5 ms·

With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. Other than that - don't worry: the best parent is a

With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. Other than that - don't worry: the best parent is a happy parent. I was surprised to find out how many "child rearing" experts do not eat their own dog food or have no children altogether.

Andrex 6y ago
> With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. This feels like dangerous advice re: vaccinations.
- eric_h 6y ago
  I believe the parent is presuming a higher base level of rationality in GP's "gut" than that of the population-at-large. While I'm not a parent, I'm certain that my "gut" would tell me that vaccinating my child is the opposite of wrong, however unpleasant for the child it might seem at the time. Of course, having watched friends become parents it's also quite clear that becoming a parent changes one's brain in some fundamental ways so it's possible you have a point ;)
  - Andrex 6y ago
    I accept the downvotes but I still feel like "by-the-gut" parenting has serious downsides that shouldn't be overlooked. It's possible being homosexual and raised in a conservative household has influenced that opinion, though.
    - pstuart 6y ago
      Agreed. One should trust one's gut if it is trustworthy. Dunning-Kruger makes this advice moot ;-)
- AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
  Could you please elaborate a little bit? Which of the following do you see being dangerous: (a) ignoring achievements of modern science which can cure almost anything or (b) injecting a foreign substance into a bloodstream of otherwise healthy child in order to prevent a non-deadly decease this child will likely never have?
  - Andrex 6y ago
    I feel like the need to elaborate on my original statement proves my point. There are decisions that "by-the-gut" parenting could get wrong with disastrous consequences. More over, I don't think there's ever a parenting situation which should preclude research, which seems like what the parent OP was advocating for.
- rsynnott 6y ago
  Or just in general. Peoples’ “gut feelings” about babies have often historically been pretty bizarre. Recent example, of a quack medical treatment involving giving babies alcohol: > Prior to alcohol's removal from the recipe, Woodward's maximum recommended dose of gripe water contained an alcohol content equivalent to five tots of whiskey for an 80kg adult. It was only in 1992 that Britain mandated that alcohol be removed from Gripe water, and in 1993 the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ordered an automatic detention of all shipments of Woodward's Gripe Water into the U.S. Giving babies alcohol, in various forms and often in quite large amounts, was part of the ‘conventional wisdom’ for a long time (though never really endorsed by medical science). If peoples’ guts were so wrong then, I wouldn’t trust them now.
  - aaron695 6y ago
    This comment is a good example of the attack of junk science from experts. Why can't you give a baby a small amount of alcohol exactly? They might become alcoholics? The alcohol helps them sleep. Which if you as a parent are falling apart is better than shaking them to sleep. I think this is back to the intense pressure put onto parents through pop science. "Woodward's Gripe Water contained 3.6% alcohol" So it's like giving them a teaspoon of mild beer. Scientists : Fat makes you fat, so we all ate sugar. Scientists: A virus is tiny and obviously can pass through a non-N95 mask.
    - tonyhb 6y ago
      It hampers brain, nervous, and muscular development. Researching this is easy. It took less than 20 seconds: https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/AA67/AA67.htm https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/AA67/AA67.htm. You're proving OPs point - you can't apply bullshit logic to science.
      - aaron695 6y ago
        Lol, from your link which took 20 seconds. "It’s simply not known how alcohol will affect the long-term memory and learning skills of people who began drinking heavily as adolescents." Maybe the section on drink driving is more appropriate on babies having a teaspoon of beer when colic? We've lost the ability to think for ourselves, and it seems to Google.

Andrex 6y ago

> With rearing a child, as stupid as it may sound, trust your gut. If something feels wrong - it probably is. This feels like dangerous advice re: vaccinations.

eric_h 6y ago
I believe the parent is presuming a higher base level of rationality in GP's "gut" than that of the population-at-large. While I'm not a parent, I'm certain that my "gut" would tell me that vaccinating my child is the opposite of wrong, however unpleasant for the child it might seem at the time. Of course, having watched friends become parents it's also quite clear that becoming a parent changes one's brain in some fundamental ways so it's possible you have a point ;)
- Andrex 6y ago
  I accept the downvotes but I still feel like "by-the-gut" parenting has serious downsides that shouldn't be overlooked. It's possible being homosexual and raised in a conservative household has influenced that opinion, though.
  - pstuart 6y ago
    Agreed. One should trust one's gut if it is trustworthy. Dunning-Kruger makes this advice moot ;-)
AlexTWithBeard 6y ago
Could you please elaborate a little bit? Which of the following do you see being dangerous: (a) ignoring achievements of modern science which can cure almost anything or (b) injecting a foreign substance into a bloodstream of otherwise healthy child in order to prevent a non-deadly decease this child will likely never have?
- Andrex 6y ago
  I feel like the need to elaborate on my original statement proves my point. There are decisions that "by-the-gut" parenting could get wrong with disastrous consequences. More over, I don't think there's ever a parenting situation which should preclude research, which seems like what the parent OP was advocating for.
rsynnott 6y ago
Or just in general. Peoples’ “gut feelings” about babies have often historically been pretty bizarre. Recent example, of a quack medical treatment involving giving babies alcohol: > Prior to alcohol's removal from the recipe, Woodward's maximum recommended dose of gripe water contained an alcohol content equivalent to five tots of whiskey for an 80kg adult. It was only in 1992 that Britain mandated that alcohol be removed from Gripe water, and in 1993 the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ordered an automatic detention of all shipments of Woodward's Gripe Water into the U.S. Giving babies alcohol, in various forms and often in quite large amounts, was part of the ‘conventional wisdom’ for a long time (though never really endorsed by medical science). If peoples’ guts were so wrong then, I wouldn’t trust them now.
- aaron695 6y ago
  This comment is a good example of the attack of junk science from experts. Why can't you give a baby a small amount of alcohol exactly? They might become alcoholics? The alcohol helps them sleep. Which if you as a parent are falling apart is better than shaking them to sleep. I think this is back to the intense pressure put onto parents through pop science. "Woodward's Gripe Water contained 3.6% alcohol" So it's like giving them a teaspoon of mild beer. Scientists : Fat makes you fat, so we all ate sugar. Scientists: A virus is tiny and obviously can pass through a non-N95 mask.
  - tonyhb 6y ago
    It hampers brain, nervous, and muscular development. Researching this is easy. It took less than 20 seconds: https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/AA67/AA67.htm https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/AA67/AA67.htm. You're proving OPs point - you can't apply bullshit logic to science.
    - aaron695 6y ago
      Lol, from your link which took 20 seconds. "It’s simply not known how alcohol will affect the long-term memory and learning skills of people who began drinking heavily as adolescents." Maybe the section on drink driving is more appropriate on babies having a teaspoon of beer when colic? We've lost the ability to think for ourselves, and it seems to Google.