We have all been told that we have to be consistent and firm with our kids. Yet we don't have to and sometimes that's not even the right thing to do.
A new "gentle" approach to sleep suggests that if parents meet all their child's needs, sleep will follow. However, I disagree and believe this type of approach can actually harm families. Here's why.
"What is most important for your child's development?" If you answered sleep, I think we need to talk.
New research suggests a method of "responsive settling" actually can improve infant sleep as well as extinction methods. Is this wholly accurate?
Elizabeth Pantley has created perhaps her best book yet in the popular and much-needed No-Cry series. A book that helps families gently navigate sleep from the start, it's an excellent (and easy) read for all parents.
For the majority of human history, we have shared sleep with our infants which has led some researchers to speculate that this is related to the development of secure attachment, but this has yet to be studied... until now. The results may surprise some people.
The dismissal of the importance of a rise in cortisol on the developing brain is very popular with extinction sleep training apologists. Although we do not know the exact influences, there are reasons to be cautious of this dismissal, which ignores key evolutionary and biological information.
I feel like sleep trainers are like a mythical monster where every time you cut off one head with science and reason, two more take their place that are even more dangerous than before. In the last few months alone, the media has highlighted this method of locking your child in a room for 12 hours a day under the guise of “helping” your child and a method of sleep training newborns by not feeding them at night.