cosleeping Re: [AlwaysLearning] Need 'supporting' links, etc.
Schuyler
Whenever I think about co-sleeping in older children I think about a book by Marjorie Shostak called Nisa: The Life and Words of a !Kung Woman. It's the autobiography of a Dobe !Kung woman as framed within the narration that Marjorie Shostak gives it. I don't know why the text from that book stuck with me, but there are passages in the book where Nisa talks about becoming aware of her parents having sex while she coslept. There is a passage in the beginning of a chapter called Discovering Sex that describes the sleeping arrangements (without reference to age, the !Kung don't have any calendar, usually the aging of individuals comes from using the data that the Herero, their neighbors kept of who was born when who the !Kung knew to be roughly the same age. "Parents and children sleep together, sharing their blankets, in small one-room huts that have no dividers or private sections."
Meredith Small has this to say in the book Our Babies, Ourselves (oh, a quick search gave me a similar piece from an article she wrote here:http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/sleep/small.html):
In Appalachia or eastern Kentucy, co-sleeping in infancy and childhood is the norm, as it has been for hundreds of years <there is a citation to a paper that I'd like to access>. Although the people of this area are not an "ethnic minority" or recent immigrants, they do represent a chesive population that has been resistant to change. Historians note that in colonial times on the eastern seaboard in the United States, several people slept in the same bed--it was the only way to sleep in such small houses (cit. Tobacco Colony: Life in Early Maryland 1650-1720. G. Main). But when new ideas about privacy began to appear in the nineteenth centruy, housing reflected thos changes and suddenly there were private sleeping rooms, first in public houses and then in private homes. The people of Appalachia, descendants of that more colonial tradition, continued the communal sleeping arrangement and even now refuse to place babies alone even when there is plenty of
room. Contrary to the advice given by pediatricians in the area, these mothers place their babies in the parental bed because they believe in their particular parenting ideology. As anthropologist Susan Abbott points out, "What it [co-sleeping] is not is some kind of quaint holdover from an archaic past, nor is it pathological in its constitution or outcome for the majority of those who experience it. It is a current, well-situated pattern of child rearing that is withstanding the onslaught of advice by contemporary childcare experts." The point is to make a tightly knit family and keep children close. Seventy-five-year-old Verna Mae Sloane writes of motherhood in Appalachia: "How can you expect to hold on to them in life if you begin by pushing them away?" (cit. Common Folks, Sloane, V.M., 1978) Again, the ideology guiding co-sleeping in such cultures is one of attachment rather than independence.
Oh, here's a nice little piece: http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/longterm.html, a couple of snippets:
In a survey of adult college age subjects, Lewis
and Janda (2) report that males who coslept with their parents between
birth and five years of age had significantly higher self-esteem,
experienced less guilt and anxiety, and reported greater frequency of
sex. Boys who coslept between 6 and 11 years of age also had higher
self-esteem. For women, cosleeping during childhood was associated with
less discomfort about physical contact and affection as adults. (While
these traits may be confounded by parental attitudes, such findings are
clearly inconsistent with the folk belief that cosleeping has
detrimental long-term effects on psycho-social development.
* A study of parents of 86
children in clinics of pediatrics and child psychiatry (ages 2-13
years) on military bases (offspring of military personnel) revealed
that cosleeping children received higher evaluations of their
comportment from their teachers than did solitary sleeping children,
and they were underrepresented in psychiatric populations compared with
children who did not cosleep. The authors state: "Contrary to
expectations, those children who had not had previous professional
attention for emotional or behavioral problems coslept more frequently
than did children who were known to have had psychiatric intervention,
and lower parental ratings of adaptive functioning. The same finding
occurred in a sample of boys one might consider "Oedipal victors" (e.g.
3 year old and older boys who sleep with their mothers in the absence
of their fathers)--a finding which directly opposes traditional
analytic thought" (4).
Schuyler
________________________________
From: sorschasmom <willowsfortress@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, 8 December, 2008 3:25:09 AM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Need 'supporting' links, etc.
My Mil (who is really cool and we get along beautifully) just came
for a visit. She almost always (yes, that's a true use of words
there) has questions or concerns about our lifestyle that we address
in a supportive manner. We LIKE that she ask questions and she LIKES
that we give her information regarding her concerns. After her
visits we typically send her weblinks that support our 'answers'.
Here are two concerns she had that we need further information that
supports our decisions. If anyone can supply website links, etc. we
would appreciate it.
Here goes…
She is concerned with Tails being 11-years-old and co-sleeping. She
thinks that it is/will inhibit Tails from being independent. We have
only been able to find 'infant' co-sleep info - is there anything
about older children and co-sleeping out there?
Y
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Meredith Small has this to say in the book Our Babies, Ourselves (oh, a quick search gave me a similar piece from an article she wrote here:http://www.mothering.com/articles/new_baby/sleep/small.html):
In Appalachia or eastern Kentucy, co-sleeping in infancy and childhood is the norm, as it has been for hundreds of years <there is a citation to a paper that I'd like to access>. Although the people of this area are not an "ethnic minority" or recent immigrants, they do represent a chesive population that has been resistant to change. Historians note that in colonial times on the eastern seaboard in the United States, several people slept in the same bed--it was the only way to sleep in such small houses (cit. Tobacco Colony: Life in Early Maryland 1650-1720. G. Main). But when new ideas about privacy began to appear in the nineteenth centruy, housing reflected thos changes and suddenly there were private sleeping rooms, first in public houses and then in private homes. The people of Appalachia, descendants of that more colonial tradition, continued the communal sleeping arrangement and even now refuse to place babies alone even when there is plenty of
room. Contrary to the advice given by pediatricians in the area, these mothers place their babies in the parental bed because they believe in their particular parenting ideology. As anthropologist Susan Abbott points out, "What it [co-sleeping] is not is some kind of quaint holdover from an archaic past, nor is it pathological in its constitution or outcome for the majority of those who experience it. It is a current, well-situated pattern of child rearing that is withstanding the onslaught of advice by contemporary childcare experts." The point is to make a tightly knit family and keep children close. Seventy-five-year-old Verna Mae Sloane writes of motherhood in Appalachia: "How can you expect to hold on to them in life if you begin by pushing them away?" (cit. Common Folks, Sloane, V.M., 1978) Again, the ideology guiding co-sleeping in such cultures is one of attachment rather than independence.
Oh, here's a nice little piece: http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/longterm.html, a couple of snippets:
In a survey of adult college age subjects, Lewis
and Janda (2) report that males who coslept with their parents between
birth and five years of age had significantly higher self-esteem,
experienced less guilt and anxiety, and reported greater frequency of
sex. Boys who coslept between 6 and 11 years of age also had higher
self-esteem. For women, cosleeping during childhood was associated with
less discomfort about physical contact and affection as adults. (While
these traits may be confounded by parental attitudes, such findings are
clearly inconsistent with the folk belief that cosleeping has
detrimental long-term effects on psycho-social development.
* A study of parents of 86
children in clinics of pediatrics and child psychiatry (ages 2-13
years) on military bases (offspring of military personnel) revealed
that cosleeping children received higher evaluations of their
comportment from their teachers than did solitary sleeping children,
and they were underrepresented in psychiatric populations compared with
children who did not cosleep. The authors state: "Contrary to
expectations, those children who had not had previous professional
attention for emotional or behavioral problems coslept more frequently
than did children who were known to have had psychiatric intervention,
and lower parental ratings of adaptive functioning. The same finding
occurred in a sample of boys one might consider "Oedipal victors" (e.g.
3 year old and older boys who sleep with their mothers in the absence
of their fathers)--a finding which directly opposes traditional
analytic thought" (4).
Schuyler
________________________________
From: sorschasmom <willowsfortress@...>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Monday, 8 December, 2008 3:25:09 AM
Subject: [AlwaysLearning] Need 'supporting' links, etc.
My Mil (who is really cool and we get along beautifully) just came
for a visit. She almost always (yes, that's a true use of words
there) has questions or concerns about our lifestyle that we address
in a supportive manner. We LIKE that she ask questions and she LIKES
that we give her information regarding her concerns. After her
visits we typically send her weblinks that support our 'answers'.
