attachment parenting

iVillage Member
Registered: 02-19-2004
attachment parenting
1781
Mon, 08-14-2006 - 3:17pm

A woman I know (I used to work with her dh) practices "attachment parenting". Here is a definition (for those who don't know what it is):

"Attachment Parenting includes respecting your child's needs, feeding on demand, and answering your baby's cries. Other parts of Attachment Parenting include co-sleeping, nursing on demand, sling or other baby carrier wearing, and cloth diapering. Not all Attachment Parents practice all of the above, but never the less love the idea of Attachment Parenting and comforting their children.

Attachment parenting uses mild discipline methods and avoids all physical or emotional punishment, such as inflicting shame on a child for inappropriate behavior. Children are encouraged and allowed to sleep with their parents, and you treat your bed as the family bed. Meeting your child's needs according to the child's time frame during the early years of development is an essential part of attachment parenting. Children will be allowed to grow and learn at their own pace and not according to standard time frames."

What do you all think of attachment parenting?

I don't see attachment parenting as something a WOH parent could do, or could they? What do u think?

I am also curious to see if SAHPs vs/ WOHPs will have different opionions on this topic.

If anyone here practices attachment parenting - was your decision to do so closely linked with your decision to be a SAHP?

josee

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-15-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:04am

there is loads of scripture (jerimiah,john to name a couple) that support God's holiness and supreme self above all ills.........but i think the real proof that God didn't create disease comes from the fault of adam and eve,when original sin was first introduced.

and if you don't believe in scripture but believe disease is part of God's work, you're contradicting yourself. there is so much about the bible that supports why people pray. kwim?




Edited 8/27/2006 9:23 am ET by egd3blessed

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:19am
What percentage of mothers work during those 1.5 years?
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:22am
No. I was given a clean bill of health at 2 weeks. I wasn't sick at all past that. Most women I know had all medical restrictions lifted within a month. I know women who returned to work at 2 weeks and 4 weeks. Most large companies her insist on 6. I don't know why because most women I know were fine long before that.
iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:28am

Yes and no it's not the same thing. My employer does not allow a return to work for 6 weeks. Since they were telling me I couldn't work, they paid me for that time (just as they would if they had laid me off because it was their decision not mine). My employer considers women who are within 6 weeks post partum to be too ill to work, which is silly IMO. Healthwise, I could have gone back to work at 2 weeks.

An employer requiring what they consider time to physically recover is not the same as a society paying women who are healthy not to work. Those two are miles apart. How can you compare a period of time when an employer considers you too ill to work to a society simply paying healthy workers not to work because they have childern under a certain age?

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:31am

The point is that they will pay you not to work by choice if you have kids.

Can someone who does not have kids decide to take off a year and get the pay? The conditions they set on getting the pay are telling. If my understanding is correct, they only cover voluntary time off after you have a baby. For whatever reason, they've decided that a parent at home is so important that these funds should be made available to make sure it happens.

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-06-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:32am
When you will pay someone not to do something, in this case work when you have children under a certain age, you are making a very strong statement about what you think is right.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:40am
There is no way I could have gone back to work at 2 weeks. I had a hard enough time taking care of 4 kids when my husband went back to work 10 days after I had our 4 child. Ofcorse with this last one I lost a lot of blood and had some other issues after having him but still. Heck I wasnt even allowed to drive for 4 weeks after I had my 4th child. Not to say that I didnt drive during that time (someone had to take the kids to school and pick them up) but I wasnt suposed to drive during that time.
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
Avatar for taylormomma
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 9:50am

<>

So, if God didn't create disease, who did? Who is the other Creator, that could sully
God's creation so?

<>

No, I have no idea what you mean. You say that scripture says God didn't create disease, then say I'm contradicting myself by not believing scripture and also believing something different than what scripture says. Sounds to me like I'm pretty consistent there. (Even though, to be accurate, I've never said I don't believe scripture. I have said, many time in other discussions, that I am not a literalist, given that the bible is mostly metaphor) And I have no idea what you mean about the bible supporting why people pray. People in many cultures pray, not just judeo-christian ones. I'm sure their religious texts and traditions support their reasons for prayer, as well.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-26-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 10:14am
I disagree. OB GYN have stated that it takes 6 to 8 weeks for the body to heal completely and the hormone levels to return to a more stable level. Not to mention that the parents of a 2 to 4 week old aren't getting the most amount of sleep. Companies give 6 weeks paid and up to 12 weeks without pay so that these families can get into a routine and they can get an employee back that isn't sleep deprieved or hormonally unbalanced.
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-26-2006
Sun, 08-27-2006 - 10:16am

<<>>

So because YOUR health is ok that is how your company should handle it? Not to mention I have never seen a DC center that will take a 2 week old baby. Have you? How much sleep were you getting at 2 weeks after your baby was born? Maybe your company isn't considering just the mother's health but maybe the health of the baby. Not to mention that many mothers that have c sections are not ready to work at 2 weeks.


Pages