What do you think?
Rate this book
Bésame mucho
Carlos González, tras el indiscutible éxito de Mi niño no me come, que alcanzo los 40.000 ejemplares vendidos, regresa con Bésame mucho, una versión actualizada que incluye nuevos ejemplos que pueden ayudar a los padres a entender más y mejor a sus hijos. ¿Por qué los niños no quieren dormir solos?, ¿Por qué tienen celos?, ¿Por qué tienen rabietas?, ¿Por qué lloran?, ¿Por qué llaman nuestra atención? Bésame mucho, es un libro ameno, divertido, pero sobre todo especialmente didáctico, dónde los padres pueden encontrar las respuestas a las mil y una preguntas que cada día les asaltan sobre el crecimiento de sus hijos.
279 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1999
673 people are currently reading
1,767 people want to read
About the author
Carlos González
14books242followersCarlos González, a father of three, studied medicine at the Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona and trained as a paediatrician at the Hospital de Sant Joan de Déu. 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).
March 28, 2020
They recommended me the author and this book as “the bible� 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’t agree with many of his ideas or values, but because of how the author expresses them, and to sum up because of the book’s 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 “supporting the children’s side”� 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 “normal real� (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 “bad� parents or “strict� parents or “traditions/myths�, 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 “supporting the children’s side”� 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 “normal real� (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 “bad� parents or “strict� parents or “traditions/myths�, 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.
September 28, 2010
This is a very interesting book, writing by a pediatric (Carlos González) dealing with many of the myths and falsehoods of child care.
Truly, it pays special attention to the called "Método 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 González 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. González 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 "Método 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 González 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. González 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?
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 sólo utiliza extremismos para intentar convencerte. Sinceramente, una mierda. Si quieres un libro realmente bueno sobre el mismo tema, con más 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 lástima que este libro no esté traducido al español, porque libros como "Bésame mucho" pueden, con su *forma* de decir las cosas, hacer un daño que sólo mejor libros podría prevenir o curar. Si no sabes leer en inglés, intenta que alguien que pueda se lea "Bright from the Start" por tí y te lo explique.
Una mierda. El autor usa la clase de argumentos que no se sostienen y la clase de comparaciones que sólo utiliza extremismos para intentar convencerte. Sinceramente, una mierda. Si quieres un libro realmente bueno sobre el mismo tema, con más 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 lástima que este libro no esté traducido al español, porque libros como "Bésame mucho" pueden, con su *forma* de decir las cosas, hacer un daño que sólo mejor libros podría prevenir o curar. Si no sabes leer en inglés, intenta que alguien que pueda se lea "Bright from the Start" por tí y te lo explique.
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: “Kiss Me! How To Raise Your Children With Love�. 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 clichés. 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� 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: “Sure, 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?�. 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. González suggests from time to time that we replace “children� with “women�, “blacks� or “workers� in seemingly innocuous sentences about babies, to help reveal the latent evil in them. Doing so, one may end up with outrageous statements like: “John grounded his disobedient wife for the rest of the weekend�; “for their own benefit, it's good not to give blacks everything that they demand�; or “make sure you monitor what TV programmes your factory workers watch regularly, and exercise appropriate control�. 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: “bathe your husband at least every other day and use moisturiser sparingly� (who has a right to bathe other people against their will?); “if 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�; or “it'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�.
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 clichés. 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� 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: “Sure, 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?�. 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:
“Es notable que muchos niños muestren en esta época [la época en que pueden caminar un poco solos] una especial delicadeza de sentimientos: el mismo niño que exige con llantos desesperados que sus padres le lleven en brazos será capaz de caminar junto a sus abuelos, porque percibe que estos no tienen ya la fuerza y la agilidad para llevarle. […] Y no lo ha hecho para obtener ventajas y alabanzas, […] sino por pura bondad, porque tiene una conciencia moral y desea hacer el bien siempre que le es posible.�
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. González suggests from time to time that we replace “children� with “women�, “blacks� or “workers� in seemingly innocuous sentences about babies, to help reveal the latent evil in them. Doing so, one may end up with outrageous statements like: “John grounded his disobedient wife for the rest of the weekend�; “for their own benefit, it's good not to give blacks everything that they demand�; or “make sure you monitor what TV programmes your factory workers watch regularly, and exercise appropriate control�. 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: “bathe your husband at least every other day and use moisturiser sparingly� (who has a right to bathe other people against their will?); “if 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�; or “it'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�.
October 3, 2012
Puede gustarte su filosofía o no, pero el autor pasa todo el día criticando otras ideas y poniendo comparaciones inverosímiles, resulta bastante pesado y no guía nada a los padres. La idea puede ser buena y clarificadora, pero con leer las primeras páginas 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 nesidžiaugti. Autorius sugeba paprastai ir kartu remdamasis tyrimais aptarti vaikų raidą ir jų auklėjimo teorijas. Ir visa tai papildyti šmaikščiais komentarais ar palyginimais, kurie mane ne kartą nustebino.
Pavyzdžiui, "Nė vienas vaikas niekada nebuvo "psichologiškai traumuotas", nes žmonės jam daug šypsojosi ir dažnai sakė "ku kū".
Arba šis pasakojimas (po jo atskleisiu, su kuo tai lyginama):
"Įsivaizduokite, jeigu jūsų vyras vieną vakarą namo grįžtų su jaunesne moterimi.
- Brangioji, tai Laura, antroji mano žmona. Tikiuosi, susidraugausite. Jai reikės apsiprasti, todėl su ja turėsiu praleisti daugiau laiko. Tikiuosi, kad tu, vyresnė, elgsiesi gražiai ir padėsi buityje. Ji miegos mano kambaryje - galėsiu geriau ja pasirūpinti, o tu turėsi atskirą kambarį. Nori jį turėti? Beje, tau teks dalytis su ja savo papuošalais.
