Tuesday, 4 March 2008

Sleeping through the night - Kathryn Dettwyler

The below article is one that I find very interesting and very true.

http://www.kathydettwyler.org/detsleepthrough.html



I am an Adjunct (semi-retired) Associate Professor of Anthropology and Nutrition at Texas A&M University, and I do research on infant/child feeding beliefs/practices both cross-culturally and from an evolutionary perspective, as well as research on children's health and growth. I know from first-hand experience that being a new parent is a difficult time of adjustment, especially when expectations don't match reality, especially when our culture has taught us that children should have certain needs/wants/behaviors and then our children don't seem to fit that mold. This problem of a mismatch between expectations and reality can be very difficult for new parents to accept and adjust to. Sometimes, some children can be encouraged/convinced/forced to fit the mold of cultural expectations, and they do fine. Othertimes, though they do eventually fit the mold, it is at the expense of their sense of who they are, their self-confidence, their view of the world as a safe and trusting place, sometimes, even, at the expense of their health or life. Probably nowhere do cultural expectations and the reality of children's needs conflict more than in the two areas of breastfeeding frequency and sleeping behaviors.

Human children are designed (whether you believe by millions of years of evolution, or by God, it doesn't matter) -- to nurse *very* frequently, based on the composition of the milk of the species, the fact that all higher primates (Primates are the zoological Order to which humans belong, higher primates include monkeys and apes) keep their offspring in the mother's arms or on her back for several years, the size of the young child's stomach, the rapidity with which breast milk is digested, the need for an almost constant source of nutrients to grow that huge brain (in humans, especially), and so on. By very frequently, I mean 3-4 times per hour, for a few minutes each time. The way in which some young infants are fed in our culture -- trying to get them to shift to a 3-4 hour schedule, with feedings of 15-20 minutes at a time, goes against our basic physiology. But humans are very adaptable, and some mothers will be able to make sufficient milk with this very infrequent stimulation and draining of the breasts, and some children will be able to adapt to large meals spaced far apart. Unfortunately, some mothers don't make enough milk with this little nursing, and some babies can't adjust, and so are fussy, cry a lot, seem to want to nurse "before it is time" and fail to grow and thrive. Of course, usually the mother's body is blamed -- "You can't make enough milk" -- rather than the culturally-imposed expectation that feeding every 3-4 hours should be sufficient, and the mother begins supplementing with formula, which leads to a steady spiral downward to complete weaning from the breast. Human children are also designed to have breast milk be a part of their diet for a minimum of 2.5 years, with many indicators pointing to 6-7 years as the true physiological duration of breastfeeding -- regardless of what your cultural beliefs may be. I can provide you with references to my research on this topic if you wish to read more.

The same is true of sleeping. Human children are designed to be sleeping with their parents. The sense of touch is the most important sense to primates, along with sight. Young primates are carried on their mother's body and sleep with her for years after birth, often until well after weaning. The expected pattern is for mother and child to sleep together, and for child to be able to nurse whenever they want during the night. Normal, healthy, breastfed and co-sleeping children do not sleep "through the night" (say 7-9 hours at a stretch) until they are 3-4 years old, and no longer need night nursing. I repeat -- this is NORMAL and HEALTHY. Dr. James McKenna's research on co-sleeping clearly shows the dangers of solitary sleeping in young infants, who slip into abnormal patterns of very deep sleep from which it is very difficult for them to rouse themselves when they experience an episode of apnea (stop breathing). When co-sleeping, the mother is monitoring the baby's sleep and breathing patterns, even though she herself is asleep. When the baby has an episode of apnea, she rouses the baby by her movements and touch. This is thought to be the primary mechanism by which co-sleeping protects children from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. In other words, many cases of SIDS in solitary sleeping children are thought to be due to them having learned to sleep for long stretches at a time at a very early age, so they find themselves in these deep troughs of sleep, then they may experience an episode of apnea, and no one is there to notice or rouse them from it, so they just never start breathing again. Co-sleeping also allows a mother to monitor the baby's temperature during the night, to be there if they spit up and start to choke, and just to provide the normal, safe environment that the baby/child has been designed to expect.

Is this convenient for parents? No!

Is this difficult for some new parents to adjust to? Yes!

No doubt about it, the gap between what our culture teaches us to expect of the sleep patterns of a young child (read them a story, tuck them in, turn out the light, and not see them again for 8 hours) and the reality of how children actually sleep if healthy and normal, yawns widely.

But the first steps to dealing with the fact that your young child doesn't sleep through the night, or doesn't want to sleep without you is to realize that:

  • (1) Not sleeping through the night until they are 3 or 4 years of age is normal and healthy behavior for human infants.
  • (2) Your children are not being difficult or manipulative, they are being normal and healthy, and behaving in ways that are appropriate for our species.

Once you understand these simple truths, it becomes much easier to deal with parenting your child at night. Once you give up the idea that you must have 8 hours of uninterrupted sleep at night, and view these nighttime interactions with your child as precious and fleeting, you get used to them very quickly.

I highly recommend Dr. Sears' book on Nighttime Parenting [available from the La Leche League International Catalogue]. Our children's early years represent the most important and influential time of their lives. It passes all too quickly. But meeting your child's needs during these first few years will pay off in many ways in the years to come.

Prepared August 25, 1997.


