3 ms·

> I don't doubt that children who are being cuddles more could have their genetics changed. Looks like actual experts in the field disagree with you. [1] Also

by dgut 9y ago

> I don't doubt that children who are being cuddles more could have their genetics changed. Looks like actual experts in the field disagree with you. [1] Also, deny a child affection and you have a mentally ill adult. Sadly, there is now an entire generation of parents who have been advertised things like the "cry-out" method. [2] [1] http://developingchild.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Early-Experiences-Can-Alter-Gene-Expression-and-Affect-Long-Term-Development.pdf http://developingchild.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/0... [2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/192222.Solve_Your_Child_s_Sleep_Problems https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/192222.Solve_Your_Child_...

ThomPete 9y ago
France has done the cry out method for generations.
- dgut 9y ago
  Just because someone has done something for generations doesn't make it right. They also send children to kindergarten by the 3rd month, for economic reasons. Having traveled a bit in Northern Africa, I noticed baby sleep problems are virtually non-existent there. They do what humans have done for eons: co-sleeping and breastfeeding. They do it so naturally, mothers are never fully awake while they breastfeed during the night (wife had to sleep in a room full of women and children on several occasions). Biologically, this makes a lot more sense than giving the signal to the most immaturely born placental mammal that she can't rely on the mother's care.
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    Wait are we talking morals or are we talking genetic and statistics? Denmark sends their kids to nursery school early too and because many women work full time there it means most children aren't with their parent's for a long duration of the day (used ot be much earlier). What you think about it morally isn't interesting to me. Unless you can prove it's somehow making them worse of then my original position is intact.
    - celman 9y ago
      Maybe I'm reading it wrong but i don't think parent is raising a morality issue. I think the point was parent's experience with cosleeping having positive effects re baby sleep. I'm not saying this is scientifically valid, btw. However, saying "unless you can prove it" shows ignorance. Not everything is known. Lack of proof does not indicate a hypothesis' invalidity. and I'm not aware of solid proof against it either.
    - dgut 9y ago
      I think you might have misinterpreted my comment as an argument about moral. Leaving babies to cry or separating them from their mothers for extended periods of time is primarily a health issue which I believe should concern society. [1][2][3] Unfortunately, it fits our economic model very well -- so there is that. [1] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.432.5090&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.432... [2] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/development-and-psychopathology/article/role-of-early-experience-in-shaping-behavioral-and-brain-development-and-its-implications-for-social-policy/B7D22C728385CFEEEF9675EAC2760054 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/development-and-psyc... [3] http://champagnelab.psych.columbia.edu/docs/champ11.pdf http://champagnelab.psych.columbia.edu/docs/champ11.pdf
      - ThomPete 9y ago
        No, I asked you what we were discussing because it sounded like you were talking about right or wrong. If you want it to concern society perhaps first you need to make clear what it is you are trying to avoid. I don't see any evidence which proves some larger societal problem.
ashark 9y ago
> Sadly, there is now an entire generation of parents who have been advertised things like the "cry-out" method. For sleep training? It’s a somewhat rough 2-7 nights when they’re in the 8-12 week age range, or way, way worse later and a ton of bad nights until then. Probably some kids don’t take to it, but that’s true of anything you try. We’re 3-for-3 on it, with the worst taking three nights. A+++++, would not accustom my kids to someone coming in and rescuing them from learning how to chain REM cycles every time they wimper again. Only way I’ve seen it go wrong with ours or with friends’ kids is 1) inconsistency on the part of the parents, or 2) illness getting in the way.

by dgut 9y ago

ThomPete 9y ago

France has done the cry out method for generations.

dgut 9y ago
Just because someone has done something for generations doesn't make it right. They also send children to kindergarten by the 3rd month, for economic reasons. Having traveled a bit in Northern Africa, I noticed baby sleep problems are virtually non-existent there. They do what humans have done for eons: co-sleeping and breastfeeding. They do it so naturally, mothers are never fully awake while they breastfeed during the night (wife had to sleep in a room full of women and children on several occasions). Biologically, this makes a lot more sense than giving the signal to the most immaturely born placental mammal that she can't rely on the mother's care.
- ThomPete 9y ago
  Wait are we talking morals or are we talking genetic and statistics? Denmark sends their kids to nursery school early too and because many women work full time there it means most children aren't with their parent's for a long duration of the day (used ot be much earlier). What you think about it morally isn't interesting to me. Unless you can prove it's somehow making them worse of then my original position is intact.
  - celman 9y ago
    Maybe I'm reading it wrong but i don't think parent is raising a morality issue. I think the point was parent's experience with cosleeping having positive effects re baby sleep. I'm not saying this is scientifically valid, btw. However, saying "unless you can prove it" shows ignorance. Not everything is known. Lack of proof does not indicate a hypothesis' invalidity. and I'm not aware of solid proof against it either.
  - dgut 9y ago
    I think you might have misinterpreted my comment as an argument about moral. Leaving babies to cry or separating them from their mothers for extended periods of time is primarily a health issue which I believe should concern society. [1][2][3] Unfortunately, it fits our economic model very well -- so there is that. [1] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.432.5090&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.432... [2] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/development-and-psychopathology/article/role-of-early-experience-in-shaping-behavioral-and-brain-development-and-its-implications-for-social-policy/B7D22C728385CFEEEF9675EAC2760054 https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/development-and-psyc... [3] http://champagnelab.psych.columbia.edu/docs/champ11.pdf http://champagnelab.psych.columbia.edu/docs/champ11.pdf
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      No, I asked you what we were discussing because it sounded like you were talking about right or wrong. If you want it to concern society perhaps first you need to make clear what it is you are trying to avoid. I don't see any evidence which proves some larger societal problem.

ashark 9y ago

> Sadly, there is now an entire generation of parents who have been advertised things like the "cry-out" method. For sleep training? It’s a somewhat rough 2-7 nights when they’re in the 8-12 week age range, or way, way worse later and a ton of bad nights until then. Probably some kids don’t take to it, but that’s true of anything you try. We’re 3-for-3 on it, with the worst taking three nights. A+++++, would not accustom my kids to someone coming in and rescuing them from learning how to chain REM cycles every time they wimper again. Only way I’ve seen it go wrong with ours or with friends’ kids is 1) inconsistency on the part of the parents, or 2) illness getting in the way.