather than their own (yes that usually means rocking and soothing them to sleep for several months) will get enough sleep. Any outliers are ill—the last kids who should be left to cry

+1

CIO was developed as a "method" in order to facilitate the way we raise kids in the US -- dual income families, minimal family or community support. Babies are expected to get on adult schedules as quickly as possible because there is such limited accommodation for children.

In countries with sufficient parental leave and more support for young families, CIO is not a thing because it's not necessary. Even when both parents work, there is often extended family or communal support that enables the parents to work. Or families work alternate schedules. The idea that a couple will get their child STTN by month 2 or 3 so that the parents can get uninterrupted sleep without the assistance of extended family and then return to pre-baby schedules at work, is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Go ask people in other societies about Ferber or CIO or any of this. They don't know what you are talking about. Babies don't need to be "trained" to sleep. It's just in the country we train them to function as much like adults as possible to accommodate a culture that does not accommodate children or families but expects them to accommodate everyone else.

Ha! My German family recommended CIO to me before I ever considered it myself.

Lots of Europeans have adopted American parenting philosophies. Not incidentally, this has happened as European countries have adopted more American-style capitalism, with fewer worker protections and more pressure on workers to be productive in a global economy. Your German family would not have recommended this 20 years ago -- they wouldn't know what it was and they would have considered it cruel and unnatural.

Who cares? Why have your kid up all night for months and possibly even years when it’s unnecessary? That’s great that so many Europeans stay up all night with their crying kids, but I’m not interested in that. There is absolutely NO benefit to my kid staying up all night. I much prefer the American method as you claim of CIO and then my entire family gets good quality sleep. ‘Merica!

[Anonymous]

CIO shouldn't result in hours of crying. It might be 10 minutes over a few days.

[Anonymous]

It’s so funny that proponents of CIO think babies not subjected to this are sleep deprived and their parents are up all night. Not at all. Babies don’t need to be trained to sleep.
I coslept with mine for years. Once they were past needing diaper changes at night (a few weeks?), all I had to do was roll over, nurse, go back to sleep. Didn’t even need to fully wake up, & there was literally no crying. My kids are older now & sleep just fine. No “training” required.
There’s a reason it feels so wrong to ignore a young baby’s cries.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get real. The only reason to CIO is to support parents’ sanity, livelihood, marital relationship, etc. It doesn’t help children sleep more or better—that’s delusion parents use to justify their choice. Happens to be the same reasoning people used when spanking kids “for their own good”. They too believed it was important for establishing boundaries, learning to self-regulate, etc.

Any infant who is on a good schedule, gets enough sunlight early and has a caregiver willing to work with the child’s clock rather than their own (yes that usually means rocking and soothing them to sleep for several months) will get enough sleep. Any outliers are ill—the last kids who should be left to cry

+1

CIO was developed as a "method" in order to facilitate the way we raise kids in the US -- dual income families, minimal family or community support. Babies are expected to get on adult schedules as quickly as possible because there is such limited accommodation for children.

In countries with sufficient parental leave and more support for young families, CIO is not a thing because it's not necessary. Even when both parents work, there is often extended family or communal support that enables the parents to work. Or families work alternate schedules. The idea that a couple will get their child STTN by month 2 or 3 so that the parents can get uninterrupted sleep without the assistance of extended family and then return to pre-baby schedules at work, is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Go ask people in other societies about Ferber or CIO or any of this. They don't know what you are talking about. Babies don't need to be "trained" to sleep. It's just in the country we train them to function as much like adults as possible to accommodate a culture that does not accommodate children or families but expects them to accommodate everyone else.

Ha! My German family recommended CIO to me before I ever considered it myself.

Lots of Europeans have adopted American parenting philosophies. Not incidentally, this has happened as European countries have adopted more American-style capitalism, with fewer worker protections and more pressure on workers to be productive in a global economy. Your German family would not have recommended this 20 years ago -- they wouldn't know what it was and they would have considered it cruel and unnatural.

Who cares? Why have your kid up all night for months and possibly even years when it’s unnecessary? That’s great that so many Europeans stay up all night with their crying kids, but I’m not interested in that. There is absolutely NO benefit to my kid staying up all night. I much prefer the American method as you claim of CIO and then my entire family gets good quality sleep. ‘Merica!

I care. I care that it may have been a fad to help parents but hurt babies. My kids were never up all night or sleep deprived but I never let them cry at night when I could easily soothe them.

