Serious question for strenuous anti CIO advocates

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

I have 3 kids. My third was a crying maniac. Basically cried nonstop. I wanted to be able to ignore it because it basically was my entire life and I really couldn't get anything done at all. But, there was something that wouldn't let me do that. I couldn't not respond to my crying infant. I think we are wired to do this from a very biological perspective. I ended up hiring someone to help out because my baby cried so much and I did need to do other things. So, I do think it is bizarre if a mother of an infant can basically ignore a crying newborn and feel ok about it. Of course the baby might cry sometimes and you physically cannot get there for some reason (like in a car stuck in traffic), but almost all of my friends report feeling the way I do when that happens (anxious, upset, etc). Not, ehh, whatever.

Nobody is suggesting that a parent not respond to a crying infant. Just that, in a world of limited resources, sometimes the baby ends up having to cry a bit and will be fine. Yes, we are wired to respond to crying babies. Good for you that you could afford help. There are plenty of colicky infants who cry NO MATTER WHAT, so this logic about, you must do whatever it takes to stop your baby from crying is a bit ridiculous. Sometimes there isn't anything that can be done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

I have 3 kids. My third was a crying maniac. Basically cried nonstop. I wanted to be able to ignore it because it basically was my entire life and I really couldn't get anything done at all. But, there was something that wouldn't let me do that. I couldn't not respond to my crying infant. I think we are wired to do this from a very biological perspective. I ended up hiring someone to help out because my baby cried so much and I did need to do other things. So, I do think it is bizarre if a mother of an infant can basically ignore a crying newborn and feel ok about it. Of course the baby might cry sometimes and you physically cannot get there for some reason (like in a car stuck in traffic), but almost all of my friends report feeling the way I do when that happens (anxious, upset, etc). Not, ehh, whatever.

Nobody is suggesting that a parent not respond to a crying infant. Just that, in a world of limited resources, sometimes the baby ends up having to cry a bit and will be fine. Yes, we are wired to respond to crying babies. Good for you that you could afford help. There are plenty of colicky infants who cry NO MATTER WHAT, so this logic about, you must do whatever it takes to stop your baby from crying is a bit ridiculous. Sometimes there isn't anything that can be done.

Oh, and please note, getting a baby to stop crying to make YOU feel better is a very different thing from getting a baby to stop crying because the baby is going to somehow be harmed if you don't. Let's please not shame new mom OP into not being able to tell the difference. OP is not neglecting her child.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

I have 3 kids. My third was a crying maniac. Basically cried nonstop. I wanted to be able to ignore it because it basically was my entire life and I really couldn't get anything done at all. But, there was something that wouldn't let me do that. I couldn't not respond to my crying infant. I think we are wired to do this from a very biological perspective. I ended up hiring someone to help out because my baby cried so much and I did need to do other things. So, I do think it is bizarre if a mother of an infant can basically ignore a crying newborn and feel ok about it. Of course the baby might cry sometimes and you physically cannot get there for some reason (like in a car stuck in traffic), but almost all of my friends report feeling the way I do when that happens (anxious, upset, etc). Not, ehh, whatever.

Nobody is suggesting that a parent not respond to a crying infant. Just that, in a world of limited resources, sometimes the baby ends up having to cry a bit and will be fine. Yes, we are wired to respond to crying babies. Good for you that you could afford help. There are plenty of colicky infants who cry NO MATTER WHAT, so this logic about, you must do whatever it takes to stop your baby from crying is a bit ridiculous. Sometimes there isn't anything that can be done.

I think you are misreading. I know babies will cry. I have lived it. They will cry and they will live. But a mother who continues on with a 20 minute leisurely shower without hurrying or getting upset is, umm, unusual. I had times when I had to shower because we had to be somewhere important. But I did it fast and I felt a lot of anxiety because my newborn was crying. I would be concerned about ppd because that is not a typical response.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP ignore the harpies. Your approach seems normal and healthy and in fact will probably lead to a better sleeping baby even without having to do CIO. They have done research showing that not jumping to pick your baby up immediately when they stir at night leads to a better sleeper, without CIO.

Ummm yeah after six months. Not four weeks. Big difference.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You have a 4 week old. When she cries. You pick her up. Right now, that is your life. There really is nothing else...all other things are on hold for a bit.

This isn't a 3 month old, it's a 4 week old. Nothing else is more important.

This. And it's what we all go through.

