Free-Range Kids and Attachment Parenting

Your timing was perfect. There was a big article in our local paper just today about attachment parenting, spurred by negative comments made by a well-known parenting guy (someone I have a lot of respect for, but I think he did some unnecessary bashing in this case). I appreciate you making a non-issue out of it.

I agree with the above commenter. I think of attachment parenting as more of a parenting philosophy for babies and very young toddlers. For me, it naturally progressed into Freerange parenting as my kids got older. Both seem intuitive and give kids the security and freedoms they need at various ages.

I don’t think attachment parenting and free-range are mutually exclusive at all. I think there are misunderstandings about attachment parenting where many assume that it is just another term for helicopter parenting. That would be counter to Dr. Sears’ philosophy. In his books, he stresses that although attachment parenting strives to make sure children can effectively communicate their need to adults and have them met, he goes on to say that if the child can meet that need themselves, they should. I see attachment parenting simply as growing and developing, but with the kids setting the pace, which sounds kinda like what free-range is all about. Gradual independence as the child is ready for it. I consider myself to be both attachment-oriented, and free-range.

Having thrown that out there, let the discourse begin!

I’d love to hear more about combining attachment-focused parenting and free-range parenting in the context of (non-infant) adoption, where a child really does need a level of attention and responsiveness disproportionate to their age in order to build attachments that are normally built beginning at birth but are instead building them at an age when they’re otherwise much more capable and competent.

Quite possibly not starting from a place of fear is the place to start here, too.

I think that attachment parenting would give the child a sense of security and love knowing the parent is always available that would then in turn give the child more confidence to free range.

Balancing Jane said it perfectly: I don’t think there is any fundamental conflict between attachment parenting and free-range parenting. I don’t really label myself as an attachment parent-er. I breastfed on demand, but didn’t cosleep or baby wear (tried to, but my baby HATED the sling, was much more comfortable being free to kick her limbs). But from what I understand, attachment parenting philosophy focuses mainly on the first few years of life, whereas I’ve always taken free range to be more preschool and adolescent-focused. I do know some attachment-parents though, and I don’t consider them to be helicopter-ish at all. To say that the two philosophies are at odds with one another would require two assumptions:

1) That attachment parenting comes from a place of wanting to protect your child from anything and everything, to be a physical and emotional barrier between him or her and the rest of the world.

and

2) That free-range parenting comes from a place of wanting to provide no such protection at all, and let them “tough it out” on their own.

Both of these assumptions are false, in my opinion. No situation is that black and white. I think FRP and attachment parenting can actually complement each other really well. AP says “I’m here if you need me, always.”, while FRP says “I’m going to expect you to try things and take risks, and live up to your potential.”, but both come, ultimately, from a place of love.

Definitely agree with the sentiment that they are complimentary (and disliking the labeling too). I think parenting very young children in the “attachement” way, leads very, very naturally into letting them be free range. In fact, as I always understood it, this is what we were setting them up for–to be more independent by giving them the foundation to be so.

I think AP is exactly what others have said – being available to the child. That’s completely different from setting fearful limits on the child. Available doesn’t have to mean right there – it can mean willing to pause and listen when a kid comes home from being out alone. Ideally, having a strong relationship with your child in the early years should lead to a more confident, independent kid, which would seem completely compatible with free range kids.

Our four year old still sleeps with us because he’s not ready to sleep by himself. He also rides our horses (closely supervised), helps groom them (suitably helmeted) and helps the girls at the stables with barrows of feed.

Definitely complementary approaches, assuming you apply a decent amount of sensitivity and common sense to both. Use what applies to your situation and ignore what doesn’t

I agree with Lisa above. We took from attachment parenting what worked for us – I breastfed just past 2 years of age, did a mix of babywearing and stroller time, never let him cry it out, etc. Now, at 4, he runs around our shared backyards, goes and plays at the park without me hovering and had no problems running up and joining his t-ball team without me running the bases with him (like some parents did….) I think that regardless of labels, you just need to find what works best for your kids and your family and go with it.

I’ve defined as an attachment parent and a free range parent. One of the principles of AP is bonding to ensure security so that when the time comes, kids feel strong and safe and ready for adventure! My whole investment in AP is raising strong kids who feel confident taking on the world, not breeding codependence and neediness. I get really irritated when AP is collapsed in to the category of “helicopter parenting” when I don’t see it that way at all. AP principles (which I’m more interested in that specific practices that are considered AP) also encourage us to respect our children as unique individuals, and to trust them: this means encouraging autonomy and not second-guessing everything for them. That’s the opposite of helicoptering, ad totally in line with free range.

I meant that all that is included in attachment parenting is a matter of course for us here. We do all that well into the child’s first 10 years or so of life, of course, is what I meant. So ‘of course,’ breast feeding is not continued till then. Please, there is no need for sarcasm, here.

It’s a matter of degree… There’s a line between free range and neglect and attachment and dependence. Pay attention to your kids, let them make decisions, and let them fail and succeed.

I think it all comes down to communicating with your kids and not being judgmental. Personally I think all these labels are silly. It’s all about being parents.

I really like some of the comments that talk about how we’re not raising kids, we’re raising adults. Give kids the support they need to grow into functioning adults and don’t stress about the labels.

Each of my kids was dramatically different even as babies; one wanted a lot more attachment than the other. Both have grown up to be pretty good middle and high-schoolers. Interestingly the one more attached as a baby is more independent now as a teenager. But that could also be a matter of age…..

I am both an attachment parent and a free range parent. Actually the unschooling movement grows out of attachment parenting and you can’t get more free range then that! Attachment parenting isn’t just about cosleeping, breastfeeding and babywearing, it’s about meeting the child’s emotional needs when they occur. In the older years kids crave responsibility and freedom and with a strong base of attachment those kids grow into kids who easily detach from their parents, are fearless, secure and self assured. They’re both very compatible parenting styles because they both give the child what they need to thrive. My attachment parented kids are now 6, 5, 5 and 2 and my twins were SO CLINGY and moody and crabby for their first few years. Now that they’re older they are outgoing, strong, independent little girls. In fact all of my kids are, I love that 🙂

To SLJ, we have adopted an older child and we took an AP focus and responded very quickly to all needs, we also had other adults in his life always bring him to us when he needed something until it was natural for him to look to us to provide for him. Now we are just beginning to give some freedom but it is more on level with what we gave our BC’s when they were two than 5, not because he isn’t capable but because he needs to go through these steps that he missed.

I wouldn’t have thought Free Range is inimical to attachment parenting at all – attachment parenting is about keeping very young children close to help their development, not about hovering over them for their safety. Certainly, as far as I can tell, the Sears see AP as a means of allowing parents to have confidence in their children, and children growing up having it in themselves. NB, I haven’t practised AP myself, though I’ve read up on and found it interesting, and something to bear in mind in my parenting

I hope I don’t upset anybody, Lenore especially, but I most certainly am anti-attachment parenting. I am NOT here to be ugly to anybody, but I am as against attachment parenting as I am helicopter parenting.

As I have said before, my 2 main parenting pundits whom I respect & love to hear opinions from: Lenore Skenazy & John Rosemond. I’ve read the teachings of John Rosemond for even longer than I’ve done so Lenore’s (he actually once wrote an article about her in the “subway alone” aftermath & actually congratulated her for her not succumbing to paranoia or something of that nature). He is very much against anti-attachment parenting, as am I–in the aftermath of the Time Magazine cover, I wrote somewhere: “I’d rather get my parenting advice from John Rosemond than Sears & Roebuck [meaning William Sears] anyday.” And I meant it.

In my opinion, if you are married, your SPOUSE should be first, NOT your kids. Period. As I stated last night: if my kids want to watch Dora but my wife feels like an “adult” movie (not adult as in “dirty” but meaning it’s not Dora the Explorer or Sponge Bob etc) my wife’s preferences win. If the kids feel like McDonald’s but my wife (or I) feel like Italian, then Italian it is. My kids are also expected, if we are watching such a movie and cuddling on the couch spending time with each other, to entertain themselves and to not bother us with anything other than something serious. You don’t dare interrupt us from having husband & wife time on those occasions. By the same token, I am not for having kids watch much TV at all, but I did put a TV in their room (which Rosemond does NOT advise–see, I don’t just do what he says like a robot, in case anyone thinks I do) so that on the very few occasions I do allow “Dora” or “Sponge Bob,” it isn’t shouting in the living room where, frankly, I don’t care to have to listen to it.

Again, I am NOT HERE to bash anybody, and if I am doing so, please forgive me. But just as I am passionate about us letting kids be kids without going nuts with worry, I am also about teaching them that they’re not the center of the universe. Thus: our kids have never slept in our bedroom, not once, not even when they were 3 days home & it was their 1st day home from the hospital. Even when it storms, they STILL sleep in their own room. When a local mother accidentally killed her child by rolling over onto it while it slept in their bed, and they found her guilty of child endangerment (largely because she had 2 years ago lost a child the same way, and yet CONTINUED co-sleeping with her new child), I applauded the decision. I normally am sympathetic to accidents rather than blaming the parents as being negligent, but not in this case–becuase it involved co-sleeping, and because it was the second time. I am sorry: again, forgive me if I am being ugly, but anyone who says their child “needs” to sleep with them, they only THINK they do. The child needs to be broken from that immediately, and if they don’t like it–tough. I don’t for one minute believe someone when they say their spouse is fine with it or that it doesn’t affect their marital relationship–how can it not, when your own bedroom is now occupied by kids old enough to not have any business seeing what 2 heterosexual people are doing in there?

