0


A few days ago, the SINC agency published a report with a title amazing, eye-catching and I would say that worrying: "parenting with attachment not working as they preach the ‘gurus’". Since that day, the report reached me on numerous occasions, mostly shared by people who wanted to know my opinion about it, seeking them confirmed their suspicions, and that in some cases were relatively concerned about that that "does not work".

I was required to read it carefully to give an answer, because only with the introduction I saw clearly that there was a misconception in the wording. So my response to these people was brief: "No, no one has proven yet that parenting with attachment is not working." But as this sentence doesn't say anything, I will then move to analyze the story and give my view on the matter.


What is parenting with attachment?

Before going to analyze it seems important to explain a little what is parenting with attachment. The term "parenting with attachment" is a translation pretty horrible of the English 'Attachment parenting'. And I say horrible because it seems to say that only those who follow their principles feel attachment for their children, when the reality is not that.

I like to call it "respectful child-rearing", or similar to, though usually not the soil name because I do not say "I practice the respectful child-rearing" as if it were a method, but I talk about it as I think it is normal and natural, to educate the children, without putting a name or label: children it is necessary to educate them on the respect to grow up to be people-friendly. That is to say, every person deserves to be treated with respect; and the children, until proven otherwise, are people, too.

One of the people that diffusion has made about parenting with attachment is to William Sears, who dared to split this philosophy of care in eight principles:

Birth bonding (emotional ties from birth): give the importance to not be separated from the baby at birth and to initiate a bond of care and affection that can be very beneficial both for the newborn and for the mother.
Breastfeeding (lactation): breast-feeding the baby to be considered the method of normal feeding of the baby, protector of sudden death, and facilitator of the above-mentioned link between the baby and the mother.
Baby wearing (carrying the baby on top): portage to the baby to improve its relationship with the carrier and with the environment, as well as their physical and psychological development.
Beding close to baby (to sleep close to the baby: sleep with the baby nearby in order to provide security, tranquility, and promote the breastfeeding on demand.
Belief in the language value of your baby's cry (trust in the value of his crying as a language): to give value to the crying as a form of communication, without falling into the temptation of saying "let him cry" or "crying to manipulate".
Beware of baby trainers (be careful with the training): to be aware of the methods to modify the behaviors of normal infants may lead parents to think that there is a problem that is not real, and can generate distrust in a relationship that should be the opposite.
Balance (maintaining a balance): between rules and freedom. The children's basic needs must be satisfied; when these needs are no longer basic, the parents must be able to educate and explain the reasons with respect.
Both (both): that the raising of the child is carried out both by the mother as by the father.
Now, these eight principles are not instructions, but a guide. There is not a listing to be followed to the letter if the baby is communicating another thing.

Let Me explain better: all of these principles have an ultimate goal, which is to respond to the needs of the babies, take care of them, and so to make them feel dear, accompanied and sustained emotionally and physically, so that from the calm, can develop properly. If at any point the baby wants something different, the logical thing to do is not to follow the specific point (if a baby does not want to be ported because it is uncomfortable, or if you prefer to sleep in a cot next to the parents, instead of sharing a bed...), because in the end, as I say, the important thing is to adapt to the child, and not to adapt the child to some instructions.


Parenting with attachment

We, that is a generalization of what most babies are doing well, but not something that need to be met as if a method is involved. Basically because there are people who say, "I educated him according to the method of parenting with attachment because I sleep with him, give him the chest, portaging, etc", which then does not get between the baby and she (or he) is to establish a trust relationship, or secure attachment, because the important thing in the end is not what you do, but why. And why is no other than the goal that I have already explained: do you feel the baby loved, comforted and quiet. And not because you should be as well, that too, but because you really feel as well.

Happens to me often when I speak of these issues I finding it increasingly difficult to put the ideas in perspective because it is something that is a part of me. I am not educated and my children to get anything concrete, or I look at the list of instructions once in a while to see if I'm good. I do so because I was born to do so; because it would not be able to do otherwise; because it is as well as I feel that I should do so. Is more, to raise with respect to a child with the goal of being a leader, or a person of social success or something like that is a mistake, because then you'll be directing everything to achieve your goal, when the logical thing to do is to be a companion on the way.

How it starts the article out of SYNC

Having said all this, I go on to explain what it says in the introduction of the article, which for me was already enough to answer those who asked me:

A relationship strong and healthy between babies and their caregivers is essential in the evolution of any creature. The supporters of the ‘natural motherhood’ promote three practices for strengthening it: co-sleeping, breastfeeding, and porterage. However, its rules are neither necessary nor sufficient, according to the science that studies the development of the child. The secure link is achieved by responding to their emotional and physical needs and, for that, not worth three tricks.

Begin by confirming that you essential is a healthy relationship and strong between infants and caregivers, which is precisely what you are looking for when you parents are told to respond to the crying of the baby and adapt to your needs (the principles of the respectful child-rearing, we will).

