What do you think?
Rate this book
笑褨谢褍泄褌械 屑械薪械 屑褨褑薪芯. 携泻 胁懈褏芯胁褍胁邪褌懈 写褨褌械泄 蟹 谢褞斜芯胁'褞
芦笑褨谢褍泄褌械 屑械薪械 屑褨褑薪芯! 携泻 胁懈褏芯胁褍胁邪褌懈 写褨褌械泄 蟹 谢褞斜芯胁鈥櫻幝� 鈥� 褑械 泻薪懈谐邪, 薪邪锌懈褋邪薪邪 薪邪 蟹邪褏懈褋褌 写懈褌懈薪懈. 袧邪 褩褩 褋褌芯褉褨薪泻邪褏 写芯泻褌芯褉 袣邪褉谢芯褋 袚芯薪褋邪谢械褋 芯锌芯薪褍褦 褌邪泻 蟹胁邪薪懈屑 褎邪褏褨胁褑褟屑, 褟泻褨 蟹薪邪褞褌褜 褟泻 胁懈褏芯胁褍胁邪褌懈 写褨褌械泄, 写芯屑邪谐邪褞褔懈褋褜 胁褨写 薪懈褏 褏芯褉芯褕芯褩 锌芯胁械写褨薪泻懈. 袗胁褌芯褉 锌芯泻邪蟹褍褦 薪邪屑, 褖芯 薪邪褕邪 屑械褌邪 褟泻 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁 锌芯谢褟谐邪褦 薪械 胁 褌芯屑褍, 褖芯斜 锌褉懈胁褔懈褌懈 写褨褌械泄 写芯 褨写械邪谢褜薪芯褩 写懈褋褑懈锌谢褨薪懈 褨 锌褉懈胁懈褌懈 褩屑 薪懈蟹泻褍 泻芯褉懈褋薪懈褏 薪邪胁懈褔芯泻, 邪 胁 褌芯屑褍, 褖芯斜 蟹邪写芯胁芯谢褜薪懈褌懈 褩褏薪褞 锌褉懈褉芯写薪褍 锌芯褌褉械斜褍 胁 锌褉懈胁鈥櫻徯沸靶叫狙佈傃�, 胁 械屑芯褑褨泄薪芯屑褍 褨 褎褨蟹懈褔薪芯屑褍 泻芯薪褌邪泻褌褨.
校 泻薪懈蟹褨 写械褌邪谢褜薪芯 褉芯蟹谐谢褟写邪褞褌褜褋褟 锌懈褌邪薪薪褟, 褟泻褨 褔邪褋褌芯 褌褍褉斜褍褞褌褜 屑芯谢芯写懈褏 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁: 褔芯屑褍 屑邪谢褞泻懈 锌褉芯褋褟褌褜褋褟 薪邪 褉褍泻懈, 褔芯屑褍 胁芯薪懈 薪械 谢褞斜谢褟褌褜 褋锌邪褌懈 芯写薪褨, 泻芯谢懈 卸 写懈褌懈薪邪 褋褌邪薪械 褋邪屑芯褋褌褨泄薪芯褞, 褔懈 锌芯褌褉褨斜薪芯 褏胁邪谢懈褌懈 褨 泻邪褉邪褌懈 写褨褌械泄, 褔懈 胁邪褉褌芯 胁褨写写邪胁邪褌懈 写懈褌懈薪褍 胁 写懈褌褟褔懈泄 褋邪写芯泻, 褖芯 褌邪泻械 褋芯褑褨邪谢褨蟹邪褑褨褟 褨 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褨薪褕懈褏.
袟邪 胁褨写谐褍泻邪屑懈 褔懈褌邪褔褨胁 褑械 鈥� 芯写薪邪 蟹 泻褉邪褖懈褏 泻薪懈谐 锌褉芯 褌械, 褟泻 胁懈褏芯胁褍胁邪褌懈 写褨褌械泄. 袩褉懈 褑褜芯屑褍 薪械 胁邪褉褌芯 褔械泻邪褌懈 胁褨写 邪胁褌芯褉邪 谐芯褌芯胁懈褏 褉械褑械锌褌褨胁, 胁褨薪 胁褨写写邪褦 锌械褉械胁邪谐褍 褉芯蟹写褍屑邪屑 褨 褋锌芯褋褌械褉械卸械薪薪褟屑懈. 袘邪谐邪褌芯 褉械褔械泄, 褟泻褨 蟹写邪胁邪谢懈褋褟 褌邪泻懈屑懈 芯褔械胁懈写薪懈屑懈, 蟹芯斜褉邪卸械薪褨 邪胁褌芯褉芯屑 薪褨斜懈 蟹 褨薪褕芯谐芯 斜芯泻褍. 袣薪懈谐邪 薪邪锌懈褋邪薪邪 锌褉芯褋褌芯褞 褨 谢械谐泻芯褞 屑芯胁芯褞.
校 泻薪懈蟹褨 写械褌邪谢褜薪芯 褉芯蟹谐谢褟写邪褞褌褜褋褟 锌懈褌邪薪薪褟, 褟泻褨 褔邪褋褌芯 褌褍褉斜褍褞褌褜 屑芯谢芯写懈褏 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁: 褔芯屑褍 屑邪谢褞泻懈 锌褉芯褋褟褌褜褋褟 薪邪 褉褍泻懈, 褔芯屑褍 胁芯薪懈 薪械 谢褞斜谢褟褌褜 褋锌邪褌懈 芯写薪褨, 泻芯谢懈 卸 写懈褌懈薪邪 褋褌邪薪械 褋邪屑芯褋褌褨泄薪芯褞, 褔懈 锌芯褌褉褨斜薪芯 褏胁邪谢懈褌懈 褨 泻邪褉邪褌懈 写褨褌械泄, 褔懈 胁邪褉褌芯 胁褨写写邪胁邪褌懈 写懈褌懈薪褍 胁 写懈褌褟褔懈泄 褋邪写芯泻, 褖芯 褌邪泻械 褋芯褑褨邪谢褨蟹邪褑褨褟 褨 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褨薪褕懈褏.
袟邪 胁褨写谐褍泻邪屑懈 褔懈褌邪褔褨胁 褑械 鈥� 芯写薪邪 蟹 泻褉邪褖懈褏 泻薪懈谐 锌褉芯 褌械, 褟泻 胁懈褏芯胁褍胁邪褌懈 写褨褌械泄. 袩褉懈 褑褜芯屑褍 薪械 胁邪褉褌芯 褔械泻邪褌懈 胁褨写 邪胁褌芯褉邪 谐芯褌芯胁懈褏 褉械褑械锌褌褨胁, 胁褨薪 胁褨写写邪褦 锌械褉械胁邪谐褍 褉芯蟹写褍屑邪屑 褨 褋锌芯褋褌械褉械卸械薪薪褟屑懈. 袘邪谐邪褌芯 褉械褔械泄, 褟泻褨 蟹写邪胁邪谢懈褋褟 褌邪泻懈屑懈 芯褔械胁懈写薪懈屑懈, 蟹芯斜褉邪卸械薪褨 邪胁褌芯褉芯屑 薪褨斜懈 蟹 褨薪褕芯谐芯 斜芯泻褍. 袣薪懈谐邪 薪邪锌懈褋邪薪邪 锌褉芯褋褌芯褞 褨 谢械谐泻芯褞 屑芯胁芯褞.
240 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
673 people are currently reading
1,762 people want to read
About the author
Carlos Gonz谩lez
14听books242听followersCarlos Gonz谩lez, a father of three, studied medicine at the Universidad Aut贸noma de Barcelona and trained as a paediatrician at the Hospital de Sant Joan de D茅u. The founder and president of the Catalan Breastfeeding Association (ACPAM), he currently gives courses on breastfeeding for medical professionals.
Since 1996 he has been breastfeeding correspondent for Ser Padres (Being Parents) magazine.
Since 1996 he has been breastfeeding correspondent for Ser Padres (Being Parents) magazine.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 311 reviews
July 26, 2022
It is very difficult to be a good father. The main challenge is knowing what to do in each situation. Of course you will do what you think is the best but there are always lots of doubts.
For instance, there some popular books that ask you to let your baby cry in order to teach him or her the correct manners. I just could not stand the idea of doing something like that.
This book is an alternative that is based in a close relation with your baby. Skin to skin. It has a simply message. Do you love your baby? Just let him or her know. Kisses are welcome. Baby in your bed is welcome. Warm hugs are welcome.
With this book I have found the way I know - deep inside - I should care for my baby.
For instance, there some popular books that ask you to let your baby cry in order to teach him or her the correct manners. I just could not stand the idea of doing something like that.
This book is an alternative that is based in a close relation with your baby. Skin to skin. It has a simply message. Do you love your baby? Just let him or her know. Kisses are welcome. Baby in your bed is welcome. Warm hugs are welcome.
With this book I have found the way I know - deep inside - I should care for my baby.
September 29, 2009
This book was the first book about parenting that told me that it was Ok what I was doing with my son: caresing him, sleeping with him, "spoiling" him. Then I found "attachment parenting" : that validated what I knew in my heart, but was embarrased to accept in public :)
October 2, 2012
I'll be buying my own copy of this book. It's not the best argued, the way it uses evidence is possibly rather suspect, but it has a unique eloquence.
It's a lovely book that I'll want to re-read and share with others, especially when I want a laugh, and to get some perspective, especially when I despair of my children behaving as I would like them to. It's quite unusual to read polemic with such humour. I've heard Carlos Gonzales speak and despite the challenges of excellent English with a heavy Spanish accent, he was captivating. I loved his "My Child Won't Eat". Despite being a paediatrician by training he has a way of really getting down to fundamentals and seeing things very simply through a child's eyes (without blaming parents for their feelings and situations) and in this book he has just let rip with it - he says himself that these are really just his opinions because that's all there is.
It was also interesting for someone like me, immersed in supporting others with the fallout from so many English-speaking parenting gurus pronouncements from the polarised to the faux-moderate to see that there are similar issues in the non-English speaking parenting literature. Whilst he's not the first person to do it, his use of quotations from very old parenting texts is both amusing and salutary. He shows how the self-positioning of some authors as the 'middle way' or 'moderation' is at best merely a reflection of where they choose to place their own goalposts. Like Sue Gerhardt's excellent The Selfish Society, he takes the discussion slightly further and I am sure there will be some who are uncomfortable with his implicit political view and explicit personal values.
He has some lovely, moving examples which are best left for the reader to discover for themselves.
So no, it's not "How to raise your children with love", it's not "Kiss me!" but it is "Put yourself for a moment in your child's position and then see whether you think you should carry on with exactly the same expectations or practices" (you might, but it will not be for the same reasons).
It's a lovely book that I'll want to re-read and share with others, especially when I want a laugh, and to get some perspective, especially when I despair of my children behaving as I would like them to. It's quite unusual to read polemic with such humour. I've heard Carlos Gonzales speak and despite the challenges of excellent English with a heavy Spanish accent, he was captivating. I loved his "My Child Won't Eat". Despite being a paediatrician by training he has a way of really getting down to fundamentals and seeing things very simply through a child's eyes (without blaming parents for their feelings and situations) and in this book he has just let rip with it - he says himself that these are really just his opinions because that's all there is.
It was also interesting for someone like me, immersed in supporting others with the fallout from so many English-speaking parenting gurus pronouncements from the polarised to the faux-moderate to see that there are similar issues in the non-English speaking parenting literature. Whilst he's not the first person to do it, his use of quotations from very old parenting texts is both amusing and salutary. He shows how the self-positioning of some authors as the 'middle way' or 'moderation' is at best merely a reflection of where they choose to place their own goalposts. Like Sue Gerhardt's excellent The Selfish Society, he takes the discussion slightly further and I am sure there will be some who are uncomfortable with his implicit political view and explicit personal values.
He has some lovely, moving examples which are best left for the reader to discover for themselves.
So no, it's not "How to raise your children with love", it's not "Kiss me!" but it is "Put yourself for a moment in your child's position and then see whether you think you should carry on with exactly the same expectations or practices" (you might, but it will not be for the same reasons).
September 28, 2010
This is a very interesting book, writing by a pediatric (Carlos Gonz谩lez) dealing with many of the myths and falsehoods of child care.
Truly, it pays special attention to the called "M茅todo Estivill" (the Spanish version of the behavioral Ferber method), although it deals with a huge amount of other well established believes and myths.
Basically, he gives scientific evidence (on a huge bibliography) of their falsehood and erroneousness providing the results of statistical data (if available) or pointing out the skewed and dubiousness of their conception and interpretation.
Interesting enough, Dr. Estivill does not provide any but general, unsupported claims.
