[afandian]

I apologise, I’ve not read literature on it, or the particular methodology you describe. I’m not judging you.

That said, whatever the merits of a structured approach, for every parent that diligently follows them, there are others that are less careful. And I’ve met them.

I’m responding to sentiments like “I just ignore them and they go to sleep eventually”, “don’t go and check, he only wants attention” from other parents, and other reports from someone I know who is a midwife.

The model we followed was “Hand in hand”, which resonated for us. And we were saddened that that philosophy does not seem to be very mainstream amongst parents I have met.

[awillen]

You're throwing around accusations of abuse despite the fact that you admit you haven't read literature on it. Why are you contributing your admittedly uneducated opinion on this? Go read some of the literature instead. Stop judging parents you've never met (and yes, despite you saying you're not judging, you obviously are). Just because something worked for you doesn't mean it works for all babies or families, and it's profoundly arrogant of you to assume otherwise.

[metabagel]

I think this is a dangerous practice. Read the literature on attachment theory.

https://www.attachmentparenting.org/ensure-safe-sleep-physic...

"Research shows us that an infant is not neurologically or developmentally capable of calming or soothing himself to sleep in a way that is healthy. The part of the brain that helps with self-soothing isn't well developed until the child is two and a half to three years of age. Until that time, a child depends on his parents to help him calm down and learn to regulate his intense feelings."

[jjulius]

Do you have an unbiased source? Both that website, and the only piece of research linked to at the bottom of the page, are from heavily biased sources (Attachment Parenting International and Journal of Attachment Parenting). None of the primary articles under "Research Related to This Principle" support the quote you highlight (least as far as I can tell, maybe I missed!), and the specific quote doesn't link back to any specific study. Not only that, but...

>Until that time, a child depends on his parents to help him calm down and learn to regulate his intense feelings.

Again, you're ignoring the fact that parents absolutely do tend to their children emotionally during sleep training. I highlighted that in another response to you earlier, as well as this very comment chain. You even edited your comment and acquiesced to support a version of it at six months, and now you're back admonishing the practice as "dangerous" altogether?

Edit: I am not saying you shouldn't hold your own views. Do what you want with your kids as long as you and your family are happy. Just ease up on telling others they are wrong - they are just as right for their family as you are for yours.

[mrjh]

You’re getting downvoted because this is just one person’s opinion and yet you’re presenting it as gospel… dogmatically repeating the same post over and over in spite of there clearly being strong support for the opposing POV. More than one opinion can be valid.

[Tams80]

I think this is vastly overblowing the upbringing of babies.

Honestly, if it mattered that much, we'd have a global epidemic of behaviour disorders due to poor parenting in the very early years. But that just isn't the case.

[sanderjd]

You shouldn't call people abusive in one breath and then try to say "I'm not judging you" in the next. It isn't credible.