Erica Jong is a genius, but she’s sooooo wrong on this issue. And tonight when I get home from work, and after my kiddos are in bed, I’ll expound on why I believe she’s so wrong. But until then, let me know in the comments below what you think of Ms. Jong’s assertion that “attachment parenting is a prison for mothers.”
Please visit Henry’s Fund
I agree wholeheartedly with Jong about the expectations and guilt. Everyone mothers differently but there is a lot of pressure to do it the "right" way. I'm a work at home mom, and I still feel guilty about not being around enough for my children. I don't know that that's an attachment parenting issue per se or just a parenting issue in general. Mothers have incredible and often unrealistic expectations placed upon them, and if you feel you don't measure up, the guilt is enormous. All you read about is the wonderful, instantaneous and ferocious bond when a mother first sees her child, for instance.. When my first baby was born, my first thought was, "Thank God that's over." I've felt guilty about that, about not wanting to spend every second with a baby in my arms, etc.
The myth that a woman can have it all is a prison. The expectation that all women MUST have full-time careers and babies to fulfill their potentials can be a guilt-inducing prison. The expectation of perfection in any endeavor is imprisoning and engenders guilt at the inevitable falling short. Attachment parenting is freeing. Mothers have always felt guilty and always will. Attachment parenting is just something new to blame that feeling on. Women who believe in Ezzo-style parenting likely feel just as guilty when they bend the rules on that method. The problem is the guilt itself, not what women are pinning it on at any given moment.
Incidentally, have you read Iris Kraznow's book, Surrendering to Motherhood? Erica Jong had a huge impact on her during her college days, and she met her personally and talked with her, but she certainly reached far different conclusions about Being There for her children, which she found freeing.
I like the statement "there are no rules." I have seen a number of different successful parenting styles and as long as you love your kid and spent time with them, it seems to work out.
The issues is really the idea of making moms who can't do it feel inadequate. Which would be anyone under the middle-class at minimum and many in the middle class. Whatever that is.
Many moms are struggling to make a living for their kids, living close to the poverty level. Not everyone can work at home, or even hire great nannies. I say we respect all forms of mothering as long as they are rooted in love.
Like I said, I plan to write a lot more about this later, but quick comment: no one can have EVERYTHING in ANY area of life. Why do we always focus on mothers and mothers with jobs in this "have it all" discussion? Do we have it all in our marriages? Friendships? Spiritual lives? No, life is a constant balancing act where we tweak and adjust and refocus as circumstances change and evolve – circumstances that are often, largely beyond our control.
If women would stop arguing about this stuff and instead put our energies into a political movement that would provide a social construct that supports motherhood (including for those of us who have to or choose to earn money to support our families via paid outside employment), we'd all be better off.
-kag
I left this comment at Strollerderby:
" I agree with Katie. AP is an acknowledgment that young children need to develop healthy attachments to their caregivers, usually a primary caregiver. There are many ways to facilitate that attachment and nobody needs to follow every single rule or the attachment is nonexistent or harmed. If I had that view, I’d have failed at AP from the second my children were born (I had three c-sections, which are not very “AP”).
I think many misinterpret the tactics for facilitating a healthy attachment as strict rules that must be followed perfectly…or else. And holding to such rules when they conflict with other necessary needs and desires (such as holding down a job) will create a feeling of stress for the mother.
The first step to letting go of Mommy Guilt is refusing to accept it–make the choices that are best for you and your family and let the things that don’t support those goals go. You can do this while acknowledging the value of a healthy attachment and doing other things to facilitate that healthy attachment."
This whole Mommy Guilt topic is one I'm passionate about. I think it's easy to get caught up in the "perfect mommy" myth, and also worry too much about how others view us. Make your choices consciously and take into account what's best for your family and for yourself, and the rest of the world be damned!
)
I totally disagree with the premise that AP is not "working mother friendly." In fact, it was because I practiced AP that I could go back to work. My babies slept beside me and I could never even answer teh question, "How often does she wake up at night." Granted, I am blessed with being able to fall back to sleep very easily, but I think that co-sleeping allowed me MORE sleep. Also, because my husband was the at-home parent (my work was the source of our insurance and his work was flexible), I disagree that AP discourages multiple caregivers. I will say that I agree with some of the points about unrealistic expectations and guilt. And … I was very disheartened by the divide between working and stay-at-home moms. Some of the most awful comments I heard were from fellow AP mothers, "I don't know how you do it. I could NEVER leave my baby." I think that AP has wandered from its roots and given rise to a kind of "professionalized" parenting when it is actually the most basic and natural parenting styles around.
Anyway — I could go on and on but I look forward to hearing more comments on the topic.
I do think attachment parenting is biologically correct. What makes it difficult is that so many nuclear families are separated by distance from the extended family. Also, with industrialization, the home/work spheres separated, so parenting duties are borne primarily by mothers during the day. If we lived in tribes, or on a farm with both parents around and many kin, it would be easier. Still, if someone's needs have to be sacrificed in these unideal conditions, I would prefer it not be the infant's.
Alisun: I totally agree. Here's something I wrote on that topic about 3 years ago: http://www.babble.com/the-over-parenting-crisis-k…
"Do the best you can. There are no rules.” seems to sum up AP very well.
I would love to spend more time with my daughter, but I work to earn money. She goes to pre-school to augment (not replace) my role and her mother's role.
As to the statement about not being able to put your effort toward changing the world, that's where she has it wrong. The way to change the world is by investing in our children.
Thanks so much to all the mothers out there for making me feel not guilty of being a horrible mother as I do not practice attachment parenting. My children are loving, balanced and successful children and now young adults, even if they never ever shared the matrimonial bed with their parents. Only now that they have grown did I pat myself in the back. Yeayyyy kids, you have done so well in every aspect and made momma proud!
One of the major insights I took away from the Sears' books was that I was a capable mother who should trust her instincts about what was right for my child/ren. I don't think their books set up an unrealistic expectation (or prison) for mothers. Did we read the same books?
The Sears' books are very baby centered – basically saying that once you have a kid, it's all about the kid. This is not to say that it's about spoiling the kid, but it is about changing your adult life to accommodate what is best for the child you brought into this world. If that's prison, then lock me up. Parents need "me time", and self actualization in addition to the fulfilling the responsibilities of adulthood. I get that. But learning to balance all of that is part of the package.
