Now that the organ workshop is over, I've been excited to get back to talking about other things! I've had this post in the back of my mind for several months. This is a pretty straightforward topic, not needing as much research and documentation as other attachment parenting topics I've tackled.
From the Attachment Parenting International website (http://www.attachmentparenting.org/):
Babies and young children have an intense need for the physical presence of a consistent, loving, responsive caregiver: ideally a parent. If it becomes necessary, choose an alternate caregiver who has formed a bond with the child and who cares for him in a way that strengthens the attachment relationship. Keep schedules flexible, and minimize stress and fear during short separations.
Basically, the gist of this principle is this: when humanly possible, stay at home with your children! Especially when they are babies!
As LDS parents, we receive a lot of institutional and cultural support for our efforts to do just this. In fact, as I read the chapter in Attached at the Heart discussing this, I wondered what on earth I would write about, because I would be preaching to the choir. I would not be sharing much that was new to this particular audience.
However, even us LDS stay-at-home mothers need to take care. It can become easy to let various commitments take us out of our homes much more than we need to be.
I'm reminded of the stirring words of Sister Julie B. Beck in general conference two years ago:
Mothers who know do less.... Mothers who know are willing to live on less and consume less of the world's goods in order to spend more time with their children—more time eating together, more time working together, more time reading together, more time talking, laughing, singing, and exemplifying. These mothers choose carefully and do not try to choose it all. Their goal is to prepare a rising generation of children who will take the gospel of Jesus Christ into the entire world. Their goal is to prepare future fathers and mothers who will be builders of the Lord's kingdom for the next 50 years. That is influence; that is power.
I had an interesting experience this summer preparing for the organ workshop. As much as I was excited for the opportunity, I found it to be such a drain on my time and resources. The week away from home was no big deal. I was enthused and able to focus,, and it was a memorable event. My children had a blast with grandma and their cousins. But the weeks of preparation definitely took a toll on my family, as I was unavailable, either physically or mentally, much of the time. Sure, I was lucky to have a supportive husband who took the kids to the park or on walks, or stayed home with them while I went to the church to practice. I gave in to the Wii almost every day the last few weeks so that I could get things done on the computer for the workshop. My kids resented it. Dallin told me several times during those few weeks and again today that he doesn't want me to teach at the workshop again.
Now, this workshop was a once-a-year thing. While I probably won't teach again for a few years, I definitely intend to do it again. In reality, a month or so of intensive "time away " for mom isn't going to scar my children for life. But it did make me think ALOT about priorities. As I found myself so stressed and frazzled trying to "do it all", prepare for this workshop where I knew I would be on display in front of very talented people, yet also provide my children with a summer full of memories, I questioned how on earth women with full-time careers could possibly do it. I could barely do it for a month! This experience made me more fully appreciate how blessed I am to be able to stay at home with my children. It made me grateful for the days full of small moments that I would otherwise miss. And it made me appreciate the impact that my presence has on my children, day in and day out.
Reading up on this principle of attachment parenting, I did realize that there were things I needed to address, even though staying at home with one's children probably wouldn't be a controversial subject. One of those things that I want to talk about is our church culture and the pressure on parents to leave their babies and young children often to do church work. I guess this is one of my personal pet peeves, and again I don't think it's an issue of doctrine as much as it is an issue of culture--and culture can be changed, one brave person at a time.
I wish that there were fewer demands taking mothers outside of the home for church callings and more support for mothers who choose not to be outside the home for extended periods of time, without their children, for church callings. A prime example of this is girl's camp. It honestly surprises me how many mother are willing to leave their young babies (under 1 year of age) for 3-5 days in order to go to girl's camp. It saddens me to hear of mothers weaning their babies long before they should be weaned so that they "can take a bottle while I'm away at girl's camp". Honestly, what individual mothers choose to do is their business, of course. But I hate that now there's this culture where this kind of behavior is expected, and a mother who says, "No, I'm sorry, my baby is too young to be without me for a week" is looked down on as being unwilling to sacrifice, as not contributing to "the cause".
I wish there was less pressure to leave children at home, and more acceptance of bringing them... bring them to meetings, to activities, to whatever it might be.
I know youth leaders are told not to bring their children as they are working in their callings. I also understand the reasons why, that children can be a distraction and leaders need to be focusing on the youth. But it still makes me sad, and I still don't agree. A baby separated from it's mama is such a foreign idea to me! I love the picture I have in my mind of a good friend who taught Gospel Doctrine with her infant strapped to her front in a Baby Bjorn. Scenes like that make me want to cheer!
Another pet peeve: When the only "legitimate" reason for a mother not leaving her baby is that she is breastfeeding. Ugh, ALL babies need their mommies, not just breastfed ones! It's not just about the milk, or about baby not being able to take a bottle. It's about baby needing Mom's presence! Mom is usually her baby's primary attachment figure, what author Joseph Chilton Pearce calls the "matrix", the base from which baby operates.