Here are two concerns she had that we need further information that
supports our decisions. If anyone can supply website links, etc. we
would appreciate it.
Here goes…
She is concerned with Tails being 11-years-old and co-sleeping. She
thinks that it is/will inhibit Tails from being independent. We have
only been able to find 'infant' co-sleep info - is there anything
about older children and co-sleeping out there?
Y
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-Historians note that in colonial times on the eastern seaboard in
the United States, several people slept in the same bed--it was the
only way to sleep in such small houses (cit. Tobacco Colony: Life in
Early Maryland 1650-1720. G. Main). -=-
In one of the castle/stately-home combos near Cambridge, England,
there's a bed that's really wide, made for a whole family. About
four times wider than long, I think.
(I have notes somewhere of where exactly I was...)
At our old house, I started off sleeping with the kids in their room
(a double bed under a single bed, after a while, but a double bed
before Holly was born), and would go in with Keith sometime later in
the night, or one of the kids would, maybe. When Holly was born we
got a bunk bed and Kirby slept on top.
When we moved to a bigger house so the kids could have their own
room, we all slept together the first many times we were in the
house, before we had lots of furniture. Keith was in Minneapolis,
and the house was big and spooky. We moved a mattress from room to
room and slept in many different rooms, all together (me and the
kids). It was fun.
When Holly had her own room, I slept with her lots of times, at least
until she was asleep.
A couple of years ago she went through a time of wanting me to go to
sleep in her room, either reading to her or just being there while
she stayed up and read or played games. She was 14 and around there.
I think one thing to consider in these modern situations is that
having the option to sleep with parents when one has his own bed
elsewhere isn't the same as being forced from necessity or tradition
to sleep with the parents whether or not one wants to. And my
sleeping with my kids because I wanted to was a choice, and so
there's a happiness and a giving there that is missing in both the
"sleep in your own bed" model and the "we all share the bed because
it's the only bed" model.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
the United States, several people slept in the same bed--it was the
only way to sleep in such small houses (cit. Tobacco Colony: Life in
Early Maryland 1650-1720. G. Main). -=-
In one of the castle/stately-home combos near Cambridge, England,
there's a bed that's really wide, made for a whole family. About
four times wider than long, I think.
(I have notes somewhere of where exactly I was...)
At our old house, I started off sleeping with the kids in their room
(a double bed under a single bed, after a while, but a double bed
before Holly was born), and would go in with Keith sometime later in
the night, or one of the kids would, maybe. When Holly was born we
got a bunk bed and Kirby slept on top.
When we moved to a bigger house so the kids could have their own
room, we all slept together the first many times we were in the
house, before we had lots of furniture. Keith was in Minneapolis,
and the house was big and spooky. We moved a mattress from room to
room and slept in many different rooms, all together (me and the
kids). It was fun.
When Holly had her own room, I slept with her lots of times, at least
until she was asleep.
A couple of years ago she went through a time of wanting me to go to
sleep in her room, either reading to her or just being there while
she stayed up and read or played games. She was 14 and around there.
I think one thing to consider in these modern situations is that
having the option to sleep with parents when one has his own bed
elsewhere isn't the same as being forced from necessity or tradition
to sleep with the parents whether or not one wants to. And my
sleeping with my kids because I wanted to was a choice, and so
there's a happiness and a giving there that is missing in both the
"sleep in your own bed" model and the "we all share the bed because
it's the only bed" model.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny C
And my
information, was the idea that co-sleeping started to die off because
people could afford bigger houses and more beds, so within that idea it
becomes an issue of "have" and "have not", when really the issue is
probably more of a biological one. So the reasoning behind co-sleeping
or no co-sleeping has become a confused issue, then throw in the whole
psychoanalyst "sex" aspect, and you have an idea that's been twisted
into something that it's not.
I wish I could have found the information about co-sleeping in Japanese
culture, instead of just references to it. It seems that part of the
idea in Japanese culture is that co-sleeping helps keep everyone
cohesive and bound to one another and dependent on one another through
family, within society at large. That seems to follow through with some
of the sleep studies done in anthropological research as well.
I'm reading a book right now that takes place in the Ireland and
Scotland and they made reference to the fact that all kids co-slept with
each other if they weren't sleeping with their parents, and it was
referencing the 1930's, so really not that long ago. It's fiction,
though, so no references. The book is "Dream Angus" for anyone
interested, it's largely about celtic gods and mythology. It also
happens to be the first chapter book that Margaux has allowed me to read
to her. It isn't a kid's book though.
I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.
> sleeping with my kids because I wanted to was a choice, and soSomething I discovered when I was trying to find articles or links to
> there's a happiness and a giving there that is missing in both the
> "sleep in your own bed" model and the "we all share the bed because
> it's the only bed" model.
information, was the idea that co-sleeping started to die off because
people could afford bigger houses and more beds, so within that idea it
becomes an issue of "have" and "have not", when really the issue is
probably more of a biological one. So the reasoning behind co-sleeping
or no co-sleeping has become a confused issue, then throw in the whole
psychoanalyst "sex" aspect, and you have an idea that's been twisted
into something that it's not.
I wish I could have found the information about co-sleeping in Japanese
culture, instead of just references to it. It seems that part of the
idea in Japanese culture is that co-sleeping helps keep everyone
cohesive and bound to one another and dependent on one another through
family, within society at large. That seems to follow through with some
of the sleep studies done in anthropological research as well.
I'm reading a book right now that takes place in the Ireland and
Scotland and they made reference to the fact that all kids co-slept with
each other if they weren't sleeping with their parents, and it was
referencing the 1930's, so really not that long ago. It's fiction,
though, so no references. The book is "Dream Angus" for anyone
interested, it's largely about celtic gods and mythology. It also
happens to be the first chapter book that Margaux has allowed me to read
to her. It isn't a kid's book though.
I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.
k
In the 30s because of poverty, my dad and his siblings slept in the same
room (and maybe sometimes the same bed) as his parents. Co sleeping was
considered a thing of the past in our home when I was growing up, a by
product of the circumstances brought about by the Great Depression era. Not
normal or a good but an embarrassing problem that couldn't be done away with
at the time.
Both Brian and I remember as do many of our generation wanting to sleep with
mom and dad instead of alone or with a sibling (also frowned on in our home
when I was a child). I was less afraid of the dark than one of my sisters
was. I often walked her to the bathroom after bedtime. She's still afraid
of the dark, and for whatever reason (people are different), I'm not spooked
by it. Karl is definitely afraid of the dark but getting less so as time
goes by and I give him ideas for how to deal with it and go with him
whenever he wants me to. And of course I feel that knowing he can always
have us to be with at night is the biggest deterrent to prolonged fear and
feelings of incompetence.
~Katherine
room (and maybe sometimes the same bed) as his parents. Co sleeping was
considered a thing of the past in our home when I was growing up, a by
product of the circumstances brought about by the Great Depression era. Not
normal or a good but an embarrassing problem that couldn't be done away with
at the time.
Both Brian and I remember as do many of our generation wanting to sleep with
mom and dad instead of alone or with a sibling (also frowned on in our home
when I was a child). I was less afraid of the dark than one of my sisters
was. I often walked her to the bathroom after bedtime. She's still afraid
of the dark, and for whatever reason (people are different), I'm not spooked
by it. Karl is definitely afraid of the dark but getting less so as time
goes by and I give him ideas for how to deal with it and go with him
whenever he wants me to. And of course I feel that knowing he can always
have us to be with at night is the biggest deterrent to prolonged fear and
feelings of incompetence.
~Katherine
On 12/8/08, Jenny C <jenstarc4@...> wrote:
>
>
> And my
> > sleeping with my kids because I wanted to was a choice, and so
> > there's a happiness and a giving there that is missing in both the
> > "sleep in your own bed" model and the "we all share the bed because
> > it's the only bed" model.