"The difficult, I'll do right now. The impossible will take a little while..." but not 20 minutes. Ever.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

No, of course not, I have two kids. However, you adapt. You wear the newborn. You put them in the bouncie and rock it with your foot while you help older kid. You talk to them as you're finishing up a task quickly. You don't ignore them so you can have me time and we really don't have studies on letting newborns CIO because it's considered inappropriate and studies can't potentially hurt the participants.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

I have 3 kids. My third was a crying maniac. Basically cried nonstop. I wanted to be able to ignore it because it basically was my entire life and I really couldn't get anything done at all. But, there was something that wouldn't let me do that. I couldn't not respond to my crying infant. I think we are wired to do this from a very biological perspective. I ended up hiring someone to help out because my baby cried so much and I did need to do other things. So, I do think it is bizarre if a mother of an infant can basically ignore a crying newborn and feel ok about it. Of course the baby might cry sometimes and you physically cannot get there for some reason (like in a car stuck in traffic), but almost all of my friends report feeling the way I do when that happens (anxious, upset, etc). Not, ehh, whatever.

Nobody is suggesting that a parent not respond to a crying infant. Just that, in a world of limited resources, sometimes the baby ends up having to cry a bit and will be fine. Yes, we are wired to respond to crying babies. Good for you that you could afford help. There are plenty of colicky infants who cry NO MATTER WHAT, so this logic about, you must do whatever it takes to stop your baby from crying is a bit ridiculous. Sometimes there isn't anything that can be done.

Oh, and please note, getting a baby to stop crying to make YOU feel better is a very different thing from getting a baby to stop crying because the baby is going to somehow be harmed if you don't. Let's please not shame new mom OP into not being able to tell the difference. OP is not neglecting her child.

I actually consider letting a newborn to cry for extended periods on multiple occasions neglectful. OP rattled off a list of incidents where she essentially ignored her newborn and the baby is only 4 weeks old. That's really not the norm and I think implying it is isn't helpful to anyone.

[Anonymous]

OP- shower when she is napping. Problem solved.

Until you figure out how to do that PICK HER UP WHEN SHE CRIES.

[Anonymous]

I think the difference with many of you posting, is you said you couldn't get to your babies right away...and you felt anxiety over it.

The OP was relaxing in the shower while her newborn cried. That does not seem normal.

[Anonymous]

Who could shower while their baby cried for 20 minutes? I know that after about 2 minutes my maternal instinct would have had me in tears if I tried.

I agree with many of the PPs: this isn't training for CIO. It's desensitizing you to neglectful parenting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

I have 3 kids. My third was a crying maniac. Basically cried nonstop. I wanted to be able to ignore it because it basically was my entire life and I really couldn't get anything done at all. But, there was something that wouldn't let me do that. I couldn't not respond to my crying infant. I think we are wired to do this from a very biological perspective. I ended up hiring someone to help out because my baby cried so much and I did need to do other things. So, I do think it is bizarre if a mother of an infant can basically ignore a crying newborn and feel ok about it. Of course the baby might cry sometimes and you physically cannot get there for some reason (like in a car stuck in traffic), but almost all of my friends report feeling the way I do when that happens (anxious, upset, etc). Not, ehh, whatever.

Nobody is suggesting that a parent not respond to a crying infant. Just that, in a world of limited resources, sometimes the baby ends up having to cry a bit and will be fine. Yes, we are wired to respond to crying babies. Good for you that you could afford help. There are plenty of colicky infants who cry NO MATTER WHAT, so this logic about, you must do whatever it takes to stop your baby from crying is a bit ridiculous. Sometimes there isn't anything that can be done.

I think you are misreading. I know babies will cry. I have lived it. They will cry and they will live. But a mother who continues on with a 20 minute leisurely shower without hurrying or getting upset is, umm, unusual. I had times when I had to shower because we had to be somewhere important. But I did it fast and I felt a lot of anxiety because my newborn was crying. I would be concerned about ppd because that is not a typical response.

This is op one last time since apparently I'm neglectful and suffering severe ppd. If you read my followup to the shower thing (which I did not time, maybe it just felt like 20 minutes) I said the reason it took so long was because I was going in and out to rock the rock and play. I find it relaxing to be well showered clean and put together. That makes me feel like a human being so I try to prioritize it, it makes me a happy mom the rest of the day. So I don't shortchange any of my normal shower habits. The image of me standing in the shower humming happily while my baby screams is completely inaccurate. I find her crying to be stressful and upsetting but I have been making a conscious effort to try to not respond to it emotionally because that WAS making me feel depressed in the beginning.

My question was essentially that there seem to be times during the day that the baby cries and I am, for whatever reason, unable to respond immediately. Maybe I'm pooping. Is that a better bathroom example? Do people who adhere to anti CIO philosophies believe these incidents are just as harmful as CIO and if so how do they combat it and if not why?

But it seems that you just modify your life a bit more than I'm willing to. My DH is at work during the day and if I needed to pull over every time she cried I would be trapped at home because it would take forever to get anywhere. Thanks to the few pps that did not assume I was a neglectful monster.

