A thought on crying babies

And yet we've all known or heard of mothers who keep their offspring permanently attached to them and that can generate criticism as well.

It would be interesting to see some proper research being carried out on the subject, but I suppose the long-term effects on children would take many years to demonstrate any meaningful results.

and it seems to me that mum doesn't leave them until they are mobile

Is that always the case, though, whitewave? I'm sure I've seen wildlife programmes which show a mother leaving her litter, well hidden, while she goes off to forage/hunt for food. This is possibly on a par with Mum leaving her baby to cry while she prepares dinner / loads the washing machine / cleans the house / sterilises bottles / prepares feeds. All necessary jobs, just like foraging and hunting.
But I do take your point - I hate to think of a baby being left to cry. For the first few months of life they are far too dependent and needy - it's a big, scary world! My DD pops her little one in a sling while she's getting on with things if her DD is unhappy on her own.

I didn't know that parents left their babies to cry any more.

I was instructed by MIL that this was the thing to do with my first-born and I feel guilty to this day. However, mostly I spent a long time soothing her and walking her up and down. It was just the middle of the night when I was sooo tired (and DH was away for months on end ....).

Yes Mums who keep baby with them all the time are criticised ( but that is only a cultural thing)

I am the worse one to let baby cry and always got very unhappy about it. Daughter was fine - independent from birth - still is but son was dreadful and cried none stop. I can remember at the time thinking that I would love one of those slings used in Africa ( they didn't exist in the 70 s) I do wonder though if it was accepted practice to keep baby close until they indicate in dependence would make life easier for all concerned?

I watched a wildlife programme where a lioness had a second set of cubs and had to go off to find food. The older cubs 'played' with the tiny ones, throwing them up in the air, tossing them around, swinging them around by a leg, dropping them .... When mum came back it was too late for the tinies.
It was heart-rending.

Any baby animals that started crying in the wild when left by mother would attract predators and be eaten. So only those with no-cry genes will live to breed.
I don't think the same rules apply to human babies in the 21st century

Those Baby Bjorn carriers are wonderful, I wish they had been invented when mine were small.

Rose I didn't want to know that that's why I don't watch wildlife programmes any more.

Well at least that doesnt happen. roseq
Also apparently it has become right to follow the French way - who do let their babies cry. The couple the other side who have now moved never seem to attend to their babies at night after a few months. They seemed to cry for ever, and yet in every other way they were doting parents. I hated it.

I can't bear to hear babies cry either Whitewave. I always picked mine up.
We lived in Hongkong when they were little and I carried them on my back in a mei-dai like the Chinese women did.

When I was expecting DD 40 years ago I was told that researchers in America had found that babies who were picked up as soon as they cried would cry less than those who were left to cry because they learnt that there was always someone there. Those who were left would cry for much longer in the hope of someone answering.

Crying in the evening with the so called 6 month colic that lasts for EVER is, of course, something else!

DD had both her babies in a sling for most of the day and they have both turned out as independent as anyone could want.

Sorry Anya
I still think about it and wish I hadn't seen it.

I do remember when my DB and SIL were desperate for sleep because DN cried all night (and slept in the day!!). SIL went to the doctor who said he was going to prescribe sleeping tablets.
SIL said 'I can't give sleeping tablets to a little baby '
The GP said - 'no, they're for you, so you'll sleep through. He'll sleep through in two or three nights'.

DS was born in the British Military Hospital in HK and one morning when he was 4 or 5 days old, he was crying, and the midwives made me go and have my breakfast, saying it was 'good' for him to learn that he couldn't have my attention all the time.
When I went back to the nursery he had manoeuvred himself so he was lying across the cot and had wedged himself with his head on one side and his little feet on the other, red faced, bawling his head off

I think that experience coloured my views!

I remember being told about that research too, Deedaa.

They're crying because they're miserable for some reason or another.

Just attention-seeking as MIL would say - well, yes, wanting mummy.

Did it work Roseq ??

No, my DB got up and saw to him!!
Although SIL did manage to get a few good nights' sleep.
He did settle eventually I think

There's a lot of research that shows that youngest children do not suffer from neglect. Think of it this way, you have three children, the eldest is five, the next one is two and you have a new baby. So a typical morning would go something like this.... the eldest has to be roused from their slumber, given breakfast and encouraged to dress for school, get washed and have their teeth brushed. They can't find their reading book, so that has to be found. The two year old has to be dressed and given their breakfast, washed, teeth and potty. Everyone has to get their coats and shoes on, ready to leave for the school run. Just as you're ready to go the two year old needs the potty again but oh no, the baby has started to cry. Anyway, she's safely in the pram must see to the two year old. That's sorted and the baby's gone quiet, can we make it to school and back before she cries again? No time to worry, off we go.

I had three under five and my youngest is the happiest adult, yet as a baby was always the last in the queue. It's just how it is.

I remember always going to my firstborn when she cried; but with my second when she began to cry, sometimes I would be dealing with a potty scenario (or similar) in the elder and by the time I had sorted that out No.2 had stopped crying.

My DDs have never left any of their children to cry; and the DDs were all on their knees in a big way - still are!

I hated to leave my babies to cry, but with three under four, I'm afraid DS, the youngest, got a lot less of my attention than the DDs. Though usually he'd have a big sister or two fussing round him to more than make up for it And at least he escaped the 1980s flash cards DD1 had to suffer - what was I thinking of believing that tosh?!

We were on our own in Jamaica with no health visitors or family. Just surrounded by many baby experts with varying opinions. We therefore bought Spock and stuck to it (1978 ).

He advised always feeding at 10.00 pm, whatsoever, especiallyto train them not to wake at 12.00am .......deadly.then he had a 10 mins ..or was it 20 mins to leave them to cry because they need to do it. It sounds cruel now to my granny self. But both boys slept through from 6 weeks .

Some babies do cry a lot more than others

And some babies do seem to need to get 'over a hump' before they can go to sleep and do that by crying.

I didn't leave mine to cry in the day in fact DH spent many an hour cradling them whilst they slept. However DS was a horror at night and it wasn't until a older HV advised us to try 'controlled crying' that he slept through the night for the first time ever. He was 8mths at the time. It was hard but worth it.

Supernanny and the Three Day Nanny would leave them to cry I believe. Seems to work.....but that's on TV!