>
>
>
> Something I discovered when I was trying to find articles or links to
> information, was the idea that co-sleeping started to die off because
> people could afford bigger houses and more beds, so within that idea it
> becomes an issue of "have" and "have not", when really the issue is
> probably more of a biological one. So the reasoning behind co-sleeping
> or no co-sleeping has become a confused issue, then throw in the whole
> psychoanalyst "sex" aspect, and you have an idea that's been twisted
> into something that it's not.
>
> I wish I could have found the information about co-sleeping in Japanese
> culture, instead of just references to it. It seems that part of the
> idea in Japanese culture is that co-sleeping helps keep everyone
> cohesive and bound to one another and dependent on one another through
> family, within society at large. That seems to follow through with some
> of the sleep studies done in anthropological research as well.
>
> I'm reading a book right now that takes place in the Ireland and
> Scotland and they made reference to the fact that all kids co-slept with
> each other if they weren't sleeping with their parents, and it was
> referencing the 1930's, so really not that long ago. It's fiction,
> though, so no references. The book is "Dream Angus" for anyone
> interested, it's largely about celtic gods and mythology. It also
> happens to be the first chapter book that Margaux has allowed me to read
> to her. It isn't a kid's book though.
>
> I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
> co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
> common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
> just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
sorschasmom
Thanks so much for all the links, words, etc. There's lot's of great
perspectives and info that will help my Mil. I'm not the best with
words sometimes so I value the thoughts that I can forward to her. I
know that she will appreciate them also.
<<I read that you and your mom or MIL like to debate these things>>
We debate politics, religion, and all the things that hairstylist are
not supposed to discuss with clients. <g>. I guess we don't
necessarily debate (too heated and emotional) my family's choice of
lifestyle but we do ponder different topics based on my family's
choices. It's in the same way Tails and I would discuss our
differences of opinions. It's supportive and respectful both
ways.
Yes, I do know that `our family's choice is ours' but I am also
respectful of someone who raised my husband. She's known all the
particulars of our radical unschooling journey from the beginning.
She truly asks questions to understand why & what we are doing.
She's got 5 other grandkids whose family's all do it `one way'. I
treat her questions the same as I would Tails.
Radical unschooling is about partnerships to me I can't promote
(cruddy choice of words) that to Tails if I'm blowing off what I
consider innocent questions from her Grandmama. The relationship is
more important to me than the control of being right, etc. She
doesn't agree with many of our choices, but she does support us
respectfully.
<<<Frankly, some of our best discussions and communication is done in
the bed late
at night--all of us in the dark (somewhat) and the kids really
connect with us
and with each other in ways that maybe the light of day inhibits.
These
memories, this comfort, I am sure, will be the things we all hold on
tight to
throughout our lives.>>>
YES, YES, YES. Tails has her `day persona' (strong, independent,
self-assured). At night, I get her `night persona' (little girl,
needs her Mama, has many questions, big emotions). If I told Tails
to `get in your room and go to bed' I would NEVER have the
opportunity to share this special part of her. Hmmmm, I wouldn't
even know it exists. I'm grateful for our `nights' together.
Thanks so much again.
~Crystal in Albuquerque~
http://livingtheliquidlife.blogspot.com/
perspectives and info that will help my Mil. I'm not the best with
words sometimes so I value the thoughts that I can forward to her. I
know that she will appreciate them also.
<<I read that you and your mom or MIL like to debate these things>>
We debate politics, religion, and all the things that hairstylist are
not supposed to discuss with clients. <g>. I guess we don't
necessarily debate (too heated and emotional) my family's choice of
lifestyle but we do ponder different topics based on my family's
choices. It's in the same way Tails and I would discuss our
differences of opinions. It's supportive and respectful both
ways.
Yes, I do know that `our family's choice is ours' but I am also
respectful of someone who raised my husband. She's known all the
particulars of our radical unschooling journey from the beginning.
She truly asks questions to understand why & what we are doing.
She's got 5 other grandkids whose family's all do it `one way'. I
treat her questions the same as I would Tails.
Radical unschooling is about partnerships to me I can't promote
(cruddy choice of words) that to Tails if I'm blowing off what I
consider innocent questions from her Grandmama. The relationship is
more important to me than the control of being right, etc. She
doesn't agree with many of our choices, but she does support us
respectfully.
<<<Frankly, some of our best discussions and communication is done in
the bed late
at night--all of us in the dark (somewhat) and the kids really
connect with us
and with each other in ways that maybe the light of day inhibits.
These
memories, this comfort, I am sure, will be the things we all hold on
tight to
throughout our lives.>>>
YES, YES, YES. Tails has her `day persona' (strong, independent,
self-assured). At night, I get her `night persona' (little girl,
needs her Mama, has many questions, big emotions). If I told Tails
to `get in your room and go to bed' I would NEVER have the
opportunity to share this special part of her. Hmmmm, I wouldn't
even know it exists. I'm grateful for our `nights' together.
Thanks so much again.
~Crystal in Albuquerque~
http://livingtheliquidlife.blogspot.com/
Sandra Dodd
-=-I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.-=-
In English history and literature there are lots of mentions of co-
sleeping among adults and adults with children, though not the
parents (in what I'm thinking of).
In families with money and "houses" (as opposed to cottages or
hovels), there was a nurse hired to watch the children at night and
she slept with them, or if the family was rich there might be one
nurse for each child. This is still true in some wealthy families
with nannies--maybe not in the same bed, but the one to get up at
night if a baby cries.
Older kids slept with other older kids.
I've read that in inns and pubs, in the 19th century and before,
sometimes paying to stay the night involved sharing a bed with a
stranger. So two men who didn't even know each other might be in
the same bed.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.-=-
In English history and literature there are lots of mentions of co-
sleeping among adults and adults with children, though not the
parents (in what I'm thinking of).
In families with money and "houses" (as opposed to cottages or
hovels), there was a nurse hired to watch the children at night and
she slept with them, or if the family was rich there might be one
nurse for each child. This is still true in some wealthy families
with nannies--maybe not in the same bed, but the one to get up at
night if a baby cries.
Older kids slept with other older kids.
I've read that in inns and pubs, in the 19th century and before,
sometimes paying to stay the night involved sharing a bed with a
stranger. So two men who didn't even know each other might be in
the same bed.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-In the 30s because of poverty, my dad and his siblings slept in
the same
room (and maybe sometimes the same bed) as his parents. Co sleeping was
considered a thing of the past in our home when I was growing up, a by
product of the circumstances brought about by the Great Depression
era. Not
normal or a good but an embarrassing problem that couldn't be done
away with
at the time.-=-
There was also a lot of turn-of-the-century advice that sleeping
alone (even married couples) was healthier than sleeping together,
because breathing the breath of other people was considered germy, I
think especially by English (and German?) doctors. They also
recommended having a window open at night, too, which I've heard is
still more common in the U.K. than here.
I was thinking about that window things just yesterday. Our bedroom
is stuffy, and Keith's thinking of running an antennae wire outside,
but it's a round cable, not a flat wire like older antenna wire. And
he doesn't want the window to stay open that much, but I was thinking
it might be nice. The stronger feeling is "conserve heat" here, I
think (U.S.) and probably the "leave a window open" came from coal
fire days, when the room was going to be cold by morning anyway, and
it was good to get some oxygen. But people often keep the rule
without the reason.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
the same
room (and maybe sometimes the same bed) as his parents. Co sleeping was
considered a thing of the past in our home when I was growing up, a by
product of the circumstances brought about by the Great Depression
era. Not
normal or a good but an embarrassing problem that couldn't be done
away with
at the time.-=-
There was also a lot of turn-of-the-century advice that sleeping
alone (even married couples) was healthier than sleeping together,
because breathing the breath of other people was considered germy, I
think especially by English (and German?) doctors. They also
recommended having a window open at night, too, which I've heard is
still more common in the U.K. than here.
I was thinking about that window things just yesterday. Our bedroom
is stuffy, and Keith's thinking of running an antennae wire outside,
but it's a round cable, not a flat wire like older antenna wire. And
he doesn't want the window to stay open that much, but I was thinking
it might be nice. The stronger feeling is "conserve heat" here, I
think (U.S.) and probably the "leave a window open" came from coal
fire days, when the room was going to be cold by morning anyway, and
it was good to get some oxygen. But people often keep the rule
without the reason.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Bea
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
Dh is German, and when we first started going to his parents' place, I
was horrified that his parents' bedroom was always around 15 degrees
Celsius (59 degrees F.)
