"My grandmother wanted me to have an education, so she kept me out of school." 
-Margaret Mead

Sleeping Safe and (Psychologically) Sound

This post is part of the 2010 API Principles of Parenting blog carnival, a series of monthly parenting blog carnivals, hosted by API Speaks. Learn more about attachment parenting by visiting the API website.

Bedsharing is an ancient concept. Still practiced all over the world, bed sharing has become a subject of controversy in the United States. Often the debate centers around the safety issues regarding bed sharing (if you would like to read more on safe sleep practices, click here). While this is important, the real danger every child encounters during the night is psychological.

Modern developmental psychology is based on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, a simple structured look at what needs must be met to move forward in development created by Abraham Maslow in the 1940s.

Maslow believed that human growth and development occurred through building upon a basic foundation of met physiological needs.  All lower-order needs (physiological and security) must be met before higher-order needs (self-esteem and self-actualization) can be achieved.  If a person achieves a higher-order need and then loses a basic need, they can revert back in their development.

Infants require their two lowest-order needs to be met for them.  They must be provided with food, shelter, care, and safety to grow physically and develop psychologically.  However too many parents are pressured into practices which compromise an infant's ability to achieve these foundations.  Popular practices like cry it out and bedding baby in an isolated nursery can undermine development, creating developmental hang-ups that can lead to difficulties forming attachments or decrease self-esteem.  The entire attitude surrounding infant care focuses on meeting basic physiological needs with too little attention paid to the psychological needs of the child.  At baby showers, mothers are given clothing, blankets, and diapers to meet the physical needs of the child and then are bombarded with well-intentioned advice regarding sleep and scheduling of infants.  The question every new parent is asked repeatedly - how's baby sleeping? - presumes all parents to be desperate to achieve pre-infant sleep.  We are preoccupied with infant sleep, and yet, American attitudes toward sleep ignore the very foundations of healthy psychological development.

Rather than considering the psychological and emotional needs of infants, there is push toward sleep training in the United States.   Parents become obsessed with baby sleeping through the night often allowing an infant to cry it out, or employing the Ferber method or Babywise.  Recent research has shown that allowing an infant to cry it out can hamper brain development, because during intense crying the infant's brain releases Cortisol, a stress hormone, that interferes with normal development (BBC).  Therefore an infant who is left to cry in an isolated room, in an effort to be trained, is at risk of brain damage from the overload of toxic chemicals.  Parents are often told that these practices are for the best because an infant must learn how to sleep and self-soothe.  Infants do not need to learn how to sleep.  A child that is tired enough will always sleep.  Allowing them to cry it out only teaches them that they are alone and their need for safety and security is not being met.  The infant does not learn from the experience, rather their psychological and emotional development is stunted as only their basic survival needs are met.  They wear themselves down until they are only capable of sleep.

The focus on sleeping through the night also prevents the infant from meeting the basic need of food.  Recent disturbing developments in infant formula manufacturing boast advances in slowing the digestion of formula and thus allowing for deeper, longer periods of sleep.  An infant is not physiologically programmed to go 10-12 hours between feedings.  The need for an infant to eat every few hours is likely a survival mechanism.  SIDS has been linked to deeper sleep in infants and some researchers believe an infant's metabolism is designed to wake the child frequently to prevent long periods of deep sleep, which could prove dangerous to infants still learning to regulate their breathing patterns.  An infant left to sleep on their own is therefore in survival mode, attempting to meet his or her most basic needs.

Many attachment parents subscribe to the philosophy of "nine months in, nine months out," the premise of which is that human babies are born considerably underdeveloped due to the reproductive design of the human female.  Therefore infants require more sleep, feeding, and care before significant physical milestones are met.  Rather than rushing infants towards crawling or walking, infants are fed on demand, carried close to the mother or father, and allowed to sleep with their mother.  These principals allow the infant to develop in a nurturing, healthy environment.