Pearce wrote a book called Magical Child, which is a long and dry read, combining some great ideas with some that are a bit too far-out for my taste. But he talks a lot about the science of biology and how it impacts parents and babies. I liked this thought, about the importance of keeping baby in close proximity to mother and not putting him or her in situations to be without her: "
She [the infant who gets to be with mother 24-7] is finding that learning is not movement from the known into the unknown, but movement of the known into the unknown.
A fear of abandonment in the older infant and child is not a simple fear of losing his/her source of nourishment, or object attachment... For more important than the problem of nourishment or even ease of body stress, fear of abandment is based on fear of a threat of a collapse into chaos, a loss of the means for concept structuring. Mother is his/her conceptual channel for interacting and responding to the world as intent prompts him/her to do. Mother represents the building block, the cornerstone of meaning, the pattern around which the child's mind-brain structures its whole body of knowledge.
This leads me into another aspect of the principle, and that is the part that says, "Minimize stress and fear during short separations". We choose to avoid separations from our children when they are babies unless absolutely necessary. We transition our kids very gradually, choosing caregivers with whom they are well-acquainted and comfortable. We try not to leave them very often.
One big separation experience for LDS toddlers is going to nursery. Interestingly, did you know that separation anxiety peaks at 18 months? I was shocked when I read that for the first time. This means that age 18 months is when separation anxiety tends to be at its worst. Right as young children head for nursery. Yet often, this normal developmental stage is not handled very empathetically by either parents or leaders. I've watched kids literally shoved through the door by their parents on their first day, no transition whatsoever. I've watched kids cry and cry for their parents, and have that cry ignored.
My goal is to first give my child a positive nursery experience, to have them know that nursery is a fun place to be, before they have to deal with any separation. To this end, I look at staying for the first four weeks or so, and then very gradually transitioning them to staying on their own. I believe that they first need to know that nursery is a safe and happy place. Their first idea about nursery should not be "I get left", because if that is their first experience, then they can never clear their head enough to realize that nursery is fun.
Again, parents get to make these decisions for their children. I've decided that if I were a nursery leader, I would respect a parent's choice as to how to handle the transition, even if I didn't agree with it, because I would want the same courtesy. The problem comes when there is pressure on a parent to conform to something they don't believe is right. I remember a mom of five, staying in the nursery with her twins who'd been in there for almost two years and were still having problems with separation. She got all kind of criticism behind her back for doing this. But she told me, "All my kids have separation issues through their Sunbeam year in Primary. Then they're fine and go without looking back." She knew it would be fine. She knew her kids.
Anyway, there's my rant on this topic! Like I said, I'm pretty open to other people doing things how they see fit, I just hate it that there is pressure on people like me to conform to those other things!
From the Attachment Parenting International website (http://www.attachmentparenting.org/):
Babies and young children have an intense need for the physical presence of a consistent, loving, responsive caregiver: ideally a parent. If it becomes necessary, choose an alternate caregiver who has formed a bond with the child and who cares for him in a way that strengthens the attachment relationship. Keep schedules flexible, and minimize stress and fear during short separations.
Basically, the gist of this principle is this: when humanly possible, stay at home with your children! Especially when they are babies!
As LDS parents, we receive a lot of institutional and cultural support for our efforts to do just this. In fact, as I read the chapter in Attached at the Heart discussing this, I wondered what on earth I would write about, because I would be preaching to the choir. I would not be sharing much that was new to this particular audience.
However, even us LDS stay-at-home mothers need to take care. It can become easy to let various commitments take us out of our homes much more than we need to be.
I'm reminded of the stirring words of Sister Julie B. Beck in general conference two years ago:
Mothers who know do less.... Mothers who know are willing to live on less and consume less of the world's goods in order to spend more time with their children—more time eating together, more time working together, more time reading together, more time talking, laughing, singing, and exemplifying. These mothers choose carefully and do not try to choose it all. Their goal is to prepare a rising generation of children who will take the gospel of Jesus Christ into the entire world. Their goal is to prepare future fathers and mothers who will be builders of the Lord's kingdom for the next 50 years. That is influence; that is power.
I had an interesting experience this summer preparing for the organ workshop. As much as I was excited for the opportunity, I found it to be such a drain on my time and resources. The week away from home was no big deal. I was enthused and able to focus,, and it was a memorable event. My children had a blast with grandma and their cousins. But the weeks of preparation definitely took a toll on my family, as I was unavailable, either physically or mentally, much of the time. Sure, I was lucky to have a supportive husband who took the kids to the park or on walks, or stayed home with them while I went to the church to practice. I gave in to the Wii almost every day the last few weeks so that I could get things done on the computer for the workshop. My kids resented it. Dallin told me several times during those few weeks and again today that he doesn't want me to teach at the workshop again.
Now, this workshop was a once-a-year thing. While I probably won't teach again for a few years, I definitely intend to do it again. In reality, a month or so of intensive "time away " for mom isn't going to scar my children for life. But it did make me think ALOT about priorities. As I found myself so stressed and frazzled trying to "do it all", prepare for this workshop where I knew I would be on display in front of very talented people, yet also provide my children with a summer full of memories, I questioned how on earth women with full-time careers could possibly do it. I could barely do it for a month! This experience made me more fully appreciate how blessed I am to be able to stay at home with my children. It made me grateful for the days full of small moments that I would otherwise miss. And it made me appreciate the impact that my presence has on my children, day in and day out.