The window open at night thing was an ongoing battle between dh and I
for a long time. He claimed there was not enough oxygen in the room
if the window was closed. But now I got used to it and we sleep with
the window open most nights (and turn the heat off, or at least down.)
Bea
>Lol!
> They also
> recommended having a window open at night, too, which I've heard is
> still more common in the U.K. than here.
>
> I was thinking about that window things just yesterday. Our bedroom
> is stuffy, and Keith's thinking of running an antennae wire outside,
> but it's a round cable, not a flat wire like older antenna wire. And
> he doesn't want the window to stay open that much, but I was thinking
> it might be nice. The stronger feeling is "conserve heat" here, I
> think (U.S.) and probably the "leave a window open" came from coal
> fire days, when the room was going to be cold by morning anyway, and
> it was good to get some oxygen. But people often keep the rule
> without the reason.
>
Dh is German, and when we first started going to his parents' place, I
was horrified that his parents' bedroom was always around 15 degrees
Celsius (59 degrees F.)
The window open at night thing was an ongoing battle between dh and I
for a long time. He claimed there was not enough oxygen in the room
if the window was closed. But now I got used to it and we sleep with
the window open most nights (and turn the heat off, or at least down.)
Bea
Nancy Wooton
On Dec 8, 2008, at 3:23 PM, Sandra Dodd wrote:
open was essential (carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide dangers).
You'll find recommendations about it, and about getting children
outdoors every day, in the Charlotte Mason books.
Nancy
> They alsoWhen all heating and lighting sources were flame, keeping a window
> recommended having a window open at night, too, which I've heard is
> still more common in the U.K. than here.
>
> I was thinking about that window things just yesterday. Our bedroom
> is stuffy, and Keith's thinking of running an antennae wire outside,
> but it's a round cable, not a flat wire like older antenna wire. And
> he doesn't want the window to stay open that much, but I was thinking
> it might be nice. The stronger feeling is "conserve heat" here, I
> think (U.S.) and probably the "leave a window open" came from coal
> fire days, when the room was going to be cold by morning anyway, and
> it was good to get some oxygen. But people often keep the rule
> without the reason.
open was essential (carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide dangers).
You'll find recommendations about it, and about getting children
outdoors every day, in the Charlotte Mason books.
Nancy
Schuyler
David got the paper about Appalachian co-sleeping practices and it has a wonderful review of the literature on co-sleeping. Sharon Abbott mentions a study about Japanese co-sleeping: "Caudill and Plath's (1966) well-known study ofJapanese sleeping locations describes their practices throughout the life span, making this an unusual study. They report that the Japanese age of transi- tion away from sleeping with parents is 11, with the process not complete until 15 or 16 years. "
The paper is really fascinating. Sharon Abbott is arguing that early family co-sleeping is one of a series of strategies that a parent uses to create a close relationship, an interdependence between parent and child that lasts into adulthood with children continuing to live near their parents. In a paper comparing family characteristics and dynamics in Japan and the U.S. (and so titled) the abstract is this:
This paper uses the Family Environment Scale (FES) to compare and
contrast psychosocial environments of Japanese families with those of
American families. The aim is to explore some cultural dynamics of each
society from the point of view of family behavior. The FES contains 10
subscales, measuring the following family characteristics: Cohesion,
Expressiveness, Conflict, Independence, Achievement Orientation,
Intellectual-Cultural Orientation, Active-Recreational Orientation,
Moral-Religious Emphasis, Organization, and Control. Comparison of each
subscale between Japan and the United States revealed that: (a)
Cohesion and Control were positively correlated for Japanese parents
but negatively correlated for American parents; (b) Achievement
Orientation and Intellectual-Cultural Orientation were positively
correlated for Japanese parents and uncorrelated for American parents;
(c) Cohesion and Control were negatively correlated for American
children but uncorrelated for Japanese children; and (d) Achievement
and Conflict were positively correlated for Japanese children but
uncorrelated for American children. Eight of the 10 constructs were
useful for understanding family dynamics in Japan. Independence and
Expressiveness, which are important for American families, did not seem
to be easily understood concepts for the Japanese. The results and the
implications are discussed in terms of cross-cultural understanding
between Japan and the United States.
I found it looking for Caudill and Plath's study. I also found a paper (http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/153/4/339) that said this:
The 2 cultures endow the child as an organism differently.
In Japan, the infant is seen more as a separate biological organismwho from the beginning, in order to develop, needs to be drawninto increasingly interdependent relations with others. In America,the infant is seen more as a dependent biological organism who,in order to develop, needs to be made increasingly independentof others.22(p15)
Both cultures acknowledge that isolating a child at night isstressful but interpret the experience differently. In the UnitedStates, solitary sleep is thought to engender independence inchildren23 and ensure privacy for parents.6 These values supersedethe child's perceived need. United States values of self-relianceand self-assertion lead mothers to encourage more play withobjects and more attention to the environment than is seen inJapan.24 Night-time counterparts may be found in the use ofpacifiers and transitional objects to encourage infants to fallasleep alone.25The Japanese acknowledge the same developmental struggle withseparation, but, in acceding to the child's need, emphasizethe value of dependence as the primary socializing experience.The Japanese word for a common cosleeping arrangement demonstratesthis value. "The custom of the child sleeping between the parentsis referred to as kawa. Kawa is the Japanese character for ariver flowing between
2 banks and kawa is therefore used torefer to the child sleeping between the protective support ofthe 2 parents."26(p138) Other cultures or subgroups seem tohave a similar emphasis.27-29 Thus, the balance between interdependencyand autonomy is a useful framework in considering cultural differencesin childrearing practices.30-32
Anyhow, I don't know if that helps with anything or gives you more ideas to discuss with your mother-in-law. But I found it an interesting perspective on the outcomes of co-sleeping. When David looked at co-sleeping in the northeast of the UK he found that it correlated heavily with other attachment practices like extended breastfeeding and sling carrying. It makes sense if it is seen as a parental strategy (I'm not arguing that it is a strategy that someone is aware of) for bonding children to parents and to create a more interdependent family structure that those things would be associated. It also makes sense that the bonding that occurs in those first few moments of breastfeeding, producing such a huge oxytocin response and bio feedback loop, would produce all of those correlations as well.
Schuyler
________________________________
And my
information, was the idea that co-sleeping started to die off because
people could afford bigger houses and more beds, so within that idea it
becomes an issue of "have" and "have not", when really the issue is
probably more of a biological one. So the reasoning behind co-sleeping
or no co-sleeping has become a confused issue, then throw in the whole
psychoanalyst "sex" aspect, and you have an idea that's been twisted
into something that it's not.
I wish I could have found the information about co-sleeping in Japanese
culture, instead of just references to it. It seems that part of the
idea in Japanese culture is that co-sleeping helps keep everyone
cohesive and bound to one another and dependent on one another through
family, within society at large. That seems to follow through with some
of the sleep studies done in anthropological research as well.
I'm reading a book right now that takes place in the Ireland and
Scotland and they made reference to the fact that all kids co-slept with
each other if they weren't sleeping with their parents, and it was
referencing the 1930's, so really not that long ago. It's fiction,
though, so no references. The book is "Dream Angus" for anyone
interested, it's largely about celtic gods and mythology. It also
happens to be the first chapter book that Margaux has allowed me to read
to her. It isn't a kid's book though.