I agree with the idea that there should be "no rules" at least in terms of judgment and criticism among mothers. I think that's where everyone's knickers get twisted.
"One of the major insights I took away from the Sears’ books was that I was a capable mother who should trust her instincts about what was right for my child/ren. I don’t think their books set up an unrealistic expectation (or prison) for mothers. Did we read the same books?"
Yes, exactly what Heather just said!
What little I've seen of this phenomenon (my kids are older and I no longer move in such baby-heavy circles) is more about materialism than AP per se. Attachment isn't the goal, amassing really cool fair-trade eco-friendly diapers and toys and babywearing gear is. (and yes, I'm being a little facetious, but this is what I've observed)
I worked out of the home during much of my kids' early childhood years, and sleeping with them, cloth diapering (cheaper and requiring no "OMG, we're out of diapers" midnight convenience store runs when I didn't own a car) and babywearing were just a lot easier, as was making my own baby food and not buying a lot of baby gear or plastic crapola. It wasn't a big political statement, it was just being young and poor and trying to find a way for all of us to get the most sleep, the most bang for my limited income and being aware of where the kids were and what they were doing.
I haven't (yet) read Granju on AP, nor Jong; I did read at least 2 of Sears' books. I did find aspects of Sears' writing irritating; I specifically remember an evening when I was reading his book on infants while my son (with whom I'd spent all day; I was still on maternity leave) sat happily as an electric swing rocked him. While he rocked, I read words Sears had written to the effect of, "Sure, you could let an electric swing rock your baby, but why would you do that when you could hold and rock him yourself?!" And I thought, "So I won't be tempted to strangle him!" I love my son dearly, but there exists no human being of any age with whom I want to spend 24 hours straight with no break, or even just all my waking hours, even in any one day (not that I haven't managed, but it's definitely not my first choice). I'm too much of an introvert; I need "me" time to recharge (never mind time to earn a living, etc. etc.).
To be honest, I'm eagerly awaiting Sears' wife's tell-all, presumably after he passes on. Of course I'm kidding, but then again …
As for AP more generally, I'm not familiar enough with the literature to comment. Personally my parenting's been heavily guided by the writing of evolutionary psychologist (and anthropologist) Sarah Blaffer Hrdy, much of whose writing details the ways in and reasons for which it is all but impossible for a woman (or, more recently, man; as Hrdy points out, until formula existed, this was out of the question, and in many places still is) to single-handedly care for a child, and the assortment of solutions that different cultures have found to this problem — most (if I may oversimplify greatly) involving some assortment of multiple caregivers, perhaps involving fathers, grandmothers, aunts, and/or paid help. That's not to say that I think Hrdy is necessarily at odds with AP, just that it's her perspective, not the AP writing, that I know and have been guided by.
I'll say up front that I don't know a thing about attachment parenting. I'm not a parent, by choice. The voices in my head from my childhood say that a girl is supposed to grow up, get married and have babies. My parents tried to drown those voices, but it didn't quite work on me. Even though I have never married or had babies, I sometimes feel guilty about that.
I have seen enough different parenting styles that I can say that no one style works for everyone. If I had kids, I would have wanted to be the "perfect mom" – one that didn't exist and there was no way I could be. So I opted out. I don't think that anyone should allow themselves to feel guilty for their parenting choices, whatever they may be. As long as your kids are healthy (physically and emotionally), safe and educated you're doing just fine.
I do believe that choosing to have a child is important to the child's well-being. My mom became a mother by chance and was in a position where the only option was to have me and keep me. I know she loves me, but of the three of us, middle sibling (who was the only one planned) is the most 'normal'. Both I and my youngest sibling have had issues with feeling like we were resented. The fact is we were. It doesn't mean our parents don't love us and they're not happy we're here. But kids can tell.
Anyway, do the best you can, pray like crazy and don't worry about what anyone else thinks. Easier said than done, I know, but there it is.
Of course no one can have it all in any area of life. But I think we focus more on mothers in the "have it all" discussion because 1) initially it was framed that way (remember the Enjoli ad?) and 2) mothers are expected to "DO it all" (or maybe we expect it of ourselves; I don't know.
What I obseve is that men are willing to take time for themselves, to rest when they get home from work, and women are not. You can say the man should be helping around the house–he SHOULD, of course–but you could also say that the mom ought to be able to let go and relax a little, but most women I know feel guilty doing that. If you are a mother and especially if you are working outside the home as well, every time you sit still you are aware that is time when something is not getting done.
But this has nothing to do with attachment parenting, which I think makes things easier for mothers and has nothing to do with letting the baby rule the household at all! I always felt like it was the "lazy way to parent. "
Katie, I think the AP thing is a bit of a red herring. Reading Jong's piece and rereading your Babble essay side by side–you're actually making similar points about the cult of overinvolved parenting. She uses AP as her straw man but her main point seems to be what you say in your comment above, that what we really need is a world that better supports parents and families (and that devoting ourselves to the perfection of parenting distracts us from advocating for such a world).
I do think she has a fair point about (a) the cult of perfect motherhood and (b) the "noble savage" attitude of a lot of AP folks I've personally run across. Babywearing certainly is convenient and I don't doubt that that's how we evolved, but I'm sure that a mother in a hunter-gatherer society would be delighted by the innovation of a bouncy seat and would gladly add that to her arsenal of baby-wrangling tricks. Those women were/are not mothers to the exclusion of everything else. They contribute(d) to the economic well-being of their households and communities.
And I do not believe that being away from my child while I work to support our family has made her less attached, less secure, or less whole a person. The "fading things [I do] at work" not only put food on the table, they make me a happier and more fulfilled person, and I consider my own well-being to be just as important as my child's–not to mention that my well-being and my child's well-being are inextricably entwined.