Monday, 3 March 2008

Study: Spanking can bring problems later

The next article is no news to me.
I actually have been convinced of it for years already, but now there has been a study done after it.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080301/ap_on_he_me/spanking_study_3a

DURHAM, N.H. - New research by a University of New Hampshire domestic abuse expert says spanking children affects their sex lives as adults. Professor Murray Straus concludes that children who are spanked are more likely as adults to coerce partners to have sex, to have unprotected sex and to have masochistic sex.


Other studies have shown the link between spanking and physical violence, but Straus said his research is the first to show a link between corporal punishment and sexual behavior.

"My underlying motive was to bring this to the attention of parents and of more people," Straus said, "in the hope it will help continue the decrease in the use of corporal punishment."

Straus, co-director of UNH's Family Research Laboratory, conducted a study in the mid-1990s in which he asked 207 students at three colleges whether they'd ever been aroused by masochistic sex. He also asked them if they'd been spanked as children. He found that students who were spanked were nearly twice as likely to like masochistic sex.

He has bundled that study with three new ones that explore the connections between corporal punishment, coerced sex and risky sex. He presented all four studies this week at the American Psychological Association's Summit on Violence and Abuse in Relationships in Bethesda, Md.

Straus said his study found adults who were spanked as children are more likely to coerce their partners to have sex.

Straus asked 14,000 college students in 32 different countries whether they strongly disagreed, disagreed, agreed or strongly agreed with this statement: "I was spanked or hit a lot before age 12." He also asked whether they had ever verbally or physically coerced an uninterested partner to have sex.

He found a big difference between students who said they'd been hit a lot before age 12 and those who said they hadn't. For every increased step on Straus's four-step scale of agreement, men were 10 percent more likely to have verbally coerced sex from a partner by insisting on sex or threatening to end the relationship if the partner refused. Women were 12 percent more likely to have done that.

Previous studies have shown that 90 percent of parents strike their toddlers, a statistic that's held steady throughout the 30 years Straus has researched corporal punishment. Meanwhile, the number of parents who hit older children has drastically decreased. Straus said it's unclear why, though he has some theories. One is that 2- and 3-year-olds are less likely to respond to repeated verbal warnings.

Straus said he would like more pediatricians and child-rearing experts to warn against spanking. He'd also like lawmakers to take a stand by dedicating state money to teaching parents about the dangers of corporal punishment.

"The best-kept secret in child psychology is that children who were never spanked are among the best behaved," Straus said.

___

Information from: Concord Monitor, http://www.cmonitor.com

Saturday, 23 February 2008

Sorted

It took some people a bit of thinking, but we managed to get a birth certificate and an NHS number on 15 february anyway. It was surprising at how easy it ended up being.
I was assigned a midwife funny enough, not that I needed one, but whatever, I just went along with that.
The first midwife that showed up was relatively hostile in the beginning, but mellowed half way through the visit and was actually making jokes at the end.
Then Wednesday another midwife showed up, this lady, named June was really fun and cool about it. She and I just chatted and she looked at the baby and was happy with the way she was developing. She was also cool enough to ask whether I would be alright with her coming over again on Sunday, I agreed to that. Sunday we had another chat and she weighed the baby, not necessary, we had done that already and we knew she was gaining weight.
The chat we had on Sunday was really cool, as she was really curious as to why we decided to do things the way we did, so I explained that this was a very big educational trip and she could see that. She also said it must have been very empowering, yes it was.
After that we ended up talking about breastfeeding and parenting, so I told her a bit about where I am coming from with parenting and breastfeeding, being a leader for 2 organisations.
Before she left she also mentioned that she felt that a lot of women could learn something from me. I can only agree.

Monday, 11 February 2008

Today's crap

Today we first went to the doctors office to see if we could get our daughter registered for an NHS number, no we couldn't. We needed a birth certificate first.
Okay, then we go to the registrar's office. When we got there we managed to end up surprising her, as we had a freebirth. Therefore no hospital records, and without they have no clue what to do and cannot just register.
One thing led to another and in the end I ended up getting a phone call from the hospital that they will have to report us to Social Services. I still don't understand why, baby is healthy, I am healthy, no problems with anything at all, so what is the big deal.
As I am completely ticked off by this I will take counter action where appropriate, as this is total rubbish. Social Services no doubt has better things to do than following up on this.

Its a girl!


On 7 February at 04.00 am our 4th girl was born, after a wonderful natural (unassisted) pregnancy and a likewise wonderful natural (unassisted) birth / freebirth. Everything went really smooth and easy. No problems at all with the birth. She is also doing wonderful.
Here she is how she looked the morning after she was born. This photograph was taken at around 11.00 in the morning.

Belly Cast

On 5 February as friend of mine came over who makes live casts.
Her website is www.dinkiedannies.com.
She made a belly cast of my big pregnant belly. It was really fun to do that. When I get the whole finished cast I will make a photo of it and put it up, as it will no doubt be gorgeous as her casts are super!

Mother Blessing

On 2 February my friends organized a mother blessing for me.
It was really nice.
First we talked about our negative feelings about birth and wrote them down and burned those.
Then they read their positive poem, writing, something about motherhood and birth, which they saw fit for me. That was really touching, we all ended up crying with the beautiful pieces they had brought. Then we used a long piece of yarn and tied wrists with that. The we made bracelets with beads, which was really nice.
Of course there was plenty of cake, cookies and more cake with drinks, which we all enjoyed.