The child sleep expert Eduard Estivill He had been in the shadow for a few months (or it seemed to me) and now he has reappeared in the world of motherhood and fatherhood for his controversial statements, increasingly contradictory and meaningless. If a few days ago we explained that he told parents that if they let their children cry they were doing it wrong, now he goes and tells us, in his Facebook account, the difference between the types of crying of babies, as if one could be ignored and the other not. And since nothing fits us anymore, ** we don't know whether to laugh or cry **.
But what did he say?
Well, what you have next, taken from his Facebook:
It is important to differentiate the type of crying of a baby. Lately they make me the comment that letting the child cry can have serious consequences. We should know that there are two types of crying: 1. The crying of pain or abandonment. 2. The cry of communication or demand. Naturally, the baby only communicates through crying, and it is important to differentiate it. When we leave the baby in the nursery, the baby cries to say "Stay with me mom" is a demand. The same happens when you leave it in bed. Demand.
And parents increasingly upset
Because we will see. The other day he tells us that a baby should never be allowed to cry to teach him to sleep, and if you do it that way, it is because you have not understood his book. But now the man goes and starts to differentiate between two types of crying.
And I say: What else does it matter? That is, if you don't have to let a baby cry, what else does it matter why he cries? He is served and that's it.
But he is explaining it because apparently there is a kind of crying that can have consequences and another that does not ... at least I understand his arguments.
Are there really two types of crying?
According to Estivill yes, crying in pain or abandonment Y the communication or demand. In one he is telling you that he suffers and in the other, too? I don't know how to explain it, I'm sorry. I guess this is better explained by him, because I don't see the difference. Well, yes: the difference can be the act that motivates the baby's tears. If he falls and hurts himself, he cries in pain. If he is hungry, he cries of hunger. If he feels lonely, he cries because he feels lonely, abandoned.
And why does he cry? Because that way he is communicating, to you or to those who hear him, that he needs someone to help him: if he has been harmed, that he calms him a little, if he is hungry, that you feed him and if he feels alone, accompany him.
That is, in fact the crying of pain or abandonment is the same as that of communication or demand: it cries because something hurts or feels abandoned and tells you that you need something.
However, man does not know what a mess by putting examples:
- "When we leave the baby in the nursery, the baby cries to say 'Stay with me mom' is a demand": Yes, of course it is a demand, but it is because he feels alone or abandoned and asks that you not leave him in that state.
- "The same happens at the time of leaving him in bed. Demand": again it is another demand, but it is for the same reason: he feels alone or abandoned, and probably hurt (crying from pain or abandonment) and cries to ask for company.
That is, Estivill wants us to believe that if a child cries because you leave him alone nothing happens, but that if he cries because he feels abandoned. And then, when does a baby cry for feeling abandoned? When you leave it on the street forever? When you leave it in a church because you are not going to take care of it anymore? I do not understand. If so, if he cried because you leave it on the street and run away, the crying would be exactly the same as if you left it alone at night, because the feeling is the same: the baby feels lonely in both cases and cries for the same reason and in the same way.
And even if it were different, is one crying less important than the other?
Come on, it seems absurd what he writes because it makes no sense, but also because if he believed me, if he considered his premises valid, I would think that he is out of place for thinking that a baby has a cry of suffering and another of non-suffering . We all know that it is not the same to cry because you do not give him something that he wants to cry because you have left him alone (the second I think is worse), but it is that if we talk about a baby of 3-6 months, age in the that it is recommended to follow the Estivill method, it makes no sense to differentiate between cries. We talk about babies, their reasoning is very limited and all their demands are authentic: If a baby of that age cries, you have to assist him when you can.
I repeat: I no longer know if he is serious or joking. I I don't know whether to laugh or cry anymore.
Photos | Eduard Estivill Twitter, iStock
In Babies and more | What Dr. Estivill should explain (if he were sincere), Fetuses already sleep alone before birth and many parents help them unlearn him, says Estivill, At bedtime, let him cry or help him catch the dream?