In fact, they were sleeping through the night interrupted by the time they were 3 months old. And yes, we used “cry it out” BIGTIME. A cry because you’re hungry–fine, because you have gas, sure. But crying because you wish to be held 24/7 & skip the napping, and you think I’m going to rock you to sleep? Heck no. If I had to, I even used an MP3 player to drown out the noise, even going outside & playing basketball in the yard during those moments.

The minute my kids were old enough to eat real food vs baby food or breast-feed, they were put on it, no complaining allowed (they didn’t complain anyway, but had they done so–oh well). Again, I am sorry if I am preaching, and I hope I am not out-of-line by turning this thread into the “John Rosemond Sermon” or something like that, but one of his main principles is that we should not do for a child what they are fully capable of doing for themselves, and when our son was capable of eating real food vs having it done for him, the expectation was held to. Besides, they ended up liking real food better anyway. We taught them to use forks & spoons early on (age-appropriate, not at 3 months obviously)

For the most part, I am all for NOT bashing people, and I hope I am not bashing anyone personally. Any opinions shared should be out of love, not out of condemnation (unless we’re talking about molestation etc). I am just saying I am strongly of the opinion that all of this wearing a baby on a sling, having them sleep with you until they’re 8 almost, letting them have the run of what’s on TV watching “The Lion King” 3011 times in a row, making all of your time be about them and not enough about your marriage–it’s not what I think is right, period. To me, anyway, Free Range goes hand-in-hand with this–you teach them to fend for themselves age-appropriate, you let them play outside without going nuts with worry–you do this because it’s good for them in terms of development, but it’s also good for the parents to not have kids “underfoot” 24/7 and dominating their attention so much their spouse ends up feeling neglected.

My 2 cents worth, and again, I hope I’m not attacking anyone PERSONALLY, that is NOT my intention.

LRH

I think whatever works for a given family is what is best. My only beef with the AP crowd (or maybe it’s their fringe) is the gloom and doom they connect with other parenting choices. Like, letting your kid cry a little at night will cause irreversible brain damage and more (but it’s OK to let them “express themselves” in every other time and place).

I think even most free-range parents don’t try much free-ranging before their child is mature enough to, say, cross a street alone. At that point, most of the AP pros and cons are moot.

@LRH: But why should I have to choose between my spouse and my baby? Can’t I cuddle with my spouse and nurse my baby in the night at the same time? Can’t I nurse my baby while I have dinner with my spouse? Why not keep the baby in our bedroom, if everybody is getting good sleep? Also, small babies generally sleep really, really soundly no matter what is going on in the room. Just sayin’.

Nobody comes first in my house. It’s not a race.

Also just wanted to add, as an MIT grad, that a kid going to Harvard is my worst nightmare. Shudder. If attachment parenting leads to that, I’ll never hug my kids again, LOL.

I’m with Jenny Islander here-Nobody comes first because it is not a race.

@SKL-crying a little at night is one thing, but crying to sleep every night is another. http://www.askdrsears.com/topics/fussy-baby/science-says-excessive-crying-could-be-harmful explains why and has peer reviewed journals in the bibliography backing up what he says.

The AP parents I know do not allow their kids to run wild. I most certainly don’t. At airports I will find polite ways for my kid to release energy so she won’t be a mess when we actually get on the plane. I’ve threatened to get up and leave a place if she doesn’t stop x behavior. I do enforce boundaries because neither she, nor I are the center of the universe. Discipline is very important in raising children. AP /=helicopter parenting. AP /= out of control children.

Quick (and brief, I hope) follow-up (and I hope there are no typos, I saw a few in my prior post):

SKL I agree. Even if the opinions are right, when everyone from here to eternity goes beyond just being helpful & giving tips and it starts becoming about them TELLING you want to do and acting like you’re Hussein for not doing it their way–that is NOT right. My own mother does that sometimes (more on that in a bit) & others sure do as well. The ones who would call social services over it–to me, they’re not just annoying, they’re nothing short of evil. Regardless, the #1 most important thing to me above & beyond all of this–the respect of parental authority & sovereignity. (I’ll repeat that again in a bit.)

The “fringe” AP’ers as you call them (meaning I am NOT referring to parents who use certain AP principles) acting like your child will have brain damage & not know you love it because you dare to expect it to sleep in its own room & on a schedule–it’s nuts. Our children all the time come up to me and mommy, open their arms and say “I love you”–and how can we say no to that? We don’t, and these are the same 2 kids who have not once slept in our rooms, and these are the same 2 kids whom we “shoo” away from us if we’re having the “couch time” I spoke of.

I do agree with BMS as well. I have to be careful lest I try and “convert” people to the “John Rosemond” style of parenting myself. In my case, I make it a point to not dare be ugly or judgmental. I do state that I think AP is just plain wrong period in terms of the kids being overly attached to the parents so much that it’s suffocating, but beyond that–I recognize & respect that what style someone chooses, whatever it is & whatever it’s called, it is THEIR BUSINESS. Most of all it is their RIGHT. The #1 thing that I think must be respected–parental soveriegnity. Even if I don’t agree with co-sleeping or baby-slinging & speak against it philosophically, I must even more than this stand up for the RIGHTS of parents to do what they think is right without governmental interference or nastiness. You can say what you think is right, but TONE is important–you must do it from a standpoint of respect & love, not snotty judgmentalism and with a superior attitude.

If I have trouble doing this, all I have to do is remember my mother. She tends to go against much of what we believe, especially free-range, even though she did free-range with me when I was little–how many of us can relate to that here? Anyway, she has a tendency to be rather judgmental and nasty in expressing her beliefs, rather than just offering her tips and stating what she thinks is right & wrong but strongly respecting that we as the parents are the ones to make the call. It digusts and angers me (enough I’ve sent her home a time or two over it), and if I don’t want it done to me, I can’t do so to anyone else either. I can state that I think such & such is right and wrong, but I must do so from an angle of respect & not trying to condemn people PERSONALLY–it must about the PRINCIPLES, not the PEOPLE, and it can’t be ugly in tone.

Jenny Islander If that works for you guys, that is your right. I would NEVER dare infringe upon it, and anyone who would do so is wrong. I would just say that I think the boundary should be drawn even in breast-feeding cases, there’s ways to work around it (pump into bottles, set the alarm for 3 hours, get up feed them, go back to bed), the reason I say this–as a general rule, when the time comes to “make the break” (that is, transition the child to their own room), it tends to be a nasty state of affairs, whereas if you establish separate rooms as the status quo from day one, it goes much easier. That’s just my observation. I’ve seen it too many times to think otherwise, but again, no condemnation coming from here. As I said, the #1 most important thing–you’re the parent, you get to decide, not me or anyone else, even if I or whoever doesn’t necessarily agree with it, that you are the one who gets to make the call is the most important thing of all.

LRH

“I had moms telling me how it was possible to induce lactation for my adopted kids and I should really consider it.”

I had that too. I care about well-being, and I also care about ease, choice, and autonomy. I’ve seen women doing the assisted lactation thing with the tubes, etc, and I don’t try to talk them out of it. I wish I hadn’t had a particular LLL mom wax rhapsodic to me about the possibilities of assisted lactation for my adopted son. Sigh.

Attachment parenting is not only very compatible with Free Range parenting, but it makes it more likely. Attachment parenting means meeting your baby’s needs and it leads to independent self-assured children. I’m an attachment parent and the others that I know are also not in to helicoptering. If you helicopter, it’s because you don’t know your child well enough to know her/his limits, desires, and abilities. I know those things about my child and I feel very confident in giving her the freedom that she needs.

Please don’t anyone buy into the myth that attachment parenting has anything whatsoever with being overprotective. They’re not related.

Again one mama you have the right to do that as you see fit, you are the parent, not me. I’m not condemning people. That said, while you & the others said “it is not a race,” I have seen where it becomes one later–you & your spouse want to eat out for Italian, but the kids are whining for McDonald’s. You & your spouse feel like an adult movie rated PG but your kids want to watch “Dora.” You feel like time alone with your husband on your anniversary but your kids are being clingy.

Too many parents, in those sorts of cases, go along with what the kids wants. I’m saying I would not, and we do not, we tend to do what WE want (obviously we do give them SOME of what they want in small doses here & there). It’s just the nature of kids, especially as they get older, to want all of the attention, it’s part of the blueprint that humans, even little ones, are inherently selfish. We once attended a parenting class, and even the TEACHER of the parenting class said babies can be “master manipulators,” they learn that every time they cry the parents drop everything & tend to them, so they will thus cry even when they don’t really NEED anything so as to get all the attention.

What I am talking about is simply recognizing that and drawing boundaries that declare–no, precious little one, you are NOT the center of this. We as a married couple, WE ARE, yet we love you & we will care for your needs. But WE call the shots.