I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
The paper is really fascinating. Sharon Abbott is arguing that early family co-sleeping is one of a series of strategies that a parent uses to create a close relationship, an interdependence between parent and child that lasts into adulthood with children continuing to live near their parents. In a paper comparing family characteristics and dynamics in Japan and the U.S. (and so titled) the abstract is this:
This paper uses the Family Environment Scale (FES) to compare and
contrast psychosocial environments of Japanese families with those of
American families. The aim is to explore some cultural dynamics of each
society from the point of view of family behavior. The FES contains 10
subscales, measuring the following family characteristics: Cohesion,
Expressiveness, Conflict, Independence, Achievement Orientation,
Intellectual-Cultural Orientation, Active-Recreational Orientation,
Moral-Religious Emphasis, Organization, and Control. Comparison of each
subscale between Japan and the United States revealed that: (a)
Cohesion and Control were positively correlated for Japanese parents
but negatively correlated for American parents; (b) Achievement
Orientation and Intellectual-Cultural Orientation were positively
correlated for Japanese parents and uncorrelated for American parents;
(c) Cohesion and Control were negatively correlated for American
children but uncorrelated for Japanese children; and (d) Achievement
and Conflict were positively correlated for Japanese children but
uncorrelated for American children. Eight of the 10 constructs were
useful for understanding family dynamics in Japan. Independence and
Expressiveness, which are important for American families, did not seem
to be easily understood concepts for the Japanese. The results and the
implications are discussed in terms of cross-cultural understanding
between Japan and the United States.
I found it looking for Caudill and Plath's study. I also found a paper (http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/153/4/339) that said this:
The 2 cultures endow the child as an organism differently.
In Japan, the infant is seen more as a separate biological organismwho from the beginning, in order to develop, needs to be drawninto increasingly interdependent relations with others. In America,the infant is seen more as a dependent biological organism who,in order to develop, needs to be made increasingly independentof others.22(p15)
Both cultures acknowledge that isolating a child at night isstressful but interpret the experience differently. In the UnitedStates, solitary sleep is thought to engender independence inchildren23 and ensure privacy for parents.6 These values supersedethe child's perceived need. United States values of self-relianceand self-assertion lead mothers to encourage more play withobjects and more attention to the environment than is seen inJapan.24 Night-time counterparts may be found in the use ofpacifiers and transitional objects to encourage infants to fallasleep alone.25The Japanese acknowledge the same developmental struggle withseparation, but, in acceding to the child's need, emphasizethe value of dependence as the primary socializing experience.The Japanese word for a common cosleeping arrangement demonstratesthis value. "The custom of the child sleeping between the parentsis referred to as kawa. Kawa is the Japanese character for ariver flowing between
2 banks and kawa is therefore used torefer to the child sleeping between the protective support ofthe 2 parents."26(p138) Other cultures or subgroups seem tohave a similar emphasis.27-29 Thus, the balance between interdependencyand autonomy is a useful framework in considering cultural differencesin childrearing practices.30-32
Anyhow, I don't know if that helps with anything or gives you more ideas to discuss with your mother-in-law. But I found it an interesting perspective on the outcomes of co-sleeping. When David looked at co-sleeping in the northeast of the UK he found that it correlated heavily with other attachment practices like extended breastfeeding and sling carrying. It makes sense if it is seen as a parental strategy (I'm not arguing that it is a strategy that someone is aware of) for bonding children to parents and to create a more interdependent family structure that those things would be associated. It also makes sense that the bonding that occurs in those first few moments of breastfeeding, producing such a huge oxytocin response and bio feedback loop, would produce all of those correlations as well.
Schuyler
________________________________
And my
> sleeping with my kids because I wanted to was a choice, and soSomething I discovered when I was trying to find articles or links to
> there's a happiness and a giving there that is missing in both the
> "sleep in your own bed" model and the "we all share the bed because
> it's the only bed" model.
information, was the idea that co-sleeping started to die off because
people could afford bigger houses and more beds, so within that idea it
becomes an issue of "have" and "have not", when really the issue is
probably more of a biological one. So the reasoning behind co-sleeping
or no co-sleeping has become a confused issue, then throw in the whole
psychoanalyst "sex" aspect, and you have an idea that's been twisted
into something that it's not.
I wish I could have found the information about co-sleeping in Japanese
culture, instead of just references to it. It seems that part of the
idea in Japanese culture is that co-sleeping helps keep everyone
cohesive and bound to one another and dependent on one another through
family, within society at large. That seems to follow through with some
of the sleep studies done in anthropological research as well.
I'm reading a book right now that takes place in the Ireland and
Scotland and they made reference to the fact that all kids co-slept with
each other if they weren't sleeping with their parents, and it was
referencing the 1930's, so really not that long ago. It's fiction,
though, so no references. The book is "Dream Angus" for anyone
interested, it's largely about celtic gods and mythology. It also
happens to be the first chapter book that Margaux has allowed me to read
to her. It isn't a kid's book though.
I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Brad Holcomb
I read Robin Grille's Parenting for a Peaceful World last year (very
powerful book!), and it spurred me to research cosleeping more. I learned
that in 17th Century Europe, cosleeping was banned by law to combat
infanticide. At the time, babies were often killed by parents during
economic hardships (reducing number of mouths to feed). And a common way to
accomplish it was to "accidentally" roll over on the baby at night, easily
done since cosleeping was the norm.
This might help explain why cosleeping fell out of favor in western
civilization in the past few centuries...the after-effects of the ban, even
when the ban was no longer necessary since infanticide became socially
unacceptable. -=b.
powerful book!), and it spurred me to research cosleeping more. I learned
that in 17th Century Europe, cosleeping was banned by law to combat
infanticide. At the time, babies were often killed by parents during
economic hardships (reducing number of mouths to feed). And a common way to
accomplish it was to "accidentally" roll over on the baby at night, easily
done since cosleeping was the norm.
This might help explain why cosleeping fell out of favor in western
civilization in the past few centuries...the after-effects of the ban, even
when the ban was no longer necessary since infanticide became socially
unacceptable. -=b.
k
I heard about the 17th century co sleeping ban in Europe too, Brad, in
university. It was in response to the idea that not all kids reputed to had
actually died of SIDS but some probably of infanticide.
~Katherine
university. It was in response to the idea that not all kids reputed to had
actually died of SIDS but some probably of infanticide.
~Katherine
On 12/9/08, Brad Holcomb <list.brad@...> wrote:
>
>
> I read Robin Grille's Parenting for a Peaceful World last year (very
> powerful book!), and it spurred me to research cosleeping more. I learned
> that in 17th Century Europe, cosleeping was banned by law to combat
> infanticide. At the time, babies were often killed by parents during
> economic hardships (reducing number of mouths to feed). And a common way
> to
> accomplish it was to "accidentally" roll over on the baby at night, easily
> done since cosleeping was the norm.
>
> This might help explain why cosleeping fell out of favor in western
> civilization in the past few centuries...the after-effects of the ban, even
> when the ban was no longer necessary since infanticide became socially
> unacceptable. -=b.
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Vicki Dennis
You happen to remember the sources showing the creation of the law as well
as the "purpose" behind it? Which countries?
vicki
as the "purpose" behind it? Which countries?
vicki
On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 8:19 AM, Brad Holcomb <list.brad@...> wrote:
>
> I read Robin Grille's Parenting for a Peaceful World last year (very
> powerful book!), and it spurred me to research cosleeping more. I learned
> that in 17th Century Europe, cosleeping was banned by law to combat
> infanticide. At the time, babies were often killed by parents during
> economic hardships (reducing number of mouths to feed). And a common way to
> accomplish it was to "accidentally" roll over on the baby at night, easily
> done since cosleeping was the norm.
>
> This might help explain why cosleeping fell out of favor in western
> civilization in the past few centuries...the after-effects of the ban, even
> when the ban was no longer necessary since infanticide became socially
> unacceptable. -=b.
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
Crystal and others who might could use this, I'm starting a page on
co-sleeping, and have put Schuyler's post about studies there already:
http://sandradodd.com/sleep/cosleeping
If others want to post things here that you think should go on that
page, I have a good webpage-working day here.
Sandra
co-sleeping, and have put Schuyler's post about studies there already:
http://sandradodd.com/sleep/cosleeping
If others want to post things here that you think should go on that
page, I have a good webpage-working day here.
Sandra
Lyla Wolfenstein
have you seen this article?
http://discovermagazine.com/2007/dec/sleeping-like-a-hunter-gatherer
Crystal and others who might could use this, I'm starting a page on
co-sleeping, and have put Schuyler's post about studies there already:
http://sandradodd.com/sleep/cosleeping
If others want to post things here that you think should go on that
page, I have a good webpage-working day here.