[Anonymous]

Why do people think that if you don't let your kids CIO they will be sleep-deprived? I held/breastfeed/laid with my baby until asleep. My kids were never sleep-deprived.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s get real. The only reason to CIO is to support parents’ sanity, livelihood, marital relationship, etc. It doesn’t help children sleep more or better—that’s delusion parents use to justify their choice. Happens to be the same reasoning people used when spanking kids “for their own good”. They too believed it was important for establishing boundaries, learning to self-regulate, etc.

Any infant who is on a good schedule, gets enough sunlight early and has a caregiver willing to work with the child’s clock rather than their own (yes that usually means rocking and soothing them to sleep for several months) will get enough sleep. Any outliers are ill—the last kids who should be left to cry

+1

CIO was developed as a "method" in order to facilitate the way we raise kids in the US -- dual income families, minimal family or community support. Babies are expected to get on adult schedules as quickly as possible because there is such limited accommodation for children.

In countries with sufficient parental leave and more support for young families, CIO is not a thing because it's not necessary. Even when both parents work, there is often extended family or communal support that enables the parents to work. Or families work alternate schedules. The idea that a couple will get their child STTN by month 2 or 3 so that the parents can get uninterrupted sleep without the assistance of extended family and then return to pre-baby schedules at work, is a uniquely American phenomenon.

Go ask people in other societies about Ferber or CIO or any of this. They don't know what you are talking about. Babies don't need to be "trained" to sleep. It's just in the country we train them to function as much like adults as possible to accommodate a culture that does not accommodate children or families but expects them to accommodate everyone else.

Ha! My German family recommended CIO to me before I ever considered it myself.

Lots of Europeans have adopted American parenting philosophies. Not incidentally, this has happened as European countries have adopted more American-style capitalism, with fewer worker protections and more pressure on workers to be productive in a global economy. Your German family would not have recommended this 20 years ago -- they wouldn't know what it was and they would have considered it cruel and unnatural.

Who cares? Why have your kid up all night for months and possibly even years when it’s unnecessary? That’s great that so many Europeans stay up all night with their crying kids, but I’m not interested in that. There is absolutely NO benefit to my kid staying up all night. I much prefer the American method as you claim of CIO and then my entire family gets good quality sleep. ‘Merica!

People do not stay up all night with crying babies. Rather, they adapt their lives to infant sleep schedules.

My kids slept in our room with us for the first 8-11 months of life. We used a cosleeper and when they woke up, I'd nurse them. I took 6 months off work so for the most intensive months, if I was very tired after a night of waking up, I simply slept during their morning nap to catch up. By the time I returned to work, we were down to 1-2 wakeup a night and they were nursing efficiently. I was pumping quite a bit by then so we could split the wake-ups between us. There was hardly any crying. Whoever's turn it was would get up and feed the baby until they fell asleep, and then return to bed. Over the next few months, we'd go from two feedings to one, to just sporadic wakeups and some nights where they STTN. Then we'd move them to a nursery. Sometimes there was a transition period where the wakeup would resurface for a period, and we'd take turns going in the nursery, generally just to comfort, no food. And once the baby felt confident that we would come in if they needed us, they'd STTN every night.

No CIO, no being up with a crying baby "all night long". What was required was a SAHP until the child was 6 months old, then some mildly disrupted sleep for a couple months, and that's it.

I am always so confused on here when CIO advocates are like "if you don't teach your child to sleep, they'll be sleep deprived forever!!!!" What on earth. Sleeping is a natural animal imperative. There is some guidance necessary to get babies accustomed to day/night sleep cycles. They need to get big enough that they can consume enough calories before sleep to not get hungry in the middle of the night (which takes longer for some babies than others -- babies sleep 12 hours at night so of course some babies will wake up at 2am and think "I need food!"). They need to trust that their caregivers are nearby and reliable so if something is wrong, they will get help. They need practice. But none of this requires you to force them to cry until they pass out from exhaustion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s so funny that proponents of CIO think babies not subjected to this are sleep deprived and their parents are up all night. Not at all. Babies don’t need to be trained to sleep.
I coslept with mine for years. Once they were past needing diaper changes at night (a few weeks?), all I had to do was roll over, nurse, go back to sleep. Didn’t even need to fully wake up, & there was literally no crying. My kids are older now & sleep just fine. No “training” required.
There’s a reason it feels so wrong to ignore a young baby’s cries.

No, parents who CIO do not assume every baby who doesn’t CIO is sleep deprived. The only thing I assume about you is that your child is different from mine, which they necessarily are because yours is an entirely separate human being.