Wow, electriclady above beat me to it by saying what I wanted to say very well. I co-slept with my kids, I nursed each until they were 2 years old. Some friends think I am into AP, but I do not consider myself a follower of any type of style of parenting. There were nice parts of the Sears book that I appreciated and other parts that rubbed me the wrong way. I worked and continue to work outside of the home, with no extended family in the US. I have had a series of nannies and other help. I don't view my career as something that puts food on the table, it's so much more than that. I agree with Jong about the cult of perfect motherhood, the self imposed and the society imposed guilt. Even the name attachment parenting rubs me the wrong way, as it has, intended or not (most probably intended), connotation that having your baby sleep in a crib, not nursing, and having your own non-baby-led parenting style leads to a lack of attachment. But I also do not believe there are "no rules". Of course there are some rules; the baby's safety is paramount, basic needs and developmental needs must be met and babies should be handled with love, respect, kindness and patience. Given these rules and other constraints placed upon us, especially time and money, we should try to do the best for all involved.
I think there's a great misunderstanding of attachment theory today. I see a lot of mothers practicing AP but mostly in terms of physical proximity–baby wearing, nursing on demand and co-sleeping. Some of them are so exhausted from the constant caregiving that they can't be present for their children in any meaningful way. Scrambling eggs whilst wearing your baby in a sling does not foster attachment. Neither does nursing a baby with such frequency that you find yourself feeding in crowded and noisy places paying little attention to the importance and intimacy of the act. API presents a bastardization of Bowlby's work.
Up until my daughter was 6 months old we were practicing AP. I found RIE (co-founded by Magda Gerber) better suited my needs and my husband's and daughter's. It agrees with the principals set forth by API, but not the specific practices. It's left me feeling pretty guilt free (except for my really, really grouchy days).
I'm looking forward to reading more comments and hearing what Katie has to say in the topic.
I don't agree that AP itself is the root of all evil, but I find myself more in agreement with Jong than less…mostly because of now, 5+ years of experience with AP parenting groups and forums on the 'net. I do believe there is an undercurrent – and it's not that far under – that "good mothers stay home to meet their children's needs." Dads are often completely disenfranchised from power in childrearing decisions, at the same time as women are encouraged to drop out of the workforce; depending on their family this may or may not disenfranchise them economically (except as consumers of baby gear – and AP gear, although not the swing, can get very pricey). Since Jong's generation was the one miserable in that configuration I get where she is coming from.
I feel very comfortable saying that as we know your family operates differently…but I am not sure yours is the norm, at least as how AP is sold.
The Sears books are a good example of it actually – on the one hand there's a lot of great information about parenting practices I agree with, like breastfeeding (when possible) and babywearing, considering co-sleeping and so on. On the other there's a definite sense that it must be the mother who provides these things (breastfeeding being a no-brainer but way, way beyond that) and a judgment on mothers who work or invite other caregivers into the mix for other reasons.
Going back out from the books, so many AP groups deal with issues like "well if you just cut back you could live on one income [almost invariably the dad's]." In other words, if you're struggling with economic and political and work realities, it's your choice to drink lattes.
This gets extended into the tot and preschool years with pressure not to enroll kids in preschool, and culminates in the concept that if you don't like education systems, homeschool – giving up your career in the process and ignoring the potential for political action and change around education and funding rather than the quick fix of everyone homeschooling in their pods. (Not that I think homeschooling is bad, but it should not be the knee-jerk reaction to every issue like "I don't like standardized testing" — "well homeschool, then!")
I haven't read the comments yet. However, I agree with her, I am anti AP. Great if it works for you, but I find it to be problematic in several areas for me particularly the baby wearing and the family co-sleeping, not to mention the AP parents I know that go to such length to emotionally satisfy their children that their marriages and adult relationships fall by the wayside. I took a good hard look at my girlfriends and my own parents roles and decided what was right for my family; and it was not AP by any stretch. I think a middle of the road approach is much more suitable for most working Mama's. The primary issue I have with AP is, I feel most APers but their children at the nucleus of the family, and not each other, and truly I think the marriage needs to be the nucleus because it is the foundation of happy parents, and a healthy home environment for the children. I also think APers often make Dad feel left out (Again, just my experiences)- not saying all APers do this.
Furthermore, the "I am more in tune mother because I baby wear or co-sleep or cloth diaper" irks the crap out of me.
http://www.attachmentparenting.org/principles/pri…
Just reading the front page sends me into a rage and makes me feel like I am an inferior mother for not breastfeeding, co-sleeping and baby wearing. It has an air of superiority written all over it.
Here is some of what is on their page
AP Site: Explore a variety of economic and work arrangement options to permit your child to be cared for by one or both parents at all times
Emma: Um yeah, OK. Can I go back to the real world please?
AP Website: Co-sleeping. "Babies and children have needs at night just as they do during the day; from hunger, loneliness, and fear, to feeling too hot or too cold. They rely on parents to soothe them and help them regulate their intense emotions. Sleep training techniques can have detrimental physiological and psychological effects. Safe co-sleeping has benefits to both babies and parents."
Emma: I totally disagree. I think teaching children to sleep happily in their own spaces creates a confident and healthy sleep habit. My child learns to self soothe, and if I hear a cry typically before 30 seconds passes he is already back asleep and was probably never really awake to begin with.
AP Website " Become emotionally and physically prepared for pregnancy and birth. Research available options for healthcare providers and birthing environments, and become informed about routine newborn care. Continuously educate yourself about developmental stages of childhood, setting realistic expectations and remaining flexible."
Emma: No home birth or natural birth for me. Give me the hospital birth please, max meds. Thanks.
It has taken me a while to organize what I am going to say, and I will probably botch it, so bear with me… go with the spirit of the words, if you will….
For me, the underlying message of 'attachment parenting' is that of sensitively responding to the needs of the partner in the relationship. So, parent responds to the needs/wants of the infant/child, and the child (in return) responds to the engagement by the mother with actions that reinforce the parent. It is the establishment of a symbiotic relationship where there is a "dance" between parent and child. But it is not just the sensitive responding…. it is also the process of mending/reestablishing relationships when things go wrong. And things always go wrong. Mom can't figure out why baby is crying… or gets too excited and causes distress in baby… etc etc…
The tools of establishing this relationship are things like cobedding, breastfeeding, babywearing, etc etc… it is easier to create those bonds when you engage in these prinicples. But they are tools, and like all tools, must be used with ease of the user or they will not work well.