Nowhere are the principals more important than in the area of infant sleep.  Since a considerable amount of a baby's day is spent sleeping, allowing the child to fulfill this basic need while meeting the secondary need of safety and security allows for optimal emotional and psychological development.  Parents can meet this need by bedding close to baby.

Breastfeeding mothers are uniquely in tune with their infants during the night and can safely co-sleep as long as safety measures are met, see link above.  This arrangement allows the infant to feel the warmth of their mother, nurse easily, and have their needs responded to quickly. In my experience, a slight startle is easily calmed by my child reaching and feeling me next to her.  We both are aware of the momentary waking but not disturbed and easily drift back to sleep.  For more info on breastfeeding and bedsharing, I recommend the work of Dr. James McKenna at Notre Dame's Mother-Baby Behavioral Sleep Laboratory.

Mothers who do not breastfeed, as well as fathers and other caregivers, can share their infant's sleep by using a co-sleeper or a bassinet placed near the bed.  This allows them to quickly reach out to a startled infant or pick the child up for a feeding.

By rethinking the predominant attitudes regarding infant sleep, we are able to better meet our children's developmental needs.  The first step is to change our perspective from training, convenience, and accepted social norms, and instead view sleep as a precious, fleeting opportunity to nurture our children during the most vital stage of their development.

Recommended reading:
The Family Bed, Tine Thevenin (excerpt here)
Safe Co-Sleeping, Mother-Baby Behavioral Sleep Laboratory.

Beautiful Blogger Award

I was humbled to receive the Beautiful Blogger Award from Lindsey over at Tidbits Parenting.  I feel like we're navigating the new blogger waters together, girl.  It is nice to know that someone is reading :)  The rules for the award are simple: 1) link to the person who nominated you,  2) tell 7 things about yourself people might not know  3) nominate 15 more beautiful bloggers!

7 things:

1.  I'm married to my high school sweetheart.  We broke up in high school and got back together my first year of college.  I knew when I was 16 I was going to marry him.  We were at his grandmother's on Easter sunday and I was holding his baby cousin.  He came in from playing basketball with his family, sat down next to me, and when I turned to look at him and saw his face, watching me hold that baby, I had a moment where I just knew I would have his children.  Sappy, I know.

2.  I wrote my masters thesis on eighteenth-century literature.  It is titled "'A Subject so Shocking': The Female Sex Offender in Richardson's Clarissa."  It is available online if you are really bored.

3.  When I was 18, my greatest aspiration was to be a member of the Royal Shakespeare Company - this did not work out.

4.  I make felt toys for extra income and because it's fun.

5.  My proudest possession is my 1991 Toyota Previa mini-van, because we bought it outright.

6.  My favorite ice cream is chocolate peanut butter.

7.  I hand make my children's birthday and Christmas presents because I think the time spent makes them more special.  I hope a few of them last and become heirlooms.

15 other Beautiful Bloggers  - these people inspire me, feed me, and so much more!

1.  Laura's Recipe Collection
2.  Ozark Mountain Blog
3.  Schultz Party of Four
4.  Surfacing after Silence
5.  So You Think You're Crafty
6.  I'm Unschooled. Yes, I can write.
7.  This Mama Makes Stuff
8.  Codename: Mama
9.  Freedom Happens
10.  Lactivist Leanings
11.  Maggie's Bookshelf
12.  Authentic Parenting
13.  Hot Mama Gowns
14.  Roger Ebert's Journal - I sincerely doubt a man w/ a Pulitzer will care, but I'm consistently impressed by his thought-provoking info.  You should be reading this blog.
15.  Pocket Buddha

Why Can't We Be Friends? The Breast Feeder v. Formula Feeder Dilemma

Tonight I happened upon the blog, Fearless Formula Feeder, and it got me thinking about the breastmilk v. formula war that has been raging as long as I can remember. I found myself wanting to dislike it. I wanted to want to chastise the mom behind it. Rather I found myself feeling sort of disinterested or rather like a Conneticut yankee in King Arthur's Court. It really wasn't meant for me.  The only thing I really took any objection to was the use of the term "factivist," but to be honest, I didn't take enough time reading the site to get the full story on it.

