To all CPs and NCPs of Infants & Toddlers...

[ProSeDadinMD]

Hmmm. Then castration would be the cure to this. Pre-emptive castration would have solved it before anything happened.

Ahhh, if I had the magical gun of sterility.

Methinks that Bloopy's state is too close to mine for comfort...

 

[ezmarelda]

Hmmm. Then castration would be the cure to this. Pre-emptive castration would have solved it before anything happened.

Ahhh, if I had the magical gun of sterility.

Do you know how bad it hurts to choke on chocolate chip cookies?

 

[Bloopy]

Yes, but what does castration have to do with testicles? Not having babies doesn't have to mean not having sex.

Castration would remove the offending testicles. But alas, fathers would still require a uterus to be “fit.” Perhaps they could all pick up a Bronzed Uterus on ebay.

 

[Silverplum]

Castration would remove the offending testicles. But alas, fathers would still require a uterus to be “fit.” Perhaps they could all pick up a Bronzed Uterus on ebay.

I wish I had bronzed my Uterus instead of just letting that stupid doctor toss it. Just think how much $$$ I could make on Ebay!!!

 

[LdiJ]

You all may not agree with that article, but it is identical to information that I have seen come from many other mental health professionals and pediatricians. I have read similar articles from numerous sources. They aren't lawyers, they don't care about the law, they are simply writing the truth from their very educated perspective.

This is a doctor focusing on what is best for children in general, irregardless of what is best or fair for either of the parents.

If a child recognizes both parents as primary caregivers, the situation in this article does not apply. My 22 month old granddaughter (who is not speaking well yet) recognizes three people as primary caregivers, her mother, me, and my mother. If her father were able to be around, then most likely by now she would recognize him as a primary caregiver as well. She may not be very verbal, but she is sharp and understands what is going on around her. She has also had plenty of experience with short separations from all of us, therefore she fully understands that we ARE coming back, and would probably be fine with an occasional overnight away from us.

That is why phased in plans are so appropriate, because they give the child the time to understand what is going on and to form a proper bond with the other parent.

Look at how many sullen, uncaring and dangerous teenagers we have out there in this country right now. We already know that divorce and unwed situations bear some responsibility for the huge problems with young people these days. However, if these doctors are correct, then attachment disorders are also a big part of the problem as well. Just because in our personal situations the child did not develope an attachement disorder, doesn't mean that every other situation is like one of ours here.

I want children to have good relationships with both parents...with very solid emotional bonds and security. If we give them time to establish those bonds they will be happier and healthier children.

And the parent who doesn't want to visit mid week because its too rushed....well I think that ALL of us agree that an infant or toddler absolutely needs to see their other parent more often than once a week, let alone once every two weeks. All we disagree on is when overnights should start.

I have said this before and I will say it again. I think that parents should be willing to make whatever sacrifices that need to be made, to ensure that infants and toddlers see both of them, EVERY day. However, I also know that its unrealistic for it to happen in many cases. Even if one of the parents is willing, generally the other is not.

 

[jaxpink]

kudos... i agree completley. At least every other day for children 12-18 months is necessary ive read before by a specialist with children and b/c they begin to explore thier independance too. thanks for you wonderful example

 

[kmb1179]

That article is a load of bull.

My husband's ex-girlfriend had a baby just before he and I got married. We had his son over for an over-night when he was 1 week old. No problems whatsoever. And mom was breast-feeding. She pumped, we fed. Pretty easy.

Mom and baby live 45 minutes away, and this was still not a problem. She called every few hours to check on baby, which was fine. We called her to let her know baby was doing fine.

And we both have web-cams, so that evening, we got online and turned on the web-cam so that she could see baby and know for her own peace of mind that all was ok. My husband was just fine with this.

From 1 week old, we have had regular (EOW) visitation with his son. His son is now 3. Great relationship with all involved. And my husband was able to be involved with the care of his son from infancy. It's been great!

 

[Bloopy]

Methinks that Bloopy's state is too close to mine for comfort...

