3 ms·

I doubt doing it once matters, but isn't there something kind of bad about having a baby escalate signals until it cries, and then responding with attention as

by wdewind 17y ago

I doubt doing it once matters, but isn't there something kind of bad about having a baby escalate signals until it cries, and then responding with attention as soon as it does? I guess there's no other way to do the experiment and then calm the kid down but it seems a little weird to watch.

ars 17y ago
It would be bad to do it a lot maybe. But a few times is not going to have any harm. At worst it will teach the baby to cry right away when the mother does that. Babies cry a lot, and people don't play with them constantly. A little more isn't going to harm them. The times where there is a positive reactions far outweigh the negative ones here. Not sure if that was clear. I mean that when there is a positive reaction the baby learns from it. A negative one is mostly ignored as far as long term learning goes.
- petercooper 17y ago
  Babies cry a lot, and people don't play with them constantly. A little more isn't going to harm them. I wish I could find the citation but my wife and I did a lot of reading of studies in the early weeks we had our baby. There were more than a few references to actually allowing your baby to be frustrated and upset from time to time in order to ensure they developed the skills to deal with a little frustration, rather than growing up to freak out at every tiny thing. We're no child psychologists, but it's worked for us. Perhaps a few times a week when the baby was inconsolable, we'd let her "cry it out" (but not full on Ferberizing) for 5-10 minutes and then console her when she went into a quieter phase. Now, at five months, she's well adjusted (for her age), sleeps through the night, and deals with frustration pretty well. It could all be BS, of course, but letting her freak out from time to time didn't do any obvious harm, at least.
petercooper 17y ago
I doubt doing it once matters, but isn't there something kind of bad about having a baby escalate signals until it cries, and then responding with attention as soon as it does? Potentially, but not as bad as you'd think. Especially if it's inconsistent. Most babies have no problem adapting to new routines or stimulus/response patterns within several days if you do it properly. This is what the so called "baby whisperers" and child psychologists do/suggest in situations where the parents have failed to encourage good behavior in babies and older children. Consistently "bad" behaviors - such as overuse of a pacifier or other prop - are not hard to train out with the right behavior consistently given from the care giver(s). The problem, though, is that most parents cave in too often for habits to be resolved adequately (while allowing the original habit to maintain its hold). Calming down a distressed baby isn't as unpleasant as it seems, by the way (sorry if you're a parent and know this, I'm just assuming you're not). My wife gets a lot of satisfaction from doing it successfully. The unpleasant times are when you have an inconsolable baby on your hands (that is, over 5-10 minutes of agonizing wailing) - but this is nearly always down to an underlying problem (in our case, reflux and gas).

by wdewind 17y ago

ars 17y ago

It would be bad to do it a lot maybe. But a few times is not going to have any harm. At worst it will teach the baby to cry right away when the mother does that. Babies cry a lot, and people don't play with them constantly. A little more isn't going to harm them. The times where there is a positive reactions far outweigh the negative ones here. Not sure if that was clear. I mean that when there is a positive reaction the baby learns from it. A negative one is mostly ignored as far as long term learning goes.

petercooper 17y ago
Babies cry a lot, and people don't play with them constantly. A little more isn't going to harm them. I wish I could find the citation but my wife and I did a lot of reading of studies in the early weeks we had our baby. There were more than a few references to actually allowing your baby to be frustrated and upset from time to time in order to ensure they developed the skills to deal with a little frustration, rather than growing up to freak out at every tiny thing. We're no child psychologists, but it's worked for us. Perhaps a few times a week when the baby was inconsolable, we'd let her "cry it out" (but not full on Ferberizing) for 5-10 minutes and then console her when she went into a quieter phase. Now, at five months, she's well adjusted (for her age), sleeps through the night, and deals with frustration pretty well. It could all be BS, of course, but letting her freak out from time to time didn't do any obvious harm, at least.

petercooper 17y ago

I doubt doing it once matters, but isn't there something kind of bad about having a baby escalate signals until it cries, and then responding with attention as soon as it does? Potentially, but not as bad as you'd think. Especially if it's inconsistent. Most babies have no problem adapting to new routines or stimulus/response patterns within several days if you do it properly. This is what the so called "baby whisperers" and child psychologists do/suggest in situations where the parents have failed to encourage good behavior in babies and older children. Consistently "bad" behaviors - such as overuse of a pacifier or other prop - are not hard to train out with the right behavior consistently given from the care giver(s). The problem, though, is that most parents cave in too often for habits to be resolved adequately (while allowing the original habit to maintain its hold). Calming down a distressed baby isn't as unpleasant as it seems, by the way (sorry if you're a parent and know this, I'm just assuming you're not). My wife gets a lot of satisfaction from doing it successfully. The unpleasant times are when you have an inconsolable baby on your hands (that is, over 5-10 minutes of agonizing wailing) - but this is nearly always down to an underlying problem (in our case, reflux and gas).