But again, parental sovereignty is the #1 priority of all. Still, that doesn’t mean you can’t disagree with certain philosophies.

LRH

Dear LRH,
You are right to do whatever you see fit for you and your husband. I don’t want to criticize your parental choices, I would just like to explain (for the sake of debate) that generalizing your personal observation to all attachment parenting is not accurate.

I have more than 1 year of parenting, my oldest is 8 years old. We go to McDonalds but he’s also perfectly capable to sit through a restaurant meal without “whining”. We can go out anytime we want, he doesn’t mind being left with a babysitter or even (gasp!) alone.

I prefer to treat children as I myself would like to be treated, they are worthy of my respect just because they are human beings.
I choose to look at my kids not as selfish, master manipulators, but as human beings who do their best with the limited knowledge and skills they have. If my 2 year old is asking for attention, I will nurse her. If my 8 year old wants attention, I will play a game of cards with him if I have time, if not, I can just tell him to go read a book. Obviously, when they call me during the night, I can make the difference between a hysterical 2 y/o and a 8 y/o who just doesn’t want to go to bed. Imposing limits and gentle discipline are part of AP. But I prefer being authoritative, not being authoritarian.

Again, this is just for debate’s sake. I’m not justifying my choices, and I’m convinced you aren’t either.

@Balancing Jane, I really agree. My parenting and relationship style is based on mutual respect. I model that respect by showing respect for myself, my partner and my child. Sometimes that means respecting that my child has irrational fears that need to be comforted in the middle of the night. I don’t see that normal childhood irrationality as manipulation

I’m sure that crying all night, every night (or all day, every day for that matter) is bad for babies. You don’t have to be “AP” to know that. I’m talking about people who insist that even one incident of crying that is “not responded to” (for 5-10 minutes) is going to have permanent horrible effects on every child that it happens to. Come on. And that’s just one example.

If people want to feel superior, that’s great. Feel all you want. I do too at times. But recognize when you’ve crossed the line into obnoxious judgment of others.

Nanci nailed it, insomuch that schedules was what we did, and more than that–the idea was for our child to fit into our lives, not have our lives revolve around them. Again, I am not criticizing others saying “you’re spoiling that kid,” I’m just saying that’s our philosophical approach to it–schedules when they were infants with the idea of molding them into our lives, not vice versa, & giving them a sense of boundaries that we & they both need.

And like SKL just said–yes, we can feel superior all we want to, but at some point if one isn’t careful, it can cross the line into being obnoxious judgment of others. Shame on me if I do this. Again, I’ve been on the receiving end of it–one lady scolded me for having our baby out & about in a stroller but without mosquito netting all around it–she didn’t delicately suggest it, she SCOLDED. You can guess how that went–I thanked her & said “I sure wish the hospital had told me of the need for it,” she replied with a sneer “that’s just common sense,” my reply “well it’s also common courtesy to mind your own business.”

I think that is the sort of thing Lenore is talking about, it certainly is the point I hope I’m making. We can argue all we want about the philosophies & parents should be receptive to well-intended wisdom being offered–however, we shouldn’t be attacking any PERSONS and bashing any PERSONS. Even if someone is doing something wrong in your eyes or mine, they mean well–and “the road to hell is paved with good intentions” is not a proper rebuttal by which you can then continue to smack them over the head with an ugly tone. To me, tone is EVERYTHING.

LRH

LRH, if you are married, your spouse should come first. I am fine with that. But that also means that both spouses need to come to the aid of the other.

Nursing, unfortunately, is primarily the mother’s job. Even if she pumps, she still has to take time to do that. It is not something the husband can just do. Feeding the child however, is something that both can do, provided the baby is of an age to not be confused by bottle vs nipple (unless that was a wives tale I was told.)

My husband did NOT want to up at night taking over a feeding. He was grumpy and grouchy. If I got up at night to sit in the living room, I could not get back to sleep. I was grumpy and grouchy. Neither of this was fair or considerate of the other spouse. The compromise was that baby went in cradle and mom and dad got snuggle time for the first part of the night. Then, late in the night when baby woke up, baby came and ate and slept in the bed.

This was our way of respecting the needs of each other. I didn’t wake him up so that he would be grouchy the next day. I got the sleep that I needed so that I was not grouchy the next day (and could do things like drive a car safely.) And, baby got fed. That baby got fed was almost the last consideration.

Overall though, my parenting is what works for us. I assign no titles nor seek any. Many of the things I did when kids were young were attachment style, because that worked for us. Yes, babies can cry. They will be fine. It was me on womanly hormones that couldn’t handle a crying baby. Those hormones effect each woman differently, and we have to respect that. As my children get older, if they cry in the night, you bet I am there – usually with a bucket. I have learned that once they sleep through the night, if they are awake and crying, there is a good reason, and personally, I hate cleaning up vomit at 3 am. Call me lazy or not giving them enough freedom, but that is how it is until they learn to recognize the signs they need to get to the toilet to vomit.

I practiced attachment parenting when my kids were babies, toddlers, and preschoolers. I breastfed all of them to 3.5years – 4 years. I co slept with them till around preschool. It has made them very confident and independent as older kids. My twins second grade year they approached me to sign them up for a week long GS summer overnight camp. I let them do it. They have been staying home alone for periods of time since they were 8. My youngest is 7 and I have let the 12 yo sisters babysit her. I might actually be pushing the line according to our County’s advice. However, the girls are so good and could handle it – I let them.

I consider myself a free range parent as my older two are heading into middle school and my rising second grader.

I free range as much as the US will legally let me w/o getting visits from CPS. You know. I was highly criticized for breastfeeding for so long. I am always doing what I feel is best for the kids.

Besides – free ranging a baby/toddler does not apply. You can not free range a person that is totally dependent on you for everything. Developmental needs should never be ignored based on a parents desire not to get up in the middle of the night.

I am happy to say that I have 12 year old daughters that have long gotten over that stage and a 7 yo that did the same.

Their developmental needs now are – they need to be let be. They will need my support forever but they now need to know how to and be able to function without me around. I am happy to say that I keep my distance and am probably the antithesis to a Helicopter mom.

I am sure there are AP parents that do not transition to this but there are parents of all styles that can not bring themselves to let go.

It is funny when I was co-sleeping with my newborns I got the “Aren’t you scared you are going to roll over on them?” yadda yadda yadda.
I was not scared – just like I was not scared of sending the twins to overnight camp the summer after their second grade year. I knew they could do it when they asked. I never got a call from camp from them. Yet I did answer every single cry in the middle of the night when they were infants. I

Lauren There is nothing to be upset about. I am expressing an opinion, nothing more.

I will say that when you mention “but I need to behave in a way that deserves respect”–I am fine with a parent not being a jerk, but that said, the way I see it & was brought up, the parent is ENTITLED to respect based solely on that they are the parent. Behavior has nothing to do with it. Obviously for extreme exceptions like molesting etc, that is not the case, otherwise–that my parents were the parents meant they were entitled to respect by that very definition. The same applied to the various aunts & uncles.

When you say that baby slinging & breastfeeding seeimingly until forever aren’t designed with co-dependence in mind–I am sure that is how you are intending to approach it, and you may even be successful–it sure isn’t my place or another’s to judge you. However, I think that such practices inheriently are prone to producing co-dependency in general. Just as those who co-sleep, I’m sure they aren’t doing thinking “I am so looking forward to Max still calling me about tummy aches when he’s 35,” of course not. And there have been many here who say they co-sleep and have had no problems long-term. I just tend to believe that as a GENERAL rule it’s asking for it. Therefore, I don’t and would never do any of them.

I’m just saying this is what I believe to be right and it’s what we do–but again, as Lenore says, there should be no condemnation just because someoen else does these things the supposedly “wrong” way .

Getting back to parents being entitled to respect–this is something I have to remind my own mother about–you can dislike how my wife or I parent or disagree with whatever, but you should be respectful because, no matter what you think of some of what she does and I do, we are your grandchildren’s parents. We both are ENTITLED to respect from you I don’t give a flip what you think of us personally or our habits. If this sounds inconsistent–I say that parents are entitled to respect while I’m saying how my own mother upsets me at times–it’s because there’s a difference when it’s parent-on-little child vs parent-on-grown child. A parent talking to their grown child should not treat them as if they are still 5 years old. Much of my complaining regarding my mother revolves on how she relates to me know when I’m a freaking grown man, not things she did when I was a child. Believe me, I intend to, as our children grow up, realize this & adjust accordingly.

Part of my attitude, too, comes from this whole “attachment disorder” psychobabble I hear about–I think it is just that, psychobabble. Supposedly you have to do all of this voodoo weirdo stuff or else your child may have “radical attachment disorder” (they even have an acronym for it, RAD) or may not “bond” with you. If you let your child cry it out, you’re communicating to them you don’t care. If you don’t run into their room at 3 in the morning to answer a cry that is based on pure nonsense, you’re telling them you don’t care about them. Puh-leaze. To me it’s nothing more than people who use it as a tool to criticize parents who parent in a more “50s way” (as we do) and make them feel like they’re not good enough. It’s about undermining parental authority & telling us we’re supposed to tailor-make our life to be about what our KIDS are telling us, rather than realizing we’re the grown-ups WE’RE the ones that know what’s going on, compared to us the kids don’t know squat.

