attachment parenting
Find a Conversation
| 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
"It's not that I have a close minded attitude, and I do take into consideration what reserach has proven, I just don't live by it."
Very good point. I don't model my life based on studies either.
Oh, please.
Just trying to get a point across to all the militant BF'ers that not *all* BM is superior to formula. In your little supposed upscale world it might be. But, come down to the slums and you might be singing a different tune.
"Some kids who don't breastfeed get emotionally attached to a blanket or a toy. I'd rather have my kid attached to the breast than a blankie or a toy -- easier to keep track of and easier to keep clean -- and ultimately, easier to take away."
Why would you rather your child be emotionally attached to a part of your anatomy? This I don't get. I can see nourishing your child with BM but for them to be emotionally attached to a part of your body seems a little bit unhealthy.
"So, if your FF child is on an honors student, etc., etc., great, but your FF child would have been slightly better had he/she been BF."
How do you know this??
"However, a FF child would have been even "better" had he/she been breastfed."
Do you go around looking down upon all those poor, neglected FF children? Do you dab at your eyes with a tissue when you see one of them walking around?
Not answering for her, but for me, I like that my son is emotionally comforted and attached to *me* (not just my breasts, though they and their milk provided the comfort) rather than being emotionally attached to an object.
Shouldn't a baby be attached to his/her mother rather than an inanimate object? I don't see it as unhealthy.
Where did you get "poor, neglected FF children"? You're really stretching what I've said. In fact, I said more than once that it would be impossible to look at a child and see the difference, which I've said is very slight.
And no, I don't look down on FF children - my DD is one of them. But I do accept that I didn't make the best choice for *her* in that situation.
Pages