Asking you focus on the possible link or CIO and insomnia not on the other effects CIO may or may not have.

for debate purposes I am talking about CIO not controlled crying. CIO being crying until they fall asleep no matter how long that takes. Some of you may not practice CIO that way that is fine but there are people who let their babies cry for as long as it takes even if thats 2 hours. (even if the baby is puking from crying so hard)

you cant MAKE child sleep. whether you parent them to sleep or let them CIO you don't get to choose when they actually fall asleep unless you want to inject them with a tranquilizer.

almost everyone I know needs something to fall asleep - some people need total quiet. some need total darkness. some need background noise or a little light. some people need firm pillows and some need soft. some people need a glass of water. some need a bath and some people cant sleep after they take a bath. you have to find your childs "special formula" that is conducive to sleep the same way you have found what works for yourself. they aren't going to sleep just because you said so.

You can make your child get a diaper change. you can make your child get their teeth brushed. you can make your child not touch a hot stove. you cannot make your child sleep. you cannot make your child not talk. you cannot makes your child walk. you CAN encourage them to do those things, and some may punish them into deciding to doing so, but you cannot physically make them do those things if they choose not to obey you. you can make your child go to bed but you cant make them sleep and making them go to bed when they aren't tired will only condition insomnia and perpetuate the bedtime problem.

This article talks about adults and insomnia, which is what got me thinking perhaps a baby who lays awake or lays crying in bed too longer may not learn to sleep but just learn to associate the bed with bad feelings and wakefulness:

Don’t lay awake in bed for extended periods

If you don't fall asleep in a few minutes, get up and do something relaxing but not too stimulating, preferably in an area other than where you sleep. Do not return to bed until you are sleepy.[/b]

Source

14. If you are still awake after 30 minutes, get up and do something until you feel sleepy and then try again. Staying in bed while you feel awake conditions your body as well as your mind to associate your bed with wakefulness and/or anxiety.[/b]

Source

From the time a child is tiny; parents fuss and work to make the child get to sleep and stay asleep. BUT, in reality, we cannot really MAKE them sleep...[/b]

<a href="http://parenting.families.com/blog/you-cant-make-a-child-sleep" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Source</a>


If anyone has some good studies or sources on sleep please share those as well. I know some CIO advocates believe CIO conditions the child to sleep, but I am thinkingthe opposite. If an adult who lays in awake would be conditioned not to sleep when they are in bed, I think the same could apply to a child as well. I think CIO conditions insomnia.

[$pryNinja]

I can see your point... bit only if the CIO is consistently not working and being continued anyway. Conditioning any behaviour takes time. I do know that when I put my DD in her crib and leave she cries not because she doesn't want to go to sleep, but because she doesn't like to be left alone. I've found that if I let her stay up with me until she is very sleepy, the crying only lasts a few minutes...

I know that if you read things to help you fall asleep it tells you that if you're having trouble falling asleep, don't just lay there in bed because it will only make it worse and turn into insomnia. You're only supposed to go to bed when you're tired so that you only associate your bed with relaxing/sleeping.

[TheOtherMichelle]

How ironic that I'm finally responding to this post on a night I'm having insomnia.

Anyway, I guess it's possible, but if the theory were to be valid wouldn't you only be able to include people who have had insomnia their entire lives? If an adult has always been a good sleeper and then recently develops insomnia you can't blame conditioning. You also have to take into consideration that adults have more worries than children (especially babies) and are therefore more prone to insomnia. One could also make the argument that CIO forces you to learn to self-soothe yourself to sleep at an earlier age than those that are not allowed to CIO.

That said, I don't support the methods of CIO that you used as an example. I've had to use it with dd, but only as she's gotten older and when I rule out any other possible issue that may be keeping her awake. For the most part she is a great sleeper (lucky us!) and when she is tired will go right to bed. (Now I know I jinxed myself and she will be up half the night!).

I think it's an interesting theory and may have some validity, but I think it would all depend on the actual stats.

i dont think any research has been done on it. I am not sure if I think my adult insomnia has anything to do with me being CIO as an infant. my mom says i was a good sleeper as a baby. as a child and up, I had sleep problems though. may or may not be connected. I dont think CIO conditions sleep like they claim it does though. i think sleeping at night conditions sleeping at night.

[zzz]

I think that there are SO many factors involved with insomnia that it would be almost, if not impossible to tell. Even now with multiple studies done on insomnia, we can only find a correlation between x, y, z, and insomnia - it would be that much harder with babies.

I'm not saying it couldn't, but I doubt it and it would be so, so hard to prove.

I don't CIO because I think it conditions other problems, but insomnia isn't really on my radar.


