Commentary: Does 'cry it out' really have no adverse effects on attachment? Reflections on Bilgin and Wolke (2020).

In their recent paper published in JCPP, Bilgin and Wolke (2020a) argue that leaving an infant to 'cry it out', rather than responding to the child's cries, had no adverse effects on mother-infant attachment at 18 months. This finding opposes evidence across a wide range of scientific fields. Here, we outline several concerns with the article and argue against some of the authors' strong claims, which have already gained media attention, including a report on the NHS website. We suggest that the authors' conclusions should be considered one piece of a larger scientific whole, where 'cry it out' seems, overall, to be of detriment to both attachment and development. Crucially, we are concerned that this study has issues regarding power and other analytical decisions. More generally, we fear that the authors have overstated their findings and we hope that members of the public do not alter their parenting behaviours in line with such claims without further research into this controversial topic.

Birth Experiences, Breastfeeding, and the Mother-Child Relationship: Evidence from a Large Sample of Mothers.

BACKGROUND: It is a priority for public health professionals to improve global breastfeeding rates, which have remained low in Western countries for more than a decade. Few researchers have addressed how maternal perceptions of birth experiences affect infant feeding methods. Furthermore, mixed results have been shown in research regarding breastfeeding and mother-child bonding, and many studies are limited by small sample sizes, representing a need for further investigation. PURPOSE: We aimed to examine the relationship between subjective birth experiences and breastfeeding outcomes, and explored whether breastfeeding affected mother-infant bonding. METHODS: 3,080 mothers up to three years postpartum completed a cross - sectional survey. RESULTS: Mothers who had more positive birth experiences were more likely to report breastfeeding their babies. Moreover, mothers who perceived their birth as more positive were more likely to breastfeed their child for a longer period (over 9 months) than those who had more negative experiences. In line with recent research, breastfeeding behaviours were not associated with reported mother-infant bonding. CONCLUSIONS: Mothers who reported better birth experiences were most likely to breastfeed, and breastfeed for longer. We find no evidence to suggest that feeding methods are associated with bonding outcomes.

Parenting styles and types: Breastfeeding attitudes in a large sample of mothers.

OBJECTIVE: The importance of breastfeeding for both maternal and infant health is well established. However, it remains the case that only a small percentage of infants are breastfed after the first six months of life. Maternal negative breastfeeding attitudes are associated with a reduced likelihood of breastfeeding an infant, but they are a malleable target for practitioner interventions. By adjusting perceptions, and therefore behaviours within the population, maternal and infant health outcomes may be improved. As such, it is important to understand whether certain types of mother might feel more negatively about breastfeeding. Here. we investigated the relationships between parenting styles, personality traits, and breastfeeding attitudes. In addition, we aimed to address the interrelated nature of parenting styles by identifying 'types' of mother who may feel more negatively about breastfeeding. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey was used in order to measure parenting styles, personality traits, and attitudes to breastfeeding. PARTICIPANTS: A sample of 1,347 mothers (age M = 31.4 years, SD = 7.4 years) participated. Recruitment took place through online mother and baby groups based predominantly in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: More permissive and less uninvolved mothers felt positively about breastfeeding, but limited associations between personality factors and breastfeeding attitudes were found. We applied a cluster analytical approach to investigate whether there were particular 'types' of mothers in our sample, and if these showed systematic differences. Our analyses revealed two profiles, best described as 'high nurturance' (high scoring on authoritative and permissive) and 'low nurturance' (low scoring on these dimensions). These two types of mother showed significant differences along all four parenting styles, and our 'high nurturance' type was more conscientious and emotionally stable, and felt more positively about breastfeeding. CONCLUSIONS: Parenting styles were associated with breastfeeding attitudes. Through identifying an underlying nurturance dimension that best explains differences in parenting styles across mothers, we provide a potential avenue to improving breastfeeding attitudes. By focussing on 'low nurturance' mothers in particular, professionals may be able to provide interventions to improve breastfeeding attitudes and, as a result, address low rates of breastfeeding in the UK.