Anyway, as a resume, Dr. Carlos Gonz谩lez tells you that your child (toddler) is a real person, with rights, desires, hopes and in truly need for your love, care and attention. His behaviour is shaped by thousands of years of evolution and that his objective is not to be neither a dictator nor a demented master "that deprives you of the most basic freedoms and dignity, and asks you unquestioning obedience". If you do not tolerate that anyone beats you, asks you blind obedience in every aspect of your life or abuses you in anyway... why do you see it right when dealing with children? The author keeps on pointing this simple fact with multiple examples throughout the book, showing the dual morality by exchanging "child" by "spouse" or "patron" or "colleague"...
The point is, I think, that many a parent long for the time when they have time for doing whatever they wanted. And now they face the fact that their time is not entirely theirs and that there is now "somebody" stealing away their comfortable lifes... and want them back! So the Ferber/Estivill method is just a behavioral one, that just makes your child do what you want, when you want and how you want, as if training a pet.
As Dr. Gonz谩lez says, to sleep, to eat, to walk, to stop using diapers... are things that happens naturally (dysfunctions avoided) without the need to be learned. What must be learned is HOW. And what many parents want is that their child DO all those things the way they want and that cause them less disturbances. Certainly, many will think that it is better if you TRAIN your child to sleep without assistance when you order it (independently if the child or the baby want it) than being with him half an hour or an hour or more telling tales or just rocking in your arms. For those who thinks the first is the best way, I tell them that they deprive themselves of the happiest and most truly moments of affection they will ever experience. A pitty.
Your child craves for your love. There is no teddy bear nor toy that can replace you (ask a child if they prefer sleep with his mother or with a teddy bear). There is nothing that you may do that they cannot forgive. Now... how are you paying back this unbound love?
Truly, it pays special attention to the called "M茅todo Estivill" (the Spanish version of the behavioral Ferber method), although it deals with a huge amount of other well established believes and myths.
Basically, he gives scientific evidence (on a huge bibliography) of their falsehood and erroneousness providing the results of statistical data (if available) or pointing out the skewed and dubiousness of their conception and interpretation.
Interesting enough, Dr. Estivill does not provide any but general, unsupported claims.
Anyway, as a resume, Dr. Carlos Gonz谩lez tells you that your child (toddler) is a real person, with rights, desires, hopes and in truly need for your love, care and attention. His behaviour is shaped by thousands of years of evolution and that his objective is not to be neither a dictator nor a demented master "that deprives you of the most basic freedoms and dignity, and asks you unquestioning obedience". If you do not tolerate that anyone beats you, asks you blind obedience in every aspect of your life or abuses you in anyway... why do you see it right when dealing with children? The author keeps on pointing this simple fact with multiple examples throughout the book, showing the dual morality by exchanging "child" by "spouse" or "patron" or "colleague"...
The point is, I think, that many a parent long for the time when they have time for doing whatever they wanted. And now they face the fact that their time is not entirely theirs and that there is now "somebody" stealing away their comfortable lifes... and want them back! So the Ferber/Estivill method is just a behavioral one, that just makes your child do what you want, when you want and how you want, as if training a pet.
As Dr. Gonz谩lez says, to sleep, to eat, to walk, to stop using diapers... are things that happens naturally (dysfunctions avoided) without the need to be learned. What must be learned is HOW. And what many parents want is that their child DO all those things the way they want and that cause them less disturbances. Certainly, many will think that it is better if you TRAIN your child to sleep without assistance when you order it (independently if the child or the baby want it) than being with him half an hour or an hour or more telling tales or just rocking in your arms. For those who thinks the first is the best way, I tell them that they deprive themselves of the happiest and most truly moments of affection they will ever experience. A pitty.
Your child craves for your love. There is no teddy bear nor toy that can replace you (ask a child if they prefer sleep with his mother or with a teddy bear). There is nothing that you may do that they cannot forgive. Now... how are you paying back this unbound love?
March 28, 2020
They recommended me the author and this book as 鈥渢he bible鈥� for modern parenting, so I really wanted to like this book, but I absolutely didn't. It was very difficult even to finish it, not because I don鈥檛 agree with many of his ideas or values, but because of how the author expresses them, and to sum up because of the book鈥檚 general inconsistency.
First of all, the book is not taking into account any new researches he could actually use to prove some of his arguments with logic. In general the book has an incredible lack of scientific, educational and psychological backup, and when he uses some, they tend to be very old, out-of-date, and unusable. He is not doing that because there is not enough research or because he is 鈥渟upporting the children鈥檚 side鈥濃€� he has to do so because is the only way his arguments can hold together somehow. Also the examples and quotes he uses are extreme and useless, criticising other perspectives without strong or argumentized reasons, therefore making his arguments to fall apart all the time. Again, he could prove he is right in a proper way! And the most annoying thing: a book that is supposed to explain how to parenting with love and understanding, but that instead is a repetitive, unjustified anthropologic comparison between parenting in different cultures and periods of history, while blaming a very specific type of parenting as general parenting or the majority, and actually not explaining or justifying anything.
In general, and this part I am speaking only as an educator, he could have defended some of his ideas so easily with updated research he completely ignored, or with 鈥渘ormal real鈥� (not extreme) and not stigmatized examples they do exist, or by quoting theories and concepts from many great pedagogues, psychologists, doctors, etc., whose ideas and theories are by the way well-established for long in Spain and in general in Western countries, both in public and private schools and nurseries, and are normalised for many parents around the world or even in the societies. Just sad he focused on the 鈥渂ad鈥� parents or 鈥渟trict鈥� parents or 鈥渢raditions/myths鈥�, when parenting and education is developing so well and fast lately, and parents try more and more to be well-informed, more empathetic and understanding more and making more efforts for a better way to raise, breed and educate their children, in this crazy world.
Not worth it at all, especially if you are a parent-to-be or a new parent.
First of all, the book is not taking into account any new researches he could actually use to prove some of his arguments with logic. In general the book has an incredible lack of scientific, educational and psychological backup, and when he uses some, they tend to be very old, out-of-date, and unusable. He is not doing that because there is not enough research or because he is 鈥渟upporting the children鈥檚 side鈥濃€� he has to do so because is the only way his arguments can hold together somehow. Also the examples and quotes he uses are extreme and useless, criticising other perspectives without strong or argumentized reasons, therefore making his arguments to fall apart all the time. Again, he could prove he is right in a proper way! And the most annoying thing: a book that is supposed to explain how to parenting with love and understanding, but that instead is a repetitive, unjustified anthropologic comparison between parenting in different cultures and periods of history, while blaming a very specific type of parenting as general parenting or the majority, and actually not explaining or justifying anything.
In general, and this part I am speaking only as an educator, he could have defended some of his ideas so easily with updated research he completely ignored, or with 鈥渘ormal real鈥� (not extreme) and not stigmatized examples they do exist, or by quoting theories and concepts from many great pedagogues, psychologists, doctors, etc., whose ideas and theories are by the way well-established for long in Spain and in general in Western countries, both in public and private schools and nurseries, and are normalised for many parents around the world or even in the societies. Just sad he focused on the 鈥渂ad鈥� parents or 鈥渟trict鈥� parents or 鈥渢raditions/myths鈥�, when parenting and education is developing so well and fast lately, and parents try more and more to be well-informed, more empathetic and understanding more and making more efforts for a better way to raise, breed and educate their children, in this crazy world.
Not worth it at all, especially if you are a parent-to-be or a new parent.
January 28, 2020
This book had been sitting around at home for a few months, since even before our little baby was born. A workmate of my girlfriend's had lent it to her, together with a few others related to pregnancy, babies and child-rearing. I had not paid much attention to it because its title and appearance put me off, frankly: 鈥淜iss Me! How To Raise Your Children With Love鈥�. Seriously? It totally looked like some bland, self-help-y, silly book for emotional mothers-to-be full of prolactin. (And there goes your politically incorrect comment of the day, you're welcome).
But then, a colleague of mine (physicist, PhD, mother of two, damn smart) recommended to me two other books by the same author, saying that they have a good scientific basis and that she had learnt something from them. I didn't have those other two, but I happened to have this one at hand. So I started reading it a couple of months ago.
These are the thoughts of a practising paediatrician about raising babies and children today.
First of all (and because I have a fixation with the form, the medium, the use of language) I have to say that it is very well written, with an elegant but approachable style, avoiding clich茅s. I spotted only one or two typos or punctuation errors (and that is quite unusual). The subject is treated in a very humane and understandable way, with plenty of day-to-day examples and some real testimonies from parents. It is quite funny sometimes, and often touching.
Another thing I liked is the emphasis on evolutionary psychology. The first part of the book is dedicated to explaining why children are the way they are: they want to be cuddled because not feeling any movement probably means that the entire tribe is gone and they are now in danger; they cry as soon as they are left alone because it's the best way for their mothers to find them again; they need to be fed every few hours at night because鈥� etcetera. That is all interesting, and indeed explains much of the behaviour of babies nowadays.
The author dedicates the last part to criticising pedagogical theories or fads that he finds false or even cruel or offensive: whimsical methods of discipline, corporal punishment (even the mildest forms of it), overtly rigid approaches to sleep, food, play time, etc. Most of that criticism sounds right to me, too.
The overall message of the book is: kids are the way they are for good (evolutionary) reasons; trying to bend their will is pointless at best, and often harmful; in most scenarios, simply do what feels right to you (comforting the baby, feeding it, letting the kid sleep in your bed); give them time and don't be angry at them, and they'll learn all important things by themselves sooner or later (eating, walking, going to the toilet); parents should mind the interests of their children first, and then their own; expressing unconditional love is the most important thing; violence (of any intensity) is to be completely avoided, as are insults, deprecating comments, threats, and even punishment (grounding).
Most of that is comforting to parents, because it feels good and it takes some burden off their shoulders (because they can mostly follow their instincts and not feel guilty). And I like a lot the loving attitude, the simple ideas about caring for children and attending to their needs as the basic, most important principle.
But I have some issues with the ideas in the book.
One problem I have is that explaining why babies are the way they are does not help resolve the question of whether/when it is necessary/good to let them be that way in the 21st century. And that dilemma, I think, is at the root of most difficult situations about parenting.
For example. Yes, babies cry a lot and demand to be held and rocked because it's the best way for them to stay alive in cold nights, among hyenas and wolves. But, when I'm absolutely certain that the night inside the bedroom will be warm, and that there will be no predators around, what reason is there to (almost?) always give up and hold a baby? Is the baby going to suffer some trauma if I restrain from doing so, say, half of the times, because I want to do other (reasonable, necessary) things? Where is the evidence for that? In fact, often I would hold my baby pursuing my own interest (because it feels nice to me, and because I would feel guilty otherwise), not its own. So, what's the reason to treat babies as if we were still a naked tribe rummaging the savannah, combating predators and famine?
To most day-to-day situations that the author explains away using evolution and biology, one could reply: 鈥淪ure, 100% agree, that's how it came to be. Now, what is the advantage of this or that adaptive behaviour in a safe environment in a developed country in 2020?鈥�. There are many obvious examples: babies hate getting shots; they cry and complain. One can imagine that feeling that acute sting hundreds of thousands of years ago could only be a sign that a scorpion is nearby, that one has injured their leg with some thorns, or that rats are biting. It made perfect sense, back then, to kick around and to try to avoid that pain. Should parents be mindful of that, respect their babies' instincts, do what feels good immediately, and thus stand between their child and the needle? Of course not. Lots of other day-to-day situations would be like that. So, what's the value in understanding why babies can be so annoying, irrational and demanding, if at the end of the day it is absolutely desirable to override many of those behaviours by force, for their own benefit?
Another issue is that the author assumes that little kids are incredibly generous and moral by default. As if Rousseau were right and man were good from the crib, unless forced to be otherwise. The book is full of passages detailing how some selfless and thoughtful baby is misunderstood and finally reprimanded by their egotistical parents:
Those ideas seem exaggerated to me. One thing is to presume that kids raised with love and patience tend to become reasonable, pleasant adults; it is very different to exclude the possibility that kids misbehave on purpose sometimes, or are consciously disrespectful of the needs of others, and need to be reprimanded.
Finally, there's yet another bogus line of reasoning in the book, that appears regularly: Dr. Gonz谩lez suggests from time to time that we replace 鈥渃hildren鈥� with 鈥渨omen鈥�, 鈥渂lacks鈥� or 鈥渨orkers鈥� in seemingly innocuous sentences about babies, to help reveal the latent evil in them. Doing so, one may end up with outrageous statements like: 鈥淛ohn grounded his disobedient wife for the rest of the weekend鈥�; 鈥渇or their own benefit, it's good not to give blacks everything that they demand鈥�; or 鈥渕ake sure you monitor what TV programmes your factory workers watch regularly, and exercise appropriate control鈥�. Clearly wrong ideas (but very funny). The problem with this rhetorical device is that it's equally easy to produce outrageous sentences corresponding to actions by parents that are obviously right and fair! Consider, for example: 鈥渂athe your husband at least every other day and use moisturiser sparingly鈥� (who has a right to bathe other people against their will?); 鈥渋f your co-worker kicks you in the balls inadvertently for the fifth time this morning, don't be mad at him and shout; instead, explain to him politely, yet again, that you find that most inconvenient鈥�; or 鈥渋t's good for their development if you let Asian bartenders sleep in your bed with you when they wake up scared in the middle of the night鈥�.
