3 ms·
I suspect the above worked for you? this is 100% nothing like my experience and it wasn't a "fairly simple scheduling problem" and "Not having to jump instantl
by 123pie123 3y ago
I suspect the above worked for you? this is 100% nothing like my experience and it wasn't a "fairly simple scheduling problem"
and "Not having to jump instantly on the crying baby" made things worse
our experience was a not great to begin with, but the sleep deprivation only lasted around 6-10months per child and for the benefits it gave - I would definately do it again
to all the potential parents out there, please do your own research and try not to fall in the trap of the victorian mindset - which on the whole (massively over simplifying it) seems to suggest actions to make your life easier at the expense of the baby.
- wharvle 3y agoLike a charm, three for three. No night feedings past 12 weeks for any of the three. Longest “cry it out” period of the three was three nights (because all were comfortably at a single feeding by then, and used to falling back asleep on their own after more-minor sleep interruptions) All slept great—and as long as medical professionals say they should, which is a thing we notice most other young kids in our circle not coming even close to doing—until old enough to start worrying about death and stuff like that, which—yeah, same here, kid. [edit] and actually the whole rest of this holds without capping it with that action, it just means you’ll need to keep up the shift thing for 6-12 months instead of 3, and—from what I’ve seen—deal with a couple nights a week of your kid waking up in the middle of the night the whole rest of their early childhood. The shift-sleeping strategy has no bearing on that, but does get you a couple REM cycles a night, even in the worst of it.