Oh no. Keep em because I said so.

Zapping would occur among females too.

All joking aside though, every now and then a doctor gets caught actually sterilizing (women) without their consent. That people seriously think they should play God is nuts.

But having worked with abused children, I can see how some of the doctors came to be nuts.

 

[Rushia]

That article is a load of bull.


My husband's ex-girlfriend had a baby just before he and I got married. We had his son over for an over-night when he was 1 week old. No problems whatsoever. And mom was breast-feeding. She pumped, we fed. Pretty easy.

Mom and baby live 45 minutes away, and this was still not a problem. She called every few hours to check on baby, which was fine. We called her to let her know baby was doing fine.

And we both have web-cams, so that evening, we got online and turned on the web-cam so that she could see baby and know for her own peace of mind that all was ok. My husband was just fine with this.

From 1 week old, we have had regular (EOW) visitation with his son. His son is now 3. Great relationship with all involved. And my husband was able to be involved with the care of his son from infancy. It's been great!

Life would be so much easier on the CHILDREN if more people acted like we did. My ex and I work together, he comes to my house (without me in it) to see the kids, we talk on the phone, his wife is my best friend and she is my daycare for my son with current DH. I take my ex's youngest son overnight at least once a month.

Seperation problems my rear end. It's a simple matter of the children picking up on the animosity between the parents and acting out. My children were FINE until the whole GP case started. NOW we have problems.

 

[Bloopy]

This is a doctor focusing on what is best for children in general, irregardless of what is best or fair for either of the parents.

That’s what everyone should want. However this article is implying the primary care giver needs to be one person and stay that way for years. It doesn’t even allow for a phased in plan for young children.

If a child recognizes both parents as primary caregivers, the situation in this article does not apply. My 22-month-old granddaughter (who is not speaking well yet) recognizes three people as primary caregivers, her mother, my mother, and me. If her father were able to be around, then most likely by now she would recognize him as a primary caregiver as well. She may not be very verbal, but she is sharp and understands what is going on around her. She has also had plenty of experience with short separations from all of us, therefore she fully understands that we ARE coming back, and would probably be fine with an occasional overnight away from us.

That is why phased in plans are so appropriate, because they give the child the time to understand what is going on and to form a proper bond with the other parent.

Exactly!

 

[LdiJ]

Life would be so much easier on the CHILDREN if more people acted like we did. My ex and I work together, he comes to my house (without me in it) to see the kids, we talk on the phone, his wife is my best friend and she is my daycare for my son with current DH. I take my ex's youngest son overnight at least once a month.

Seperation problems my rear end. It's a simple matter of the children picking up on the animosity between the parents and acting out. My children were FINE until the whole GP case started. NOW we have problems.

You know that I had a great relationship with my ex as well, and still do. He saw our child every day while she was growing up. He and I are literally best friends now. However, not everyone is lucky enough to have a situation where both parents are willing to leave their egos at the door to make that happen.

Its absolutely true that when the parents get along well...they will do what is right for the child WHEN its right for the individual child. However, they are also the same people who don't need any help from the courts....and therefore we are unlikely to see them here.

However attachment disorders are real...and its what happens in their first three years of life that can trigger that.

 

[jaxpink]

You guys do have wonderful points but i think the article stated something about if parents work together. If not, another parent has to gain that relationship and a graduation plan might suck but its for the baby you know. I dont see overnights being a problem based on the child and his/her relationship with mom and dad. Its hard when one parent pushes another way and in result the kiddo is in lack of one more caring relationship. Both parents Need and hopefully want the extra time to help teach and direct their children and be there to see all the little things. Who really wants to be an every other weekend dad or mom.
I cant think of any unless it fits them, but as always the more time the better and when the are infants it reallllly helps......

 

[kmb1179]

Life would be so much easier on the CHILDREN if more people acted like we did. My ex and I work together, he comes to my house (without me in it) to see the kids, we talk on the phone, his wife is my best friend and she is my daycare for my son with current DH. I take my ex's youngest son overnight at least once a month.