Not be a John Rosemond mouthpiece, but as he once said, people in prior generations didn’t regard parenting as being all that hard, it’s only more RECENT ones that act as if parenting is just so hard & you have to do it oh so right or else you’re going to ruin them. As Lenore said herself (not that she’s endorsing John Rosemond you understand), there shouldn’t be so much pressure to do it the “right way” or else think your kids are going to turn out horribly.

“Developmental needs should never be ignored based on a parents desire not to get up in the middle of the night.” Of course. When ours were infants & they still needed midnight feedings, I set an alarm to make sure the need was handled. But that’s different–the thing is, don’t try and convince me that an 8-month old bawling in the middle of the night because its parents aren’t there is a “need.” If that’s a “need,” then I need expensive wine and a hot tub. The child only THINKS it needs it (which doesn’t mean the child is bad or evil, but they are wrong), as the parent, I know better, and maybe my child doesn’t know better, I DON’T CARE, I DO and I’m the parent, so I make the call–nope, you don’t need me, I’m going back to sleep–thank God your room is on the other end of the house & I sleep with the fan on (even in winter) so I won’t hear you once I turn off this baby monitor. Click.

LRH

Eh. I think it is a non-issue as well. At the end of the day, your parenting is a combination of your personality, your child’s personality, and your circumstances. While I try to meet the needs of my kids now, I also try to bear in mind that they need to be taught how to navigate in this world and that includes having a sense of community, responsibility, and an ability to navigate in social situations (aka – patience, empathy, and manners).

Well again we all have our opinions & points of view etc, but yes, to me, a 8 month old crying at 3 a.m. is equivalent to a hot tub & a glass of wine–heck a BOTTLE of wine. Communicating a need at 3 in the morning? Heck no, not a chance. I know enough to know the only thing that is “wrong” is they want attention. That’s it. That’s certainly been my experience & observation. I think maybe one time when we all got up at 8 a.m or so one of them had a small fever of about 101’F or so and it passed with a small dosage of childern’s Tylenol. End of story. Not once has it been that we got up & found them choked to death rapped around strings from the blinds or what have you.

If other people want to entertain those sorts of childish foolishness at 3 in the morning, fine, that’s your choice. Me, I’ve heard too many people complain about how their kids kept them up all night being fussy over nothing & the parents got no sleep. Others said they got no sleep because the kids got up at 4 in the morning wanting to play, & they looked at me like I was Saddam Hussein when I suggested they send them back to their room, make it to where the kids physically can’t get out of the room (I’m serious), go back to bed & get your sleep–they’ll be fine. Oh no, you can’t DARE do that, something might happen. (This is a free-range site: does this sound familiar?)

No thank you.

LRH

@LRH: My question to is this: When you’re old and feeble, and your kids are taking care of you, do you want and expect to be treated the way you treat them? When you have a concern do you want to be locked in your room until your kids are ready to deal with you?

LRH — you’re mischaracterizing attachment parenting, and knocking down a straw man.
“That said, while you & the others said “it is not a race,” I have seen where it becomes one later—you & your spouse want to eat out for Italian, but the kids are whining for McDonald’s. You & your spouse feel like an adult movie rated PG but your kids want to watch “Dora.” You feel like time alone with your husband on your anniversary but your kids are being clingy.”

That has nothing to do with attachment parenting. That’s indulgent, permissive parenting. It is perfectly possible to be an AP parent and still discipline your children. And, one of the guidelines of AP is BALANCE, meaning that the child’s needs are not the center of the universe — that the parents’ needs must be considered as well. No martyrdom! I agree with you that the child should not be center of the family and that parents should have time for each other; I think that contributes to having happy, secure children. But there’s a big difference between always meeting a child’s NEEDS (which is what AP is to me) and always meeting their WANTS (which is not AP).

Anyway, I’m not a fan of being too focused on a particular ‘parenting style’, but I find most of AP just common sense. For instance, my mother, my grandmother, my great-grandmother all breast-fed on demand for a year plus. I’m happy to come from that legacy and to offer the same to my own little ones. Co-sleeping and baby-wearing make life easier on mom as well as meeting baby’s needs (and obviously, one cannot spoil a newborn). In a similar vein, free range parenting also just makes sense to me.

@July, how can you say that AP doesn’t mean that “the child’s needs are not the center of the universe” when part of AP is a refusal to have the child sleep in his own bed in his own room?

You know, the subject of this post was not about whether everyone thinks attachment parenting is good or not. It was about whether Lenore needs to care about it or address it in light of the Free Range philosophy. I think she made a very excellent case why she needs to do neither — why can’t we just leave it at that? Not everyone here cares whether LRH likes attachment parenting or not — I don’t even understand why that became a necessary part of the conversation, because it’s not relevant to the topic.

And I say this as someone who is not personally a fan of AP but thinks it is not inimical to Free Range parenting and does not feel a need to have a public opinion about the fine details of how other people lovingly, non-neglectfully and non-abusively raise their kids.

“Besides, one main difference is an 8 month old screaming at 3 in the morning over nothing is not a “concern,” it’s childish foolishness.”

How do you know that it is nothing unless you get up to check? When my brother was about 2, he was having an issue with getting out of bed and wandering around the house at night. He was put in bed one night and told that he was not to leave his bed. During the night he tried to get his parents attention but they ignored him, thinking him just up to his same stuff. Instead he had gotten out a toy toolbox with toy washers in it (I’m sure this toy has been recalled and is no longer made). One of the toy washers got stuck on his finger. By morning, his finger was so swollen that he had to go to the hospital to have the washer cut off with the ring cutter. A problem that could have been solved in 2 minutes for free at midnight took an entire morning and few hundred dollar hospital bill to resolve instead.

It ain’t always childish foolishness that have them up at 3 am.

Many seem to be saying that attachment parenting leads to free range parenting because it is about understanding your child. Without debating that issue, that idea misses the point. Much of helicopter parenting is based on thinking that there is a pedophile hiding behind every bush and every man is a potential threat. There is nothing about a specific type of parenting that dictates that head-space. Nor is that head-space limited to a particular parenting style.

That is why the entire attachment/free range parenting argument (for or against) completely boggles my mind. Nothing about breast v bottle, sling v stroller or CIO v cosleeping in any way, shape or form addresses your view of the dangerousness of the world outside. Attachment parents are not more or less likely than conventional parents to view the world as a dangerous place. Conventional parents are not more or less likely than attachment parents to think every man is a potential threat. Your head is either there or it isn’t.

@SaraLu, with AP the child sleeps wherever they need to sleep for the entire family to sleep well. If the entire family sleeps better with the child in a different bed/room, let it be. If the entire family sleeps better in the same bed, let it be.

@Donna: Thank you for that note of sanity. I’ve been trying to figure out this debate and I think you nailed it.

To me parenting is about trust, communication, and respect. You need to have all 3, bi-directional, to have a good relationship with your kids.

I work really hard at keeping those 3 elements intact with my kids.

So far so good but it takes a lot of work on all sides to keep it going. Free range stuff is a part of it.

For me, both AP and FR are about trusting my kids and trusting my own instincts. When they are infants, I trust that they are not seeking to manipulate me, that they have legitimate needs and knowledge about themselves to communicate to me if I am attentive and responsive. I trust my own instinct about what my child is or isn’t capable of, and how I can be there to help him discover his own resilience and ability.

When they are older, I trust that they can be responsible and safe without my constant vigilance. I trust that neither my children nor the world are out to deceive me or harm them. I trust that they have legitimate abilities, needs, and knowledge to communicate to me if I am attentive and responsive – and that includes the knowledge that they *don’t* need me as much as they used to. I trust my own instinct about what my child is or isn’t capable of, and how I can help him discover his own resilience and ability.

In my life, AP has been about letting go of fear – fear of spoiling my children, fear that they will take a mile if given an inch, fear that they will take my life from me if I give them my time. FR has been a similar letting-go of fear – fear that they will do too much, go too far, and be hurt, that if I give them a little freedom they will become reckless or careless, that they will take my heart from me if I give them their own time.

I don’t see any incompatibility. 🙂

I just got a brilliant idea. I’m going to start keeping a log of all the things I’ve done (and failed to do) that are theorized to cause problems for my kids. This will help them to get a start on their Mommy Dearest-esque novel and ensure I get some of the royalties in my old age.

Whenever someone complains about some aspect of my parenting, I quip that every kid needs some reason to hate their mom during the hormonal stage. At least I’m being a little proactive about what they’ll blame me for.

When people continue to raise their eyebrows, I assure them “I love kids . . . with ketchup.”

Some folks need a new hobby!

Our neighbor kid used to cry for ages, starting at exactly 10pm every night. I could have set my watch by it. They weren’t doing CIO but “responding to her needs” every time she wailed. Finally they moved away. For all I know the kid still hollers every night.

I just count my blessings – my kids didn’t have sleep issues to speak of. It probably would have killed me to lose that much sleep.