I didn't necessarily prescribe to a specific "attachment parenting" model. But I did, to the best of my ability, try and establish sensitive responsiveness. I did breastfeed, and wear my son in a sling, and my husband and I re-arranged our lives so I worked evenings when he could be home with our son (I am a RN), so we were very fortunate in that respect. I chose not to co-bed, but he did sleep in a bassenette by our bed for a long time. I rock him before bed every night… or my husband does… and he is 3 1/2. This, and other things, are the make up of our "tools".
My son is on the Autism spectrum. At 3 1/2, he is functionally non-verbal. His ability to engage in social communication is significantly delayed/altered. He is also apraxic (motor-planning speech problem). For those of you who do not know, autism spectrum disorders are neuologically based, and completely unrelated to parenting style (unlike what that ass Bettelheim had to say). But for a parent such as myself, the 'child' portion of the relationship… what I get from him socially from him… has always been altered.
Given his very significant delays in both social communication and language, my son is still amazingly loving, sensitive, and balanced. Do I credit our parenting style for that? I don't know… if I credit myself, do I then have to blame myself?
What I do know… what I rely on… is that it is only through our well-established, loving relationship that we have any hope of helping him learn and develop. We will not turn him over exclusively to therapists or teachers to help him… instead, it is our ultimate responsibility. I go to every therapy session he has. Every one. We use a parent-based model at home called Communicating Partners (with some very encouraging results), which actually has the best evidence for helping children like my son. I am sure… absolutely positive… that I will screw up. But I will do my best… my very best… and hope it is enough.
Is Ms. Jong right? I don't know… I think in reality, once you become a parent it cannot ever be about you again. It just can't. Some parents get the luxury of having that debate ("where am I in all this? Can I 'have it all?"). But it is a fallacy… once you have kids, you might get the luxury of having choices for yourself, but you might not. I don't. And I won't for a very long time. I don't resent it, tho (although I might yearn for more carefree days… and carefree parenting, for that matter). I made a choice to parent, and it is my mission to help build my child the best life that he can have.
Not sure I said anything important… but I tried…
Pia
I actually find attachment parenting convenient. I'd much rather take my baby out in a sling than try to navigate a bulky stroller everywhere, breastfeed than have to prepare bottles in the middle of the night, and have my baby sleep next to me than have to get up and go into another room when she wakes up. I don't do it because it is "right" or because I feel pressure to be the best mother ever – it's just easier for me personally and my husband as well.
Also, in my experience, contrary to what Jong writes, people who practice AP are very political and passionate about changing the world. I live in DC, maybe that is why, but AP is very popular here. You see lots of babies in slings at rallies and marches! I wonder if she knows anyone personally who does attachment parenting, or was just going on speculation.
I'm a grad student currently, and I have a 3.875 GPA. My daughter is happy, attached, and pretty damn cute. I would say that I'm doing just fine in BOTH worlds. I would say it's because we AP'd, but I can't say that because we've (my husband and our daughters village) never done anything different with her so who knows.
I think of AP as a tool in my parenting toolbox. I more closely follow the ideas behind RIE but the two are very closely related in principle. I think of parenting not only done by the parents. Even though only I breastfed my child, my childs caregivers mimicked breastfeeding when they fed my daughter. (No propped bottles, a lot of eye contact, even skin to skin contact) My daughter was never left to cry but that didn't mean that I was the one to attend to her needs at all times. I never had to go without a shower or food, even in the early weeks. Perhaps I am lucky that my friends/family were always willing to help out, but even when it was just my daughter and I we managed just fine.
I'm afraid that attachment parenting has become branded as extreme. It is sensationalized when it doesn't need to be. When my daughter was born I quickly found that I got more sleep if my daughter stayed in bed with me, on our 3rd day home from the hospital we went to bed at 7pm and woke up the following morning at 8. (She would wake,I would latch her on, and we'd both drift back to sleep). I don't think a full nights sleep is a burden at all.
Mommy guilt is so overrated.
I am not a Sears fan and thus have not read his books, but if my internet baby boards are any indicator, many of his AP followers are indeed zealots. There was just a long, nasty debate about whether parents could ever choose not to co-sleep and still be considered "AP" parents. The Sears crowd (complete with name-calling) voted "no." It is apparently evil not to co-sleep. If Jong has run into any of the same people I have, this might have informed some of her opinions.
I don't consider myself an AP parent but it also became very clear that my daughter would have hated it if I had tried to force the typical AP style on her. When she was a newborn, she cried to be put down. She wanted her own space to look at her mobile, etc. She prefers sleeping in her crib. I know this because she began sleeping 8P to 7A at the age of 7 weeks old. I work full time by choice, and she is cared for during the day by her grandparents and a wonderful nanny. She loves books, going to the park, and playing with her caregivers (chase the baby is a favorite!). She is a cheerful, social, curious little creature who is still not a cuddler but who is clearly thriving in her current environment.
I think if AP makes the family happy, they should practice it. But if parenting feels like a prison, whatever style you are using, perhaps you should rethink it.
Call me novice, or poorly read, but I wasn't even aware of the term "Attachment Parenting", until I started reading this blog. I'm not a huge fan of parenting books to begin with – but I would read references in agreement, and disagreement in various comments- so it sparked my curiosity – and I did some research.
I found, that aside from breastfeeding (which I didn't practice with any of my four children – hate if you want, been listening to it for a decade now – each bottle feeding was skin to skin and lots of eye contact regardless of where we were) that I had been parenting in the AP style, with each of my children. It seemed so very natural to me – that I was surprised that there was even a term for it, books about it, or the fact that it was even debated.
It was what came very naturally to me, and to our family. However, I am not convinced that it would come naturally to all – or that all would be able to embrace it.
Does that make parents who do not parent in the AP style, less efficient, less caring, less loving, less adequate than parents who do?
NO.
What bothers me most about this article – and debates like these – is deeming one parenting style superior to another. The fact that you breastfed your children, doesn't make you a better, more caring mother than I, who did not. The fact that I've co-slept and wore my babies around, doesn't make me a better mom than you, who doesn't.
Each family is different, each child is different and each situation is different. We all are just trying to do the best we can to raise healthy, happy, well adjusted children.
Katie, maybe she worded it a little strongly. But if you replace "is" with "can be," she is telling the truth. Some mothers are happier parenting a different way, and there is nothing wrong with that. Of course, no one forces them to attachment parent; but if all their friends are happy slinging their babies and nursing their toddlers or what-have-you, they can start feeling they should do that also or else they are bad mothers.