Reading up on this principle of attachment parenting, I did realize that there were things I needed to address, even though staying at home with one's children probably wouldn't be a controversial subject. One of those things that I want to talk about is our church culture and the pressure on parents to leave their babies and young children often to do church work. I guess this is one of my personal pet peeves, and again I don't think it's an issue of doctrine as much as it is an issue of culture--and culture can be changed, one brave person at a time.
I wish that there were fewer demands taking mothers outside of the home for church callings and more support for mothers who choose not to be outside the home for extended periods of time, without their children, for church callings. A prime example of this is girl's camp. It honestly surprises me how many mother are willing to leave their young babies (under 1 year of age) for 3-5 days in order to go to girl's camp. It saddens me to hear of mothers weaning their babies long before they should be weaned so that they "can take a bottle while I'm away at girl's camp". Honestly, what individual mothers choose to do is their business, of course. But I hate that now there's this culture where this kind of behavior is expected, and a mother who says, "No, I'm sorry, my baby is too young to be without me for a week" is looked down on as being unwilling to sacrifice, as not contributing to "the cause".
I wish there was less pressure to leave children at home, and more acceptance of bringing them... bring them to meetings, to activities, to whatever it might be.
I know youth leaders are told not to bring their children as they are working in their callings. I also understand the reasons why, that children can be a distraction and leaders need to be focusing on the youth. But it still makes me sad, and I still don't agree. A baby separated from it's mama is such a foreign idea to me! I love the picture I have in my mind of a good friend who taught Gospel Doctrine with her infant strapped to her front in a Baby Bjorn. Scenes like that make me want to cheer!
Another pet peeve: When the only "legitimate" reason for a mother not leaving her baby is that she is breastfeeding. Ugh, ALL babies need their mommies, not just breastfed ones! It's not just about the milk, or about baby not being able to take a bottle. It's about baby needing Mom's presence! Mom is usually her baby's primary attachment figure, what author Joseph Chilton Pearce calls the "matrix", the base from which baby operates.
Pearce wrote a book called Magical Child, which is a long and dry read, combining some great ideas with some that are a bit too far-out for my taste. But he talks a lot about the science of biology and how it impacts parents and babies. I liked this thought, about the importance of keeping baby in close proximity to mother and not putting him or her in situations to be without her: "
She [the infant who gets to be with mother 24-7] is finding that learning is not movement from the known into the unknown, but movement of the known into the unknown.
A fear of abandonment in the older infant and child is not a simple fear of losing his/her source of nourishment, or object attachment... For more important than the problem of nourishment or even ease of body stress, fear of abandment is based on fear of a threat of a collapse into chaos, a loss of the means for concept structuring. Mother is his/her conceptual channel for interacting and responding to the world as intent prompts him/her to do. Mother represents the building block, the cornerstone of meaning, the pattern around which the child's mind-brain structures its whole body of knowledge.
This leads me into another aspect of the principle, and that is the part that says, "Minimize stress and fear during short separations". We choose to avoid separations from our children when they are babies unless absolutely necessary. We transition our kids very gradually, choosing caregivers with whom they are well-acquainted and comfortable. We try not to leave them very often.
One big separation experience for LDS toddlers is going to nursery. Interestingly, did you know that separation anxiety peaks at 18 months? I was shocked when I read that for the first time. This means that age 18 months is when separation anxiety tends to be at its worst. Right as young children head for nursery. Yet often, this normal developmental stage is not handled very empathetically by either parents or leaders. I've watched kids literally shoved through the door by their parents on their first day, no transition whatsoever. I've watched kids cry and cry for their parents, and have that cry ignored.
My goal is to first give my child a positive nursery experience, to have them know that nursery is a fun place to be, before they have to deal with any separation. To this end, I look at staying for the first four weeks or so, and then very gradually transitioning them to staying on their own. I believe that they first need to know that nursery is a safe and happy place. Their first idea about nursery should not be "I get left", because if that is their first experience, then they can never clear their head enough to realize that nursery is fun.
Again, parents get to make these decisions for their children. I've decided that if I were a nursery leader, I would respect a parent's choice as to how to handle the transition, even if I didn't agree with it, because I would want the same courtesy. The problem comes when there is pressure on a parent to conform to something they don't believe is right. I remember a mom of five, staying in the nursery with her twins who'd been in there for almost two years and were still having problems with separation. She got all kind of criticism behind her back for doing this. But she told me, "All my kids have separation issues through their Sunbeam year in Primary. Then they're fine and go without looking back." She knew it would be fine. She knew her kids.
Anyway, there's my rant on this topic! Like I said, I'm pretty open to other people doing things how they see fit, I just hate it that there is pressure on people like me to conform to those other things!
Comments