Seperation problems my rear end. It's a simple matter of the children picking up on the animosity between the parents and acting out. My children were FINE until the whole GP case started. NOW we have problems.

Yep, life would be easier if everyone could act like they have some sense. I'm not going to lie, things between the ex-girlfriend in my post and I were a little awkward at first.

But we were both adults, got to know each other, and found that we actually had a lot in common and really like each other. She and I get together about every 2 weeks without any of the kids (YAY!) for a day of lunch and shopping. We've had her kids over-night that she has from a previous marriage and vice versa. She and I are very good friends, and she and my husband are very good friends, as they should be. They have to raise a child together for the next 15 years.

Now, if things could be that rosy with my husband's ex-wife. Lord knows I've tried with that woman, but . . .

 

[Peanuts200788]

Listen, I apologize if this article caused any trouble with anyone, and I won't post anymore links unless I ask someone first, which is what I should have done to begin with...again I apologize...

OG you are right, this article def. wouldn't be admissible (or however you spell that) in court, I just read it and found it insightful because I learned a lot about infants and the attachments they form and all that.

I know that different cases and different families are different, therefore, that should be taken into consideration as well, and also I know how important it is now for a child to have both the mother and father (if he will participate) in his/her life...and I wouldn't do anything to stop what would be in my child's best interests.

I know this article is someones opinion, and as my dad says 'opinions are like butts, we all have them, they're all different, and most of the time covered up!!' LOL but some things I did learn, others, I think like I said before depends on the situation of the family....

 

[proud_parent]

You all may not agree with that article, but it is identical to information that I have seen come from many other mental health professionals and pediatricians. I have read similar articles from numerous sources. They aren't lawyers, they don't care about the law, they are simply writing the truth from their very educated perspective.

And I can cite abundant clinical research by other educated professionals to refute Dr. Fox's conclusions. As you yourself have observed with your granddaughter (and a meta-analysis of the available research also supports this conclusion), infants and toddlers are capable of forming multiple secure attachments -- even to nonrelatives. Several widely published and peer-reviewed studies have indicated that attachment formation has as much to do with other factors (the child's temperament, the caregivers' responsiveness, sensitivity and consistency) as with the child's age.

This is a doctor focusing on what is best for children in general, irregardless of what is best or fair for either of the parents.

This is precisely what I find most outrageous about this article. How arrogant of one person, no matter what her credentials, to presume to speak to the best interests of all children! The best interests of a person must be weighed in terms of the individual's unique situation; that's why we have family courts to decide custody and visitation. If one size fit all, we would have no need of psychologists, investigators, GALs and the like -- and we wouldn't be here on this board!


For the record, the article Peanuts posted comes comes from Attachment Parenting International's web site. As the name suggests, API is a group that promotes Dr. William Sears' theory of "attachment parenting", a very particular parenting philosophy emphasizing so-called "natural" or "instinctive" parenting techniques. It is therefore not surprising that the article is so biased.

For those unfamiliar with attachment parenting (or AP), it is based on principles of attachment theory. But whereas 'attachment theory' is widely accepted by developmental psychologists, 'AP' is more of a lifestyle or a movement. Adherents of AP often contrast it to "mainstream parenting". AP support groups like API advocate such practices as home birth/midwife-assisted birth, breastfeeding beyond infancy/toddlerhood, co-sleeping (bed sharing), stay-at-home parenting, homeschooling, etc. Many AP supporters are also involved in the anti-vaccination movement.

I'm not here to debate the merits of AP versus conventional parenting, but rather to emphasize that Dr. Isabelle Fox's viewpoint is just that -- HER viewpoint. It is not generally accepted medical or psychological theory.

Peanuts200788, this article has generated some thoughtful discussion, and I for one feel that is a good thing. I encourage you to continue your reading and research, but I would caution you to give consideration to opposing viewpoints before hanging your hat on the personal opinion of any one "expert".