Then it says that the supporters promote that to happen on the basis of three practices: co-sleeping, breastfeeding, and porterage. And here is when he put the leg up to the groin (as they say in my village). As I have said above, what is important is not the how but the why: you can get a good bond with a baby without portable, for example, if, as I say, that is not what the baby demands, you can get a good bond with a baby without sleeping with him if, as I say, you prefer another thing; and you can get a good relationship and a good bond with a child if not breastfeeding. The parents say -I have not actually ever done and I have three children (that is irony, of course) - and can also be a part of this philosophy of parenting, for example (or someone would say to a dad who is not educating their child not to give him the breast?).

And just saying that "the secure link is achieved by responding to their emotional and physical needs and, for that, not worth three tricks." And with reason: the link is accomplished by responding to the physical and emotional needs of the babies, and for that there is no trick. If he asks for arms, you arms, or for the convenience of parents. If you ask for that don't sleep alone, well you got close. And if you ask for tit, and the mother gives the breast, as breastfeeding. This is not a trick, is to follow what they suggest: responding to their emotional and physical needs.


Responding to the experts

The rest of the article focuses on the words of some experts such as Alan Sroufe, considered one of the main references in the scientific research on attachment, Amy Tuteur, a gynecologist and author of the book "Push Back: Guilt in the Age of Natural Parenting", and Dieter Wolke, of the medical school of Warwick (England).

So to continue with my post, will I find your words to be able to go demonstrating that, in reality, what we come to say all the time, is that parenting with attachment is the best way of educating a child.

Many of the proposals offered by this style of parenting are good, but following them is no guarantee of a secure link and, if the parents do not comply, your creature doesn't have to have any problem.

As I said before, educating a child is not to follow some specific instructions, because the manual is the baby. What that says Sears is, basically, don't be afraid to do what your baby asks if we speak of sleeping with him (provided that it is done safely), take it in your arms, attend to your crying, etc, in addition to creating a relationship of communication and affection with the child. Because you can portage and care for a baby, but if you don't speak and you look at the eyes, for example, you will not get to have a good relationship with your child.

Why not, it is not a guarantee of anything, and like everything in life, not to do so does not necessarily pose a problem... look at how many children we drove every day without a belt and had no problem.

In the years 50, your social status what marked the club field to which belongings. Now you prove it by explaining that offspring with attachment to your children, and what school you take.

I suppose that there will be people that do it, and that it believes has a higher social status by educating the children. I am one of those who think that I do it because I don't it comes the other way and become depressed when they look at the current account.


Parenting with attachment

The formation of a good bond during the first years of life is essential, but Sears is satisfied that to do so is imperative to a perfect mother and available, both physically and emotionally 24 hours a day. If not, the child will be terrible. This is not only sexist and retrograde, but, in addition, it is a lie.

I believe that Sears says that a baby needs a mother and a father (to say "Both"), but especially the mother is the primary caregiver. You do not have to be perfect, but, given that raising a baby is totally dependent, yes interested in the mother or the father are available 24 hours a day. I think that no one would take a break from raising a baby: "Honey, the baby bears crying for five hours because it was my time of" rest " or "has been crying a hour because we were that from the three the baby was yours, and you've come to work late".

All the babies are going to generate a link with the person who raise the chicks, it is not necessary to do anything to promote it. Yes we must work on the child trust in this relationship and, in addition, we know how to get it. A secure attachment is achieved by responding to the needs and signals of the baby in a sensitive, appropriate and effective. Not with a series of tricks, as dictated by Sears.

But is that the "tricks", as they say, is the way to respond to the needs and signals of the majority of babies, "in a sensitive, appropriate and effective". Come on, if you have a lot of trouble for the child to trust in the relationship and she cries for him to take in the arms, but I can't catch it, how do I do it? What if she cries because she feels lonely night? What if she cries because I'm doing the Estivill method and suddenly I regret doing so, as it says Sears, and then I remember that these experts said that Sears was a trick and that I should not ignore? Do you let him cry to teach him to sleep, would not otherwise respond "to the needs and signals of the baby in a sensitive, appropriate and effective"?

Human development is like a pyramid: the first two years are key, but the relations of friendship that we have throughout life will also determine our ability adult to deal with conflicts.

Well, that... what we are saying: the early years, they spend with their mother and father, are key. Then the children begin to interact with other kids, and the sum of it all creates the person. I don't see that Sears, or anyone that defends the respectful child-rearing say that the kids don't have to have friends, or that you should avoid connection with other people... or even says that the ability adult to deal with conflicts depends only of what happens in the early years with the parents. But if "key" are key.


Parenting with attachment

Our conclusion is that there is nothing more important that the first experiences. But always, always, we talk about statistics. The life and development are complicated: a good principle may twist and a bad one amend.

