i don't want to watch any more of it tbh - that vile woman made me too angry... i'm also rather concerned that as the series continues, her 'tough love' bullshit will be shown to be apparently more effective - without giving the viewer any idea of any possible long term effects of this kind of treatment on kids.
bringing up baby - ch4
- Thread starter killer b
- Start date
souljacker
innit
scumbalina said:but I'm sure my long angry rant about the importance blowing rasberries on babies bellies was most informative
Oi! The raspberries method is patented by me. I was going to write a book and make a TV programme and everything
toggle
wobbly
scumbalina said:I watched about 10 minutes of this then got too stroppy and had to turn it off. We're trying for a bubby at the moment and I think I scared the shit out of Mr S but glaring at him and spitting "our baby WILL be cuddled when it cries, OKAY?" I doubt he had any itention of doing anything else, but I'm sure my long angry rant about the importance blowing rasberries on babies bellies was most informative
but that is terribly important. it remains terribly important as they grow older.
now if you will excuse me, i can see a tummy that needs attention
scumbalina
Scummy Mummy
toggle said:
I practised on Mr S last night
I has to get the technique down pat before I gets an ickle one incase I get overexcited and eats it all up 
scumbalina
Scummy Mummy
souljacker said:Oi! The raspberries method is patented by me. I was going to write a book and make a TV programme and everything
I bow down to your rasberry-wisdom oh wise one
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
What could have been an informative programme was Channel foured to death.
"How can we make a programme about babies, a little bit fly on the wall and a little bit wife swap?"
One whole hour and what did we learn? Well in the first half hour we learned what would be taking place in the second half hour, then we learned that some woman thinks sticking their babies out in the garden whatever the weather with the door closed for hours is a good idea. Spot the obvious addition of a nanny just to make people get mad with their tellies. Thanks C4, really useful for those of us with new born babies.
Why can't TV just be informative, why does it always have to involve confrontation these days?
"How can we make a programme about babies, a little bit fly on the wall and a little bit wife swap?"
One whole hour and what did we learn? Well in the first half hour we learned what would be taking place in the second half hour, then we learned that some woman thinks sticking their babies out in the garden whatever the weather with the door closed for hours is a good idea. Spot the obvious addition of a nanny just to make people get mad with their tellies. Thanks C4, really useful for those of us with new born babies.
Why can't TV just be informative, why does it always have to involve confrontation these days?
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Could have been a useful programme that could have sold shit loads of DVDs forever if it was done right.
I loved that bitches 'it will have all worked out in three months' bullshit. In three months almost all babies can last the night however you treat them.
Then there was the amazon woman who said 'the babies are crying for a reason, they want to be close to mum and dad, pick them up and they stop'.
'no they don't' says bitch lady. Er? Yes they do 95% of the time, if they arn't hungry or needing a change.
I loved that bitches 'it will have all worked out in three months' bullshit. In three months almost all babies can last the night however you treat them.
Then there was the amazon woman who said 'the babies are crying for a reason, they want to be close to mum and dad, pick them up and they stop'.
'no they don't' says bitch lady. Er? Yes they do 95% of the time, if they arn't hungry or needing a change.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Idaho said:
To be fair that is Dr Spocks advice and one of the three methods the programme is following.
LilMissHissyFit
Disturbed in a pink bra
killer b said:
Yes, you see? They want attention.... well no shit sherlock.. so wheres the logic that says you ignore them
souljacker
innit
What has astonished me, since lil' soul was born, is how many people seem to think they have the right to point out your doing something wrong. Mrs S was on the bus the other day and some old dears started having a discussion with her about whether it was right that she was doing x or y. Then the grandparents come round and say that IN THEIR DAY we did this or that. Then the NHS tells you something else, then the NCT completely contradict it. Then some TV programme or website says something else entirely.
Because of this, I've come to the conclusion that NO ONE HAS A FUCKING CLUE WHAT IS BEST. I find this attitude helps me relax a lot more......
Because of this, I've come to the conclusion that NO ONE HAS A FUCKING CLUE WHAT IS BEST. I find this attitude helps me relax a lot more......
trashpony
Hag
Here's a couple of links zenie
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...article_id=369379&in_page_id=1799&in_a_source
http://whyfiles.org/087mother/4.html - this article looks at the damage caused to children raised in Ceausescu's orphanages
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/....html?id=a1a74c84-c59d-414d-bbb7-3860fee988f1 - damage caused to babies' brains by leaving them to 'cry it out'
I could go on ...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...article_id=369379&in_page_id=1799&in_a_source
http://whyfiles.org/087mother/4.html - this article looks at the damage caused to children raised in Ceausescu's orphanages
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/....html?id=a1a74c84-c59d-414d-bbb7-3860fee988f1 - damage caused to babies' brains by leaving them to 'cry it out'
I could go on ...