I think any parenting trend/method can become a prison if someone is following it against her own basic nature. Let's let mothers become the mothers they can and want to be, rather than dictating to them how they should raise and interact with their children. I'm not saying that you, personally, dictate such things! But the attachment-parenting movement as a whole is perceived to be a tad tyrannical and dogmatic, I'm afraid. That is what Erica Jong is (over)reacting to.
Why can't we just all get along?
Pamela Brown has made some excellent points. Read John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. A baby capable of attachment can/will develop healthy attachment to caregivers other than mother and father. It is critical to bear in mind that being "emotionally available" is not the same as "physically present." The baby does not have to be physically attached for x number of hours per day in order for a parent to "attachment parent." There is negativity in both extremes.
Good Lord in Heaven! However did our great grandmothers manage to raise children without the input of the experts! Middle ground is most often a good place to strive to be. Common sense is also essential, and if you don't have it, no book is going to teach it to you.
i also had never heard of "attachment parenting" before reading this blog, so i can't speak to it with any insight or personal experience. what is really jumping out at me, both in Jong's article, and in katie's response is words like "prison" and "wrong wrong wrong". yikes, on both accounts. if i had tried attachment parenting, and it worked, for me and my family, I would be offended, and yes, defensive, if someone wrote about it and used the word prison. and maybe to ms. jong it would have seemed like a prison. but to make blanket statements about most things, and in particular different parenting styles, methods or ideas, isn't very productive. And the funny thing is, the same parenting style may not work on all of our children, as they are individuals, not clones. It sounds like both ms. jong, and katie, too, are overly concerned about defending their own choices. if attachment parenting worked for katie and her family, that is great. if it wasn't something ms. jong was interested in, fine. the phrase "live and let live" comes to mind.
I believe parents have to do what feels comfortable for them. I did do AP with my kids although I had no lable for it. It was just what worked best for our family. I found that with breastfeeding, I could get a lot more sleep if the baby was with me. Also, I knew that it was such a brief time in their lives that I would be able to hold them close like that. Pretty soon they would be crawling, then walking, and before you know it driving a car. I treasure those moments greatly, now that they are all in school (and their own beds, and one driving). I don't think it is for everyone, and certainly I do not think parenting is a one size fits all situation. However, I never felt I was in a prison by doing this nor did I feel it made me better than someone who did things differently. It was just what felt natural to me.
Oh, the energy that is devoted to parenting philosophies! I remember when my son was a baby I rounded up an arsenal of books, websites, slings and other assorted bullshit. My son liked to be held but not in the sling. He also liked to roll all over the floor and sit in his Bjorn Baby Sitter 1-2-3 (oh and by the way I wish there was a Adult Sitter 1-2-3) and stare at the ceiling fans. I become so very busy actually raising him that I decided to put the books in the donate pile and pick up some good novels to read at night. I hate, hate, hate, hate labels SO much…and why do we need so many leagues and foundations? Our grandmothers and usually our mothers simply met in groups and shared advice – my friends and I did the same when our children were babies. No labels, no stress, just moms helping one another. Is that too Utopian to ask for? Oh, and my son slept in our bed sometimes and sometimes he slept in his crib. It's the same now – if he has a nightmare he climbs in, most nights he sleeps in his own bed. I remember this was how I was as a girl and my parents were always very sweet about it. I think it's just, truly, a matter of going with your instinct.
As far as Dr. Sears, I always have found his actual "health" advice as a physician (on his website) super helpful. I like the man's work.
….there is to me an air of superiority (as some other commentators have stated) in a lot of the AP moms I know in real life. I think it's just a matter of keeping up with the Joneses – a modern version…and I can't stand that.
I have to respectfully disagree with your statement that Hong is "so wrong". That said, while I believe AP does work for many parents, there are also many people (myself included) that would have felt imprisoned by AP. I had a very independent son who has not liked being held a lot, did not like slings, did not want to be rocked to sleep, and did not sleep well until we moved him from our room to his own. I, likewise, felt overwhelmed by the thought of going from an independent career woman to spending 24 hours a day with my son. I wanted that time away and needed it in order to be the calm, sane mother he needed. But I fully believe our family achieved a healthy balance between bonding strongly with our baby and maintaining a bit of independence. I completely respect those mothers who choose AP but I also agree with Hong that SOME women might feel imprisoned by that notion or expectation. To each his/her own, but no one should feel guilty about their parenting style if they are doing what they feel is best for their family.
Please forgive the errors. My phone changed Jong to Hong without me realizing.
Extremists in any realm are not the norm, and their habits are not usually wise to emulate. And it seems to me that each "side" of the dyad in question is eager to jump to indict what are actually the most extreme examples of the "opposing" parenting style/philospophy.
So, on a more middle-of-the-road message board frequented by moms who work outside the home, for example, you'll likely read derisive posts about the stay-at-home moms who breastfeed until their child is eight years old and never allow their child to be more than an arm's length away from them. And, on a message board targeted to more traditionally-leaning, AP stay-at-home moms, you'll likely find discussion threads decrying working mothers for working "60 – 70 hours a week" and "letting nannies raise their kids".
C'mon – do we really know oodles of parents that fit either of those descriptions? In truth, I honestly think that most of us fall somewhere between these two extremes, and that most parents adopt an amalgamation of different behaviors and philosophies that work best for their own families.
I work partially because I need to financially, and partially because my brain would turn to jello and squish out my ears if I didn't. It's a need that *I* have, personally; whatever works for other families is all good. When my son was 9 months old I left my FT job and starting consulting in my field, working from my home office. My son was in a wonderful center-based childcare program affiliated with the hospital where my husband worked; at that age, he was there three days a week for 5 – 6 hours a day. I've never understood how people can purportedly "work from home" and take care of a child, while doing either one any justice. So, for those 15 – 18 hours a week, I focused on my work, confident and secure in the knowledge that my son was being loved and cuddled and stimulated and having a great time hanging out with other kiddos his age; just because it wasn't me or my husband doing those things didn't negate their value. The remainder of the week I was in 'mom mode' and – aside from some sporadic email checking – I was focused on my son. We ran around the playground, we attended music and gymnastics classes, we roamed around the bookstore, we just hung out and chilled. If my son was sick or if he had a doctor's appointment, my schedule was usually flexible enough that I could quickly morph into mom mode; if I had a non-moveable commitment, my husband and I would juggle our schedules and work together to meet our son's needs.