[Anonymous]

I guess the high-anxiety perfectionist moms can't wrap their heads around the existence of more laid back personalities. OP, nothing of what you are doing seems out of the ordinary. And you have the answer to your question: yes, attachment parenting, anti-CIO types think it is wrong to let your baby cry at all for any reason. I trust that you know what your baby needs better than they do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

I have 3 kids. My third was a crying maniac. Basically cried nonstop. I wanted to be able to ignore it because it basically was my entire life and I really couldn't get anything done at all. But, there was something that wouldn't let me do that. I couldn't not respond to my crying infant. I think we are wired to do this from a very biological perspective. I ended up hiring someone to help out because my baby cried so much and I did need to do other things. So, I do think it is bizarre if a mother of an infant can basically ignore a crying newborn and feel ok about it. Of course the baby might cry sometimes and you physically cannot get there for some reason (like in a car stuck in traffic), but almost all of my friends report feeling the way I do when that happens (anxious, upset, etc). Not, ehh, whatever.

Nobody is suggesting that a parent not respond to a crying infant. Just that, in a world of limited resources, sometimes the baby ends up having to cry a bit and will be fine. Yes, we are wired to respond to crying babies. Good for you that you could afford help. There are plenty of colicky infants who cry NO MATTER WHAT, so this logic about, you must do whatever it takes to stop your baby from crying is a bit ridiculous. Sometimes there isn't anything that can be done.

I think you are misreading. I know babies will cry. I have lived it. They will cry and they will live. But a mother who continues on with a 20 minute leisurely shower without hurrying or getting upset is, umm, unusual. I had times when I had to shower because we had to be somewhere important. But I did it fast and I felt a lot of anxiety because my newborn was crying. I would be concerned about ppd because that is not a typical response.

This is op one last time since apparently I'm neglectful and suffering severe ppd. If you read my followup to the shower thing (which I did not time, maybe it just felt like 20 minutes) I said the reason it took so long was because I was going in and out to rock the rock and play. I find it relaxing to be well showered clean and put together. That makes me feel like a human being so I try to prioritize it, it makes me a happy mom the rest of the day. So I don't shortchange any of my normal shower habits. The image of me standing in the shower humming happily while my baby screams is completely inaccurate. I find her crying to be stressful and upsetting but I have been making a conscious effort to try to not respond to it emotionally because that WAS making me feel depressed in the beginning.

My question was essentially that there seem to be times during the day that the baby cries and I am, for whatever reason, unable to respond immediately. Maybe I'm pooping. Is that a better bathroom example? Do people who adhere to anti CIO philosophies believe these incidents are just as harmful as CIO and if so how do they combat it and if not why?

But it seems that you just modify your life a bit more than I'm willing to. My DH is at work during the day and if I needed to pull over every time she cried I would be trapped at home because it would take forever to get anywhere. Thanks to the few pps that did not assume I was a neglectful monster.

Wow, I never ever question why people have kids but when you aren't willing to modify your life for a baby that's been out of the womb for four weeks your priorities are fucked up and you should probably have remained childless.

[Anonymous]

You can't keep your kid from crying, and there will always be times when your kid is upset and you can't tend to them immediately. The point is to make those minimal and to be comforting even if you can't address the issue. I think CIO is a very different issue than not being able to help your baby when shampooing your hair or in the car because it's a choice and because you are more separate from your child during this period.

When you're in the car, you can say comforting things to the baby and possibly even reach back and touch the baby's head (depending on your car set-up). Your baby isn't happy, but there isn't much you can do about it except be comforting and calm. My baby hated the car and cried a TON when we drove places, and I hated it, but there wasn't anything else I could do but try to stop and comfort him periodically and say calming things from the front seat. I don't think it scarred him.

As for shampooing your hair, if your baby is awake when you start, you can put the baby in the bathroom with you so the baby is near you and not all alone. Again, you can talk to the baby.

The issue of object permanence in these cases seems really different than if you're outside the room and the baby is alone in a crib without your voice or knowing where you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I did not think the shower thing would throw everyone so much. Like I said she was right there and I dunno I like showers. Being a new mom is stressful and the shower is calming. I was talking to her I just didn't pick her up. Maybe I should have phrased this moment as 'having a difficult moment and need a second of me time so take it.' It's all kinds of things that feel like this though. Maybe they just feel like 20 minutes and are actually just moments but it's a lot.

When I'm cleaning her bottles and she's hungry and I can't juggle her and the bottles safely or when I need to eat something and she's fussy so I set her down for a few minutes to get some sustenance. When the dog has an accident or I break a glass and have to clean it up. Like the shower thing is distracting people from my real question which is what to do when life ends up keeping you busy for a few minutes essentially.