Sandra
\.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
http://discovermagazine.com/2007/dec/sleeping-like-a-hunter-gatherer
Crystal and others who might could use this, I'm starting a page on
co-sleeping, and have put Schuyler's post about studies there already:
http://sandradodd.com/sleep/cosleeping
If others want to post things here that you think should go on that
page, I have a good webpage-working day here.
Sandra
\.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Laura
DH is French and he told me that cosleeping is mostly frowned upon
although when he would stay with his mother, he and his brother always
bed shared with her. She has been one of our biggest supporters in how
we raise our daughter including cosleeping. We don't even have a
bedroom for her...it's her playroom.
However, when his dad comes to visit next week I'm sure we'll get lots
of looks even though he knows this is what we do.
His brother is now divorced as well but cosleeps with his son who is 5
whenever he has custody of him.
Our friend in Paris is so completely against it.
Overall, in France it depends upon your culture. There are a lot of
immigrants who have brought their traditions with them which is great!
We also lived in Argentina for awhile where cosleeping does occur but
people want to show they aren't in the "poor" class so cribs are a big
thing and cosleeping is something people don't want to admit to.
Laura
although when he would stay with his mother, he and his brother always
bed shared with her. She has been one of our biggest supporters in how
we raise our daughter including cosleeping. We don't even have a
bedroom for her...it's her playroom.
However, when his dad comes to visit next week I'm sure we'll get lots
of looks even though he knows this is what we do.
His brother is now divorced as well but cosleeps with his son who is 5
whenever he has custody of him.
Our friend in Paris is so completely against it.
Overall, in France it depends upon your culture. There are a lot of
immigrants who have brought their traditions with them which is great!
We also lived in Argentina for awhile where cosleeping does occur but
people want to show they aren't in the "poor" class so cribs are a big
thing and cosleeping is something people don't want to admit to.
Laura
>
> -=-I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
> co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is way more
> common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
> just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.-=-
>
>
>
> In English history and literature there are lots of mentions of co-
> sleeping among adults and adults with children, though not the
> parents (in what I'm thinking of).
>
> In families with money and "houses" (as opposed to cottages or
> hovels), there was a nurse hired to watch the children at night and
> she slept with them, or if the family was rich there might be one
> nurse for each child. This is still true in some wealthy families
> with nannies--maybe not in the same bed, but the one to get up at
> night if a baby cries.
>
> Older kids slept with other older kids.
>
> I've read that in inns and pubs, in the 19th century and before,
> sometimes paying to stay the night involved sharing a bed with a
> stranger. So two men who didn't even know each other might be in
> the same bed.
>
> Sandra
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Sandra Dodd
-=-I learned
that in 17th Century Europe, cosleeping was banned by law to combat
infanticide. -=-
Europe was a big place in the 17th century and no law covered it all.
If you still have the book and you could find the citation, that
would be a cool factoid (the exact when and where).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
that in 17th Century Europe, cosleeping was banned by law to combat
infanticide. -=-
Europe was a big place in the 17th century and no law covered it all.
If you still have the book and you could find the citation, that
would be a cool factoid (the exact when and where).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Sandra Dodd
-=-I heard about the 17th century co sleeping ban in Europe too,
Brad, in
university. It was in response to the idea that not all kids reputed
to had
actually died of SIDS but some probably of infanticide.
~Katherine-=-
Was it a Catholic Church ban, maybe? And if late 17th century, that
wouldn't have affected all of Europe.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Brad, in
university. It was in response to the idea that not all kids reputed
to had
actually died of SIDS but some probably of infanticide.
~Katherine-=-
Was it a Catholic Church ban, maybe? And if late 17th century, that
wouldn't have affected all of Europe.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Brad Holcomb
>You happen to remember the sources showing the creation of the law as wellThe Grille book just inspired me to do more reading/research, so I don't
>as the "purpose" behind it? Which countries?
have a precise source--that info wasn't in the book, I don't think, although
infanticide itself was covered. I just now googled 'cosleeping infanticide'
and found this:
McKenna says the ban was by the church:
http://www.naturalchild.com/james_mckenna/babies_need.html
And I found a few blogs saying it was a Kaiser in Prussia that instituted
the ban, but for all I know they could all be repeating the same erroneous
info, and I don't know their source. -=b.
Sandra Dodd
-=-We also lived in Argentina for awhile where cosleeping does occur but
people want to show they aren't in the "poor" class so cribs are a big
thing and cosleeping is something people don't want to admit to.-=-
Identifying with a group is a big part of trends and decisionmaking.
As I understand a general trend, in the 50's and 60's many African
American families couldn't afford all the glass bottles and formula
and sterilization equipment, and so they breastfed from necessity,
and when lots of them could afford formula, they by god WANTED it,
regardless of the fact that research and trends had gone the other
way by the 1980's. And some conservative families will opt not to do
something simply because a group they don't like IS doing it, and
they don't want to be painted with the whatever-brush.
So if people's kids don't have their own bedrooms, they aren't using
their houses right, or something (if the house was big enough, I
mean, for all kids to have a room).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
people want to show they aren't in the "poor" class so cribs are a big
thing and cosleeping is something people don't want to admit to.-=-
Identifying with a group is a big part of trends and decisionmaking.
As I understand a general trend, in the 50's and 60's many African
American families couldn't afford all the glass bottles and formula
and sterilization equipment, and so they breastfed from necessity,
and when lots of them could afford formula, they by god WANTED it,
regardless of the fact that research and trends had gone the other
way by the 1980's. And some conservative families will opt not to do
something simply because a group they don't like IS doing it, and
they don't want to be painted with the whatever-brush.
So if people's kids don't have their own bedrooms, they aren't using
their houses right, or something (if the house was big enough, I
mean, for all kids to have a room).
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
k
As I recall... it was an article or handout in class. Not from a textbook.
The source, I dunno now. But I does seem like it was like a ban instigated
by the church. I don't even remember where in Europe it was really.
Boy.. that didn't stick very well with me. :/
Here's a quote from http://www.sids.gr.jp/invi/The%209th%20SIDS_0522.pdf:
"Until the 19th century overlaying was the only explanation of sudden and
unexpected death in infancy, and mentioned both in Roman records and in
medical and legal literature of the 12th and 13th centuries. The laws of the
church influenced secular legislation during the middle ages with defined
measures of punishment. During the 17th century publications appeared
warning against smothering of infants. Case reports similar to modern
reports were also given. Two textbooks discussing the existing knowledge of
prevention of overlaying and smothering of sucklings were published towards
the end of the 18th century."
Then it seems like there were some actual infanticide laws and such underway
during the early 17th century too.
Some of the following (from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2279/is_n156/ai_20059973/pg_19) is
pretty horrific, so brace yourself if you need to:
"(4) Keith Wrightson, `Infanticide in Earlier Seventeenth-Century England',
Local Population Studies, xv (1975). Regina Schulte's work on late
eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century Bavaria roots infanticide
firmly in the context of farm servants' everyday working lives: Regina
Schulte, The Village in Gurt: Arson, Infanticide and Poaching in the Court
Records of Upper Bavaria, 1848-1910, trans. Barrie Selman (Cambridge, 1994),
87-118. Many of the circumstances typical to early modern cases are
discussed in R. W. Malcolmson, `Infanticide in the Eighteenth Century', in
J. S. Cockburn (ed.), Crime in England, 1500-1800 (Princeton, 1977).
(5) The surviving examinations are by no means a complete record of all
prosecutions. Indictment files which survive usually contain at least
another 25 per cent of cases. For the frequency of cases in
seventeenth-century England, see P. E. Hoffer and N. E. H. Hull, Murdering
Mothers: Infanticide in England and New England, 1558-1803 (New York and
London, 1981), 21-4; Wrightson, `Infanticide in Earlier Seventeenth-Century
England'; Garthine Walker, `Gender, Crime and Social Order in Early Modern
Cheshire' (Univ. of Liverpool Ph.D. thesis, 1994), 126-7. On the debated
incidence of neonatal infanticide, see also J. S. Cockburn, `The Nature and
Incidence of Crime in England, 1559-1625: A Preliminary Survey', in Cockburn
(ed.), Crime in England, 1500-1800, 58; Angus McLaren, Reproductive Rituals:
The Perception of Fertility in England from the Sixteenth Century to the
Nineteenth Century (London, 1984), 129-35.
