Crying babies and other people's 'blogs

Maybe, I've decided, I shouldn't read other people's 'blogs. Or at least I should be very selective when it comes to the ones I do read.

Case in point. Our major metro newspaper has part of its website set aside for bloggers to write about pretty much anything they want to. Among the several parenting/life with small children type 'blogs is one written by a new mother of a baby who, I think, may still be under the age of one.

I like reading about other people's babies and children, so I visited this particular 'blog.

It was a heartbreaker for me.

Those who know me really well know that I have an intense dislike for the method of getting babies to sleep euphemistically known as "Cry It Out."

Basically what this entails is showing your tiny, vulnerable, trusting, innocent newborn that you are the Big Boss and that he or she better not try to take advantage of you. It's assertion of power and authority over someone who understands neither.

Consequently, when it comes to getting said baby to sleep, the parent follows this weird barbaric practice of letting the baby cry and cry and cry and cry.

The author of the 'blog I read said her little girl cried for THREE HOURS before finally falling asleep one night.

Mmm. I'd fall asleep too, out of sheer exhaustion and total defeat if I cried for three hours straight.

But by golly I'd know who was boss, right?

What crap.

Several mothers wrote in to the 'blog mom to remind her that babies cry for a reason and whatever the reason is, it's always a good one.

They are hungry, they are wet, they are poopy, they are cold, they are hot, they are swaddled too tightly, swaddled not tightly enough, they are lonely, they are scared, they are INSTINCTIVELY PROGRAMMED BY GOD TO WANT TO BE CLOSE TO THEIR MOTHER.

Whatever the reason, it's valid enough to throw the CIO method out the nearest window.

I find it ironic that as parents we jump through a lot of hoops to keep our children from crying, certainly when they are babies. So then we turn around and LET them cry when they should be settling down to sleep? This is illogical on every level.

I'm gonna brag here and not because I like to brag but because I want to make a point well-grounded in personal experience.

My mother and dad never let me cry. Never. If I started boo-hooing as a baby they figured out what was wrong and fixed it. If all else failed they put me in the car and drove me around until the motion of the vehicle lulled me to sleep. Consequently as I entered toddlerhood, childhood, adolescence, young adulthood, older adulthood (where I am now), I always knew my folks were there for me if I needed them.

I did not suffer sleep disorders, I was not spoiled, I did not end up a diva with a rap sheet.

Of my four children, none of whom have ever been allowed to CIO, all are good sleepers with no bedtime battles, good eaters, reasonably well-adjusted (if you ignore the I-am-four antics of my older son), loving, and independent.

My mother always said you cannot hold a baby too much, you cannot love them too much, you cannot spoil a baby.

A toddler or a young child, maybe, because by then they are old enough to be redirected to soothe themselves.

But babies up to age one or so, no way. They need to know if they cry you will come. They need to be able to trust you.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Babies do not have to be trained to sleep any more than they need to be trained to eat, poop, or smile. Letting babies cry and cry while you withhold comfort is just plain mean, and there's no argument in favor of it that I've read yet that will change my mind.

That mom's 'blog was so upsetting to me I thought I was gonna have to cry it out, so I stopped reading it.

The world is already so full of human suffering, sadness and abject misery, why do we purposely allow these things into the earliest experiences of its most innocent citizens thinking it will somehow be good for them?