But then, a colleague of mine (physicist, PhD, mother of two, damn smart) recommended to me two other books by the same author, saying that they have a good scientific basis and that she had learnt something from them. I didn't have those other two, but I happened to have this one at hand. So I started reading it a couple of months ago.
These are the thoughts of a practising paediatrician about raising babies and children today.
First of all (and because I have a fixation with the form, the medium, the use of language) I have to say that it is very well written, with an elegant but approachable style, avoiding clich茅s. I spotted only one or two typos or punctuation errors (and that is quite unusual). The subject is treated in a very humane and understandable way, with plenty of day-to-day examples and some real testimonies from parents. It is quite funny sometimes, and often touching.
Another thing I liked is the emphasis on evolutionary psychology. The first part of the book is dedicated to explaining why children are the way they are: they want to be cuddled because not feeling any movement probably means that the entire tribe is gone and they are now in danger; they cry as soon as they are left alone because it's the best way for their mothers to find them again; they need to be fed every few hours at night because鈥� etcetera. That is all interesting, and indeed explains much of the behaviour of babies nowadays.
The author dedicates the last part to criticising pedagogical theories or fads that he finds false or even cruel or offensive: whimsical methods of discipline, corporal punishment (even the mildest forms of it), overtly rigid approaches to sleep, food, play time, etc. Most of that criticism sounds right to me, too.
The overall message of the book is: kids are the way they are for good (evolutionary) reasons; trying to bend their will is pointless at best, and often harmful; in most scenarios, simply do what feels right to you (comforting the baby, feeding it, letting the kid sleep in your bed); give them time and don't be angry at them, and they'll learn all important things by themselves sooner or later (eating, walking, going to the toilet); parents should mind the interests of their children first, and then their own; expressing unconditional love is the most important thing; violence (of any intensity) is to be completely avoided, as are insults, deprecating comments, threats, and even punishment (grounding).
Most of that is comforting to parents, because it feels good and it takes some burden off their shoulders (because they can mostly follow their instincts and not feel guilty). And I like a lot the loving attitude, the simple ideas about caring for children and attending to their needs as the basic, most important principle.
But I have some issues with the ideas in the book.
One problem I have is that explaining why babies are the way they are does not help resolve the question of whether/when it is necessary/good to let them be that way in the 21st century. And that dilemma, I think, is at the root of most difficult situations about parenting.
For example. Yes, babies cry a lot and demand to be held and rocked because it's the best way for them to stay alive in cold nights, among hyenas and wolves. But, when I'm absolutely certain that the night inside the bedroom will be warm, and that there will be no predators around, what reason is there to (almost?) always give up and hold a baby? Is the baby going to suffer some trauma if I restrain from doing so, say, half of the times, because I want to do other (reasonable, necessary) things? Where is the evidence for that? In fact, often I would hold my baby pursuing my own interest (because it feels nice to me, and because I would feel guilty otherwise), not its own. So, what's the reason to treat babies as if we were still a naked tribe rummaging the savannah, combating predators and famine?
To most day-to-day situations that the author explains away using evolution and biology, one could reply: 鈥淪ure, 100% agree, that's how it came to be. Now, what is the advantage of this or that adaptive behaviour in a safe environment in a developed country in 2020?鈥�. There are many obvious examples: babies hate getting shots; they cry and complain. One can imagine that feeling that acute sting hundreds of thousands of years ago could only be a sign that a scorpion is nearby, that one has injured their leg with some thorns, or that rats are biting. It made perfect sense, back then, to kick around and to try to avoid that pain. Should parents be mindful of that, respect their babies' instincts, do what feels good immediately, and thus stand between their child and the needle? Of course not. Lots of other day-to-day situations would be like that. So, what's the value in understanding why babies can be so annoying, irrational and demanding, if at the end of the day it is absolutely desirable to override many of those behaviours by force, for their own benefit?
Another issue is that the author assumes that little kids are incredibly generous and moral by default. As if Rousseau were right and man were good from the crib, unless forced to be otherwise. The book is full of passages detailing how some selfless and thoughtful baby is misunderstood and finally reprimanded by their egotistical parents:
鈥淓s notable que muchos ni帽os muestren en esta 茅poca [la 茅poca en que pueden caminar un poco solos] una especial delicadeza de sentimientos: el mismo ni帽o que exige con llantos desesperados que sus padres le lleven en brazos ser谩 capaz de caminar junto a sus abuelos, porque percibe que estos no tienen ya la fuerza y la agilidad para llevarle. [鈥 Y no lo ha hecho para obtener ventajas y alabanzas, [鈥 sino por pura bondad, porque tiene una conciencia moral y desea hacer el bien siempre que le es posible.鈥�
Those ideas seem exaggerated to me. One thing is to presume that kids raised with love and patience tend to become reasonable, pleasant adults; it is very different to exclude the possibility that kids misbehave on purpose sometimes, or are consciously disrespectful of the needs of others, and need to be reprimanded.
Finally, there's yet another bogus line of reasoning in the book, that appears regularly: Dr. Gonz谩lez suggests from time to time that we replace 鈥渃hildren鈥� with 鈥渨omen鈥�, 鈥渂lacks鈥� or 鈥渨orkers鈥� in seemingly innocuous sentences about babies, to help reveal the latent evil in them. Doing so, one may end up with outrageous statements like: 鈥淛ohn grounded his disobedient wife for the rest of the weekend鈥�; 鈥渇or their own benefit, it's good not to give blacks everything that they demand鈥�; or 鈥渕ake sure you monitor what TV programmes your factory workers watch regularly, and exercise appropriate control鈥�. Clearly wrong ideas (but very funny). The problem with this rhetorical device is that it's equally easy to produce outrageous sentences corresponding to actions by parents that are obviously right and fair! Consider, for example: 鈥渂athe your husband at least every other day and use moisturiser sparingly鈥� (who has a right to bathe other people against their will?); 鈥渋f your co-worker kicks you in the balls inadvertently for the fifth time this morning, don't be mad at him and shout; instead, explain to him politely, yet again, that you find that most inconvenient鈥�; or 鈥渋t's good for their development if you let Asian bartenders sleep in your bed with you when they wake up scared in the middle of the night鈥�.
November 12, 2011
Piece of shit. The author uses the kind of arguments that won't hold together and the kind of comparisons that only use extremism to try to convince you. Honestly, piece of shit. If you want to read a really good book about the same subject, with about the same conclusions but with real scientific backup, please read "Bright from the Start" by Jill Stamm & Paula Spencer. I'm so sorry for those who can only read Spanish, becase this piece of shit is in their language and the really good books are only in English. If you've read me this far, go read Bright from the Start, since you can.
Una mierda. El autor usa la clase de argumentos que no se sostienen y la clase de comparaciones que s贸lo utiliza extremismos para intentar convencerte. Sinceramente, una mierda. Si quieres un libro realmente bueno sobre el mismo tema, con m谩s o menos las mismas conclusiones pero respaldado por ciencia de verdad, por favor lee "Bright from the Start" de Jill Stamm y Paula Spencer. Es una l谩stima que este libro no est茅 traducido al espa帽ol, porque libros como "B茅same mucho" pueden, con su *forma* de decir las cosas, hacer un da帽o que s贸lo mejor libros podr铆a prevenir o curar. Si no sabes leer en ingl茅s, intenta que alguien que pueda se lea "Bright from the Start" por t铆 y te lo explique.
Una mierda. El autor usa la clase de argumentos que no se sostienen y la clase de comparaciones que s贸lo utiliza extremismos para intentar convencerte. Sinceramente, una mierda. Si quieres un libro realmente bueno sobre el mismo tema, con m谩s o menos las mismas conclusiones pero respaldado por ciencia de verdad, por favor lee "Bright from the Start" de Jill Stamm y Paula Spencer. Es una l谩stima que este libro no est茅 traducido al espa帽ol, porque libros como "B茅same mucho" pueden, con su *forma* de decir las cosas, hacer un da帽o que s贸lo mejor libros podr铆a prevenir o curar. Si no sabes leer en ingl茅s, intenta que alguien que pueda se lea "Bright from the Start" por t铆 y te lo explique.
October 3, 2012
Puede gustarte su filosof铆a o no, pero el autor pasa todo el d铆a criticando otras ideas y poniendo comparaciones inveros铆miles, resulta bastante pesado y no gu铆a nada a los padres. La idea puede ser buena y clarificadora, pero con leer las primeras p谩ginas basta para captar su mensaje.
July 23, 2016
Below are my comments on the first half of the book, because I did not have enough patience to finish the other half.
In the first 20 pages or so, the author attempts to clarify the stance of child educators and of himself. I really appreciate the effort, since many authors do not detail what assumptions they have made in their arguments. However, the author somehow mis-presents his standpoint. He pledges that he would "defend children and mothers", but that is half true. His actual stance is rather naturalistic: he believes that anything associated with nature or primitive lives is good, and vice versa, most of the modern things are "unnatural", unneccessary or even bad. In defending his arguments throughout the book, he always says things like: because people in primitive societies do so, because apes/monkeys do so, that must be appropriate. It is up to you to trust his logic.
Later he continuously "debunks" current beliefs/methods on child education, using mostly his "naturalistic logic". No scientific evidence is used to support his views. His arguments are based on comparisons between human and other animals, in the way that advocates his naturalism. For example, to defend children's helplessness, much more than monkeys, he compares monkeys and apes then argues that we are more like apes than monkeys, therefore babies are helpless. Ten pages later when he tries to defend the baby-mother attachment, he uses monkeys as an analogy!!! All of his comparisons and analogies are inconsistent in favor of his claims. He then ends up with an "ideal" method: hold the baby all the time, feed it several times per hour, sleep together until it is 10 years old, etc. He doesn't ever account for the mother's physical and mental ability, the housework in modern life (you need to go to grocery and to cook foods, not simply eat apples and bananas like apes or monkeys!), the learning and adapting ability of babies.
At the middle of the book, I realized that the purpose of his "method" (if any) is not raising a well-balanced human being, but essentially to "feel good". All of his suggestions would lead us to short-term gratification, and he advocates that as an ultimately good result. In some sense, he does "defend children and mothers" as he claims at the beginning of the book, and his core advice is "do whatever you want, whatever makes you feel good, need not care about anything else". He is also a big fan of fictions. All the quotes below the chapter titles are from fictions whose context and implication are ambiguous. He cites fictions, recommend readers to read fictions to learn how to raise a kid! Many times he makes use of readers' emotion, depicts strict parents as evil.
To sum up, this is a non-scientific book. More than that, it is not about child raising or education. It is all about how to satisfy yourselves and feel good, even for a moment. It is not about fact, it's all about emotion. There are no trustful evidence but full of fictional anecdotes and bullshit.
In the first 20 pages or so, the author attempts to clarify the stance of child educators and of himself. I really appreciate the effort, since many authors do not detail what assumptions they have made in their arguments. However, the author somehow mis-presents his standpoint. He pledges that he would "defend children and mothers", but that is half true. His actual stance is rather naturalistic: he believes that anything associated with nature or primitive lives is good, and vice versa, most of the modern things are "unnatural", unneccessary or even bad. In defending his arguments throughout the book, he always says things like: because people in primitive societies do so, because apes/monkeys do so, that must be appropriate. It is up to you to trust his logic.
Later he continuously "debunks" current beliefs/methods on child education, using mostly his "naturalistic logic". No scientific evidence is used to support his views. His arguments are based on comparisons between human and other animals, in the way that advocates his naturalism. For example, to defend children's helplessness, much more than monkeys, he compares monkeys and apes then argues that we are more like apes than monkeys, therefore babies are helpless. Ten pages later when he tries to defend the baby-mother attachment, he uses monkeys as an analogy!!! All of his comparisons and analogies are inconsistent in favor of his claims. He then ends up with an "ideal" method: hold the baby all the time, feed it several times per hour, sleep together until it is 10 years old, etc. He doesn't ever account for the mother's physical and mental ability, the housework in modern life (you need to go to grocery and to cook foods, not simply eat apples and bananas like apes or monkeys!), the learning and adapting ability of babies.
