I have a subscription to Parents magazine, which I thoroughly enjoy reading. They have some really helpful articles, articles with totally fun activities, and articles that are ridiculously hilarious in their fear-mongering. Why has The Media decided to report every little thing that could possibly harm 0.01% of the population and report on it as if we're all in danger? Sheesh. But I digress.February's Parents has an article about the "windows of opportunity" for infants and toddlers, the times in which you can best begin a habit (sleep through the night, start solids, etc.). I love these kinds of articles. In all my nerdiness, I scan articles like this and keep a topical record that I can use when some of the information is more applicable.
One of their windows (which also include potty training and using a sippy cup) is the time to introduce a "lovey." This window I just don't
understand. Why why why would you purposely attach your child to a single object, something they can't sleep or leave the house without? Something that is easily lost and will lead to meltdowns and sadness for all? (The article does helpfully suggest buying a replacement lovey, though from what I know about some kids' loveys, replaco-lovey doesn't cut it.)
Many kids naturally gravitate to a lovey. That is fine. But to have a strategy for creating a lovey, as if a lovey is suddenly a necessity... Am I the only one who thinks that's just silly?
6 comments:
We have no "lovies" over here. I tried, but it didn't work. I was desperate to help Sadie sleep through the night. I was hoping it would comfort her. The things you try.
Clayton and Josie both had/have lovies. Noah doesn't (he just never found anything worth his attachment). My experience with Clayton is that, as long as you have back-ups, they're not bad. We took his lovies away about a year ago and he's totally fine with that. I think it just depends on how you use them. If they're a crutch, that's a problem. If they're a tool to help your kid calm himself down/put himself to sleep until they can do without, I think it's fine. It's a self soothing thing. But I do agree that, yes, forcing a lovey on your kid is ridiculous. Wow, that was long.
My brother's and sisters' kids have had these toys that they just can't be separated from. My sister was over at my parent's house Christmas Eve, trying to put her son to sleep but she forgot "Ruff" his stuffed dog at home. He through a FIT!!! Poor kid was traumatized that he would have to go to sleep without Ruff! I don't have kids, so I have no place to judge, but...from what I have seen they can be a good security for the kid, but if you lose it then you are SOL!!! You may be smart not even giving her the option! :)
I totally see what you're saying, but I am definitely guilty of giving my kids things that I know they'll end up getting attached to. I say if your child is good without having a "lovey" definitely don't push it on 'em, but I also think it can be really good for the child to have something that makes him/her feel safe and secure. I think a lot of kids crave it. Like I said though, I totally get your point that if they are fine without it, don't force it! Interesting topic.
Yeah, I completely agree. If it happens, it happens. But why do it on PURPOSE??? Hmmmm....
I've never seen the Leslie Patricelli books. They look super cute!
Hm..I'll have to look up Leslie Patricelli - I am always looking for new baby books!
YES! I agree with you about the lovie. I had to laugh though - I am planning on doing a wooby (sp?) post tomorrow about Landon. He has a dog that he absolutely loves but thankfully it isn't anything he NEEDS but the new thing he carries around constantly is his pillow. ??? yeah, that is weird to me.
Post a Comment