All in all, he was a happy, engaged, social kid. He loved books, he loved climbing, he loved his caregivers. But, baby wearing I was not; nor were we co-sleeping. I nursed him until he was about 6 months old. According to the tenets of some folks, I was being neglectful and a lousy parent. (And that' s not even including the fact that we have only one child and have "deprived" our son of siblings!) Am I the only one who sees a disconnect there?
At some point, it also behooves us to ask who the attachment is benefitting the most. When he started going to summer daycamp at about 5 years of age, I actually had people ask me how I could "stand" to be apart from him for so long each day. He adored playing soccer and basketball, swimming, doing arts and crafts, and learning to row a canoe with a bunch of other kids – we weren't exactly shipping him off to a sweatshop to sew piecework! So at that point, who would the 'attachment' approach have benefitted more? Me, or my son who was very secure in going off to daycamp each day and having a great time, because he already knew the irrefutable fact that "mom and dad always, ALWAYS come back."???
Bottom line: Despite any "emotional traumas" we may have inadvertently caused, my son is a bright, polite, articulate, great kid. We've always been close, and we still are … well, as close as I can be to him in his current hormonal adolescent glory. He will still hug me (unlike many other 14 YO boys I know), he'll tell me (via text and even in person, LOL) that he loves me, and he'll confide in me if something is bothering him. We laugh a lot, and we – genuinely – enjoy one anothers' company most of the time. For my family, the balance that we struck in terms of meeting his needs and meeting the range of our own needs … well, it seems to have worked out pretty well.
One of the posters above referred to striking a 'balance', and that is, I think, a critical piece of this puzzle. But there is one last point I want to make (I promise!) that has nothing to do with being professionally fulfilled or emotionally in-synch with one's child:
More than a few years ago, my husband lost his job. Since then, he has been unable to find anything that will "stick" (another story for another day) so, ironically, he has been a consultant and part-time stay-at-home parent for quite a few years now. He brings in nowhere near enough money for us to live on. I no longer work as a self-employed consultant, and haven't for some time now, but I was fortunate enough to land a full-time VP position at a company that is extremely family-friendly, including supporting telecommuting; I typically work from my home office 3 – 4 days a week. So, I'm still "around" a great deal of the time, even though I also work FT.
I think that there are more and more parents like my husband and me, who don't really fit into a preconceived mold of what working families "look like". The three of us eat dinner together nearly every evening (my husband is a terrific cook!) and I would venture to say that my son is as "attached" to us as he would have been if I'd never returned to work after my maternity leave. Maybe moreso, because I'm likely a much happier and more content person (not to mention the fact that we don't live in a refrigerator box). My son has told me that he's proud of the work I do and of the talents I use to do it, and that means a lot to me, as well.
When my husband lost his job and I picked up the "primary breadwinner" flag, you can bet that I was D@MN glad that I had the education and experience that I did, and – especially – that I'd kept my career, my contacts, and my skills current. If I'd taken an appreciable break from the workforce, our story today might be a markedly different one, and we could be in a very different type of emotional "prison". That situation is not "right" and it's not "wrong"; it just IS in my corner of the US right now. I don't work for manicures and gym memberships; I work to pay our mortgage and so that we have food on the table. I work so that we have health insurance and, yes, so my son can participate in activities he enjoys. I'm lucky enough to have a job I really enjoy, in a field that has been good to me … but the bottom line is that I'm lucky that I have a job, period. (I was laid off twice in three years not all that long ago, and it was NOT a fun time.)
So, attachment, schmattachment. Why do we parents torture ourselves trying to adhere to standards written by people we'll never meet who know nothing about the lives we actually live? Believe me, I'm the queen of guilt, and I still don't feel bad about these types of parenting "choices". I love him madly, and I do the best that I can. We've definitely made lots of mistakes, and I'm sure we'll make a slew more, but they have nothing to do with using Pampers and having him sleep in his own room; he was just as happy having his own space to sleep, and diving into our bed in the morning and cuddling and giggling while we watched Sesame Street.
I truly believe that every family needs to do what works for that family – whether that means baby-wearing or bottle toting – *not* because it's a relay checkpoint on the 'my va-jay-jay is tighter than yours" Mommy Olympics, but because it's what actually works for all concerned at that given time. And, I also think that we all need to cut ourselves some slack, and realize that not every. single. decision. we make as parents of young children will necessarily make a difference between raising a secure, happy, productive individual … or not. Because that kind of pressure? Is its own kind of prison.
I'm not against AP so much as I'm against conforming one's parenting style to a "method" devised by someone else. Every family situation, every mom and every baby is different. As long as the child and family are healthy and loved, who's to say the parents are doing it the right or wrong way?
I have a well-thumbed copy of Dr. Sears' Baby Book. I took some of the suggestions about AP and left some on the table. My son never could sleep well in our bed, so we didn't do that. He also hated the baby sling, and it made me nervous, so I didn't babywear. What I did do was breastfeed, respond to his needs and pay attention to him. Today, he's a sweet, secure kid.
My family needs two incomes. Neither my husband nor I make enough to support the family solo, and our budget is to the bone. No amount of couponing or bargain shopping will change that. I've also run into the feeling from other moms that it's so sad that I have to work. That bugs me. My son is loved and cared for. That's all that matters.
it's only prison if you think of your children as jail wardens, instead of beloved companions…? Sadly, I know of a lot of people that think of children in just that way; they are something that you have to work around, take breaks from, etc. While I am all for Mama's getting rested, I am also apalled at this society that teaches us, I feel, that we should look forward to getting away from our children. How many times do I have to hear people complain when their kids are home from school?!? or a teenaged sister in law that has to get weekly "breaks" from teh kids to go clubbing…really? I think all of these people could benefit from a stint of attachment parentings, and actually learn to enjoy the company of these little people that they created !