Rather I found myself pondering the line that's been drawn in the sand separating formula feeding moms and breastfeeding moms. Somewhere along the line we've started fighting each other rather than focusing on the root of the problem. I know this isn't always the case, but it strikes me that moms are perpetually on the defensive about how they feed their babies whether they're defending their right to nurse in public or their decision to formula feed. As a lactivist, I operate under the assumption that breastfeeding is best and I work to promote it as much as possible. As a mother, I know it's not always so easy.

Most breastfeeding advocates I know focus their fight on normalizing breastfeeding as well as attacking unethical practices on the part of formula companies. While doing so they often reference facts about the health benefits of breastfeeding. A good deal of the lactivist agenda is aimed at promoting the rights of the breastfeeding mother to nurse where ever and when ever they want, and promoting breastfeeding by trying to change formula marketers underhanded tactics meant undermine nursing relationships. I don't think the intention is to shame moms who wind up formula feeding; however, this is certainly an effect of lactivism.

I said before that I work to promote breastfeeding. I write about it, I nurse in public, I have a bumper sticker. But more than all the advocacy, I also offer my number to anyone with the express instruction to call day or night. I've offered to go to other mom's houses. I've answered questions on facebook and twitter. I don't say this to toot my own horn. I'm telling you this because I think the crux of the issue really lies outside of advocacy and debate. As a lactivist, when I hear a mom say she "couldn't breastfeed," I don't roll my eyes or give dirty looks, I immediately jump to wondering what went wrong. Did they have good support? Was there an issue with a c-section/medication? Were they given poor advice by a physician? Could I have helped them with latch? There's a laundry list of thoughts that run through my mind, and it's frustrating to me because, thanks to social media, so many moms I "meet" live across the country. I can only do so much online. Often these moms express remorse about not being able to breastfeed. Sometimes they even express hope that they can nurse their next child.

So it saddens me that this has become an us versus them issue. The thing is that I don't think most lactivists want to alienate formula feeding mothers. In our minds, we are taking on society and big business. Unfortunately, formula feeding mothers feel our advocacy more keenly then the CEO of Nestle. Believe me, he does not care what we have to say. The shameful marketing tactics of his company prove it. The mother who struggles with breastfeeding, whose physician offers formula, who wants to feel like she is feeding her child feels the attacks.

So what do we do about it? Why can't we be friends? Well, the first step is not jumping to judge formula feeding mothers. Instead, engage them in a conversation about why they use formula. Now I know this sounds uncomfortable, and it's a fine line to tread. But if you can show honest interest and openness, in my experience, the conversation is beneficial to both mothers. I know having this conversation has cleared tension in some of my mom friend relationships. The second step is to step off the soapbox occasionally. Now I love my soapbox, but real change doesn't occur from words alone. Offer your support to a mom who is struggling. Tell a friend who wants to breastfeed her baby to call you whenever she needs you. Be available for support to anyone who needs it.

I still believe breastfeeding is best for baby, but rather than preaching it all the time I want us to rethink how breastfeeding fits in our society. Yes, it's key to normalize nursing. It's important our children see breasts as for babies. It's vital moms feel comfortable and supported nursing in public, and we need to hold formula companies accountable. However, if we really want to promote breastfeeding, we must remember that breastfeeding is an art. We must rebuild community amongst women. We must open our arms, hearts, and minds to all mothers and come together. When we rebuild the collective skill and knowledge of women and restore female relationships, we will rediscover wisdom and finally be able to truly affect breastfeeding success.

The First of Three Conversations: Unschooling?