At the middle of the book, I realized that the purpose of his "method" (if any) is not raising a well-balanced human being, but essentially to "feel good". All of his suggestions would lead us to short-term gratification, and he advocates that as an ultimately good result. In some sense, he does "defend children and mothers" as he claims at the beginning of the book, and his core advice is "do whatever you want, whatever makes you feel good, need not care about anything else". He is also a big fan of fictions. All the quotes below the chapter titles are from fictions whose context and implication are ambiguous. He cites fictions, recommend readers to read fictions to learn how to raise a kid! Many times he makes use of readers' emotion, depicts strict parents as evil.
To sum up, this is a non-scientific book. More than that, it is not about child raising or education. It is all about how to satisfy yourselves and feel good, even for a moment. It is not about fact, it's all about emotion. There are no trustful evidence but full of fictional anecdotes and bullshit.
February 17, 2020
Dar viena puiki autoriaus knyga. Negaliu ja nesid啪iaugti. Autorius sugeba paprastai ir kartu remdamasis tyrimais aptarti vaik懦 raid膮 ir j懦 aukl臈jimo teorijas. Ir visa tai papildyti 拧maik拧膷iais komentarais ar palyginimais, kurie mane ne kart膮 nustebino.
Pavyzd啪iui, "N臈 vienas vaikas niekada nebuvo "psichologi拧kai traumuotas", nes 啪mon臈s jam daug 拧ypsojosi ir da啪nai sak臈 "ku k奴".
Arba 拧is pasakojimas (po jo atskleisiu, su kuo tai lyginama):
"漠sivaizduokite, jeigu j奴s懦 vyras vien膮 vakar膮 namo gr寞啪t懦 su jaunesne moterimi.
- Brangioji, tai Laura, antroji mano 啪mona. Tikiuosi, susidraugausite. Jai reik臈s apsiprasti, tod臈l su ja tur臈siu praleisti daugiau laiko. Tikiuosi, kad tu, vyresn臈, elgsiesi gra啪iai ir pad臈si buityje. Ji miegos mano kambaryje - gal臈siu geriau ja pasir奴pinti, o tu tur臈si atskir膮 kambar寞. Nori j寞 tur臈ti? Beje, tau teks dalytis su ja savo papuo拧alais.
狈别辫补惫测诲臈迟耻尘臈迟别?"
Taip, gal jau ir atsp臈jote, tai apie vaik懦 pavyd膮 broliams ir seserims. Toki懦 netik臈t懦 istorij懦 pilna knygoje.
沤od啪iu, malonu ir lengva skaityti, o kartu gavau daug 寞domi懦 ir svarbi懦 啪ini懦.
Pavyzd啪iui, "N臈 vienas vaikas niekada nebuvo "psichologi拧kai traumuotas", nes 啪mon臈s jam daug 拧ypsojosi ir da啪nai sak臈 "ku k奴".
Arba 拧is pasakojimas (po jo atskleisiu, su kuo tai lyginama):
"漠sivaizduokite, jeigu j奴s懦 vyras vien膮 vakar膮 namo gr寞啪t懦 su jaunesne moterimi.
- Brangioji, tai Laura, antroji mano 啪mona. Tikiuosi, susidraugausite. Jai reik臈s apsiprasti, tod臈l su ja tur臈siu praleisti daugiau laiko. Tikiuosi, kad tu, vyresn臈, elgsiesi gra啪iai ir pad臈si buityje. Ji miegos mano kambaryje - gal臈siu geriau ja pasir奴pinti, o tu tur臈si atskir膮 kambar寞. Nori j寞 tur臈ti? Beje, tau teks dalytis su ja savo papuo拧alais.
狈别辫补惫测诲臈迟耻尘臈迟别?"
Taip, gal jau ir atsp臈jote, tai apie vaik懦 pavyd膮 broliams ir seserims. Toki懦 netik臈t懦 istorij懦 pilna knygoje.
沤od啪iu, malonu ir lengva skaityti, o kartu gavau daug 寞domi懦 ir svarbi懦 啪ini懦.
December 15, 2018
A priori podr铆a parecer que no es necesario un libro con un subt铆tulo tan evidente como 'Criar a tus hijos con cari帽o y respeto', pero cuando se contin煤an escuchando de ciertos pediatras que es bueno dejar llorar a los ni帽os (algo que va absolutamente en contra de nuestros instintos protectores), cuando muchos padres siguen criando a sus hijos con premios y castigos, cuando escuchas a tanta gente diversa de tu entorno aconsej谩ndote sobre c贸mo alimentar, educar y hacer dormir a tu beb茅, te das cuenta de que s铆 es necesario un libro que te diga simplemente: "S铆, lo est谩s haciendo bien, y las teor铆as de los dem谩s no tienen fundamento cient铆fico". No es tanto una gu铆a, como un ensayo en defensa de la felicidad de los ni帽os. Gracias a Carlos Gonz谩lez por imponer el sentido com煤n en este y otros libros suyos. :)
February 18, 2013
Bravo! This book just makes so much SENSE! If only we could all take this laid-back view of parenting our children that embraces what comes naturally - wouldn't life be easier for us all. I love his humor as well - makes for a very enjoyable read. I love the comparisons he draws between how we treat other adults, and how we should treat our children - with equal respect.
July 21, 2017
[quote]"The book you are reading is not an attempt to strike a 'happy medium'; it is taking a clear stand. [b]This book assumes all children are essentially good, that their emotional needs are important and that we as parents owe them love, respect and attention.[/b] Those who disagree with these principles, who prefer to believe their child is a "little monster" and are looking for ways to bring him to heel, will -regrettably, in my opinion - find plenty of books more in line with their beliefs"[/quote]
Sometimes you read a book that just blows you out of the water. A book that is so right you want to send messages of thanks to the author. This is one of those books.
I am a well-educated person, a voracious reader, and had a rough enough childhood to make me want to search for better ways of parenting. So I read lots of parenting books, my own values were established long before I became a parent (back when I was a teacher), but I love additional insight and encouragement that reading provides. For me, parenting (and this same ethos applied when I was a teacher) is about respecting the child as a person. When a child asks me for something I often ask myself "how would I respond if my best friend was asking me for that" (It is not as simple as that of course, but it works as a litmus test of my attitudes). uses a very similiar technique in both books that I have read. He takes what sounds like a reasonable parenting statement and replaces the term 'toddler' with that of 'wife' to see how reasonable it sounds. He is about respecting and loving the child, and it is a really enlightened way to treat a child.
This book consolidated much of my own ethos, providing quotes and anecdotes and ideas that I have been pondering over the last few days. I have already seen it make me stronger and more able to stay calm and loving.
For example, I try to never yell at my kids and I certainly don't smack them. However it all goes to pieces at 3am when my 3yo is screaming at me and her screams are waking the 1yo. This happens more frequently then I would like and my response is reactive, I shush her, I threaten, I yell, and I feel awful admitting that I have hit her. I do all the things I know are wrong, but feel powerless to find a better way (insert some excuses are being over tired and home alone). My daughter woke screaming the night that I had started reading this book. I remember feeling such a weight lifted, reminding me that she was indeed 3yo, and that yelling would not produce any of the desired effects, that she only wanted my help to become calm again. I pondered over the words that I had read as I stayed calm, not fake calm with an inner serve of seething, but actually calm and peaceful. I pondered on how much my little girl needed me, not how annoyed I was at anything. She calmed down quicker then she ever has, and I offered to tell her a story to help her get back to sleep. So she lay in my arms and I whispered a story in her ear until we were eventually both asleep. What was different, was that internally I was not frustrated, just loving and caring. It is a worthwhile thing to be able to stay peaceful when your child is going mental, not only does the child then learn from you how to remain calm, but you don't feel your blood starting to boil, you just get to feel love (all oxytocin and no adrenaline I might suggest). Many a time after facing down a screaming child I have wanted to go scream myself in order to let off steam, I suspect the solution is to remain calm throughout.
Back to the book. The author uses a very interesting tone that I love, but I wonder if it might be confusing for some readers. He mixes truth and absurdities together without any real clear distinction, other than the reader's own ability to know which sentence is the right one. I found this simple but I wonder if everyone would.
My copy of the book is now heavily highlighted, so as always her as some of the quotes, go buy the book. If there is only one parenting book in your library then it should be this one:
[quote]I am not prepared to accept that 'a timely smack' is anything other than mistreatment, and I can think of no good reason for being attentive towards a child during the day but not at night[/quote]
He identifies three modern taboos (which he disagrees with of course)
[quote]- With regard to crying: it is forbidden to pay attention to children, pick them up, or give them what they want when they cry
- With regard to sleeping: it is forbidden to let children fall asleep while holding them or breastfeeding them, to sing to them or rock them in order to send them to sleep, to co-sleep with them.
- With regard to breastfeeding: it is forbidden to breastfeed them at any time or in any place, or to breastfeed a child when he is too 'old'.
Almost all of these taboos have one thing in common: They prohibit physical contact between mother and child. On the other hand, all activities that tend to reduce physical contact and increase distance between mother and child are widely recommended:
- Leave the child alone in his room.
- Push him around in a buggy...
- Take him to nursery school...
[/quote]
[quote]The aim of this book is to debunk myths, to break taboos, and to give every mother the freedom to enjoy motherhood the way she wants.[/quote]
[quote]If you decide not to give your child what she asks for, then let this be for a sensible reason (because she already has too many toys, because it is expensive, because sweets are bad for her teeth - and not simply in order to 'train' her to 'learn that she can't get her own way'; don't say 'no' to your child simply out of spite.[/quote]
[quote]There is a world of difference between a child who stops calling her mother because she no longer needs her, and a child who stops calling because she knows that however much she calls, her mother will never come.[/quote]
[quote]Why is learning to share such an obsession with so many parents and educators? What good does it do a child to learn about sharing? As adults, we share almost nothing.[/quote]
[quote]Our children forgive us dozens of times a day. They do so sincerely, unreservedly, without resentment to the point of completely forgetting the offence. They get over their irritation much more quickly than we do.[/quote]
[quote]Children who are bought up with love and respect are loving and respectful. Not always, of course, but most of the time.[/quote]
Sometimes you read a book that just blows you out of the water. A book that is so right you want to send messages of thanks to the author. This is one of those books.
I am a well-educated person, a voracious reader, and had a rough enough childhood to make me want to search for better ways of parenting. So I read lots of parenting books, my own values were established long before I became a parent (back when I was a teacher), but I love additional insight and encouragement that reading provides. For me, parenting (and this same ethos applied when I was a teacher) is about respecting the child as a person. When a child asks me for something I often ask myself "how would I respond if my best friend was asking me for that" (It is not as simple as that of course, but it works as a litmus test of my attitudes). uses a very similiar technique in both books that I have read. He takes what sounds like a reasonable parenting statement and replaces the term 'toddler' with that of 'wife' to see how reasonable it sounds. He is about respecting and loving the child, and it is a really enlightened way to treat a child.
This book consolidated much of my own ethos, providing quotes and anecdotes and ideas that I have been pondering over the last few days. I have already seen it make me stronger and more able to stay calm and loving.
For example, I try to never yell at my kids and I certainly don't smack them. However it all goes to pieces at 3am when my 3yo is screaming at me and her screams are waking the 1yo. This happens more frequently then I would like and my response is reactive, I shush her, I threaten, I yell, and I feel awful admitting that I have hit her. I do all the things I know are wrong, but feel powerless to find a better way (insert some excuses are being over tired and home alone). My daughter woke screaming the night that I had started reading this book. I remember feeling such a weight lifted, reminding me that she was indeed 3yo, and that yelling would not produce any of the desired effects, that she only wanted my help to become calm again. I pondered over the words that I had read as I stayed calm, not fake calm with an inner serve of seething, but actually calm and peaceful. I pondered on how much my little girl needed me, not how annoyed I was at anything. She calmed down quicker then she ever has, and I offered to tell her a story to help her get back to sleep. So she lay in my arms and I whispered a story in her ear until we were eventually both asleep. What was different, was that internally I was not frustrated, just loving and caring. It is a worthwhile thing to be able to stay peaceful when your child is going mental, not only does the child then learn from you how to remain calm, but you don't feel your blood starting to boil, you just get to feel love (all oxytocin and no adrenaline I might suggest). Many a time after facing down a screaming child I have wanted to go scream myself in order to let off steam, I suspect the solution is to remain calm throughout.
Back to the book. The author uses a very interesting tone that I love, but I wonder if it might be confusing for some readers. He mixes truth and absurdities together without any real clear distinction, other than the reader's own ability to know which sentence is the right one. I found this simple but I wonder if everyone would.
