This is an emergency post. What can happen if I let my child cry?
I don't like anything having to write this way because it means that something is not going well. But I started reading the avant-garde article yesterday and I had to jump to the keys. I know there are a lot of very qualified blogs talking about this right now, but I can't stop giving my opinion.
Let's analyze the article in question point by point.
Calm down I cry of a baby It is one of the things that most worries parents, especially if they are first time. It is often the accumulation of experience that helps to discern the reason why the child cries (hunger, sleep, needs a diaper change ...) and to identify if the crying It is really a demand for attention without more.
First lines and we started badly. Do not believe it, it is not true. When I was pregnant, I kept hearing that when the baby is born one of the things that most new parents are most afraid of is not knowing what happens to them when they cry. When M was born I was very scared. But I can assure you that at the first cry I knew I had. Hungry, sometimes he cried because he wanted a diaper change, sometimes because his belly hurt (gas is the most insistent), sometimes because he needed arms, honey or wanted to sleep next to us. Yes, you will know. Do not worry, you will know him as nobody. Your parents instinct will know what it has to do at all times. And what I do assure you that you will know is that you should not let him cry.
But on many occasions, doubt or fear arises as to whether to let him cry in case prolonged crying can be a problem for the child. There are no studies that certify that continued crying may pose a risk to the baby, even though specialists in psychosomatic medicine ensure that such a situation triggers an increase in stress that could lead to neurological problems. The pediatricians remember that there is no scientific evidence to make these statements and point out that there is no golden rule to know how long we can let a small child cry or what time we should attend to his crying, although they do set maximum limits and some basic guidelines to follow in which common sense is fundamental.
Can anyone explain to me what they are trying to explain here? It seems very contradictory to start by saying that there is no scientific evidence or golden rules to know how long to let the child cry but there are maximum limits marked by common sense. Sorry? They also say there are no pediatricians who say otherwise. Here you can see a study I have shared with you countless times, but I will not get tired of doing it because I think it is very successful, rigorous and well worked.
"Letting a child cry has no consequences on the central nervous system," he says categorically. Francisco Javier López Pisón, president of the Spanish Society of Pediatric Neurology, which also ensures that there are no scientific studies that certify that excessive crying can cause stress in children. Therefore, for López Pisón we can let children cry without fearing damage to the nervous system or learning.
I would like to see an adult crying for 3 hours, 2 hours or even a single hour of necessity. In full lung, as usually happens with babies from 6 months to 2 years (to say an age) What do you think would happen? That they would end up crying for several reasons: Because nobody pays attention to them (abandonment) and for total exhaustion (physical and mental). These two things affect emotionally and physically without a doubt.
For the renowned doctor Eduard Estivill, a continuous crying could cause anxiety in the child. Therefore, this specialist worldwide known for his method for children to learn to sleep alone, advises, like Gonzalez, not to let a child cry without caring for him; You have to find out what happens to him, especially if we suspect he cries because he has been harmed. On the other hand, he points out that if it is a communication cry "it is necessary to assess whether it should be taken care of or ignored". For this pediatrician, after six months of age babies can already learn to use crying as a form of communication that should not be confused with "manipulation," he warns. They have learned that crying is the quick way to be treated and they start using crying for this purpose. Thus, Estivill exemplifies, if he cries because he has behaved badly and you have quarreled him or to get us to give him a blow we are facing a communication cry and this continuous crying will never be “traumatic” as long as we are by his side teaching him the correct behavior . And for this doctor this type of action can be carried out with very young children: "you don't have to wait for him to talk to tell you things".
And here we find another contradiction. Eduard Estivill, who a few months ago said that half an hour doing things well was enough, that on the Internet they messed with him and that the problem that his method did not work was because the parents did not understand it. Now he says yes, that we serve him. By the way it makes me very funny that when they talk about Eduard Estivill, he is 'the renowned doctor' and when they talk about Carlos González he is 'pediatrician' without further ado.
López Pisón goes further and ensures that a child with four months can already know that if he cries they will catch him or attend him.
Logical, thankfully that is so. I think the statement of this phrase is misspelled. It is not that a 4-month-old child can already know that if he cries they will catch him, if not that a four-month-old child cries to be caught, on many occasions. This is logical and healthy. How many times are you alone and do you want to be with your partner, with your sister, with your mother, father or any other loved one? What do you do to get it? You talk to them, pick up the phone or write a message. What would you feel if they told you if you didn't need it? It's absurd, you don't believe. Yes it can be: 'Now I can't, but we can talk on the phone and tell me what happens to you, if you want we will meet later.' In the case of the child it is the same. One will not let the child cry because yes, but if at that time you cannot attend to him physically, I assure you that you are looking for a way to distract him in other ways. We in while we showered and M cried, we did the 'shower theater'. It happened instantly and we could continue with our task.
Transmitting security and confidence in children is one of the tips to try to ensure that a communicative cry does not last over time. Beyond this, there are as many techniques or formulas as families. With babies, breastfeeding, picking up, singing or whispering can help calm crying, explains pediatrician Carlos González. In older children, telling a story, distracting a story or tickling can also be some of the allies to calm the child. In any case, common sense is the one that must prevail always attending if the crying is due to pain or reasonable anxiety. In this case it will be difficult to comfort him until the cause that causes it is resolved.
What I was telling you. An article wanting to confuse and without any objective. If you want, read it (I do not like to make too much publicity), if you can get something clear you tell me, OK?
Honestly, you know what I think. I think we should leave to theorize about what is right or wrong in the baby's crying. The baby's crying is something that the little one does so that his parents, grandparents, brothers, uncles or caregivers will listen and attend to him. It serves to be able to channel your frustrations, your needs, your desire to be understood, etc.
Parents will know exactly what to do, because our grandparents, parents have done it and we are doing it now.. Possibly one day you are wrong and probably one day your son will tell you that that day you hurt him. But that is the upbringing: listen, observe, do according to your instinct, tell you and sometimes make mistakes.
Isn't it better to see them like that? 😉 I can't stop watching and laugh alone in front of the computer.