D
I can't imagine living with a mentality that would tell me to put my newborn down so he/she doesn't bother me: I personally don't want to miss a single second…granted, this time around, I have really, really looked forward to baby (17 months) moving to her own bed…she's a bed-hogging baby-monster of the worst sort
and I second people that don't confrom specifically to a parenting style. I get irked with people that go overboard with AP, just for the sake of being AP, just as much as I get annoyed with parents that try to ditch theirs kids with sitters at every turn…but I applaud any parent taking the time, regardless of method, to develop a conscious plan for parenting.
Good lord – this is navel gazing a bit, isn't it? There are so many children and families in crisis around the world: starving, ill, under attack, raped, punished, conscripted into fighting, forced to work at young ages in terrible conditions, deprived of education and stability.
If you're a conscientious parent who doesn't hurt or neglect her children, then you're doing a great job. We're all human, and our kids will generally grow up to be parents who are human, too. AP will not guarantee that our children will be perfect, that they won't resent us at times, or that we won't have regrets.
I think that definitive statements are dangerous when it comes to something as distinctive as mothering (and who're we kidding – AP, for better or worse, is all about Mama.
I practiced my own form of AP with my sons. Breastfed both as long as I could, co-slept to different degrees in the first six months, really got into wearing my second. But that was what worked for us and different strokes, etc. Other than breastfeeding, which seems pretty categorically the best option whenever possible, I think there are almost limitless ways to rear happy, healthy kids. What does us in is isolation and isolation can be the result of judgement (either the act of or the fear of) and guilt. If we can put aside our guilt-ridden and judgemental paralysis and connect, we are all healthier.
When I was pregnant, someone gave me one of Dr. Sears' shorter books (not The Baby Book, but something shorter?). I had a very negative reaction to it, ended up tossing it down the hall at high speed, and then chucking it after my husband refused to let me use it as kindling in his beloved grill.
I found the tone of the book very patronizing, kind of controlling, and quite conservative in terms of gender roles. If I had more self-confidence, was a more tolerant person, or had read more baby books, I might have found it helpful. It seemed very rigid (stay at home stay at home stay at home) and designed for a reader who wanted a strong father figure or guru to follow.
In retrospect, I was angry about a lot of things during my first pregnancy, and not all of it was hormonal or can be blamed on The Sears Empire. In my adult life, I'd never had so many people (from friends to family to convenience store clerks to the handyman in my building) expound on the "proper" way to do anything. The wrong baby crib? Oh, the horror. The wrong swaddler? Better start saving for therapy.
And of course, no one actually listened to anything coming out of the mouth of the angry pregnant cow (by which I mean me), so it's just like being a bride except about 22 times more annoying. I'm also on the older end of things, so I'd enjoyed about 10 years of post-college time where my life choices were not really remarked upon by anyone and I didn't seem to need a 16-page manual for wiping my own rear.
Sifting through the noise is really hard, especially if you actually like news and books and listening to people's opinions on a recreational basis.
This is one of the reasons I was so glad to find your blog, Katie, where I'd like to think that we probably have pretty similar beliefs and practices but come upon them in very different ways.
As a working mother, I feel a bit like a conscript in a war I don't want to fight, and I don't think the mothers on the other side of the line really want to fight it either. It's just hard when the stay-at-home ap ubermommy can't manage to return your baby equipment for nearly two years, yet rallies long enough to make little digs about how daycare is the source of my two year old's tantrum ("she just misses mommy!"). And don't get me started on the famous people – the no-tv celebrities with hot and cold running nannies, the perfect mommy politicians (on both sides) who don't actually support early childhood education or family leave, and the parenting experts who've never been the primary caregiver for a child under 5 for more than an afternoon. I wish there was a better fight to fight.
Like others here, I think that extreme attachment parenting would definitely be a prison and can go hand in hand with a judgmental tone. When the pendulum swings, it always shoots over a bit. However, I think it's important to realize how un-attachment things were for many families in the middle of the century. For at least a couple of generations (40's era), mothers' instincts were negated by (mostly) male pediatricians. When my son was six months old (and I was relishing nursing, close-sleeping, and part-time baby wearing), I found my grandmother's journal from raising her first baby, my aunt. In addition to the detailed daily schedule and how she realized the baby got a tooth because of the "clink" on her GLASS of orange juice, she wrote that she had a very difficult time listening to my aunt cry and cry, but that the pediatrician told her it was necessary for the child's development. When I read that I had such a moment of clarity, and sense that (non-extreme) attachment parenting was RIGHT. And like others above, I believe Sears got a bit confused between social/emotional attachment and physical proximity.
It reminds me a bit of the extreme natural childbirth movement – again it is the pendulum going to far, but in a very necessary direction because not that long ago fathers were not even allowed in the delivery room. And not too long before that, women were completely drugged during childbirth (called a "twilight birth", experienced by my same grandma who wrote the journal).
We would be in a much worse place if attachment parenting and childbirth activists did not go a little nutso with their zeal. Now bjorns, slings, nursing, all that good stuff is mainstream (at least in Cali). In the past, people didn't even know that close-sleeping (i just made that up and I like it!) was an option … now they do and they can decide what works for them. There is more awareness about babies' need for connection … and that's all good.
Thanks for pointing out a great article and getting an interesting discussion going. I watched the Henry TV show with my husband and we really appreciate you going public with your loss. I've noticed since following your blog that there are many incidents of death in the community that are quite possibly related to prescription drub use and abuse, but they are rarely explained fully. One of the best professional surfers in the world, Andy Irons, died last week and it is quite likely that the death was related to use and/or addiction to painkillers. But no one is talking… it could be such a great opportunity to teach the youngsters who looked up to him. So far, mum's the word. A tangent, I know.
"Attachment Parenting" is the red herring here; it stirs all the same ridiculous and tired debates.
This article is about a mother / daughter relationship. I know the family. This is all about Ms Jung publicly ridiculing her daughter's parenting choices. This is about a daughter who decided to have children at a young age by NYC standards, a young mother raising her children differently than her own mother.
I see Molly success as a loving attentive parent as a mirror to how indifferently Ms Jong was as a parent. Molly shows her mother that she was a neglectful parent to her. So Ms Jung criticizes in public how her daughter is choosing to attentively “attachment parent” her grandkids!