My copy of the book is now heavily highlighted, so as always her as some of the quotes, go buy the book. If there is only one parenting book in your library then it should be this one:
[quote]I am not prepared to accept that 'a timely smack' is anything other than mistreatment, and I can think of no good reason for being attentive towards a child during the day but not at night[/quote]
He identifies three modern taboos (which he disagrees with of course)
[quote]- With regard to crying: it is forbidden to pay attention to children, pick them up, or give them what they want when they cry
- With regard to sleeping: it is forbidden to let children fall asleep while holding them or breastfeeding them, to sing to them or rock them in order to send them to sleep, to co-sleep with them.
- With regard to breastfeeding: it is forbidden to breastfeed them at any time or in any place, or to breastfeed a child when he is too 'old'.
Almost all of these taboos have one thing in common: They prohibit physical contact between mother and child. On the other hand, all activities that tend to reduce physical contact and increase distance between mother and child are widely recommended:
- Leave the child alone in his room.
- Push him around in a buggy...
- Take him to nursery school...
[/quote]
[quote]The aim of this book is to debunk myths, to break taboos, and to give every mother the freedom to enjoy motherhood the way she wants.[/quote]
[quote]If you decide not to give your child what she asks for, then let this be for a sensible reason (because she already has too many toys, because it is expensive, because sweets are bad for her teeth - and not simply in order to 'train' her to 'learn that she can't get her own way'; don't say 'no' to your child simply out of spite.[/quote]
[quote]There is a world of difference between a child who stops calling her mother because she no longer needs her, and a child who stops calling because she knows that however much she calls, her mother will never come.[/quote]
[quote]Why is learning to share such an obsession with so many parents and educators? What good does it do a child to learn about sharing? As adults, we share almost nothing.[/quote]
[quote]Our children forgive us dozens of times a day. They do so sincerely, unreservedly, without resentment to the point of completely forgetting the offence. They get over their irritation much more quickly than we do.[/quote]
[quote]Children who are bought up with love and respect are loving and respectful. Not always, of course, but most of the time.[/quote]
December 24, 2022
Knyga su labai svarbia 啪inute, apie tai kod臈l k奴dikiai verkia, ar galima vaik膮 "i拧lepinti" j寞 prisiglaud啪iant ar guod啪iant.
Vienintelis knygos minusas, kad 寞 knygos gal膮 labai kartojasi kit懦 vaik懦 aukl臈jimo knyg懦 autori懦 kritika.
Vienintelis knygos minusas, kad 寞 knygos gal膮 labai kartojasi kit懦 vaik懦 aukl臈jimo knyg懦 autori懦 kritika.
December 9, 2022
袧械 斜褍写褍 泻褉懈褌懈泻褍胁邪褌懈 泻薪懈谐褍 蟹邪 泻邪褌械谐芯褉懈褔薪褨褋褌褜: 邪胁褌芯褉 褖械 褍 胁褋褌褍锌褨 褔褨褌泻芯 芯泻褉械褋谢懈胁 褋胁芯褞 锌芯蟹懈褑褨褞 鈥� 褖芯 胁褨薪 斜褍写械 锌懈褋邪褌懈 褋邪屑械 褌邪泻, 褑械 泻薪懈谐邪 薪邪 蟹邪褏懈褋褌 写褨褌械泄, 薪邪 蟹邪褏懈褋褌 褩褏薪褜芯谐芯 锌褉邪胁邪 薪邪 谢褞斜芯胁.
袘邪谐邪褌芯 褏褌芯 蟹 薪邪褋 薪邪谢械卸懈褌褜 写芯 锌芯泻芯谢褨薪薪褟, 褟泻械 斜芯褟谢芯褋褜 "锌械褉械谢褞斜懈褌懈" 写褨褌械泄: 薪械 斜械褉懈 薪邪 褉褍泻懈, 褏邪泄 褋邪屑 蟹邪褋锌芯泻芯褩褌褜褋褟, 薪械 蟹胁械褉褌胁泄 褍胁邪谐懈, 写懈褌懈薪邪 屑邪薪褨锌褍谢褞褦, 褑褨谢褍泄, 斜芯 蟹胁懈泻薪械, 褋锌褍褋褌懈 蟹 褉褍泻, 斜芯 写芯 褕泻芯谢懈 薪械 蟹谢褨蟹械 褨 斜谢邪斜谢邪斜谢邪. 孝邪泻褨 蟹谢褨 锌芯褉邪写懈 褨 蟹邪褉邪蟹 芯褌褉懈屑褍褞褌褜 斜邪谐邪褌芯 屑芯谢芯写懈褏 屑邪屑, 邪谢械 胁 屑芯褩泄 褨薪褎芯褉屑邪褑褨泄薪褨泄 斜褍谢褜斜邪褕褑褨 褌邪泻芯谐芯 屑邪谢芯: 写褨褌械泄 蟹邪泻谢懈泻邪褞褌褜 谢褞斜懈褌懈, 谐谢邪写懈褌懈, 芯斜褨泄屑邪褌懈 褨 薪褨泻芯谢懈 薪械 谢懈褕邪褌懈 褋邪屑-薪邪-褋邪屑 蟹褨 褋胁芯褩屑懈 械屑芯褑褨褟屑懈.
袟 褑懈屑 胁邪卸泻芯 薪械 锌芯谐芯写懈褌懈褋褜. 袨褋薪芯胁邪, 薪邪 褟泻褍 褋锌懈褉邪褦褌褜褋褟 邪胁褌芯褉 鈥� 褌械, 褟泻 蟹邪泻谢邪写械薪芯 锌褨泻谢褍胁邪褌懈褋褜 锌褉芯 写褨褌械泄 褍 谢褞写懈薪懈 褟泻 斜褨芯谢芯谐褨褔薪芯谐芯 胁懈写褍. 袧邪胁褉褟写褔懈 锌械褉胁褨褋薪邪 卸褨薪泻邪 锌芯泻谢邪谢邪 斜懈 褋锌邪褌懈 薪械屑芯胁谢褟 胁 褨薪褕懈泄 斜褨泻 锌械褔械褉懈, 胁褔懈谢邪 泄芯谐芯 锌芯胁蟹邪褌懈 褔懈 褏芯写懈褌懈 褨 褌.写. 袉 薪褨斜懈 褟泻 褦 锌械胁薪褨 芯褋薪芯胁薪褨 锌芯褌褉械斜懈 褍 写懈褌懈薪懈, 蟹邪泻谢邪写械薪褨 锌褉懈褉芯写芯褞 褖械 蟹 褌懈褏 写邪谢械泻懈褏 写邪胁薪褨褏 褔邪褋褨胁, 褟泻褨 蟹邪谐褍斜懈谢懈褋褟, 蟹邪斜褍谢懈褋褟 胁 褍褉斜邪薪褨蟹芯胁邪薪芯屑褍 褋褍褋锌褨谢褜褋褌胁褨.
孝褨谢褜泻懈 芯褌 蟹邪褉邪蟹 卸褨薪泻邪 薪械 谢械卸懈褌褜 胁 锌械褔械褉褨 褨 薪械 褔械泻邪褦, 锌芯泻懈 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻 锌褉懈薪械褋械 褩泄 褕褍斜褍 屑邪屑芯薪褌邪; 屑懈 薪械 卸懈胁械屑芯 锌芯 30 褉芯泻褨胁 褨 薪械 薪邪褉芯写卸褍褦屑芯 锌芯 30 写褨褌械泄; 写褨褌懈 卸懈胁褍褌褜 写芯胁褕械, 蟹写芯褉芯胁褨褕械, 薪械 胁屑懈褉邪褞褌褜 胁 褌邪泻懈褏 泻褨谢褜泻芯褋褌褟褏 锌褨写 褔邪褋 锌芯谢芯谐褨胁 卸褨薪泻懈 褌邪 写褨褌懈. 笑械 胁褋械 薪械 褋泻邪褋芯胁褍褦 褌芯谐芯, 褖芯 写懈褌懈薪邪 锌芯褌褉械斜褍褦 谢褞斜芯胁褨 褨 泻芯薪褌邪泻褌褍.
孝褍褌 锌褉芯褌懈褋褌邪胁谢褟褌褜褋褟 褋褍褔邪褋薪械 蟹邪褏褨写薪械 褋褍褋锌褨谢褜褋褌胁芯, 写械 屑邪屑邪 屑芯卸械 锌芯泻懈薪褍褌懈 薪械屑芯胁谢褟 褨 锌褨褌懈 薪邪 屑邪薪褨泻褞褉 鈥� 褌邪泻 薪械 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈, 褨 泻芯谢懈 写芯褉芯褋谢褨 邪褉谐褍屑械薪褌褍褞褌褜 褑械 褌懈屑, 褖芯 胁芯薪懈 屑邪褞褌褜 锌褉邪胁芯 薪邪 褋胁芯褦 卸懈褌褌褟, 邪胁褌芯褉 褋褌邪胁懈褌褜 褌邪泻懈褏 薪邪 屑褨褋褑械: 褌邪泻, 卸懈褌褌褟 蟹 写懈褌懈薪芯褞. 效芯屑褍褋褜, 泻芯谢懈 薪邪褉芯写卸褍褦褌褜褋褟 写懈褌懈薪邪, 褑械 薪芯褉屑邪谢褜薪芯 褏芯褌褨褌懈 褏芯褔邪 斜 褨薪芯写褨 "卸懈褌懈 锌邪褉芯褞", 邪 泻芯谢懈 谢褞写懈薪邪 芯写褉褍卸懈褌褜褋褟, 褌芯 褩褩 褌褟谐褍 锌芯卸懈褌懈 "褋邪屑芯褋褌褨泄薪械 卸懈褌褌褟 写谢褟 褋械斜械 褏芯褔 褌褉芯褕泻懈" 鈥� 薪械 蟹褉芯蟹褍屑褨褞褌褜.
袉 褌邪泻懈褏 写褍屑芯泻 褌褍褌 斜邪谐邪褌芯.
袣薪懈谐褍 褟 褉械泻芯屑械薪写褍褞, 邪谢械 芯斜芯胁'褟蟹泻芯胁芯 褔懈褌邪褌懈 锌芯胁薪褨褋褌褞. 效邪褋褌懈薪褍 胁懈 胁褨写泻懈薪械褌械 褟泻 薪械锌褉懈泄薪褟褌薪褍 写谢褟 褋械斜械. 些芯褋褜 胁邪褋 泻芯薪泻褉械褌薪芯 褌褉懈谐械褉薪械 鈥� 屑械薪械, 薪邪锌褉懈泻谢邪写, 锌芯褌褉械斜邪 斜褍褌懈 锌芯褉褍褔 蟹 写懈褌懈薪芯褞 胁褨写褉邪蟹褍 锌褨褋谢褟 薪邪褉芯写卸械薪薪褟. 袉 褌褍褌 褟 褌邪泻邪, 褟泻邪 胁蟹褟谢邪 薪邪 褉褍泻懈 胁锌械褉褕械 屑邪谢褟 薪邪 7 写械薪褜 锌褨褋谢褟 薪邪褉芯写卸械薪薪褟, 写芯 褌芯谐芯 鈥� 锌械褉械斜褍胁邪薪薪褟 薪邪 褉褨蟹薪懈褏 锌芯胁械褉褏邪褏, 胁 褉褨蟹薪懈褏 斜褍写褨胁谢褟褏, 褉褨蟹薪懈褏 屑褨褋褌邪褏. 携泻褖芯 胁褨褉懈褌懈 褌邪泻懈屑 械泻褋锌械褉褌邪屑, 褌芯 褌邪屑 褌褉邪胁屑邪 薪邪 胁褋械 卸懈褌褌褟 胁 写懈褌懈薪懈, 褔懈 褟泻?
袗谢械 褖芯褋褜 胁懈 褨 胁褨蟹褜屑械褌械 写谢褟 褋械斜械.
袘邪谐邪褌芯 褏褌芯 蟹 薪邪褋 薪邪谢械卸懈褌褜 写芯 锌芯泻芯谢褨薪薪褟, 褟泻械 斜芯褟谢芯褋褜 "锌械褉械谢褞斜懈褌懈" 写褨褌械泄: 薪械 斜械褉懈 薪邪 褉褍泻懈, 褏邪泄 褋邪屑 蟹邪褋锌芯泻芯褩褌褜褋褟, 薪械 蟹胁械褉褌胁泄 褍胁邪谐懈, 写懈褌懈薪邪 屑邪薪褨锌褍谢褞褦, 褑褨谢褍泄, 斜芯 蟹胁懈泻薪械, 褋锌褍褋褌懈 蟹 褉褍泻, 斜芯 写芯 褕泻芯谢懈 薪械 蟹谢褨蟹械 褨 斜谢邪斜谢邪斜谢邪. 孝邪泻褨 蟹谢褨 锌芯褉邪写懈 褨 蟹邪褉邪蟹 芯褌褉懈屑褍褞褌褜 斜邪谐邪褌芯 屑芯谢芯写懈褏 屑邪屑, 邪谢械 胁 屑芯褩泄 褨薪褎芯褉屑邪褑褨泄薪褨泄 斜褍谢褜斜邪褕褑褨 褌邪泻芯谐芯 屑邪谢芯: 写褨褌械泄 蟹邪泻谢懈泻邪褞褌褜 谢褞斜懈褌懈, 谐谢邪写懈褌懈, 芯斜褨泄屑邪褌懈 褨 薪褨泻芯谢懈 薪械 谢懈褕邪褌懈 褋邪屑-薪邪-褋邪屑 蟹褨 褋胁芯褩屑懈 械屑芯褑褨褟屑懈.