Lisa

[AngieMom07]

Honestly? I think it depends on the child. I think that in some cases CIO probably has negative effects, sometimes it was just what the child needed to get them to fall asleep.

[beck12]

Asking you focus on the possible link or CIO and insomnia not on the other effects CIO may or may not have.

for debate purposes I am talking about CIO not controlled crying. CIO being crying until they fall asleep no matter how long that takes. Some of you may not practice CIO that way that is fine but there are people who let their babies cry for as long as it takes even if thats 2 hours. (even if the baby is puking from crying so hard)

you cant MAKE child sleep. whether you parent them to sleep or let them CIO you don't get to choose when they actually fall asleep unless you want to inject them with a tranquilizer.

almost everyone I know needs something to fall asleep - some people need total quiet. some need total darkness. some need background noise or a little light. some people need firm pillows and some need soft. some people need a glass of water. some need a bath and some people cant sleep after they take a bath. you have to find your childs "special formula" that is conducive to sleep the same way you have found what works for yourself. they aren't going to sleep just because you said so.

You can make your child get a diaper change. you can make your child get their teeth brushed. you can make your child not touch a hot stove. you cannot make your child sleep. you cannot make your child not talk. you cannot makes your child walk. you CAN encourage them to do those things, and some may punish them into deciding to doing so, but you cannot physically make them do those things if they choose not to obey you. you can make your child go to bed but you cant make them sleep and making them go to bed when they aren't tired will only condition insomnia and perpetuate the bedtime problem.

This article talks about adults and insomnia, which is what got me thinking perhaps a baby who lays awake or lays crying in bed too longer may not learn to sleep but just learn to associate the bed with bad feelings and wakefulness:
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE

Don’t lay awake in bed for extended periods

If you don't fall asleep in a few minutes, get up and do something relaxing but not too stimulating, preferably in an area other than where you sleep. Do not return to bed until you are sleepy.[/b]

Source

14. If you are still awake after 30 minutes, get up and do something until you feel sleepy and then try again. Staying in bed while you feel awake conditions your body as well as your mind to associate your bed with wakefulness and/or anxiety.[/b]

Source

From the time a child is tiny; parents fuss and work to make the child get to sleep and stay asleep. BUT, in reality, we cannot really MAKE them sleep...[/b]

<a href="http://parenting.families.com/blog/you-cant-make-a-child-sleep" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">
Source</a>


If anyone has some good studies or sources on sleep please share those as well. I know some CIO advocates believe CIO conditions the child to sleep, but I am thinking the opposite. If an adult who lays in awake would be conditioned not to sleep when they are in bed, I think the same could apply to a child as well. I think CIO conditions insomnia.
[/b][/quote]
To the bolded...while I believe there are things that can be counterproductive to an infant's sleep (such as loud active music) I do not think we are born with such predispositions as needing total darkness or total silence to sleep. In fact I think total silence is a weird concept. I believe that is totally man-made. Until modern times human existed in a fairly flexible world that was ruled by the rising & falling of the sun & changes in seasons, etc. This is overall part of why I don't believe in rigid schedules for babies, etc. It makes no sense to me that we feel like we need to create a bubble world where things happen in a certain way at a certain time & without that all chaos occurs. I DO agree a baby (or anyone) will not sleep because you said so....but I really think we sometimes handicap our child's ability to sleep simply by being rigid on their sleep conditions whatever that may be (CIO or not). I do see where CIO could aid in developing sleep issues. I think the same though on some level of any sleep arrangement if one doesn't use common sense. I think it is thought provoking as a concept though & would be fascinated to read any additional studies on it.

[rdhdtrue]

I am a CIO parent and I can say I almost WISH my kids (and husband) had issues with sleep. Then I would not spend the first 30 minutes of a work day trying to get them all to wake up. I would even take light sleepers at this point ... really ...

[TigerMom]

I would be interested to see studies about insomnia and sleeping patterns for kids, regardless of how their parents dealt with sleeping habits.

The inferences made in the OP are interesting, but can also be reversed. For example, would a child who is never taught to self-soothe (and always rocked to sleep, etc.) have trouble getting him or herself to sleep as an adult and therefore suffer insomnia? DISCLAIMER - I'm not saying that is the case!! Just posing a hypothetical question, just like the original poster did.

im not sure because i always taught my children to self sooth, i just taught them to do so without crying. I guess the same could be true for a child who is never taught to self soothe. I think you have to find a middle ground between forcing a child to self sooth by making them cry it out, and never allowing a child learn to self sooth. also I suppose the sleep problems could do either way as rd pointed out. Perhaps causing sleep problems, but not necessarily insomnia.