I don't know. Your description of how you prioritize your life right now seems strange. When mine were newborns (especially the first), I barely ever put her down. I ate one handed while holding her, or not until someone came home to help. I didn't shower unless my husband was home. Cleaning? Yeah right. I didn't want to leave my new baby to cry even for a minute. My world revolved around her. I've since learned some balance, but yeah - there is a reason its a running joke that new moms don't shower/have messy houses/etc. I find your indifference toward responding to the baby in favor of mundane/non-essential tasks bizarre.

Clearly I'm doing things more differently than I thought I was. I didn't think the cumulative time that she's set down for these things all that substantial. 10/20 minutes here and there, some of which she's fussy for doesn't seem like it should invalidate the other 11 hours I'm devoted to her every need. I can't imagine a mom of two or three not facing moments like this with a new newborn. I don't really view trying to maintain my mental health as non essential, nor washing the vessels from which she eats but I guess everyone's thresholds are different. I'm going to take pps advice and bow out of this thread. I think the fact that I even had this question means we probably diverge on a fundamental level. I really was curious though not trying to be clever.

If you can't accomodate your baby's needs I suggest getting help because for the first couple months all needs should be responded to pretty much on demand. If your mental health prevents you from responding it's still your responsibility to make sure those needs are met. The way you put off meeting your newborn's needs is pretty atypical from my experience. Sure, everyone has a bathroom example or finishing up showering but those aren't norms at all and usually people feel very bad about that, not justified.

Do you really think that moms with a bunch of kids close together are able to deal with their newborn instantaneously 100% of the time? In a month I will have a toddler and a newborn and sometimes I will have to take care of them by myself. I have actually heard that the toddler's needs sometimes need to come first in that kind of conflict situation. The newborn is safe, isn't going to starve, etc., and - YES THIS IS TRUE - 20 minutes of crying is not going to harm them long term.

OP on the other hand I doubt it was actually 20 minutes. One time when my kid was a little older I tried to let her cry 10 in her pack n play for naptime and I only made it to 8.

I have 3 kids. My third was a crying maniac. Basically cried nonstop. I wanted to be able to ignore it because it basically was my entire life and I really couldn't get anything done at all. But, there was something that wouldn't let me do that. I couldn't not respond to my crying infant. I think we are wired to do this from a very biological perspective. I ended up hiring someone to help out because my baby cried so much and I did need to do other things. So, I do think it is bizarre if a mother of an infant can basically ignore a crying newborn and feel ok about it. Of course the baby might cry sometimes and you physically cannot get there for some reason (like in a car stuck in traffic), but almost all of my friends report feeling the way I do when that happens (anxious, upset, etc). Not, ehh, whatever.

Nobody is suggesting that a parent not respond to a crying infant. Just that, in a world of limited resources, sometimes the baby ends up having to cry a bit and will be fine. Yes, we are wired to respond to crying babies. Good for you that you could afford help. There are plenty of colicky infants who cry NO MATTER WHAT, so this logic about, you must do whatever it takes to stop your baby from crying is a bit ridiculous. Sometimes there isn't anything that can be done.

I think you are misreading. I know babies will cry. I have lived it. They will cry and they will live. But a mother who continues on with a 20 minute leisurely shower without hurrying or getting upset is, umm, unusual. I had times when I had to shower because we had to be somewhere important. But I did it fast and I felt a lot of anxiety because my newborn was crying. I would be concerned about ppd because that is not a typical response.

This is op one last time since apparently I'm neglectful and suffering severe ppd. If you read my followup to the shower thing (which I did not time, maybe it just felt like 20 minutes) I said the reason it took so long was because I was going in and out to rock the rock and play. I find it relaxing to be well showered clean and put together. That makes me feel like a human being so I try to prioritize it, it makes me a happy mom the rest of the day. So I don't shortchange any of my normal shower habits. The image of me standing in the shower humming happily while my baby screams is completely inaccurate. I find her crying to be stressful and upsetting but I have been making a conscious effort to try to not respond to it emotionally because that WAS making me feel depressed in the beginning.

My question was essentially that there seem to be times during the day that the baby cries and I am, for whatever reason, unable to respond immediately. Maybe I'm pooping. Is that a better bathroom example? Do people who adhere to anti CIO philosophies believe these incidents are just as harmful as CIO and if so how do they combat it and if not why?

But it seems that you just modify your life a bit more than I'm willing to. My DH is at work during the day and if I needed to pull over every time she cried I would be trapped at home because it would take forever to get anywhere. Thanks to the few pps that did not assume I was a neglectful monster.

Wow, I never ever question why people have kids but when you aren't willing to modify your life for a baby that's been out of the womb for four weeks your priorities are fucked up and you should probably have remained childless.

She should have remained childless because she takes time to herself to poop? Mommy wars have reached a ridiculous new low!