Molly is present in her children's everyday life, unlike what her mother did to her, abandon her to housekeepers that raised her. It’s publicly known and written about the horrible complicated adolescence Molly had and her serious struggles with addiction. Ms Jong should be kissing the ground Molly walks on that she survived her adolescence, and became the thoughtful attentive parent that she never had. If Molly is extreme, maybe it’s an overreaction to how she was parented.
Ms Jong did not raise Molly, she completely disregard the best interest of her daughter. It’s really seen humiliating that Molly has to defend her parenting choices in public, tragic family relations.
I don't think Ms. Jong is wrong if you look at the principles on the API website. It speaks less to responding to a child's needs in a way that is appropriate for everyone in the family and more to "rules" that must be followed. Let's take co-sleeping for one. It does not work for me. I don't enjoy sleeping with my children and I get less sleep due to anxiety over having a wee person in bed along with discomfort from the constant movement. I know this because I did it for 2 months with my 3rd child. It just doesn't work for us. Yet this is somehow anti-AP even though my son did not object at all when he was moved into his own room. Sometimes baby wearing works, sometimes it doesn't. And yet there is only one "right" way according to the API philosophy. So those parents who are concerned, stressed, confused, and loving can come upon resources like this and feel that following them may feel like a prison to them. To say it's definitely not a prison does not take those families into account nor does it truly examine what "AP" means to many people.
Anonymous for today: Wow. Now that smells like Truth, that right there. Sad.
Just popping in to say I totally agree with Allisun. Attachment parenting made my going back to work so much easier. My husband stayed at home with our daughter (he is a masters student) and he parenting with the AP principles in mind. When I am home, I do the same and it helps to assuage any saddness* I have about being away from her. By bedsharing, breastfeeding on demand and babywearing, we are able to achieve a strong bond. Of course it isn't all rainbows and ponies, but I feel connected to her in a way I wouldn't if I didn't hold her as much and sent her to sleep in a separate room.
*Saddness, maybe wistfulness, NOT guilt. No one can make me feel guilty. Only I have that power, and I refuse to feel guilty for the way I parent. Like all parents, I do what is in the best interest of my family, and right now that means I work. I will never feel guilty for being a strong woman who can earn enough to support my entire family comfortably. I will never feel guilty for leaving my child in someone else's care because I will always make sure that person is trusted and cares deeply about my child's well-being.
I'm also one of those women who doesn't fall into the "usual" categories. I homeschool my kids, but I also have an online business that my husband and I do from home. So we are both home with the kids every day and we love it that way.
I feel like I've come the closest to "having it all" that I've seen…being able to be professionally fulfilled but also homeschool my kids. It's awesome and I wish more women could be in my position – and actually in the past few years I've heard of more and more situations like mine.
However, I did not sleep with my kids as babies. I'm a terrible, light sleeper who has trouble falling asleep even when exhausted. I tried to have them sleep with me and it simply did not work (and I stopped nursing at about 6 months with each).
When I look at my kids' lives, overall, I can't even begin to think that I could somehow be closer to them if they had slept with me or I had nursed them longer, given that I spend the better part of each day with them. These are the moments they'll remember – the projects we do, the field trips, the books we read – eating almost every meal as a family – not whether or not they slept with me as babies.
If the term "attachment parenting" is going to ever regain relevancy, I think its definition needs to change, to encompass a whole childhood and not just the first few months or years. Isn't attachment parenting just being there, in a healthy way, for your child whenever they need you? Making sure they know you love them and will keep them safe? It's surely more than where they sleep, what/how they eat, where they go to school, etc.
No family I've ever seen has looked exactly the same in every way, so I'm not sure why "attachment parenting" should be narrowly defined and why each AP home should look the same.
I can't work up any interest in what one person thinks of other people's parenting styles. I can't manufacture any guilt over what I did or didn't do. I can't fool myself into thinking that parenting is the hardest job I'll ever do. I'll take navel-gazing for $300, Alex.
Honestly, it sounds like Jong is justifying her own disinterested/absentee parenting style by insulting people who actually want to be around their children. If she chose to be a celebrity instead of a parent and let her nannies do the heavy lifting – then fine. But to insult women who actually do it is pretty petty. This entire piece is about her own guilt and not about AP…it's just the scapegoat.
I wonder if she's even read The Baby Book? From the tone of her article, I doubt she has.
(The Baby Book fun fact: the dad illustration on page 10 looks exactly like Will Farrell from the SNL sketch "The Lover". Just saying')
I'm of the same mind as a number of commentators — Chrissy most notably. I loathe labels, and have never been one to comfortably join clubs, or groups or movements… The pressure to conform has always made me ill at ease, and "attachment parenting" is no different. Each child is has different needs and requires something different from their parents. Each family has different circumstances, a different style… I just can't see how there are any right or wrong answers. Yes, I cloth diapered and breastfed, but didn't co-sleep until my youngest insisted at around 18 months of age. He still sleeps on his own, but usually prefers to snuggle in with us, and we enjoy it too (he doesn't thrash about). I've been attacked on a design blog for using a stroller instead of a sling (hate being hot, sticky, and heavier than I need to be, not to mention having my chest weighted forward resulting in bad posture) by the AP moms. Am I AP? in some ways, and not in others. Like a lot of parents here, we do what works for us. What matters most to me are not the physical "tools" of attachment, but that my children have a secure sense of attachment, and they do. (Funnily enough, my biggest crush in school grew up to be a professor of psychology concentrating on attachment theory). The only thing that bugs me about other people's parenting styles (and which I get a bit judgmental about) are parents who don't actively work to instill kindness, compassion and respect for others into their kids.
It is popular to attack the AP philosophy, in part because there are many overzealous AP moms on comment boards and in forums who put down other parenting styles especially if they deviate in any way from what they view at AP orthodoxy; in part because that seems to be the way that many women deal with each other (parenting being just one of the many frontiers of criticism). Criticism of AP mothers is becoming very old and very tired.
What rang the most true for me was the comment from "Anonymous for today" — Erica Jong's article is a shot across the bow aimed squarely at her daughter's parenting choices, and is more about Erica Jong's sense of guilt and failings as a mother than it is a critique of AP. It's transparently painful, and more than a little bit sick.
You make good points in your article Katie; good for you for calling Ms. Jong on the carpet on her article.