袟 褑懈屑 胁邪卸泻芯 薪械 锌芯谐芯写懈褌懈褋褜. 袨褋薪芯胁邪, 薪邪 褟泻褍 褋锌懈褉邪褦褌褜褋褟 邪胁褌芯褉 鈥� 褌械, 褟泻 蟹邪泻谢邪写械薪芯 锌褨泻谢褍胁邪褌懈褋褜 锌褉芯 写褨褌械泄 褍 谢褞写懈薪懈 褟泻 斜褨芯谢芯谐褨褔薪芯谐芯 胁懈写褍. 袧邪胁褉褟写褔懈 锌械褉胁褨褋薪邪 卸褨薪泻邪 锌芯泻谢邪谢邪 斜懈 褋锌邪褌懈 薪械屑芯胁谢褟 胁 褨薪褕懈泄 斜褨泻 锌械褔械褉懈, 胁褔懈谢邪 泄芯谐芯 锌芯胁蟹邪褌懈 褔懈 褏芯写懈褌懈 褨 褌.写. 袉 薪褨斜懈 褟泻 褦 锌械胁薪褨 芯褋薪芯胁薪褨 锌芯褌褉械斜懈 褍 写懈褌懈薪懈, 蟹邪泻谢邪写械薪褨 锌褉懈褉芯写芯褞 褖械 蟹 褌懈褏 写邪谢械泻懈褏 写邪胁薪褨褏 褔邪褋褨胁, 褟泻褨 蟹邪谐褍斜懈谢懈褋褟, 蟹邪斜褍谢懈褋褟 胁 褍褉斜邪薪褨蟹芯胁邪薪芯屑褍 褋褍褋锌褨谢褜褋褌胁褨.
孝褨谢褜泻懈 芯褌 蟹邪褉邪蟹 卸褨薪泻邪 薪械 谢械卸懈褌褜 胁 锌械褔械褉褨 褨 薪械 褔械泻邪褦, 锌芯泻懈 褔芯谢芯胁褨泻 锌褉懈薪械褋械 褩泄 褕褍斜褍 屑邪屑芯薪褌邪; 屑懈 薪械 卸懈胁械屑芯 锌芯 30 褉芯泻褨胁 褨 薪械 薪邪褉芯写卸褍褦屑芯 锌芯 30 写褨褌械泄; 写褨褌懈 卸懈胁褍褌褜 写芯胁褕械, 蟹写芯褉芯胁褨褕械, 薪械 胁屑懈褉邪褞褌褜 胁 褌邪泻懈褏 泻褨谢褜泻芯褋褌褟褏 锌褨写 褔邪褋 锌芯谢芯谐褨胁 卸褨薪泻懈 褌邪 写褨褌懈. 笑械 胁褋械 薪械 褋泻邪褋芯胁褍褦 褌芯谐芯, 褖芯 写懈褌懈薪邪 锌芯褌褉械斜褍褦 谢褞斜芯胁褨 褨 泻芯薪褌邪泻褌褍.
孝褍褌 锌褉芯褌懈褋褌邪胁谢褟褌褜褋褟 褋褍褔邪褋薪械 蟹邪褏褨写薪械 褋褍褋锌褨谢褜褋褌胁芯, 写械 屑邪屑邪 屑芯卸械 锌芯泻懈薪褍褌懈 薪械屑芯胁谢褟 褨 锌褨褌懈 薪邪 屑邪薪褨泻褞褉 鈥� 褌邪泻 薪械 屑邪褦 斜褍褌懈, 褨 泻芯谢懈 写芯褉芯褋谢褨 邪褉谐褍屑械薪褌褍褞褌褜 褑械 褌懈屑, 褖芯 胁芯薪懈 屑邪褞褌褜 锌褉邪胁芯 薪邪 褋胁芯褦 卸懈褌褌褟, 邪胁褌芯褉 褋褌邪胁懈褌褜 褌邪泻懈褏 薪邪 屑褨褋褑械: 褌邪泻, 卸懈褌褌褟 蟹 写懈褌懈薪芯褞. 效芯屑褍褋褜, 泻芯谢懈 薪邪褉芯写卸褍褦褌褜褋褟 写懈褌懈薪邪, 褑械 薪芯褉屑邪谢褜薪芯 褏芯褌褨褌懈 褏芯褔邪 斜 褨薪芯写褨 "卸懈褌懈 锌邪褉芯褞", 邪 泻芯谢懈 谢褞写懈薪邪 芯写褉褍卸懈褌褜褋褟, 褌芯 褩褩 褌褟谐褍 锌芯卸懈褌懈 "褋邪屑芯褋褌褨泄薪械 卸懈褌褌褟 写谢褟 褋械斜械 褏芯褔 褌褉芯褕泻懈" 鈥� 薪械 蟹褉芯蟹褍屑褨褞褌褜.
袉 褌邪泻懈褏 写褍屑芯泻 褌褍褌 斜邪谐邪褌芯.
袣薪懈谐褍 褟 褉械泻芯屑械薪写褍褞, 邪谢械 芯斜芯胁'褟蟹泻芯胁芯 褔懈褌邪褌懈 锌芯胁薪褨褋褌褞. 效邪褋褌懈薪褍 胁懈 胁褨写泻懈薪械褌械 褟泻 薪械锌褉懈泄薪褟褌薪褍 写谢褟 褋械斜械. 些芯褋褜 胁邪褋 泻芯薪泻褉械褌薪芯 褌褉懈谐械褉薪械 鈥� 屑械薪械, 薪邪锌褉懈泻谢邪写, 锌芯褌褉械斜邪 斜褍褌懈 锌芯褉褍褔 蟹 写懈褌懈薪芯褞 胁褨写褉邪蟹褍 锌褨褋谢褟 薪邪褉芯写卸械薪薪褟. 袉 褌褍褌 褟 褌邪泻邪, 褟泻邪 胁蟹褟谢邪 薪邪 褉褍泻懈 胁锌械褉褕械 屑邪谢褟 薪邪 7 写械薪褜 锌褨褋谢褟 薪邪褉芯写卸械薪薪褟, 写芯 褌芯谐芯 鈥� 锌械褉械斜褍胁邪薪薪褟 薪邪 褉褨蟹薪懈褏 锌芯胁械褉褏邪褏, 胁 褉褨蟹薪懈褏 斜褍写褨胁谢褟褏, 褉褨蟹薪懈褏 屑褨褋褌邪褏. 携泻褖芯 胁褨褉懈褌懈 褌邪泻懈屑 械泻褋锌械褉褌邪屑, 褌芯 褌邪屑 褌褉邪胁屑邪 薪邪 胁褋械 卸懈褌褌褟 胁 写懈褌懈薪懈, 褔懈 褟泻?
袗谢械 褖芯褋褜 胁懈 褨 胁褨蟹褜屑械褌械 写谢褟 褋械斜械.
February 28, 2021
Puiki knyga. Ypa膷 tinka tiems, kurie neturi ar nem臈gsta skaityti knyg懦 - tad u啪tekt懦 perskaityti 拧i膮 vien膮!
Arba tiems, kas skait臈 daug ir jau nebe啪ino kuom tik臈ti, k膮 atsirinkti :)
Knygoje aptariamos pagrindin臈s temos : apie mieg膮, verksm膮, vaik懦 nor膮 b奴ti ne拧iojam, apie bausmi懦 ir apdovanojim懦 pasekmes, apie tualeto reikaliukus ir kt...
Taip pat kalba apie vaiko raid膮 ir atitinkam膮 elges寞, kuris yra NORMALUS tam tikro am啪iaus vaikui. Pavyzd啪iui, jei vaikas jau moka vaik拧膷ioti, tai nerei拧kia, kad jis moka eiti 拧alia suaugusiojo ir kad pra拧osi ant rank懦 ne d臈l to, kad mumis manipuliuoja...
Pus臈 knygos skirta populiarioms teorijoms paneigti. Ir vis膮 tai autorius perteikia per palyginimus su suaugusiaisiais. Tad visk膮 daug lengviau suprasti ir 寞sivaizduoti!
Baisu skaityti kai kuri懦 "specialist懦" patarimus ir dar baisiau 寞sivaizduoti vaikus, kuriems reik臈jo i拧k臋sti tiek daug smurto, tiek fizinio, tiek psichologinio...
Skaitydama 拧i膮 knyg膮 taip pat nema啪ai su啪inojau ir apie m奴s懦 prot臈vius, kaip atsirado m奴s懦 instinktai, kod臈l mamas taip veikia vaiko verksmas arba kod臈l nakt寞 norisi tikrinti ar vaikas vis dar kv臈puoja..
Taip pat patiko palyginimai su kitais gyv奴nais ir j懦 jaunikliais.
Buvo 寞domu ir naudinga. Tikrai rekomenduoju!
Arba tiems, kas skait臈 daug ir jau nebe啪ino kuom tik臈ti, k膮 atsirinkti :)
Knygoje aptariamos pagrindin臈s temos : apie mieg膮, verksm膮, vaik懦 nor膮 b奴ti ne拧iojam, apie bausmi懦 ir apdovanojim懦 pasekmes, apie tualeto reikaliukus ir kt...
Taip pat kalba apie vaiko raid膮 ir atitinkam膮 elges寞, kuris yra NORMALUS tam tikro am啪iaus vaikui. Pavyzd啪iui, jei vaikas jau moka vaik拧膷ioti, tai nerei拧kia, kad jis moka eiti 拧alia suaugusiojo ir kad pra拧osi ant rank懦 ne d臈l to, kad mumis manipuliuoja...
Pus臈 knygos skirta populiarioms teorijoms paneigti. Ir vis膮 tai autorius perteikia per palyginimus su suaugusiaisiais. Tad visk膮 daug lengviau suprasti ir 寞sivaizduoti!
Baisu skaityti kai kuri懦 "specialist懦" patarimus ir dar baisiau 寞sivaizduoti vaikus, kuriems reik臈jo i拧k臋sti tiek daug smurto, tiek fizinio, tiek psichologinio...
Skaitydama 拧i膮 knyg膮 taip pat nema啪ai su啪inojau ir apie m奴s懦 prot臈vius, kaip atsirado m奴s懦 instinktai, kod臈l mamas taip veikia vaiko verksmas arba kod臈l nakt寞 norisi tikrinti ar vaikas vis dar kv臈puoja..
Taip pat patiko palyginimai su kitais gyv奴nais ir j懦 jaunikliais.
Buvo 寞domu ir naudinga. Tikrai rekomenduoju!
December 1, 2019
Prie拧 pradedant kalb臈ti i拧samiau apie knyg膮, pasakysiu tik tai, jog kiekvienam privaloma j膮 perskaityti! I拧 vis, jei tik b奴t懦 galima 鈥� dalin膷iau visiems t臈vams kartu i拧einant i拧 ligonin臈s su k奴dikiu 馃檪
Tai knyga apie meil臋, apie meil臋 savo vaikui ir kaip jos nevar啪yti. Manau pagrindin臈 mintis 鈥� t臈vam i拧silaisvinti i拧 t懦 visokiausi懦 mokym懦 ir ai拧kinim懦 kaip daryti, o tiesiog klausyti savo 拧irdies.
Man visos autoriaus id臈jos labai priimtinos ir visomis jomis a拧 naudojuosi. Nuo dukryt臈s gimimo buvau pasiry啪usi elgtis taip kaip sako mano 拧irdis, o ne kaip si奴lo 鈥減rofesionalai鈥� ir atrodo neklydau taip pasirinkdama, nes 拧i knyga b奴tent apie tai kaip myl臈ti ir negail臈ti tos meil臈s.
O pabaigai tik pasakysiu, jog autoriaus teigiamas po啪i奴ris 寞 vaikus tiesiog spinduliuoja i拧 knygos ir man tas labai imponavo (gal, kad mano po啪i奴ris pana拧us) 馃檪 Ir paskutiniam 鈥渦啪sikandimui鈥� tarsi desertui paliksiu citat膮, kuri mane prajuokino 馃檪
Man jau iki kaklo t懦 imigrant懦, atplaukia 膷ia valtimis ir u啪ima m奴s懦 膷iuo啪yklas.