[beck12]

I would be interested to see studies about insomnia and sleeping patterns for kids, regardless of how their parents dealt with sleeping habits.

The inferences made in the OP are interesting, but can also be reversed. For example, would a child who is never taught to self-soothe (and always rocked to sleep, etc.) have trouble getting him or herself to sleep as an adult and therefore suffer insomnia? DISCLAIMER - I'm not saying that is the case!! Just posing a hypothetical question, just like the original poster did.[/b]

I realize you aren't saying that is the case...but to that "argument" I have a serious question... Do you (general you) believe in swimming lessons or are you a sink or swim (throw them in) kind of believer? Personally I think things are best learned through gentle repetition & example. I do think it is absolutely possible to teach a child to self soothe THROUGH rocking them & cuddling them. When we all feel bad (typically) we like to put on something cozy & comfy & "cuddle up". I tell my DS all the time things to assist him in understanding self-soothing concepts...like saying "I know you are sad that you cannot go outside (let's say its raining), mama will give you a cuddle & then we can find something else you love to do". I don't expect him to get his mind off of it on his own yet (he is 17 months) - so I teach him how to get past it. If he can fall asleep by himself, which he often can then great, if not I help him settle. I do not personally think anyone can ever learn best through sink or swim teaching. Sure a lot of kids when thrown in can technically swim - but you can bet they have lousy form & without further instruction to correct it & improve it, they will NEVER make any swim teams.

that was beautifully put Beckie!

[TigerMom]

Do you (general you) believe in swimming lessons or are you a sink or swim (throw them in) kind of believer? Personally I think things are best learned through gentle repetition & example.[/b]

To answer your initial question, no I'm not a "throw them in" exclusively kind of person. For each of our kids we watched as our child reacted to the water (our younger one was more at ease with the pool than the other). We never threw them in, but did let them test their own limits and see if they caught on - and accompanied it with guidance, teaching, etc. Just like we would have tried other options if CIO hadn't worked on either of our children, we made sure what we did was working with swimming.

But while I see your point, swimming and sleeping are two very different examples. The immediate risk of throwing a child into the pool to see if he'll swim is far greater than the risk of letting a child fuss/cry a bit to see if he'll go to sleep. The former risk is drowning; the latter is continued crying.

I do think it is absolutely possible to teach a child to self soothe THROUGH rocking them & cuddling them.[/b]

I'm sure it does, since many parents don't use CIO and their kids learn just fine. I'm not saying it never works. But it's not a foolproof thing either; as with any method, it doesn't work with every child. In some cases it results in kids staying up later or unable to get themselves to sleep because they're used to being rocked - which in turn results in a child who doesn't get enough sleep.

[rdhdtrue]

In hypothetical (sp?) instances sink or swim happens more then a slow rise to conquest. But no to say a parent that has used CIO and compare it to a parent throwing a child into a pool and hoping for the best ... that is not comparable.

A child needs to be reliant on themselves foremost before needing a parent until they are in their forties or beyond. My siblings and ex-husband all still rely on their parents to get them through the tough times ... for financial issues and emotional. A parent is responsible to help a child learn to become self efficient and independent. If that is not the case (in my eyes) they have failed as parents.

One of my brothers clearly states the reason he is, like he is, is because he did not get enough cheese when growing up ... (Oh and he is 50 years old) Babying and spoiling is not a good thing in any instance.

[beck12]

To answer your initial question, no I'm not a "throw them in" exclusively kind of person. For each of our kids we watched as our child reacted to the water (our younger one was more at ease with the pool than the other). We never threw them in, but did let them test their own limits and see if they caught on - and accompanied it with guidance, teaching, etc. Just like we would have tried other options if CIO hadn't worked on either of our children, we made sure what we did was working with swimming.

But while I see your point, swimming and sleeping are two very different examples. The immediate risk of throwing a child into the pool to see if he'll swim is far greater than the risk of letting a child fuss/cry a bit to see if he'll go to sleep. The former risk is drowning; the latter is continued crying.

