Why I'm not CIOing

[Anonymous]

Just a question for those parents that are anti-CIO. And this is a question out of curiosity not snarkiness. Where do you draw the line for CIO? If a child is left to whimper in bed for up to 15 to 20 minutes, do you think that's going too far? I'm not big on the CIO thing, but I'm not completely against it. I think people have to do what works for them, and every baby is different with different needs. But it seems that most people who do CIO, don't leave their baby crying for hours on end (although I realize there are extreme cases like this). If a baby cries for a short amount of time and is able to start falling asleep on his/her own, I think that's great. Great for baby and great for the parents. I usually let my LO cry for about five minutes (it's usually just fussiness) and he falls asleep on his own. I personally don't feel comfortable with CIO but I think that's because my LO has been a decent sleeper... but if someone lets their baby cry for 15 minutes before falling asleep, do you think that's going too far?

[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.

Oh no. You havent gone away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Just a question for those parents that are anti-CIO. And this is a question out of curiosity not snarkiness. Where do you draw the line for CIO? If a child is left to whimper in bed for up to 15 to 20 minutes, do you think that's going too far? I'm not big on the CIO thing, but I'm not completely against it. I think people have to do what works for them, and every baby is different with different needs. But it seems that most people who do CIO, don't leave their baby crying for hours on end (although I realize there are extreme cases like this). If a baby cries for a short amount of time and is able to start falling asleep on his/her own, I think that's great. Great for baby and great for the parents. I usually let my LO cry for about five minutes (it's usually just fussiness) and he falls asleep on his own. I personally don't feel comfortable with CIO but I think that's because my LO has been a decent sleeper... but if someone lets their baby cry for 15 minutes before falling asleep, do you think that's going too far?

I think there's a difference between a baby who cries to wind down or as part of the falling to sleep process and a baby who cries because they need something. (And a big difference between fussiness and screaming; I've never heard anyone describe hearing their baby fuss as excruciating.) The baby who cries as part of the going to sleep process -- that's parents who need to be trained not to fuss over the baby. But there are babies who really need their parents and the parents are not meeting their needs -- that's the damaging CIO I am talking about. And I think most parents with babies who are needy in this way are so sleep-deprived and desperate that they are willing to believe they are "training" their infant to sleep better by doing something barbaric to them. Sleep training that involves extended periods of going in to sooth the baby over and over but not pick them up is what I'm talking about.

[Anonymous]

Why doesnt the "go away poster" go away. She is on countless threads all the time telling people to go away

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh no. You havent gone away.

That's right, i didn't go away just because you insulted and bullied me. I have something legitimate to say and I'm going to ignore the mean posts like yours from now on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh no. You havent gone away.

That's right, i didn't go away just because you insulted and bullied me. I have something legitimate to say and I'm going to ignore the mean posts like yours from now on.

Excuse me? How did I insult and bully you? I just read this in the morning. Go sling YOUR insults elsewhere and FYI they are not legitimate claims. I have read all the posts and you are the one who is antagonizing everyone. Good bye and good riddance.

[Anonymous]

Once again cosleeping is dangerous, not Cio

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why doesnt the "go away poster" go away. She is on countless threads all the time telling people to go away

Yes because on all the threads out of all the thousands of posts there is the same person doing this all the time. Wow you are really smart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Once again cosleeping is dangerous, not Cio

Amen my friend!

[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.

Oh, I get it. You have your very own definition of CIO, which is different from everyone else's definition. Well, that explains it. You don't really know what it is, so you made up a theory of what you THINK it is, and then come on here and judge everyone who attempts to sleep train their kids and call them cruel, neglectful and abusive parents. Got it. Thanks for clarifying.

[Anonymous]

She is the same. She gets in fights and then says "go away". You sound like you might be lacking a few things as well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, employing some cockamamie baby torture scheme from a book: natural; parenting your baby as homo sapiens have for millenia: wrong and bad. Check and check. Bowing out now bc anyone who ascribes to the aformentioned logic can't be convinced of squat. Plus, I have to nurse my sweet baby to sleep (actually, toddler!) and then squish his against his daddy, bwahaha!!!

uhhhh??! you aren't a history major are you? "homo sapiens" used to swaddle their kids up and hang them up on hooks on the wall while they went about to do their work. (and in some parts of the world they still do). is that natural for you?

[Anonymous]

To the posters whose buttons are being pushed to the point that they can only hurl insults instead of responding logically to my anti-CIO arguments, and who can only read my arguments as insults against them instead of responding to them on an intellectual level, you may want to ask yourself why you are being so defensive.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Oh, I get it. You have your very own definition of CIO, which is different from everyone else's definition. Well, that explains it. You don't really know what it is, so you made up a theory of what you THINK it is, and then come on here and judge everyone who attempts to sleep train their kids and call them cruel, neglectful and abusive parents. Got it. Thanks for clarifying.

your sarcasm and meanness are very impressive, PP. Very impressive. (Kind of humorous, too.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone with more than one child has had a baby cry for 5 or 10 minutes here and there. Most "CIO" experiences require that amount of crying several times over several nights. If you'd seen it, you would know it's not traumatic.

If a child cries more than that, you back off and try again in a month.

It's not hours of crying alone. Babies seem programmed to fall asleep quickly if they are tired, fed, dry, warm, patted, and not in pain, ALL of which Ferber requires.

Seriously, if this is abuse, then anyone with twins who doesn't constantly have one adult on hand for each baby better watch out for Child Services.

How does it work when the child gets angrier when you go check on them?

If a child get angrier, you can elongate the time between check ins to say, 15 minutes. Many kids will fall asleep before three check ins. And that's the first night. The second night is faster still. If there is a third night, you're probably down to 5 minutes.

By the way, I've never described the process as excruciating but those who do simply mean they find it upsetting when their child cries. That's the sign of a GOOD parent, not a bad one. The next sign of good parenting is deciding how to respond to a cry, knowing that you can't always take the action that would end the crying because it's not in the best interest of the child. The baby cries during diaper changes? That can be upsetting but you need to change anyway. The baby cries during a shot? Same thing, obviously.

CIO requires judgment. If a child doesn't have the temperament for training at one age, you have to wait a while and try again. The PP who is assuming hours and hours of crying over nights and nights, and who seems to think that the baby is hunger and in pain during those hours, is describing a form of "CIO" that I've never seen defended on this board.