Attachment Parenting
Question about baby "propping", etc
I've seen posters here say that they don't think a child should be put into a position they cannot physically get themselves into- ex they shouldn't be put in bumbos before they can sit, in jumpers/saucers before they can stand, walkers, etc. I've also seen this carry over to not walking a baby around holding on to their hands.
I sort of understand the bumbo/excersaucer thing. I really don't understand the walking thing... it seems perfectly reasonable to me that parents have been walking their toddlers around for eons. Also, from the time Emmy was teeny tiny I would prop her up into a sitting position on my lap. Or stand her up, or whatever.
Am I misunderstanding the reasoning? Or is there some purpose I don't understand?
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Question about baby "propping", etc
The only place I've ever read the no walking with baby's hands or propping etc. was here:
https://www.janetlansbury.com/2009/12/dont-stand-me-up/
And some of her ideas come across as pretty nutty.
It seems odd that everything she says about motor development seems counter to the idea of a 'zone of proximal development', which I've read as a much more accepted idea of how children learn.
Wyo- you are right, the zone of proximal development is HUGE in Early Childhood development! I don't think I've written a single paper in my degree program that doesn't include vygotsky and/or piaget
My understanding is that a) it means their muscles develop in the right order to support each stage and b) a child that has physically learnt to do things itself is a safer child.
I suppose I'm in the middle. I don't put her in any "contraption" but I do prop her up on my lap, and I know I will walk her along when she's toddling.
Like you I think parents have been doing this for ever.
I'm a big believer in nature getting it right. It could be easy to put a bay in a bumbo or a jumper and forget about them (I'm not suggesting that parents who use this do forget their child, just that you could). Where as you can't forget the toddler attached to your hands as you walk along with them, and my patience/back strength, for that is probably an appropriate length of time for them to practice walking.
My theory is of course wildly unscientific.
Elizabeth 5yrs old Jane 3yrs old
DH & I are spending the better part of the day walking Ari around the house while holding his hand right now. He's pretty much refusing to crawl or cruise & will only take about 10-15 steps on his own.
Glad to know I'm harming his natural development.
I think there's a bit of a difference between a walker or exersaucer & holding your LOs hands while they walk. That lady is crazy cakes anyway.
Yes, scaffolding also has played a large part in my papers
I'm pretty sure that my default answers on the praxis will be "Vygotsky" or "Piaget" if it's a person and "Scaffolding" or "Zone of Proximal Devlopment" if not!
Well, I'm one of those posters so I guess I better say something
Basically babies shouldn't be put in unnatural positions because it will hamper their development. If they aren't ready to do it on their own they aren't physically prepared to do it. Bumbo's for example prop babies up putting too much strain on their spines and necks. They can't say they are tired, there's nothing for them to lean on when they are uncomfortable. As far as walking, part of babies development that allows them to walk is developing balance. If I baby is unnaturally walked they very well might gain the mechanics and strength but balance can't be rushed. This can have a lifelong affect on the child that might simply manifest as being clumsy but the point is they will most likely be less coordinated than they would have been.
That all said, of course it's natural to sit a baby in your lap, etc - and I know I walked DS around! Stay away from the bumbos and walkers that can prop a baby up too long and you'll be fine.
And I agree about Janet Landsbury, she has a few good points but when I read most of what she writes I feel like slushying her ala glee, lol.
no clue who would say it's a bad thing and why it's a bad thing. to me, it's such an iconic moment of babyhood. seeing those little legs toddling along holding on to mama or dada's hands.
an iconic moment we never got to experience until much later because little miss independence would never hold on to us until she was fully walking on her own.
j+k+m+e | running with needles
I guess then we shouldn't change their diapers until they are old enough to clean themselves? That argument can lead to a whole host of crazy things
j+k+m+e | running with needles
That woman drives me nuts and I have no idea why she seems to have so much credibility.
I actually hated the bumbo, and I feel like it put DS in a very unnatural position. He would slump over and had a weird curve in his back. When he sat up on his own, he had perfect posture. The exersaucer - I really only think its mildly unnatural. I mean - if the baby can support himself enough to stand in it, then I don't think that its terrible. Obviously, I wouldn't leave my kid in one for a long time, and I don't think its natural for a kid to hang from his crotch area for a long time.
As for holding hands while walking or sitting a baby up in your lap - I think this is totally natural. Again, I wouldn't put a baby in this position for a long time because it seems like it would be uncomfortable, but if they are trying to get into the position or can hold themselves in that type of position for a short period of time, I don't think it hurts them.
I will say, though, my chiropractor told me that he thinks a lot of people have neck problems as adults because they didn't get enough tummy time as babies or they were encouraged to walk early and put in unnatural positions (like standing when they weren't ready to stand) for a long period of time before their muscles were developed enough. This theory makes sense to me.
I'll give her credit for a lot of self-promotion on the web, as I've never seen anything she's said shared or analyzed by anyone else. I think she's interesting fodder for the AP board because her focus is attachment, but she firmly believes in achieving it via a very different path than Sears.
Agreed. Heck, picking your baby up and holding them puts them 'unnaturally' above the ground at a height they can't get to 'naturally' . . . so maybe we should just roll our babies everywhere until they walk and climb
Definitely. Call me crazy but I think it is her coming onto this board from time to time promoting her agenda and raising heck. I actually "agree" with her core philosophy and my DS is in a flippin' RIE based DCP but I think she is militant and leaves a bad taste in my mouth.