Idaho
continuity character
It's no-one's advice. Dr Spock was apparently a crap parent.ATOMIC SUPLEX said:
Yeah I hate that about modern programmes. That and the fact they have to preview what they say, say it, then review what they have just said. And after an hour you end up with so little information being relayed you wonder why they bothered.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
Idaho said:
Are you thinking of Mr Spock? Because I think he took the non emotional approach.
foo
dirtysweet
souljacker said:
when my first child was born 23 years ago - it was wrong to lie them on their backs. because they would choke.
these days it's wrong to lie them on their front. because they will suffocate.
fashions change, even when it comes to parenting it seems. i find it quite ridiculous.
foo said:
yup...that IS parenting in a nutshell.
zenie said:
There is plenty of evidence showing how the development of the brain, particularly in the first year of life, is effected by the relationship with primary caregivers. The development of those parts of the brain that we depend on for emotional regulation and ability to make and sustain relationships i.e the parts of the brain necessary to the functioning of human beings in human society whatever form that may take, largely take place after birth. If you’re interested there is a book by Sue Gerhardt called Why Love Matters: How Affection Shapes a Baby’s Brain that combines a psychoanalytic psychotherapeutic approach with the research being done in developmental psychology and neuroscience. A lot of this stuff is within an attachment theory framework developed by John Bowlby in the 1950s, since when loads of studies have been done on the effect of the interactions of our first years on our type of relating to others as adults.
zenie said:Cheers mate
Only, I got brought up like that, leave baby's crying unless they need nappies/food and they'll shut-up so maybe I'll go analyse myself
Me too! There is a piccie of me as a baby on the mantlepiece - expecting my own bab in a couple of weeks - and there I am sitting in my pram all wrapped up getting some fresh air in the garden! Its my favourite baby pic - I'm smiling - or is it a grimace? - but up until last night I wasn't aware of what it represented
I saw my mum yesterday for the second time since the beginning of my pregancy and she was just as unresponsive and unable to parent as when I was little - of course, following a model, or claiming to, can quite easily be a rationalisation or a cover up for behaviour that is unavoidable. After all, she can hardly claim that being nice to me is going to 'spoil' me at 37 years of age. Likewise, for example, I could use baby-wearing as a way of meeting my own unmet infantile needs but hopefully being aware of those will minimise that kind of thing.
Its taken me a good few years of therapy to feel as good as I reckon it gets. Luckily we're a pretty resilient species - it takes a lot to completely fuck us up - but I’d rather not have had to pay someone to re-parent me in my thirties for what was lacking in my childhood.
Thora said:The Continuum Concept looks the best out of that lot, but some people into attachment parenting are like religious nutters
I first read the Continuum Concept years ago and found it really interesting. No doubt there is plenty of idealisation going on in her portrayal of tribal life - it’s a subjective account of life, rather than a piece of academic anthropology as it usually gets described – but there have been anthropological studies since that show that babies cry less in cultures where there is more contact either through co-sleeping or baby-wearing. Its not a child-care book and it doesn’t tell parents what to do. I didn’t find it dogmatic in the slightest, it took account quite clearly of the differences between modern society and traditional societies but highlighted certain aspects of living, not just child care, that she felt were beneficial to good mental health. One of the most important things was that the women she describes are not raising a child in isolation in the home as women are in our society; she doesn’t describe constant contact between mother and child but actually emphasises how helpful it is to all that baby is carried etc. by siblings, other children, other adults, family or not. Importantly, there is also no split between work and every other aspect of their life as has been the case in this society for a long, long time now. Jean Liedloff was a New Yorker; she didn’t recommend trying to live a tribal life in modern urban society but did suggest that within those limitations perhaps we should rethink our childrearing practices so that we are more in tune with our history as human beings. This includes co-sleeping, breast-feeding, baby-wearing and being attuned to baby’s needs through close physical proximity. But equally important is an emphasis on the child adapting to the mother’s life rather than a child-centred approach that makes the child the centre of the universe. It strikes me as very sane and very balanced.
Similar threads