(6) The link between secret pregnancies and infanticide had been made
explicit by the statute of 1624, which made the concealment of an infant's
death the essence of the crime; at least some commentators saw the failure
to engage help in labour as evidence of guilty intent: Jackson, New-Born
Child Murder, 32.
(7) Although `the rising of the apron' was a well-established metaphor for
pregnancy and the stomachs of women suspected of pregnancy were certainly
watched by neighbours, clothing seems both to have disguised pregnancy to
some extent and to have made stomachs more difficult of access than breasts.
It also seems that, here, touching the breasts of a woman who might be
pregnant was culturally more acceptable than touching her stomach; early
modern women were also likely to gain less weight than modern women and the
weight gain of pregnancy might have remained unnoticed for longer.
(8) Since at least some people expected milk to be present in the breasts
from around the fourth month of pregnancy, the test served to check for a
current pregnancy as well as a recent birth or miscarriage: Audrey Eccles,
Obstetrics and Gynaecology in Tudor and Stuart England (London, 1982), 153."
~Katherine
The source, I dunno now. But I does seem like it was like a ban instigated
by the church. I don't even remember where in Europe it was really.
Boy.. that didn't stick very well with me. :/
Here's a quote from http://www.sids.gr.jp/invi/The%209th%20SIDS_0522.pdf:
"Until the 19th century overlaying was the only explanation of sudden and
unexpected death in infancy, and mentioned both in Roman records and in
medical and legal literature of the 12th and 13th centuries. The laws of the
church influenced secular legislation during the middle ages with defined
measures of punishment. During the 17th century publications appeared
warning against smothering of infants. Case reports similar to modern
reports were also given. Two textbooks discussing the existing knowledge of
prevention of overlaying and smothering of sucklings were published towards
the end of the 18th century."
Then it seems like there were some actual infanticide laws and such underway
during the early 17th century too.
Some of the following (from
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2279/is_n156/ai_20059973/pg_19) is
pretty horrific, so brace yourself if you need to:
"(4) Keith Wrightson, `Infanticide in Earlier Seventeenth-Century England',
Local Population Studies, xv (1975). Regina Schulte's work on late
eighteenth-century and early nineteenth-century Bavaria roots infanticide
firmly in the context of farm servants' everyday working lives: Regina
Schulte, The Village in Gurt: Arson, Infanticide and Poaching in the Court
Records of Upper Bavaria, 1848-1910, trans. Barrie Selman (Cambridge, 1994),
87-118. Many of the circumstances typical to early modern cases are
discussed in R. W. Malcolmson, `Infanticide in the Eighteenth Century', in
J. S. Cockburn (ed.), Crime in England, 1500-1800 (Princeton, 1977).
(5) The surviving examinations are by no means a complete record of all
prosecutions. Indictment files which survive usually contain at least
another 25 per cent of cases. For the frequency of cases in
seventeenth-century England, see P. E. Hoffer and N. E. H. Hull, Murdering
Mothers: Infanticide in England and New England, 1558-1803 (New York and
London, 1981), 21-4; Wrightson, `Infanticide in Earlier Seventeenth-Century
England'; Garthine Walker, `Gender, Crime and Social Order in Early Modern
Cheshire' (Univ. of Liverpool Ph.D. thesis, 1994), 126-7. On the debated
incidence of neonatal infanticide, see also J. S. Cockburn, `The Nature and
Incidence of Crime in England, 1559-1625: A Preliminary Survey', in Cockburn
(ed.), Crime in England, 1500-1800, 58; Angus McLaren, Reproductive Rituals:
The Perception of Fertility in England from the Sixteenth Century to the
Nineteenth Century (London, 1984), 129-35.
(6) The link between secret pregnancies and infanticide had been made
explicit by the statute of 1624, which made the concealment of an infant's
death the essence of the crime; at least some commentators saw the failure
to engage help in labour as evidence of guilty intent: Jackson, New-Born
Child Murder, 32.
(7) Although `the rising of the apron' was a well-established metaphor for
pregnancy and the stomachs of women suspected of pregnancy were certainly
watched by neighbours, clothing seems both to have disguised pregnancy to
some extent and to have made stomachs more difficult of access than breasts.
It also seems that, here, touching the breasts of a woman who might be
pregnant was culturally more acceptable than touching her stomach; early
modern women were also likely to gain less weight than modern women and the
weight gain of pregnancy might have remained unnoticed for longer.
(8) Since at least some people expected milk to be present in the breasts
from around the fourth month of pregnancy, the test served to check for a
current pregnancy as well as a recent birth or miscarriage: Audrey Eccles,
Obstetrics and Gynaecology in Tudor and Stuart England (London, 1982), 153."
~Katherine
On 12/9/08, Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
>
> -=-I heard about the 17th century co sleeping ban in Europe too,
>
> Brad, in
> university. It was in response to the idea that not all kids reputed
> to had
> actually died of SIDS but some probably of infanticide.
>
>
> ~Katherine-=-
>
>
>
> Was it a Catholic Church ban, maybe? And if late 17th century, that
> wouldn't have affected all of Europe.
>
>
>
>
> Sandra
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Jenny C
Thanks Schyler! That was really cool to read! I really liked the
portion about how the different cultures inherently view the infant
child. I can totally see that, and in fact, when Chamille was very
little, without even realizing it, I held such beliefs.
Even though Chamille slept with us on and off for most of her young
life, I clearly held the view that independence was a good thing and
something that should be upheld. Of course, it helped immensly that she
was a very independent kiddo and a very solid sleeper. I used to lay
down with her or hold her hand until she fell asleep, but I never
question the need for her to be in her own bed or not.
In fact, I never questioned our sleeping arrangements until Margaux was
born and absolutely would NOT sleep alone for longer than 10 min,
literally!
Since Margaux needed to sleep at times during the day, the only way it
would happen was to cradle her in my arms, so thank goodness for the
internet and unschooling.com, so I could actually do something while she
slept in my arms, and wow, I actually became a better mother because of
it all!
At night time, I'd lay with Margaux, nurse her to sleep and put on the
jazz station on the radio. Once she was good and asleep, I'd get up to
do other stuff before coming to bed, if the radio was loud and big band
enough, she'd stay asleep for long enough for me to wash some dishes or
something, if it moved on to light soft jazz, she'd wake up and I'd have
to go to bed for the night.
portion about how the different cultures inherently view the infant
child. I can totally see that, and in fact, when Chamille was very
little, without even realizing it, I held such beliefs.
Even though Chamille slept with us on and off for most of her young
life, I clearly held the view that independence was a good thing and
something that should be upheld. Of course, it helped immensly that she
was a very independent kiddo and a very solid sleeper. I used to lay
down with her or hold her hand until she fell asleep, but I never
question the need for her to be in her own bed or not.
In fact, I never questioned our sleeping arrangements until Margaux was
born and absolutely would NOT sleep alone for longer than 10 min,
literally!
Since Margaux needed to sleep at times during the day, the only way it
would happen was to cradle her in my arms, so thank goodness for the
internet and unschooling.com, so I could actually do something while she
slept in my arms, and wow, I actually became a better mother because of
it all!
At night time, I'd lay with Margaux, nurse her to sleep and put on the
jazz station on the radio. Once she was good and asleep, I'd get up to
do other stuff before coming to bed, if the radio was loud and big band
enough, she'd stay asleep for long enough for me to wash some dishes or
something, if it moved on to light soft jazz, she'd wake up and I'd have
to go to bed for the night.
elwazani
--- In [email protected], Sandra Dodd <Sandra@...> wrote:
about studies showing that children do not respond to home fire alarms
until some time after the age of 12 or so...and they had invented a
smoker detector that sounded out a recording of the mothers voice
firmly stating get up, there's a fire in the house get out now...
this is why I always tell my kids I want to know where every one is
sleeping at night incase of an emergency.