Clear. That's life, that doesn't always happen as one expects. But that doesn't mean we will stop trying to make things right, or as we feel it should be done: "Look son, from now on I'm going to give up eating hamburgers and potatoes every day, that total, there are children who eat very well from childhood that then are twisted equally."

Mothers of babies with an insecure attachment or evasive have them in your arms for as long as the rest of mothers. The key is not how much, but to do so when the baby requires such a physical proximity.

Well I don't know... if there is insecure attachment, or evasive will be because of truth don't get so much in arms. If it was the same time, would be in arms when the baby requires. In any case, it does not say that grip is bad, so: why not?

Breastfeeding is a precious thing, but it is not critical for the child to develop a secure link. The important thing is to feed a baby when this requires it and not when you want to eat.

Exact: demand feeding. That know it all mothers who breastfeed. On the link, same thing. It is not indispensable, because the parents we can also make a secure bond with the children, and obviously also the mothers who do not breastfeed, but if it makes it easier and in addition it is the normal food of a baby: why not?

With breastfeeding, the transportation of the equipment and co-sleeping, the mother proclaims her emotional bond with the baby via an attachment to the physical body. I can't even sleep alone!

Well... if you want to sleep alone to do so. But it is very likely that the baby is crying. If she's not, perfect. If she cries and the mother is not caring because it considers more important to sleep alone to treat you, then it will not comply with that principle that advocate "the formation of a good bond during the first years of life is essential." Basically, the formation of the link serves for that, so that the mother and father are able to understand the baby's needs and meet them. If not, you can call link: "I have a link wonderful with my baby, that's why at night, even though she cries, I go to sleep alone."

The sound of babies crying is the first form of communication to make sure the food and the proximity. (When asked if the sound of babies crying could be due to the behavior of the parents): it Can be, but it would be very unlikely. There is very little evidence, at least for the crying of colic, is related with a care of poor parents.

At least for the crying the colic. And what about for the rest of the tears? The truth is that it is quite mathematical: the more you attend to a baby, less crying. The less you attend, the more she cries. Unless you cry because you have the so-called colic of the infant, and then it gives a little as they pick up or not, because she cries also in the arms (although it is logical that what you get by if that's what you relieve those a little bit).

But let's go back to what has come before: can we defend the "care poor" because they may not increases the crying or is it better that care can be successful but not reduce it? Best the second thing, isn't it?


Now I wish to quote the whole article to understand it well:

When in the year 2006, the American Academy of sleep Medicine reviewed 52 studies on the efficiency of the training techniques of the dream, he obtained a remarkable result. “94% of the interventions were effective, with clinical improvement [of insomnia] in 80% of the children treated, which was maintained between three and six months,” explains the abstract of the study. “The training techniques of sleep are safe to at least five years after the intervention”.

This is a great news for all those parents of infants and children with insomnia for children, which should be very few, although some of you may have. In Spain we have the so-called "Clinical Practice guideline on Sleep Disorders in Childhood and Adolescence in Primary Care", which also suggests the methods behaviorists and similar to children with sleep disorders.

I am glad to know that even though you carry out these methods, these children with problems will have a good relationship with their parents and that they really will sleep better. In fact, it is most likely that in children with sleep disorders, studies show that once you have made the methods, the ratio is even better: a baby or a child will not be able to sleep by night or by day, and not be able to get a good night's sleep, can cause you to be irritable, annoyed with the parents, and even have problems with concentration, learning, and development. Surely, any effective technique, by more crying that it causes for some days will help you a lot in this sense, as a child will finally sleep, rest, and the day will have their capabilities in a better state.

Now, speaking of normal children without sleep problems, those who have the majority of fathers and mothers in the world, those who wake up several times at night to eat a little and know that their parents are still there, and that we refer to when we talk about parenting with respect, then it's not what I know. Because if your baby sleeps and rests, and by day is a happy child, what need is there to make you feel like you have abandoned him? In fact, what need is there to make to think to the parents that the child has a problem, if you don't have it? Do not alterations the link, making believe to the parents that they have to do to make your child better is to let him cry, make him suffer? Do not disconnect so the parents of the basic needs -crying - babies, those who carried all of the article telling us that we need to address?


Finishing...

Let's, for which I thank all that I have passed this article that you have done so, because thanks to these experts, even I got it more clear: the best way of rearing and educating a child is one in which the parents respond to the needs of the children; by in arms, serving them, giving them affection and spending time with them. What is usually summarized as 'to raise with attachment' or 'raising respect', for the sake of giving it a name that differentiates this current style of the one in that the children do not we caught her in his arms and that we do not become accustomed, let us weep for the night to learn to sleep alone and we were punished and hit for us portáramos well, and we are obedient as soon as possible.

Post a Comment

Incasso Advies Nederland Premium-registratie online-brochure Vraag Offerte aan 3 Gratis traplift offertes
 
Top