LRH I agree. One thing I hate hearing is parents that say they demand feed. No way my child is ever going to “demand” anything, they’ll wait! I understand of course that these parents are talking about small babies that do not yet understand that they are being demanding. But by giving them what they want whenever they fuss for it right from the beginning you are setting yourself up for a toddler/child that will demand what they want. Don’t even get me started on the parents that only feed their kids mac and cheese and nuggets ’cause “that’s all they will eat”!

@Nanci: I don’t like using the term “demand feeding” for an infant because it does set up the association between feeding a hungrythirstytense baby and placating a demanding brat. “Cue feeding” is more accurate. Baby experiences hunger, thirst, and/or tension and produces the cue that tells the adult that it is time to provide food, water, and/or a mild sedative, all of which are delivered in breastmilk in a neat package, with other comfort measures substituting for the sedative while bottle feeding. Feeding the baby the instant the cue is produced, if possible, eliminates the tension, provides what is needed for rest and growth, and can head off a lot of crying. (For non-parents reading along, the cue to feed is not actually a cry. It begins as restlessness with rooting after milk and generally does not escalate to a cry for a minute or two. But every baby is different.) It does not teach infants that they can make people jump.

Infants are only dimly aware that other people exist separately from them and they have no idea that there are other minds out there that can be manipulated. Understanding of social cues grows quickly, of course, and before they are a year old babies generally understand that, for example, bouncing and grinning will get people to drop what they are doing and say, “Awww.” But I have never in all my life seen a baby fake hunger, thirst, or upsetness in an attempt to make people jump.

Personally I don’t see the point in making somebody wait who can’t even understand the word “wait” in order to teach them a lesson about waiting. How are they going to know that they are supposed to be learning not to demand things when they can’t even say “dada,” much less “please?” That lesson is better introduced after the child learns to talk.

@Jenny Islander-good post! I agree! While I was never able to breastfeed, I did feed my kids when they were hungry. it never took long for them to put themselves on a schedule. I never had a need to force them to wait or anything. It was always every 2 hrs, then every 4 hours when they got a little older. No work needed on my part to make a feeding schedule, I’ve never understood that. They knew when they were hungry. When they got old enough to no longer need night feedings then I stopped them. There is a distinctly different cry between a child who is hungry and a child who is fussing out of habit. I’ve, also, never seen an infant fuss just to fuss. Nor a toddler for that matter. And with the toddler, it’s often easy to put a stop to by teaching them ways to handle their emotions or fix what they view as being wrong than ignore them. Ignoring a child when they are trying to vocalize a need or frustration is a missed chance at teaching them valuable lessons.

I think some people have lost sight of the fact that it’s actually good for the child if you teach him respect. It can be very easy to ignore disrespectful behavior when they are little and cute and not able to actually control anything. As a parent, if I get sick of my kid’s attitude there are many things I can do about it, up to and including throwing him out of the house once he gets too big for me to push around. So there’s no big emergency from my side as far as teaching respect. But not having a sense of awe for the parent leaves a child confused and insecure, which are developmentally problematic at a young age.

I do believe you can teach respect as an AP. You can feed a child “on cue” and still teach respect. Just like you can feed a child on a schedule and still teach that you care for him.

LRH, your story about your 10mo made me chuckle because it reminded me of mine, but for the wrong reasons. (This is mostly off topic.) My daughter was just home from foster care and she ate very little. When she did eat, it was an ounce at a time (age 12mos). Once in a while she’d make a sucking motion with her mouth and it was clearly a communication, which I took to mean “I’m hungry.” So I’d go into the kitchen to prep her formula and she’d start hollering, louder and louder. Even as I was coming with the bottle in plain view, the screaming would escalate. It made me nuts. (Being just adopted, it would not have been appropriate to “punish” her, but one time I did say rather loudly, “NO MORE.”) A long time later, I realized that the sucking motion really meant “I want my furry stuffed animal.” No wonder she was upset.

I have a book that I heard the title of and avoided like the plague, but enough people I have a sense of shared reality with recommended it so I relented and read it. I am very glad I did, and I’d like to recommend to everyone here: it’s called “Hold on to Your Kids” by Gordon Neufeld and Gabor Mate.

It falls under the “label” of “attachment parenting,” and I was afraid it was going to be advocating a lot of the über-closeness stuff that I skipped when my kids were very small. Instead, it’s about kids at the early Free-Range age on up to adulthood, and how helpful it is to stay warmly connected with them as they go out into the world, form other relationships, etc.

True confession: I didn’t really enjoy the “dependence” phase of parenting, where my kids needed to rely on me for their very survival. I didn’t enjoy what I perceived as a yawning chasm of need on their part, with no sign of support or end in sight for me. When people would cluck their tongues and say, “Enjoy this age! It goes so fast!” I would secretly want to scream and though ruefully, “More like watching paint dry.” I knew I would be the type of mom that ushered by kids outside to play by themselves, not just for their own development, but for my sense of balance and sanity in life. I chalk this up to a dire lack of community in my life. I still say we were not meant to raise young children separately from other people, locked away in our little homesteads, and especially not as single parents.

Anyway, I was in a big hurry to have my son go do things with his friends. His friends, his friends, his friends. What I’d remembered from my own childhood was playing with kids up the road. This option wasn’t available because of the way things play out these days with so much organized activity for kids, so it was “play dates.” My dream was that my son would have a playdate pretty much every day. I wanted his bored, sassy butt out of the house and I wanted him to run around, and not with me.

After a few years of this, the predictable result was that he didn’t really want to be close to me, he didn’t want to give me respect. He went a bit nuts when he was apart from his friends and seemed to feel almost a sense of revulsion around home. I chalked it up to being a pre-teen, but when I read that book, I realized that I had not really supported my kid’s healthy development, I had foisted him onto his peers, and he had started to look to them to meet his needs instead of me.

If you think that sounds like a good thing, what it really meant was no cooperation at home, and the harder I came down on him, the worse it got. The answer was NOT more discipline. The answer was connection.

So there is an “attachment” concept that advocates for keeping parents, and other adults who share their values, firmly in the kid’s heart so they can aspire to grow up, not sideways. How many parents, myself included, struggle with how much texting, instant messaging, and obsessing their kids seem to do with and about their peers? It’s not the technology, necessarily. It’s not the age, necessarily. It’s the connection between parent and child, and if it’s strong, there is so much more harmony at home.

I’ve come a long way with my son in the year since I read that book. I took it to heart, and though my son is free ranging farther than ever, we are closer than ever, I use less “discipline” and yet he is far more involved and cooperative. I understand that having him “on his own” a bit doesn’t mean throwing him into the mosh pit of fellow pre-teens without tether and then wondering why he’s got such a surly, uncooperative attitude at home.

Just a thought.

One of my favorites words & concepts in many sectors of life, is this simple yet startling concept: balance. It’s basically about avoiding extremes, and it covers so much.

What this means is basically don’t take things to an extreme. Don’t take free-range to such an extreme you let a ONE year old ride the subway alone. Don’t take discipline to such an extreme it sounds like boot camp around your house all the time. Don’t take attachment to such an extreme that you eat-drink-burp-wee`wee-marinate your kids 24/7 & they view you as their chief playmate. Don’t take work so seriously you never do anything fun anymore, don’t take fun so seriously you never work anymore.

I try & do that. When I draw a line, I hold to it, but I try to not let parenting be ALL about that. I play with them, but I do so in small dosages, I should not be their chief playmate, that should be kids their own age mostly. Yet, at the same time, it shouldn’t be a cold-distant relationship either.

All of that said, I know enough about AP to know it isn’t for me, and I don’t advocate it for anybody, but I don’t condemn anyone who uses it–and if your kids have turned out okay as you’re doing things, right on. I know that I like things to be to where my children pretty much fit into my world as-is vs my life being flipped upside down because they’re here & now it’s all about them. Sure there are changes, there will be, but I will be darned if my house is going to blare “Dora” 24/7 and I never get to do the fun things I did pre-kids (if it’s less often, fine, so long as it isn’t 95% gone)

I know enough to know that I don’t like my nieces-nephews being so clingy to me when they’re here. I appreciate that they like me, but at the same time, when I was growing up, I remembered mostly playing with my cousins. My aunts/uncles etc, sure I knew them & had moments with them, but most of my time was with my COUSINS. The adults facilitated the entertainment, they weren’t the actual entertainment. It should be likewise here–play with my kids, not with me so much.

When I was single & dating, I used to strongly dislike dating most single-moms, because they were SO tethered to their kids it was ridiculous. The TV was always, always, ALWAYS blaring what the kids liked, and the child clung to mom like he couldn’t take a breath without her telling him how to do it & holding said child next to her every last second. Granted, a single mother is not the same as a childless one obviously, but still I couldn’t help but think–heaven forbid we see an adult movie & tell Junior to go play in his room for more than 5 milliseconds No disrespect, but this is OUR time, your kid has you to himself every other minute when you’re not at work, I frankly would appreciate you paying attention to ME during that time–again, not to the point of neglect of your kids, but as it is, I’m being neglected.

If the child was somewhat blending in to what we were doing, and then we threw him or her a bone after awhile by treating them to ice cream or something, sure, but when it’s more a thing that mom & kid are doing very “Dora” and “Happy Meal” sorts of things & I’m just there, heck no. If that’s romance, then I’ve got a bridge in Tierro Del Fuego I’ll sell you.