The subject of our children's education has come up a lot recently. We are considering moving and often the possible location comes down to the school district, which inevitably leads to these words escaping my lips, "I could homeschool."  My husband knows exactly what this means - I want to homeschool, and I'm slowly getting him used to the idea.  And as always, he is supportive with one caveat - he's concerned about my organization.  To be honest, I am as well.  In my mind, I have 2 years before I have to get started, but let's face it there is no start date when you educate at home.  So I have started thinking about it, picking up books, etc.

One of the issues I am most interested in is homeschooling v. unschooling.  I have a hard time setting a strict curriculum and yet, the idea of completely going with the flow is daunting.  Initially I perceived unschooling as homeschooling without the rigid structure of a homeschool curriculum, but this segment on ABC got me thinking:  Unschooling: No Tests, No Books, No Bedtime

I'm not thrilled with the incredibly negative undertone to the piece, but I'll admit that I understand the skepticism.  The Martins certainly didn't meet my expectation of unschooling.  Now it could be the poor journalism at play, but it strikes me that this radical form of unschooling may prove as detrimental as the hidden curriculum of traditional schooling.  The featured family promotes no discipline, no structure, and no schooling, arguing that children don't learn best when rigidly structured.  I agree and disagree.

I don't think this is the best way for kids to learn.  Sitting in desks, reading the same books, completing workbooks, and watching videos.  I know because I used to try to teach those kids, and, as Wendy Priesnitz points out, "the reality is that (contrary to what most people prefer to believe) even school kids decide what they want to learn and when. They can’t help it; it’s a prerequisite of learning. Oh, they might memorize some stuff in order to pass a test or otherwise regurgitate on demand, but that’s not learning."  Putting 30+ kids in a small room and throwing info at them doesn't really teach them much.  Expecting that you can create a structured curriculum that meets the learning needs of every student is foolish.  Educators know they don't teach every student their classroom, because interest in any particular subject or lesson has to be intrinsically driven at least in part.  I can have the most fascinating lesson plan ever planned.  It can engage 19 out of 20 students, but one will still be daydreaming or texting, or drawing in a notebook.

But do we throw structure out completely as in the above segment?  No.  Structure does not mean rigidity.  It means foundation.  We can allow our children to explore their interests within a simply structured education - planning activities, participating in co-ops, creating "lessons" based on their interests.  There is no need to buy an entire homeschool series or give home tests on biology.  But it is imperative that we educate our children according to their needs and interests.

My own interest in unschooling and self-education is practical.  My college experience was spent exploring different subjects, taking a smattering of this and that.  My husband, possibly the most intelligent person I know, got a useless degree in a subject that was interesting to him at the time.  If we had approached college with a stronger sense of self and a greater level of experience in the world, we might not have squandered those years.  College shouldn't be the first time a person exerts true control over their education.  It's too damn expensive for one thing.  All that said, I probably still wouldn't have wound up with a practical degree but I would have rounded out my education to better encompass my interests.  College is essentially paying for unschooling after all, which is probably why so many walk away without degrees or, worse yet, liberal arts degrees.

So as the country engages in a debate over the validity of unschooling, I'd argue the heart of the problem lies both in the labels and the expectations.  The very term unschooling is problematic, because the prefix "un" can mean non as well as indicate a reversion.  So are we nonschooling our children, or are we trying to undo our own educations?  Our own educational baggage can play a role in the decision to unschool but it shouldn't dictate their actual education.  Taking charge of a child's education is a huge responsibility.  As a former teacher, I wanted the best for all my students.  I wanted them to stand on their desks and proclaim their admiration for my sacrifices with Whitman.  And every year I was rewarded with a few students I really reached.  I only reached them because they were open to the subject though.  I expect the backlash against unschooling we see from the media and main stream society is directly related to this responsibility and pressure.