When I was in labor with my fourth child I went down to the living room
to rest on the couch, which I found more comfortable... I left my then
4 year old son in bed with my husband...my son started in soon after
that with a severe case of croup...my husband slept through it...by the
time I heard him and made it up stairs. he was too far along, blue
lips, panicky...we had to rush him to the E.R. andonce there my labor
ground to a halt and didn't resume for two days! I like my kids near
by to hear them if they're sick or hurt etc...Beverly
>There was an article in our paper some time in the last year talking
> Crystal and others who might could use this, I'm starting a page on
> co-sleeping, and have put Schuyler's post about studies there already:
>
> http://sandradodd.com/sleep/cosleeping
>
>
> If others want to post things here that you think should go on that
> page, I have a good webpage-working day here.
>
> Sandra
>
about studies showing that children do not respond to home fire alarms
until some time after the age of 12 or so...and they had invented a
smoker detector that sounded out a recording of the mothers voice
firmly stating get up, there's a fire in the house get out now...
this is why I always tell my kids I want to know where every one is
sleeping at night incase of an emergency.
When I was in labor with my fourth child I went down to the living room
to rest on the couch, which I found more comfortable... I left my then
4 year old son in bed with my husband...my son started in soon after
that with a severe case of croup...my husband slept through it...by the
time I heard him and made it up stairs. he was too far along, blue
lips, panicky...we had to rush him to the E.R. andonce there my labor
ground to a halt and didn't resume for two days! I like my kids near
by to hear them if they're sick or hurt etc...Beverly
prism7513
> There was an article in our paper some time in the last year talkingalarms
> about studies showing that children do not respond to home fire
> until some time after the age of 12 or so...and they had invented aWe recently moved into two bedrooms from on, with the two older
> smoker detector that sounded out a recording of the mothers voice
> firmly stating get up, there's a fire in the house get out now...
> this is why I always tell my kids I want to know where every one is
> sleeping at night incase of an emergency.
children upstairs and my husband and me and the two babies downstairs.
I much rather would have all of us upstairs but the other room will
only allow a twin-size bed. Many nights the older kids sleep with us
on the floor beside our beds. I sleep better when they do. (The only
reason we switched it up was that the older ones were expressing a
desire for a place of their own to hang out in and have toys
in-assessable from the little ones.)
But I saw that story about fire alarms on TV, and the parents were
shocked that the kids slept through several hours of the alarms, high-
pitched, going off. I wasn't surprised at all. I was more surprised
that these parents had formerly depended on the children getting
themselves out of bed when the alarms goes off. I sleep much better at
night when I can hear each person in the room breathing.
For a very brief period, when my oldest was just 2, and my son was an
infant, we had put my daughter in her own room. Two days later she
threw up for the first time, and I didn't realize it as vomit until I
came to check on her for what I thought was a cough. At that point, I
knew she'd probably throw up again, and so we brought her back to our
room so I could hear when it happened to help her, and we never looked
back until now.
I think the only reason they do okay on the nights they sleep away
from us is that they have each other. And I still have the monitor
cranked all the way up...if there was a way to quickly make another
room down here or up there, I'd do it in a heartbeat.
Deb
casa_divina
I have heard my mother brag over and over again over the years that
there were only two times that she has ever slept with me. Once when I
was 20 and we were traveling together in Ecuador and I got the stomach
flu in the middle of the night and was violently shaking all by
myself. My parents were in the room next door and I knocked and asked
for help. My mom held me and helped me warm up and get through the night.
The other time was when I was 19 and having a mental breakdown while
at college. My roommates had called my folks to tell them I was acting
funny. I was totally out of it and she came up to fly me home and to
the doctor. The night she came to get me she shared my bed with me.
I am working hard to have a mature relationship with my mother and
take responsibility for my life and my relationships. But when I think
about those times I have heard her tell that story of us sleeping
together only in totally emergency situations it breaks my heart.
My mom has always been proud of the fact that her kids have always
been very "independent" and she has worked hard to make that so. Now,
of four kids, I am the only one that she is somewhat close to. And I
live in Ecuador! Her other children live a lot closer, but resist an
intimate relationship with her. Could it be related to her resistance
to share intimate space with us when we were younger? I think so.
Imagine her dismay when she saw the two double beds pushed together in
our house! Imagine my joy when I realized I could do it different and
have a different relationship with my children!
Molly
Divina 5
Sabina 3.5
there were only two times that she has ever slept with me. Once when I
was 20 and we were traveling together in Ecuador and I got the stomach
flu in the middle of the night and was violently shaking all by
myself. My parents were in the room next door and I knocked and asked
for help. My mom held me and helped me warm up and get through the night.
The other time was when I was 19 and having a mental breakdown while
at college. My roommates had called my folks to tell them I was acting
funny. I was totally out of it and she came up to fly me home and to
the doctor. The night she came to get me she shared my bed with me.
I am working hard to have a mature relationship with my mother and
take responsibility for my life and my relationships. But when I think
about those times I have heard her tell that story of us sleeping
together only in totally emergency situations it breaks my heart.
My mom has always been proud of the fact that her kids have always
been very "independent" and she has worked hard to make that so. Now,
of four kids, I am the only one that she is somewhat close to. And I
live in Ecuador! Her other children live a lot closer, but resist an
intimate relationship with her. Could it be related to her resistance
to share intimate space with us when we were younger? I think so.
Imagine her dismay when she saw the two double beds pushed together in
our house! Imagine my joy when I realized I could do it different and
have a different relationship with my children!
Molly
Divina 5
Sabina 3.5
>sleep with
> Both Brian and I remember as do many of our generation wanting to
> mom and dad instead of alone or with a sibling (also frowned on inour home
> when I was a child). I was less afraid of the dark than one of mysisters
> was. I often walked her to the bathroom after bedtime. She's stillafraid
> of the dark, and for whatever reason (people are different), I'm notspooked
> by it. Karl is definitely afraid of the dark but getting less so astime
> goes by and I give him ideas for how to deal with it and go with himalways
> whenever he wants me to. And of course I feel that knowing he can
> have us to be with at night is the biggest deterrent to prolongedfear and
> feelings of incompetence.idea it
>
> ~Katherine
>
>
>
>
> On 12/8/08, Jenny C <jenstarc4@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > And my
> > > sleeping with my kids because I wanted to was a choice, and so
> > > there's a happiness and a giving there that is missing in both the
> > > "sleep in your own bed" model and the "we all share the bed because
> > > it's the only bed" model.
> >
> >
> >
> > Something I discovered when I was trying to find articles or links to
> > information, was the idea that co-sleeping started to die off because
> > people could afford bigger houses and more beds, so within that
> > becomes an issue of "have" and "have not", when really the issue isco-sleeping
> > probably more of a biological one. So the reasoning behind
> > or no co-sleeping has become a confused issue, then throw in thewhole
> > psychoanalyst "sex" aspect, and you have an idea that's been twistedJapanese
> > into something that it's not.
> >
> > I wish I could have found the information about co-sleeping in
> > culture, instead of just references to it. It seems that part of thethrough
> > idea in Japanese culture is that co-sleeping helps keep everyone
> > cohesive and bound to one another and dependent on one another
> > family, within society at large. That seems to follow throughwith some
> > of the sleep studies done in anthropological research as well.co-slept with
> >
> > I'm reading a book right now that takes place in the Ireland and
> > Scotland and they made reference to the fact that all kids
> > each other if they weren't sleeping with their parents, and it wasto read
> > referencing the 1930's, so really not that long ago. It's fiction,
> > though, so no references. The book is "Dream Angus" for anyone
> > interested, it's largely about celtic gods and mythology. It also
> > happens to be the first chapter book that Margaux has allowed me
> > to her. It isn't a kid's book though.way more
> >
> > I read several things also referencing European cultures, in general
> > co-sleep, at least with babies and young children, and that is
> > common than in the US. I can't tell you wether this is true or not,
> > just anecdotal, from stuff I was reading.
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>