I couldn’t help but think–this is probably why you’re a single mom, the last guy probably got tired of being neglected and moved on. But of course, such guys like us are characterized as “jerks” and “self-centered” naturally. Oh, and we have “issues” because “you dare come between a single mother & her flesh and blood.” Yeah sure, if you say so.

I married someone without kids, and our kids are all ours, & she is of the “let them go play alone for awhile, I need some alone time for me” (or we need some alone time for us), it makes it so much easier.

LRH

@LHR You start out saying: “I am NOT here to be ugly to anybody”. Good thing you stated that to begin with, because considering your last comment about the single moms you dated, I wondering how ugly you’re capable of becoming when you don’t restrain yourself.
I find you extremely self-centred and completely lacking in empathy in your comments…

…sort of the outcome I tried to avoid in my children by using an AP-like approach (though it was so long ago, I didn’t even know it had a label)

LRH, ha ha. Single mom here! I don’t date. I have precious little time with my kids as it is. I have absolutely no time for the complex matter of sifting through the available men out there, arranging childcare at odd hours, and explaining such a “relationship” to my kids while it’s in the works. But that’s OK, I rather like being a single mom. Nobody to argue with over how to manage my kids, my money, my time, what’s for dinner, etc.

Why would a single guy want to date a single mom, anyway, if he was gonna get jealous of her “family time”?

I had 40 years to look for Mr. Right and I didn’t find him. Now it’s time for me to do right by my kids. And if I ever do get a little down time away from my kids, job, and other responsibilities, I’m gonna spend that time recharging, not looking for some other needy person to suck my last calorie out of me. I have to take mega-vitamins as it is. Gimme a break. Just thinking about dating makes me want to go take a nap.

Not sure what any of that has to do with FRK! My parents were married, but they saved their “adult time” for when the kids were in bed, or the very occasional evening out with a babysitter at home. Didn’t stop us from being extremely FRK by today’s standards. (Granted, we didn’t watch Dora. We watched the lame shows my mom liked, like the Incredible Hulk and Wonder Woman, which I found stupid even then. Maybe that’s why I don’t even turn the TV on around here. Hate stupid shows. DESPISE Dora.)

It could be argued that if someone feels “neglected” because at the end of the work day his girlfriend or wife doesn’t turn her attention from the kids to focus entirely on him quickly enough, said spouse has taken on the role of another dependent child whose needs must be immediately (not even eventually, but the moment the work day ends) met, and that therefore it is not the actual children in the household who need to grow up.

It could also be argued that rather than adding such a partner to one’s household, it’s worth holding out for a partner whose response, on seeing his wife consumed with child care at the end of the day, is not to say “hey, what about me?” but “here, let me give you a break.”

Well, LRH, you do make a lot of assumptions. Most single moms don’t tell their children if they are dating, at least until it gets “very serious” (as in, we’re planning to get married). There is no need to complicate a child’s life when the mom doesn’t know if it will come to anything or not. So it isn’t a matter of my kid having an attitude about my private life. No, that isn’t her place, but that does not mean she won’t be thinking about it if she has an inkling. For the record, my kids have expressed that they’d like me to get married so they could have a dad. Even so, I would never “get their hopes up” without being pretty darn sure about the man. That’s not a time when “suck it up, kid” is appropriate.

Honestly, I think a mom who involves her kids early on in her dating life is trashy. (Yes, I made a judgment. Shoot me.)

I understand the sentiment that a family should have two parents, an adult should have a life partner, etc. I have nothing against the ideal I just don’t have time to worry about that. Some people never meet their Prince Charming and that’s just the way it is. Always has been. No point being miserable about it.

My mom (who has been happily married for 50+years) commented that it’s men who really need a help meet – not so much women. Though my observation tells me there are some women who do – and some who don’t. Really.

Another point: I dated as a single, childless woman, off and on, for over 20 years. If I didn’t find Mr. Right during that time, who’s to say I’m going to find him any faster now, when I have wrinkles, white hair, and dependents? Sure, it’s possible, but I’m not going to invest my limited time into that particular gamble.

As for my kids, they would not mind a little more free play time during their evenings, but darn me, I make them do stuff like chores, outdoor exercise, piano practice and daily reading. Not sure why you want to make it about my kids being spoiled and selfish. I happen to like spending time with my kids between work shifts.

Hmm, okay SKL. For some reason (tone & humor maybe?) I find I can debate these things with you and smile at the end of it, rather than feeling even the tiniest bit irritated. I sincerely hope I’ve done that for you as well.

No, in your case, I wasn’t meaning to make it “selfish” as I said. Not at all. As I said, you remind me a lot of my friend in terms of being totally okay, and even seemingly EMBRACING, single-hood, the freedom it gives you especially. (The main difference is that he doesn’t have kids either.) I find no fault in that (although, again, I know you’re not looking for my approval). The fault I find is when someone DOES date and “puts themselves out there” but then wonders why many men are offended at being made 20th place on the list and seek far greener and more pleasant pastures elsewhere, and in those cases, I tend to think (assume?) that they probably were that way with the father of their child & thus ran him off, hence that’s WHY they’re single. (But of course I’m assuming.)

It certainly is possible that they’re single for other reasons, things just didn’t work out in the general sense, but whenever I used to run across what I described, & have heard of others doing, you can’t help but put 2 & 2 together, even if maybe 4 isn’t the correct answer.

In response to SLJ, I realize this may run contrary to Lenore’s “no bashing” disposition, but as SKL said regarding her position–I’m making a judgment, shoot me. To me, if you have children and a romantic relationship, your significant other/spouse etc should be given proper attention, not ignored & then scolded when they demonstrate the slightest concern of having a need for man-to-woman affection. To spoil your children & not give your significant other a fair amount of attention, especially if they’ve expressed a need, is wrong. If you do so, and they cheat on you, you brought it on yourself & have only yourself to blame. It doesn’t mean they were a low-down no-good cheating dog.

People have the right to live as they do, but that doesn’t by itself make it right. A man can commit bestiality with a dog and he and the dog are perfectly happy, but does that make it right? Am I saying these things I’ve described are as gross as bestiality, no not at all, just saying that just because they’re doing it & seem fine doing so doesn’t by itself make it right.

LRH

LOL. Bestiality! Whoa. No, if there is cheating in a marriage it is primarily the fault of the cheater, even if he isn’t getting what he wants all the time. Fact is, parenthood is exhausting at times, especially for the mom. There are other things that play in too – hormonal issues that sap energy, etc. Yes, you should have a compassionate ear if you have had a rough day at work or something. But you also need to check out the overall situation and see if maybe there’s a reason why your wife is on her last nerve / brain cell.

As for waiting until the kids are in bed, sometimes that just makes more sense. Give me 15 minutes to put the kids to bed properly, and then I can focus on my partner. But try to share the time with the kids, and you’re only going to get a half-assed version. Or are you seriously saying I should make my kids wait until tomorrow for attention because some full-grown man can’t wait 15 minutes?

It’s the same thing when my business partners think they’re going to discuss work between 6pm and 9pm. All it does is delay the time when I can start 2nd shift.

Anyhoo, I’d love to stay and have quality time, but I gotta go pick up my spoiled, selfish kids from school. Will check back in come second shift.

LRH, I hope that your comments are intended to apply to dads as well as moms. Because you come across as having expectations for / demands on moms with the dads doing all the demanding.

As for cheating, we can agree to disagree. But if a man (or woman) is that put out about not getting what s/he “needs,” why cheat? Why not stand up and say “goodbye” right out loud, go find another place to sleep, and start writing child support checks?

And another thing. If all you say is true, then getting married is basically an unacceptable risk. Because when you hit hard times and get overwhelmed with all the demands (and this pretty much WILL happen to all moms), your husband is going to sneak off and bring you home an STD or two. And it will be your own fault. Tell me again why women need men in their lives?

SKL Obviously men & women need (or don’t need) each other equally. And yes what I said applies to both genders equally. And I agree, it’s better not to cheat, but it’s a moot point if you meet each other’s needs to start with vs making excuses. And yes, both should be understanding of the other’s daily hassles & be supportive & try not to nag etc, just don’t use the daily grind as justification for putting your mate on a shelf. Your mate has no more business there than your children do.

But yes, it goes both ways–gender-wise, and meeting your partner’s needs & ALSO understanding their daily grind.

LRH

Donna While I actually agree with much of what you write in terms of free-range (and that is what we’re here for, I guess I’m guilty of steering things off in a non-free range direction), I will agree with you on that–I am glad we haven’t crossed paths.

That said, to clarify–yes, even here, there are occasions anyway where it’s “family time” as you said, and anyone who came over here at those particular times would find things to be much as what you’ve said for yourself. Seriously. That said, it isn’t that way all day long up until 8:30 p.m. either. I’ve just never allowed my kids to take over my life that much. If that is much why I’ve embraced free-range as it is for their ability to be competent & able to fend for themselves (age-appropriate as always), then so be it. I’ve seen too many people that, upon having kids, their life was barely recognizable anymore. Every thing they did, said, spoke of, spent their time etc, was TOTALLY about the kids, they didn’t really have a life anymore. Their hobbies, interests, etc–gone. It was sad, really, to me (although they seemed totally fine by it).