I suspect more people want a better education for their children and recognize that schools are failing them, but taking on a child's education is no small matter.  There are jobs and paychecks and bills that all seem to come first.  After all, we don't want to be unhoming.  But at the end of the day, the majority of us could choose to teach our children but it requires sacrifice of time, money, ourselves if we are to do it right.  Would you be willing to give up a family vacation or drive an old car to stay home and teach your kids?  Probably not, because we have been programmed to believe kids belong in school and we belong at work so we can live the dream of owning our own cookie cutter house in the suburbs.  And while we do this we complain about hating our jobs and cubicles and mourn the what-if's of our lives, and what we need to recognize is that this is all part of the same vicious cycle of institutionalization.  You are teaching your children regardless of how they are schooled.  We are telling them where to fit, but what if we could teach them to carve a space for themselves that was uniquely theirs?  What if we could break the cycle of institutionalization and inspire individuality thus allowing our children truly fulfilling lives?  This should be our motivation when considering our children's educations.  And it will involve structure and sacrifice, but it will be worth it.


Disclaimer: I have two liberal arts degrees.

A time out for a very important day!

When my son wakes up tomorrow, he will come downstairs to a playroom that wasn't there the night before!  It's his third birthday and I wanted to build him a space where he could play and have friends over while I did housework, sewed, or lollygagged online.  Here's a few pictures.  It's a work in progress, but total I have spent less than $10 so far on this project.  Some of the items were free finds through various social networks, items that have been in storage, and things I have made him.  I hope he likes it!  I'm still working on repurposing some old shelves and a bookcase to make a kitchen cupboard and fridge.  I'm also going to make a large felt play mat for him to build his train set on.

Now for the pics:

A table we had in the basement, new in box, from my mother-in-law.  We hadn't had space for it, so we made some.

Play kitchen I got free through a local network, pots and pans for less than $3 at JoAnn's, a few various garage sale finds, hot pads and curtains sewn by yours truly, and the bottle from a pint of Shatto chocolate milk I was kind enough to drink for him.

Fabric bag chair with snap off cover made entirely from scraps and my own fabric stock. Books were in storage since our last move and he's never read them!

The play area consists almost entirely of wooden toys.  I'm trying to get rid of all plastic and there is nothing here that lights up or makes sound!  Yay!

While this certainly didn't cost me much and a lot of it was things we already owned, having a playroom is going to be a great gift for James.  It's amazing how you can create a REALLY BIG present on a really small budget if you try.  I really enjoyed taking the time to put this together, and I can't wait to finish it up.  I hope he is excited about it as I am!

Bamboobies: Ultra soft nursing pads

Ultra-soft, ultra-thin, and sustainable, say it is so!  I recently had the pleasure of trying Bamboobies, a new line of nursing pads designed by a mom in Colorado.  They're different from your regular nursing pads because they are waterproof and natural.  Bamboobies uses a waterproof fabric to back their bamboo velour nursing pads.  Now normally its a big no-no to use waterproof pads because it keeps moisture next to the skin; however, the bamboo wicks away moisture and it has natural anti-microbial properties. Bamboo also holds 4x more milk than cotton.  This morning when I took them out, I was surprised because  I could feel the trapped milk.  They were every bit as absorbent as disposable pads, but I get to wash these beauties and keep them!

Bamboo has become a popular fabric for diaper making in recent years because of its unique properties.  A lot of companies have adopted it for nursing pads as well.  Bamboobies is different for a number of reasons.  As I stated previously, it is waterproof, but it also comes in a cute heart-shaped design.  The heart-shaped design with the ultra-thin fabrics allows it to cup your nipple better, and well, it's kind of cute.  My husband got a kick out of my bright pink hearts last night.  The water-proof design also prevents those lovely milk stains.  Bamboobies also uses only fair trade fabrics!


Bamboobies are handmade and hail from Boulder, Colorado (a.k.a. on e of my favorite places in the world).  You can get your own pair at www.buybamboobies.com

Pardon the mess!

Pay no attention to the links in the menu bar right now.  I'm working on the launch of www.theconnectedmom.com!