I'm sure it does, since many parents don't use CIO and their kids learn just fine. I'm not saying it never works. But it's not a foolproof thing either; as with any method, it doesn't work with every child. In some cases it results in kids staying up later or unable to get themselves to sleep because they're used to being rocked - which in turn results in a child who doesn't get enough sleep.
[/b]

I wasn't saying at ALL that if you threw your child in to a pool you would let them drown. It was not that - it had more to do with the idea of making a child find their own way with a clearly defined "line in the sand". When a child is thrown into a pool (or lake, etc & YES I have known parents who did this) - they are immediately thrown into a mode of having to step up & do it, whether they feel ready or not. I don't doubt that those same parents would jump in IMMEDIATELY if little Johnny didn't surface & I am sorry if it EVER read that I was speaking of any drowning riskl - that couldn't be further from my intent. Being CIO or not CIO is not like comparing rocking a baby to sleep every single night for eternity or letting them cry it out. Some people do rock a baby every night, but most women who don't believe in CIO don't, they simply allow a child to progress at a pace they are ready for - and it is MUCH like you described teaching a child to swim, helping a child to feel confident to push their own abilities & independence on a pace they are maturing at naturally, not at ALL to inhibit that development.

To your second part - I just can't believe that it's true that it isn't foolproof to allow a child to progress at their own pace. I think children should be encouraged & allowed to explore their independence as it starts showing through - but I don't think it should ever be something that is forced. Most of the world doesn't CIO & they don't co-sleep & they have lower rates of sleep issues than we have here. Historically people haven't coslept or CIO & historically we had less sleep issues than now. My own Gram & I talked about this (she is nearly 90) and she said in her day she didn't know anyone that didn't rock their babies to sleep each night. CIO wasn't even heard of. For hundreds of thousands of years we didn't CIO & we are all still here - I just see no reason to add some artificial formula into the parenting mix now.

[beck12]

In hypothetical (sp?) instances sink or swim happens more then a slow rise to conquest. But no to say a parent that has used CIO and compare it to a parent throwing a child into a pool and hoping for the best ... that is not comparable.

A child needs to be reliant on themselves foremost before needing a parent until they are in their forties or beyond. My siblings and ex-husband all still rely on their parents to get them through the tough times ... for financial issues and emotional. A parent is responsible to help a child learn to become self efficient and independent. If that is not the case (in my eyes) they have failed as parents.

One of my brothers clearly states the reason he is, like he is, is because he did not get enough cheese when growing up ... (Oh and he is 50 years old) Babying and spoiling is not a good thing in any instance.[/b]

This is the misnomer people have about holding & rocking babies & plain old permissive parenting. They are NOT the same thing. Just because a child CIO's doesn't mean they will be independent - not at all. Just because someone cuddles their child a lot doesn't mean they are coddled. You are right that a parent has the responsibility to help a child learn to become self sufficient & independent. HELP being the key word. Basically deciding at an arbitrary age that it is time for little Johnny to cry himself to sleep is not helping him IMO. Developing positive sleep associations, repeating patterns that help him become drowsy & ready for bed, giving him nice feelings to fall asleep with (and subsequently dream about), etc, etc, etc...cannot be ruled a bad thing in my book. If a child falls asleep feeling that they have been rejected or not heard or that their emotional needs to be comforted are being ignored - to me that is sad. Other parents may not think that is how their child feels - but none of us can say for sure. I know that I never want my son to ever feel that way...not now, not at 16, not even at 40. As long as I am alive I do plan to be there for my son. Not because he won't be able to do it for himself, but because in any good relationship, we rely on others to help us get through life's hard times. I still rely on my mom - her advice, a hug when I need it, etc. I am INCREDIBLY independent. I have paid for everything in life myself - moved out at 18, etc, etc, etc. I even paid for all of my own vehicles, my own wedding, on & on. I have a sister that is the total opposite. My mom never CIO'd, and we co-slept. Guess what? In 5 kids - she got 5 very different adults! Imagine that. Some are very very independent, some not so much, but overall we are all good, loving people. I really don't think rocking us to sleep was the whole picture & lots of inputs formed who we are - but none of us have sleep problems & none of us have a hard getting emotionally vulnerable & that I do think is important to note. I think that if a child is overly dependent that can just as easily be from lack of confidence stemming from not getting their basic emotional needs met as it can be from coddling.

I think sink or swim has a lot more correlation in MIND SETS as CIO does than your comparison between CODDLING and CUDDLING.

I agree with Beckie.

A child needs to be reliant on themselves foremost before needing a parent until they are in their forties or beyond.[/b]

that doesn't make sense to me. First of all, why should a child rely on themselves until they are 40 or older? we are their parents. we are supposed to look out for them. And what about after they are 40? then what? then we should look out of them? that seems backwards. I think parents should always look out for their children at any age, but that they should teach them to be self reliant over time so they start to rely on themselves more then their parents. I would not want my child to be 10 years old and completely self reliant though. Our children SHOULD need us to guide them and teach them how to make good decisions. There ability to take care of themselves should be age appropriate. It's not age appropriate for a child to sleep through the night without ANY help in their infancy.