I vowed that would NEVER happen to me, and it hasn’t. Yes of course things have changed, they will, but I haven’t completely lost myself or our marriage in it. I did the right thing going for someone without kids, and someone who views this all the same as I do. Besides, I think it’s different, at least for me, when they’re your kids as well as theirs. When they’re yours too, they’re not as much “getting in the way” in your mind as they are in your mind if they’re the other person’s and not yours, and that’s in addition to how, if the person is like-minded with you, there’s no arguing about that sort of stuff. Besides the obvious reality of how I would miss my wife if she passed on personally, I also would hate entering the dating world, because most likely she’d have kids of her own & be overly attached to them and I’d tire of having to wait 3011 years for some time alone, something I can get with my wife now anytime I ask for it.

I remember, growing up, besides the free-range, such things as how we would go to our grandfather’s house every Sunday, and we kids played outside with the parents/uncles etc having ADULT conversations indoors. We children were made to STAY outside just about the ENTIRE time, even if it was 93’F outside, or we had to play in an adjoining room and be quiet. Sure, we interacted with the adults SOME, we weren’t FORBIDDEN from being anywhere near them, but we didn’t dominate their attention either. They were allowed to have their time with each other NO KIDS, with no need of “playdates” or the like.

Also (I need to wrap this up), when I was little, we used to LOVE going on vacation and riding in the back of my aunt’s pickup truck with the camper shell. Yes, that was legal then (and I think it should still be, frankly). It was fun for us, but what I understand now that I didn’t then–it also allowed our 2 parents in the front cabin to talk about adult-themed subjects without us kids bothering them. We could be kids free-range, and they could have adult time.

THAT is what I look to make in our home as well, and we’ve been mostly successful so far. I guess all’s well that ends well.

Regardless, Ruth Poulsen can I say “thank you” for that link? In doing so you’re sort of steering us back on-topic, hopefully this will be put to rest soon. Heck, your post even was good enough to merit a new posting altogether. “Thank you” for reminding me that, hey, we might disagree pretty passionately about this attachment parenting or spouse/kids priorities thing, but where it regards parental support in terms of letting our kids be kids without going nuts with worry (and it benefits them, not just us, as it should if it’s going to be done), we are on the same side.

It occurs to me that this bickering we’re doing about this attachment and spouse/kids priorities thing is probably not good for our free-range unity as a whole, and while I don’t apologize for standing up for what I believe in, I do apologize if my approach in doing so has caused there to be divisions within our collective circle. Like a church breaking up over denominational differences over petty things (someone once told me a church broke up arguing over what color the new carpeting for the floor should be), let’s not let that happen. I may not agree with Donna about what she posted here, or SKL (although I think SKL & I debated the merits pretty well without getting upset), but in terms of MOST actual free-range aspects anyway, I agree with them (and many of the others) a lot of the time, and that probably should be the focus.

It has been fun (or mentally engaging) debating these other issues, but it’s probably high time to move on it seems. Can we now “cybershake hands” and proceed, with no hard feelings?

LRH

LRH, reading your posts makes me extra glad that I am single! And if I were to repartner, I would hope that I am not expected to be the perfect 50s wife who not only rules the household with an iron fist, but still manages to look perfect and sexy when her spouse comes home from work and never says no sex.

If my partner would complain about me spending more time with the kids than with them, they would be shown the door quicksmart so they can go find someone who is willing to treat them like another child.

Yuk.

I shouldn’t have commented because it was totally off topic. But that response made me even happier to be single but that is only because I am just incredibly lazy and am loving how simple my life is. My daughter can work out for herself what to do in relationships when she gets there. I’m sure she will be wise enough to work it out with the right person and I hope she does and enjoys it.

This has been on my mind lately. A few friends get defensive when I note that I consider myself free-range. It’s as though I’m suggesting that their parenting styles are in opposition with mine and attacking them – just by saying I’m free range or not that worried about someone abducting my child. I try to be sensitive and not put others on the defense, but for some reason the notion of free range parenting really sets some moms off!

I consider much of my parenting style to be attachment-ish. I breastfed on-demand, until my oldest was 26 months. We co-sleep. I don’t spank or yell. Yet, we’re very structured and expect our kids to be respectful and well-behaved. At the same time, I let my 4 year old roam and encourage him to be out going. I don’t buy into all the products marketed to make me think I need them to have safe and smart kids, and I try not to hover over them. I nurture them, try to make them feel secure and loved, and then give them developmentally appropriate freedom to explore and learn their own lessons – with our support. I guess it’s a hybrid style for me – so I can’t understand why so many moms get defensive. I agree with them in many ways but have problems with the social norms and cultural trend of always blaming mom for everything, expecting parents to prevent EVERY possible accident (to always protect kids from any remote possibility of harm), and the idea that the world is a dangerous, scary place. We have more in common that not, and my problems isn’t with other parents but with society’s parenting expectations.

LRH, I think you’re mixing up two different things. There is no question that some women suck at relationships – romantic and otherwise. I don’t think that has anything to do with the attachment parenting lifestyle. A woman can be very mature, confident, and great at relationships, respectful of her spouse, and still physically close to and responsive to her babies / tots. I really don’t see how this can even be an issue if we’re talking about two mature parents. I mean, do well-adjusted dads really get antagonistic to the presence of their very young children? Do well-adjusted moms really have a problem putting their young children down for a nap or playtime when husband needs to download after a rough day at work? I dunno. I have not seen this.

Likewise, a person who is insecure and immature in general is not unlikely to misunderstand the logic underlying AP practices and flub the way she applies them. We see the results of this in children who lash out because they have no healthy boundaries, who are insecure because they pick this up in their moms, and who are developmentally stunted because they aren’t encouraged to do age-appropriate things. The insecurity is what you’re really talking about when you bash single moms. You’re seeing kids who pick up on moms’ instability, lack trust, and therefore can’t peacefully go mind their own business. You’d see these things whether or not those moms practiced elements of “AP.” And yes, maybe that is the reason some of them are single – because they suck at relationships. It’s kind of a no-brainer, but it’s not an AP issue.

Of course, I’m just taking your word that these kids and parents are really over the top. If the kids are just curious and want to get to know you before they leave you alone with their mom, that seems reasonable. There are lots of emotions involved when kids see family dynamics changing in any way. If you alienate the kids at that time, naturally the mom is not going to be impressed.

Then again, in the animal kingdom, a female’s new mate simply kills the old mate’s kids in order to have her all to himself. I would like to think human males are a little more adaptive.

PS–darn typos, near the end, I meant to say she had a friend who would watch her son for her for that while (so we could have some time alone for a bit), and in fact this friend lived in the same apartment down the hall & they used to watch each other’s kids when the other would ask.

As long as I’m PS-ing, I want to clarify: the dishes I spoke of that I washed for her, it was a MOUNTAIN of them. I’m not talking a couple of plates, glasses and forks–it also consisted of MANY pots & pans with several-day caked-on junk as well, and NONE of that was anything I messed up nor that she messed up making me anything. Yet I washed ALL of it, in a sink. I also dried them & put them away and wiped down the countertops, sinks, tables, and even picked up some loose trash (pizza boxes, soda bottles etc) & put them in trash bags.

And no, when she saw that, I wasn’t uptight and growling “okay woman, you saw what I did for you, you’ve been with your kid all this time, when do I get anything” etc. No, I was nice & sweet and gently asked “so you want to go cuddle on the couch & talk or watch a movie etc” instead not 2 minutes later, her son was begging for attention, and she was gone, and never made it up to me later or even suggested it.

And she had asked ME out, not me her.

I say this humorously, it reminds me of a Steven Wright joke (my favorite comedian), speaking of one of his high school girlfriends: “I learned a lot about love, prior to that, I never even thought about killing myself,” ha ha ha ha.

LRH

12 midnight – 5 a.m. Yes little kids knew I was there, so what? I wasn’t figuring on being there again the next morning. I don’t know, maybe those particulars are a bit weird, I don’t know, I didn’t see it as such at the time.

And no, I wasn’t there enough yet for it to be that they were my dishes, not at all, especially since I never was one that cooked for her or her for me. That was a mess all of her making.

If I may say so, the “woop dee doo” part–now I do think that IS offensive to say such a thing or have such an attitude. For crying out loud, a guy you PUT YOURSELF OUT THERE to seek out his interest spends 5 stinking hours in a kitchen cleaning up a mess you ALONE made, when he could be anywhere else in the world (it wasn’t an exclusive thing, and no, we weren’t “knocking boots” if I need to clarify), and the response is “woop dee doo?” I’m sorry, but I think that is a most unbecoming and very ugly attitude. It really amazes me how wise that 20 & 22 year old couple are at their young age, and how unwise a lot of much older people are.

LRH

Donna That all sounds perfectly fine to me. If they’re engaged, that’s plenty fine. The experiences I had were ones were the child would persistently interrupt seemingly every 3 seconds over silly stuff. You don’t want to be ugly or a jerk, and I actually wasn’t, but yes, it was annoying. I knew in my mind if the roles were reversed, I’d have my child not interrupt so often, even if I had to make it a disciplinary issue.