P.S. labai i拧sipl臈膷iau su ap啪valga, tad 膷ia tik dalis, o vis膮 galima rasti mano tinklara拧tyje - knygugurmane.com
Tai knyga apie meil臋, apie meil臋 savo vaikui ir kaip jos nevar啪yti. Manau pagrindin臈 mintis 鈥� t臈vam i拧silaisvinti i拧 t懦 visokiausi懦 mokym懦 ir ai拧kinim懦 kaip daryti, o tiesiog klausyti savo 拧irdies.
Man visos autoriaus id臈jos labai priimtinos ir visomis jomis a拧 naudojuosi. Nuo dukryt臈s gimimo buvau pasiry啪usi elgtis taip kaip sako mano 拧irdis, o ne kaip si奴lo 鈥減rofesionalai鈥� ir atrodo neklydau taip pasirinkdama, nes 拧i knyga b奴tent apie tai kaip myl臈ti ir negail臈ti tos meil臈s.
O pabaigai tik pasakysiu, jog autoriaus teigiamas po啪i奴ris 寞 vaikus tiesiog spinduliuoja i拧 knygos ir man tas labai imponavo (gal, kad mano po啪i奴ris pana拧us) 馃檪 Ir paskutiniam 鈥渦啪sikandimui鈥� tarsi desertui paliksiu citat膮, kuri mane prajuokino 馃檪
Man jau iki kaklo t懦 imigrant懦, atplaukia 膷ia valtimis ir u啪ima m奴s懦 膷iuo啪yklas.
P.S. labai i拧sipl臈膷iau su ap啪valga, tad 膷ia tik dalis, o vis膮 galima rasti mano tinklara拧tyje - knygugurmane.com
August 29, 2016
Floj铆simo y prescindible.
Es realmente impresentable que se dedique un 65% del libro a criticar otras tendencias pedag贸gicas para dedicar el resto a las suyas propias. En cuanto a su posici贸n es defendida de manera rid铆cula: intenta explicar todo comportamiento del ni帽o por la herencia ancestral de los primeros primates pero, en los momentos en que dicho argumento flojea, no duda en tirar de la influencia de la sociedad. En cuanto una supuesta puesta en pr谩ctica de su posici贸n de dar amor a los ni帽os apenas da ninguna directriz pr谩ctica salvo coger al ni帽o en brazos o que duerma en la cama con los padres. En este 煤ltimo punto el libro es lamentable: en vez de aportar estudios donde esta pr谩ctica se demuestre beneficiosa se limita a criticar a los estudios que no la recomiendan. As铆 como su libro "Mi ni帽o no me come" pod铆a aportar algo, este es totalmente prescindible. Una p茅rdida total de tiempo.
Es realmente impresentable que se dedique un 65% del libro a criticar otras tendencias pedag贸gicas para dedicar el resto a las suyas propias. En cuanto a su posici贸n es defendida de manera rid铆cula: intenta explicar todo comportamiento del ni帽o por la herencia ancestral de los primeros primates pero, en los momentos en que dicho argumento flojea, no duda en tirar de la influencia de la sociedad. En cuanto una supuesta puesta en pr谩ctica de su posici贸n de dar amor a los ni帽os apenas da ninguna directriz pr谩ctica salvo coger al ni帽o en brazos o que duerma en la cama con los padres. En este 煤ltimo punto el libro es lamentable: en vez de aportar estudios donde esta pr谩ctica se demuestre beneficiosa se limita a criticar a los estudios que no la recomiendan. As铆 como su libro "Mi ni帽o no me come" pod铆a aportar algo, este es totalmente prescindible. Una p茅rdida total de tiempo.
September 17, 2024
袧械 写懈胁谢褟褔懈褋褜 薪邪 锌芯蟹懈褌懈胁薪褨 胁褨写谐褍泻懈, 芯褋芯斜懈褋褌芯 屑械薪褨 泻薪懈卸泻邪 薪械 褋锌芯写芯斜邪谢邪褋褜 蟹芯胁褋褨屑.
袚芯谢芯胁薪邪 写褍屑泻邪, 褟泻 薪邪 屑械薪械, 褏芯褉芯褕邪 褨 泻芯褉懈褋薪邪: 写褨褌械泄 褋胁芯褩褏 锌芯褌褉褨斜薪芯 谢褞斜懈褌懈, 芯斜褨泄屑邪褌懈 褨 写斜邪褌懈 锌褉芯 薪懈褏, 褎芯褉屑褍胁邪褌懈 蟹写芯褉芯胁褍 锌褉懈胁始褟蟹邪薪褨褋褌褜, 写邪胁邪褌懈 胁褨写褔褍褌褌褟 斜械蟹锌械泻懈, 褎芯褉屑褍胁邪褌懈 写芯胁褨褉褍. 袘芯 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁褋褌胁芯 写褍卸械 蟹邪谢械卸懈褌褜 胁褨写 褋锌褉懈泄薪褟褌褌褟, 褏褌芯褋褜 褋泻邪卸械 芦写懈褌懈薪邪 屑邪薪褨锌褍谢褟褌芯褉禄, 邪 褏褌芯褋褜 芦胁芯薪邪 锌芯褌褉械斜褍褦 写芯锌芯屑芯谐懈/褌褍褉斜芯褌懈/芯斜褨泄屑褨胁禄. 袉 邪胁褌芯褉 褍褋褨屑邪 褋懈谢邪屑懈 薪邪屑邪谐邪胁褋褟 写芯薪械褋褌懈 褖芯 写褨褌懈 薪械 胁械褉械写褍褞褌褜 斜芯 蟹谢褨 屑邪薪褨锌褍谢褟褌芯褉懈, 褨 薪邪 褉褍褔泻懈 褏芯褔褍褌褜 薪械 褌芯屑褍 褖芯 褍 薪懈褏 褌邪屑 锌褨写褋褌褍锌薪懈泄 锌谢邪薪, 邪 斜邪薪邪谢褜薪芯 褌芯屑褍 褖芯 锌芯褌褉械斜褍褞褌褜 蟹邪褏懈褋褌褍 褨 褌褍褉斜芯褌懈 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁.
袗谢械 褑械 胁褋械 写褍卸械 薪褍写薪芯 褉芯蟹褌褟谐薪褍褌芯, 邪 锌芯褋褌褨泄薪褨 锌芯褋懈谢邪薪薪褟 薪邪 褌械 褖芯 芦薪褍 芯褌 胁 锌褉邪写邪胁薪褨 褔邪褋懈禄 薪械 褌械 褖芯斜 写褍卸械 胁懈泻谢懈泻邪谢懈 写芯胁褨褉褍 褨 斜邪卸邪薪薪褟 褔懈褌邪褌懈 写邪谢褨. 孝芯屑褍 泻薪懈卸泻邪 蟹邪谢懈褕懈谢邪褋褜 薪械写芯褔懈褌邪薪芯褞.
袚芯谢芯胁薪邪 写褍屑泻邪, 褟泻 薪邪 屑械薪械, 褏芯褉芯褕邪 褨 泻芯褉懈褋薪邪: 写褨褌械泄 褋胁芯褩褏 锌芯褌褉褨斜薪芯 谢褞斜懈褌懈, 芯斜褨泄屑邪褌懈 褨 写斜邪褌懈 锌褉芯 薪懈褏, 褎芯褉屑褍胁邪褌懈 蟹写芯褉芯胁褍 锌褉懈胁始褟蟹邪薪褨褋褌褜, 写邪胁邪褌懈 胁褨写褔褍褌褌褟 斜械蟹锌械泻懈, 褎芯褉屑褍胁邪褌懈 写芯胁褨褉褍. 袘芯 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁褋褌胁芯 写褍卸械 蟹邪谢械卸懈褌褜 胁褨写 褋锌褉懈泄薪褟褌褌褟, 褏褌芯褋褜 褋泻邪卸械 芦写懈褌懈薪邪 屑邪薪褨锌褍谢褟褌芯褉禄, 邪 褏褌芯褋褜 芦胁芯薪邪 锌芯褌褉械斜褍褦 写芯锌芯屑芯谐懈/褌褍褉斜芯褌懈/芯斜褨泄屑褨胁禄. 袉 邪胁褌芯褉 褍褋褨屑邪 褋懈谢邪屑懈 薪邪屑邪谐邪胁褋褟 写芯薪械褋褌懈 褖芯 写褨褌懈 薪械 胁械褉械写褍褞褌褜 斜芯 蟹谢褨 屑邪薪褨锌褍谢褟褌芯褉懈, 褨 薪邪 褉褍褔泻懈 褏芯褔褍褌褜 薪械 褌芯屑褍 褖芯 褍 薪懈褏 褌邪屑 锌褨写褋褌褍锌薪懈泄 锌谢邪薪, 邪 斜邪薪邪谢褜薪芯 褌芯屑褍 褖芯 锌芯褌褉械斜褍褞褌褜 蟹邪褏懈褋褌褍 褨 褌褍褉斜芯褌懈 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁.
袗谢械 褑械 胁褋械 写褍卸械 薪褍写薪芯 褉芯蟹褌褟谐薪褍褌芯, 邪 锌芯褋褌褨泄薪褨 锌芯褋懈谢邪薪薪褟 薪邪 褌械 褖芯 芦薪褍 芯褌 胁 锌褉邪写邪胁薪褨 褔邪褋懈禄 薪械 褌械 褖芯斜 写褍卸械 胁懈泻谢懈泻邪谢懈 写芯胁褨褉褍 褨 斜邪卸邪薪薪褟 褔懈褌邪褌懈 写邪谢褨. 孝芯屑褍 泻薪懈卸泻邪 蟹邪谢懈褕懈谢邪褋褜 薪械写芯褔懈褌邪薪芯褞.
October 4, 2020
I already believe in most of the things that this book advocates so that was quite redundant for me. I did not like that the book kept criticising other authors, philosphers,etc in every chapter. That was quite a weird approach to put forward your belief. It was condescending towards others and that was off-putting for me.
For someone who is on the fence of attachment parenting, this book can be a good one to push you on the side that I already believe in - hold the child, breastfeeding for long, co-sleeping,etc.
I think if someone is already of a certain belief, I don't think this book can shake those beliefs.
For someone who is on the fence of attachment parenting, this book can be a good one to push you on the side that I already believe in - hold the child, breastfeeding for long, co-sleeping,etc.
I think if someone is already of a certain belief, I don't think this book can shake those beliefs.
June 16, 2012
Maybe I'm one of those brainwashed parents who has been influenced by too many parenting manuals but I wasn't convinced by this book. It used contradictory reasoning and related back to evolutionary biology but in a completely non-logical way, so it left me feeling like I couldn't actually trust anything it was saying. I also believe in everything in moderation, so while the ideals here are good some of the time (and that bit is common sense) they also need to be used with boundaries some of the time too. Was quite disappointed by this book, and wouldn't recommend it.
December 5, 2017
No lo termin茅. Me aburri贸. Si bien entrega datos cient铆ficos (basadas en los or铆genes de la especie) que respaldan t贸picos tan importantes cuando uno es madre como el apego, el colecho, las necesidades emocionales del ni帽o, lo 煤nico que da es eso. Datos cient铆ficos. Esperaba como mam谩 primeriza que me diera m谩s info de como lograr un apego eficiente. Qu茅 errores no cometer. Que hacer cuando volviera al trabajo. Esta 煤ltima respuesta no me la contest贸 ni en su charla en vivo. Lectura poco pr谩ctica cuando es eso lo que uno busca en los primeros meses de maternidad.
October 7, 2016
O autor coloca quest玫es pertinentes e faz algumas compara莽玫es interessantes. Mas, por vezes, d谩 exemplos completamente descabidos e alguns conselhos question谩veis. Tenho a sensa莽茫o de que se seguisse as suas sugest玫es 脿 risca n茫o estaria a educar um beb茅 mas sim a criar uma crian莽a desregrada e sem no莽茫o de alguns limites.