But yes, if they were present and yet “happily engaged,” fine, not a problem at all. And after awhile of that, you actually will naturally WANT to engage with them for awhile. They aren’t the enemy, after all, and never should be, but I found it was easier for it to just only date someone who had no kids at all so that you’d have quite awhile where you were able to REALLY get to know them, no interruptions, and if you had kids with them later on, by then you’d had enough time with them it wouldn’t matter (and plus, since they were also yours, you’d be able to shoo them away on occasion if need be).

So yes, all’s well that ends well.

LRH

This apparently is going to go on forever. So be it, I’m game.

Yes, I would expect that after doing what I did, not that she would necessarily “put out,” but even just spend time. It does not matter why I did it-the point is, I did it (and it was a combination of both, I do wash dishes slowly, but she also had a TON of them, I’m talking to the ceiling almost). You went to the bedroom burdened with a pig scythe of a kitchen, you wake up & someone was nice enough to fix it all for you. Where I come from, you better damn well show some respect, period, no matter what you think the ulterior motives MAY be. No, it doesn’t mean you’re obligated to “put out,” but this is a guy whose interested you solicited, I’d say said guys deserves a HELL of a lot more of a weak, barely audible mumble & a shrug of the shoulders.

And yes, after a subsequent encounter where it still was giving a shrug of the shoulders, I saw the writing on the wall and moved on. And yes, I am sure you had some nasty encounters of your own, and maybe I wouldn’t give a darn, but I wouldn’t go “woop dee doo” either.

On the contrary, one of the things that made me fall in love with my wife–early in our courtship she asked me one day to come to her family’s cookout or whatever & I told her I was busy moving (i was). The next day she showed up at my place, haven taken the BUS in the city to do so, to help me move. That impressed the heck out of me, and to stray even further from the topic, she didn’t call before she came over, she just showed up, but I didn’t act like it was “The Great Sin” the way a lot of people do now over that.

As for kids interrupting–where I come from, a child who interrupts an adult talking is treated as an act of disrespect and is absolutely called on the carpet for it. I do that. If my wife & I are talking-heck, if the electric meter man & I are talking and a chlid interrupts, they hear about it. If I’m on the phone and they’re babbling and I can’t hear, I tell them–nicely–to be quiet, if they don’t, they’re disciplined.

In like manner, one couple we know also trains their child to call every adult Mr Ms Last Name because “I want to treat my child to respect ALL adults.” Where we come from, the simple fact that so & so is an adult and so & so is a child automatically means the adult is entitled to respect. Period. No exceptions. (I expect a lot of flack from that, so be it.) It isn’t “children should be seen & not heard,” but it isn’t far off from it. (And yet, they’re loved and adored lots and lots, too. We actually make it work somehow.)

LRH

It doesn’t really matter where you come from when you spend the night at someone else’s house. What matters is where THEY come from – preferably before you get that serious. (To me, spending the night with a mother whose kids are home is very serious.) You’ve been on this earth long enough to know that everyone has different standards for their kids. You can’t “expect” anything from someone else’s.

You seem to think that a *man* doing a domestic chore is really amazing. Maybe it is “where you come from.” I certainly never kept score when I’ve been over a guy’s home and washed some dishes. I recall a get-together among school friends where we all visited a bachelor’s home. Apparently nobody ever taught him how to wash dishes and his dishwasher was broken. He tried to serve water in the most disgusting glasses I’ve ever seen. I stood there and washed all of his greasy dishes and gave him lessons in how to do it going forward. Did I get something out of it? No. (Well, other than a clean glass to drink out of.) Did I feel angry? No. I did it willingly because it needed done and it was no big deal to me. It’s a happy memory for me. So I honestly don’t see why you waste emotional energy holding a grudge against a skanky trashy woman whose dishes you washed in the hope of “getting some” in one of the travel stops in your life. (Honestly I think you should have been scared to be intimate with someone that irresponsible, because she could have given you lots more than you bargained for.)

So if your daughter ever finds herself a single mom, you would want her to feel obligated put out every time a man does something nice for her?

SKL My daughter, if she is MARRIED and she isn’t being a “skank” and the husband isn’t a “male skank” (I hope not, else, why are they married?), then I would tell her, well, not to have so many headaches. I don’t espouse Dr Laura much anymore, ESPECIALLY the “your kids come first” mantra she does, but I DO agree with her stance that a woman shouldn’t say “no” to her man 80,000 times for silly reasons (if you just got out the hospital for an appendix operation, obviously that’s not a silly reason) and then wonder why he moves on to someone else.

Actually Donna I agree with your 1st 2 paragraphs, & the “I love you every 3 seconds” thing–oh yes, that would be annoying. The other scenarios you describe, that all sounds very reasonable. I concur. You actually described the specifics better than I have done.

As for what I would do if I were a widower–yes, I’d avoid single mothers like the plague, else I’d screen for that sort of thing right off the bat. If it was someone like that “detached parenting” mom who espoused things like “APers run each other’s heads while the children sleep between them, DPers lock the door & get it on,” now if it was someone like that, I’d give it a try. Beyond that, I also don’t like people who are too attached to their pets too (dogs especially), in fact even more so (their own children is one thing, but an animal–c’mon), but that’s another matter.

LRH

Ha ha ha, SKL I can honestly say I agree 100% with you on that. I’m dead serious, I do. We actually found a slice of common ground (beside the free-range aspects). Yah!

A child is one thing, my points notwithstanding, I can at least understand one being attached (even if a bit excessively so) to your children, human-beings who are your actual CHILDREN. But a pet, a dog especially? Heck no. Man i get nauseated at these people who act like their pets are the same as children, and expect others to be tolerant of their irritating aspects, ESPECIALLY barking. (Barking drives me crazy.)

Heck, my single best friend I mentioned, he’s into dogs, they sleep with him even, but he doesn’t date, and if we mention that we may go over there, he will lock his dogs up in a kennel so that they won’t possibly hurt our kids, and he doesn’t mind it, in fact he considers it the right thing to do. Other people, their dog could all but trespass into YOUR YARD and hurt your child & they STILL won’t accept responsibility for it. I can’t stand people like that.

When I was dating (I know, I’m back on that again), there were some whom I dropped when they mentioned they had a dog (or cat) and that their pet slept with them & that anyone who got serious with them would have to be okay with that–if it came down to their dog or their husband, they would seriously chose their dog. I immediately ended any such dates, IMMEDIATELY. I’m sorry, but that’s just sick.

One type of movie I really dislike, in fact are dog-lovers movies, because they ALWAYS show somebody who isn’t that big on dogs and they always depict them as cruel heartless meanies who would sooner burn their own child alive than spend even a nickel to put the flames out or whatever. Well excuse me for not liking to have to hear “yap yap yap” all day, and excuse me if I don’t like coming home & finding half the house torn

But no, him cooking didn’t mean you were obligated to “put out,” and it sure isn’t enough to overcome “stinkie dog syndrome” either. Ha ha ha, I like it–seriously SKL, I am in 100% agreement with you on this one.

LRH

@Ayla, the thing that bothers me about AP is the seeming smugness of those that practice it, and the assumption that parents who don’t are ignoring their kids needs and can’t possibly have a close relationship with them. Even though your post was pleasant and thoughtful, you had to throw in “normal closeness” and “biological norms”.

It IS possible for those who don’t practice AP to be close with their infants. It IS possible for them to meet their baby’s needs. It IS possible for other parents to have different definitions of “normal” and still be great parents and raise great kids who become great adults. AP parents do not have a corner on this market.

I’m really glad this has come up because I’ve always wondered whether people felt AP and FRK were opposites… now I know I am only one of many who consider themselves both! (though I *am* kind of sad that so many people here still seem to think that AP means boundary-free, permissive parenting… it doesn’t, any more than FR parenting means leaving your 3 year old in the car for 5 hours while you go out to the casino.)

I guess it makes sense that many of us are both AP and FR – both philosophies are based on interacting with your child in ways that are developmentally appropriate and are based on your first-hand knowledge of their personalities, skills, etc., as well as what works for your family.

I don’t think AP is about indulging your kids or responding immediately to every need (because that’s not always possible!) so much as it is about behaving in such a way that your kids understand that their well-being is important to you and that you are doing your best to meet their *needs* (not wants… but attention and soothing is a valid need, especially for a very small baby. Trying not to be judgmental, but the idea of letting a 2 month old cry for hours every night to teach her not to need attention is just heartbreaking to me). If kids get that secure foundation early on, then they are more likely to have the self-confidence to grow and explore and be independent as they get older and develop the requisite skills.

My daughter has just turned two, and although I guess it’s a bit early to tell, I don’t think our period of co-sleeping, babywearing, cue feeding (and continued nursing) has had any negative effects on her overall independence. She’s always been ahead on her physical development and loves to navigate the playground on her own, and she’s finally getting to the age where she can amuse herself in the house for a good 20 minute block of time with marginal supervision.

I definitely lean more to the helicopter parent side however I do appreciate you bringing the opportunity to discuss both. I feel more comfortable always being there for my daughter and as she ages, that does lessen naturally, at least for her. I also agree that my way of [over] parenting] is simply a life choice I’ve made, not necessarily a “way to parent”. It works for us!