January 8, 2022
芦袗 褟泻懈泄 薪械蟹谐谢邪写懈屑懈泄 褋锌芯谐邪写 锌芯芯 褋械斜械 胁懈 褏芯褌褨谢懈 斜 蟹邪谢懈褕懈褌懈 胁 锌邪屑鈥樠徰傃� 褋胁芯褩褏 写褨褌械泄?禄
袦械薪褨 褟泻 屑邪屑褨 斜褍谢芯 褋褍屑薪芯 褔懈褌邪褌懈 褟泻 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褋褌械褉械芯褌懈锌褨胁, 写褍褉薪懈褏 芦褌褉械斜邪禄, 薪械锌芯褟褋薪褞胁邪薪懈褏 芦屑褍褋懈褕禄 写褍卸械 褔邪褋褌芯 泻械褉褍褞褌褜 薪邪褕懈屑懈 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁褋褜泻懈屑懈 胁褔懈薪泻邪屑懈 褨 褋谢芯胁邪屑懈. 孝芯写褨 褟泻 褦写懈薪械, 褖芯 屑邪褦 蟹薪邪褔械薪薪褟 褑械 谢褞斜芯胁, 褨 褉芯蟹褍屑褨薪薪褟 褖芯 薪邪褕邪 写懈褌懈薪邪 褑械 褌芯泄 写芯褉芯褋谢懈泄 褟泻芯谐芯 屑懈 褏芯褔械屑芯 斜邪褔懈褌懈 锌芯褉褍褔.
袦械薪褨 褟泻 屑邪屑褨 斜褍谢芯 褋褍屑薪芯 褔懈褌邪褌懈 褟泻 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褋褌械褉械芯褌懈锌褨胁, 写褍褉薪懈褏 芦褌褉械斜邪禄, 薪械锌芯褟褋薪褞胁邪薪懈褏 芦屑褍褋懈褕禄 写褍卸械 褔邪褋褌芯 泻械褉褍褞褌褜 薪邪褕懈屑懈 斜邪褌褜泻褨胁褋褜泻懈屑懈 胁褔懈薪泻邪屑懈 褨 褋谢芯胁邪屑懈. 孝芯写褨 褟泻 褦写懈薪械, 褖芯 屑邪褦 蟹薪邪褔械薪薪褟 褑械 谢褞斜芯胁, 褨 褉芯蟹褍屑褨薪薪褟 褖芯 薪邪褕邪 写懈褌懈薪邪 褑械 褌芯泄 写芯褉芯褋谢懈泄 褟泻芯谐芯 屑懈 褏芯褔械屑芯 斜邪褔懈褌懈 锌芯褉褍褔.
January 24, 2024
携泻邪褋褜 锌邪褋懈胁薪芯-邪谐褉械褋懈胁薪邪 泻薪懈谐邪. 孝邪泻 褨 褏芯褌褨谢芯褋褟 褋泻邪蟹邪褌懈 邪胁褌芯褉褍 锌械褉械褋褌邪褌懈 褉芯蟹屑芯胁谢褟褌懈 褌邪泻懈屑 褌芯薪芯屑. 孝邪 褨 锌褉懈泻谢邪写懈 褔邪褋褌芯 褟泻褨褋褜 邪斜褋褍褉写薪褨 褌邪 谐褨锌械褉斜芯谢褨蟹芯胁邪薪褨.
袧械 褋泻邪卸褍, 褖芯 胁芯薪邪 邪斜褋芯谢褞褌薪芯 薪械 泻芯褉懈褋薪邪, 邪谢械 薪邪 褌邪泻褨 卸 褌械屑懈, 薪邪 屑芯褞 写褍屑泻褍, 褦 泻褉邪褖褨 褌械泻褋褌懈 斜械蟹 胁懈褋芯泻芯屑褨褉薪懈褏 胁懈褟胁褨胁 胁谢邪褋薪芯谐芯 械谐芯 邪胁褌芯褉邪.
袧械 褋泻邪卸褍, 褖芯 胁芯薪邪 邪斜褋芯谢褞褌薪芯 薪械 泻芯褉懈褋薪邪, 邪谢械 薪邪 褌邪泻褨 卸 褌械屑懈, 薪邪 屑芯褞 写褍屑泻褍, 褦 泻褉邪褖褨 褌械泻褋褌懈 斜械蟹 胁懈褋芯泻芯屑褨褉薪懈褏 胁懈褟胁褨胁 胁谢邪褋薪芯谐芯 械谐芯 邪胁褌芯褉邪.
February 22, 2019
Excelente. Me ha ayudado a entender mucho m谩s a mi beb茅 y esposa. Grandioso libro.
July 30, 2020
Dar viena knyga, kuri膮 priskir膷iau prie MUST knyg懦 t臈vam. Knyga apie meil臋, meil臋 vaikui, stipr懦 t臈v懦 ir vaik懦 ry拧寞. Apie tai kaip mes galb奴t tikim臈s ir reikalaujam i拧 vaiko daugiau negu jis tame am啪iuje gali.
September 21, 2024
Estoy de acuerdo con la mayor铆a de las afirmaciones que el autor hace en este libro: no se debe pegar a los ni帽os, es importante fomentar el v铆nculo con los padres, no dejar llorar al beb茅...
El problema es que no da argumentos, la mayor铆a son falacias. Tampoco da alternativas. B谩sicamente ridiculiza y trata de desmontar teor铆as de otros autores (los hay hasta del siglo XVIII) sin dar razonamientos.
En definitiva, yo me lo he le铆do y sigo sin saber c贸mo criar a mis hijos con cari帽o y respeto. S茅 las cosas que ya opinaba antes, pero no me ha aportado nada. 236 p谩ginas vac铆as con alg煤n chiste de por medio.
El problema es que no da argumentos, la mayor铆a son falacias. Tampoco da alternativas. B谩sicamente ridiculiza y trata de desmontar teor铆as de otros autores (los hay hasta del siglo XVIII) sin dar razonamientos.
En definitiva, yo me lo he le铆do y sigo sin saber c贸mo criar a mis hijos con cari帽o y respeto. S茅 las cosas que ya opinaba antes, pero no me ha aportado nada. 236 p谩ginas vac铆as con alg煤n chiste de por medio.
October 27, 2023
袟邪谐邪谢芯屑 谐邪褉薪芯 褨 谢械谐泻芯 锌褉芯 褌械, 褖芯 写褨褌械泄 褌褉械斜邪 谢褞斜懈褌懈, 薪褨褔芯谐芯 胁褨写 薪懈褏 薪械 胁懈屑邪谐邪褌懈 褨 薪械 芯褔褨泻褍胁邪褌懈 (斜芯 薪邪屑 褌邪泻 蟹邪褏芯褌褨谢芯褋褟).
袩芯褟褋薪褞褦褌褜褋褟 斜邪谐邪褌芯 锌芯胁械写褨薪芯泻 写褨褌械泄 蟹 褌芯褔泻懈 蟹芯褉褍 写褨褌械泄, 褖芯 褋锌褉邪胁写褨 写邪褦 泻褉邪褖械 褉芯蟹褍屑褨薪薪褟.
袗斜芯 锌褉懈泻谢邪写懈, 泻芯谢懈 蟹邪屑褨褋褌褜 写懈褌懈薪懈 褍褟胁懈褌懈 写芯褉芯褋谢芯谐芯 褨 褟泻 屑懈 蟹芯胁褋褨屑 锌芯-褨薪褕芯屑褍 褉械邪谐褍褦屑芯 薪邪 褌褨 卸 褋懈褌褍邪褑褨褩.
袣褉懈褌懈泻褍褦褌褜褋褟 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褌械芯褉褨泄 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪薪褟 写褨褌械泄, 褉邪薪薪褟 褋械锌邪褉邪褑褨褩 胁褨写 屑邪屑懈, 薪械 谐芯写褍胁邪薪薪褟 谐褉褍写褜屑懈, 薪械 褋锌邪薪薪褟 褉邪蟹芯屑 褨 褌.写.
袟邪谐邪谢芯屑 谐邪褉薪芯, 邪谢械 写芯褋懈褌褜 斜邪谐邪褌芯 芯写薪芯屑邪薪褨褌薪芯谐芯 褨 锌芯 泻芯谢褍. 袗 褖械 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褟泻懈褏芯褋褜 薪械锌芯褌褉褨斜薪懈褏 褋褌邪褌懈褋褌懈泻, 胁褨写褋芯褌泻褨胁, 写芯褋谢褨写卸械薪褜. 携 邪卸 锌褉芯谐芯褉褌褍胁邪谢邪 锌芯 泻褨谢褜泻邪 褋褌芯褉褨薪芯泻, 斜芯 斜褍谢芯 薪褍写薪芯 褔懈褌邪褌懈 锌褉芯 芯褌褨 13,56% 写褨褌械泄 褖芯褋褜 褌邪屑 褖芯褋褜 褌邪屑 褨 褌.写.
袗斜芯 褑懈褌褍胁邪薪薪褟 褟泻懈褏芯褋褜 泻薪懈谐 蟹 18 褋褌., 褖芯斜 锌芯泻邪蟹邪褌懈, 褟泻褨 写褍褉薪褍胁邪褌褨 泻芯谢懈褋褜 斜褍谢懈 褌械芯褉褨褩 褨 锌芯褉邪写懈, 邪谢械 薪邪胁褨褖芯, 褟泻褖芯 蟹邪褉邪蟹 胁褋褨 褨褌邪泻 褉芯蟹褍屑褨褞褌褜, 褖芯 褑械 薪褨褋械薪褨褌薪懈褑褟.
袩芯胁薪邪 锌褉芯褌懈谢械卸薪褨褋褌褜 锌褨写褏芯写褨胁 "肖褉邪薪褑褍蟹褜泻芯谐芯 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪薪褟", 芯泻褉械屑芯屑褍 褋薪褍, 褋邪屑芯蟹邪褋懈薪邪薪薪褟, 谐褉邪褎褨泻褨胁 写薪褟.
袩芯褟褋薪褞褦褌褜褋褟 斜邪谐邪褌芯 锌芯胁械写褨薪芯泻 写褨褌械泄 蟹 褌芯褔泻懈 蟹芯褉褍 写褨褌械泄, 褖芯 褋锌褉邪胁写褨 写邪褦 泻褉邪褖械 褉芯蟹褍屑褨薪薪褟.
袗斜芯 锌褉懈泻谢邪写懈, 泻芯谢懈 蟹邪屑褨褋褌褜 写懈褌懈薪懈 褍褟胁懈褌懈 写芯褉芯褋谢芯谐芯 褨 褟泻 屑懈 蟹芯胁褋褨屑 锌芯-褨薪褕芯屑褍 褉械邪谐褍褦屑芯 薪邪 褌褨 卸 褋懈褌褍邪褑褨褩.
袣褉懈褌懈泻褍褦褌褜褋褟 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褌械芯褉褨泄 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪薪褟 写褨褌械泄, 褉邪薪薪褟 褋械锌邪褉邪褑褨褩 胁褨写 屑邪屑懈, 薪械 谐芯写褍胁邪薪薪褟 谐褉褍写褜屑懈, 薪械 褋锌邪薪薪褟 褉邪蟹芯屑 褨 褌.写.
袟邪谐邪谢芯屑 谐邪褉薪芯, 邪谢械 写芯褋懈褌褜 斜邪谐邪褌芯 芯写薪芯屑邪薪褨褌薪芯谐芯 褨 锌芯 泻芯谢褍. 袗 褖械 斜邪谐邪褌芯 褟泻懈褏芯褋褜 薪械锌芯褌褉褨斜薪懈褏 褋褌邪褌懈褋褌懈泻, 胁褨写褋芯褌泻褨胁, 写芯褋谢褨写卸械薪褜. 携 邪卸 锌褉芯谐芯褉褌褍胁邪谢邪 锌芯 泻褨谢褜泻邪 褋褌芯褉褨薪芯泻, 斜芯 斜褍谢芯 薪褍写薪芯 褔懈褌邪褌懈 锌褉芯 芯褌褨 13,56% 写褨褌械泄 褖芯褋褜 褌邪屑 褖芯褋褜 褌邪屑 褨 褌.写.
袗斜芯 褑懈褌褍胁邪薪薪褟 褟泻懈褏芯褋褜 泻薪懈谐 蟹 18 褋褌., 褖芯斜 锌芯泻邪蟹邪褌懈, 褟泻褨 写褍褉薪褍胁邪褌褨 泻芯谢懈褋褜 斜褍谢懈 褌械芯褉褨褩 褨 锌芯褉邪写懈, 邪谢械 薪邪胁褨褖芯, 褟泻褖芯 蟹邪褉邪蟹 胁褋褨 褨褌邪泻 褉芯蟹褍屑褨褞褌褜, 褖芯 褑械 薪褨褋械薪褨褌薪懈褑褟.
袩芯胁薪邪 锌褉芯褌懈谢械卸薪褨褋褌褜 锌褨写褏芯写褨胁 "肖褉邪薪褑褍蟹褜泻芯谐芯 胁懈褏芯胁邪薪薪褟", 芯泻褉械屑芯屑褍 褋薪褍, 褋邪屑芯蟹邪褋懈薪邪薪薪褟, 谐褉邪褎褨泻褨胁 写薪褟.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 311 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.