貹ėٳܳėٱ?"
Taip, gal jau ir atspėjote, tai apie vaikų pavydą broliams ir seserims. Tokių netikėtų istorijų pilna knygoje.
Žodžiu, malonu ir lengva skaityti, o kartu gavau daug įdomių ir svarbių žinių.
Pavyzdžiui, "Nė vienas vaikas niekada nebuvo "psichologiškai traumuotas", nes žmonės jam daug šypsojosi ir dažnai sakė "ku kū".
Arba šis pasakojimas (po jo atskleisiu, su kuo tai lyginama):
"Įsivaizduokite, jeigu jūsų vyras vieną vakarą namo grįžtų su jaunesne moterimi.
- Brangioji, tai Laura, antroji mano žmona. Tikiuosi, susidraugausite. Jai reikės apsiprasti, todėl su ja turėsiu praleisti daugiau laiko. Tikiuosi, kad tu, vyresnė, elgsiesi gražiai ir padėsi buityje. Ji miegos mano kambaryje - galėsiu geriau ja pasirūpinti, o tu turėsi atskirą kambarį. Nori jį turėti? Beje, tau teks dalytis su ja savo papuošalais.
貹ėٳܳėٱ?"
Taip, gal jau ir atspėjote, tai apie vaikų pavydą broliams ir seserims. Tokių netikėtų istorijų pilna knygoje.
Žodžiu, malonu ir lengva skaityti, o kartu gavau daug įdomių ir svarbių žinių.
December 15, 2018
A priori podría parecer que no es necesario un libro con un subtítulo tan evidente como 'Criar a tus hijos con cariño y respeto', pero cuando se continúan escuchando de ciertos pediatras que es bueno dejar llorar a los niños (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 aconsejándote sobre cómo alimentar, educar y hacer dormir a tu bebé, te das cuenta de que sí es necesario un libro que te diga simplemente: "Sí, lo estás haciendo bien, y las teorías de los demás no tienen fundamento científico". No es tanto una guía, como un ensayo en defensa de la felicidad de los niños. Gracias a Carlos González por imponer el sentido común 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 žinute, apie tai kodėl kūdikiai verkia, ar galima vaiką "išlepinti" jį prisiglaudžiant ar guodžiant.
Vienintelis knygos minusas, kad į knygos galą labai kartojasi kitų vaikų auklėjimo knygų autorių kritika.
Vienintelis knygos minusas, kad į knygos galą labai kartojasi kitų vaikų auklėjimo knygų autorių kritika.
December 9, 2022
Не буду критикувати книгу за категоричність: автор ще у вступі чітко окреслив свою позицію � що він буде писати саме так, це книга на захист дітей, на захист їхнього права на любов.
Багато хто з нас належить до покоління, яке боялось "перелюбити" дітей: не бери на руки, хай сам заспокоїться, не звертвй уваги, дитина маніпулює, цілуй, бо звикне, спусти з рук, бо до школи не злізе і блаблабла. Такі злі поради і зараз отримують багато молодих мам, але в моїй інформаційній бульбашці такого мало: дітей закликають любити, гладити, обіймати і ніколи не лишати сам-на-сам зі своїми емоціями.
З цим важко не погодитись. Основа, на яку спирається автор � те, як закладено піклуватись про дітей у людини як біологічного виду. Наврядчи первісна жінка поклала би спати немовля в інший бік печери, вчила його повзати чи ходити і т.д. І ніби як є певні основні потреби у дитини, закладені природою ще з тих далеких давніх часів, які загубилися, забулися в урбанізованому суспільстві.
Тільки от зараз жінка не лежить в печері і не чекає, поки чоловік принесе їй шубу мамонта; ми не живемо по 30 років і не народжуємо по 30 дітей; діти живуть довше, здоровіше, не вмирають в таких кількостях під час пологів жінки та діти. Це все не скасовує того, що дитина потребує любові і контакту.
Тут протиставляться сучасне західне суспільство, де мама може покинути немовля і піти на манікюр � так не має бути, і коли дорослі аргументують це тим, що вони мають право на своє життя, автор ставить таких на місце: так, життя з дитиною. Чомусь, коли народжується дитина, це нормально хотіти хоча б іноді "жити парою", а коли людина одружиться, то її тягу пожити "самостійне життя для себе хоч трошки" � не зрозуміють.
І таких думок тут багато.
Книгу я рекомендую, але обов'язково читати повністю. Частину ви відкинете як неприйнятну для себе. Щось вас конкретно тригерне � мене, наприклад, потреба бути поруч з дитиною відразу після народження. І тут я така, яка взяла на руки вперше маля на 7 день після народження, до того � перебування на різних поверхах, в різних будівлях, різних містах. Якщо вірити таким експертам, то там травма на все життя в дитини, чи як?
Але щось ви і візьмете для себе.
Багато хто з нас належить до покоління, яке боялось "перелюбити" дітей: не бери на руки, хай сам заспокоїться, не звертвй уваги, дитина маніпулює, цілуй, бо звикне, спусти з рук, бо до школи не злізе і блаблабла. Такі злі поради і зараз отримують багато молодих мам, але в моїй інформаційній бульбашці такого мало: дітей закликають любити, гладити, обіймати і ніколи не лишати сам-на-сам зі своїми емоціями.
З цим важко не погодитись. Основа, на яку спирається автор � те, як закладено піклуватись про дітей у людини як біологічного виду. Наврядчи первісна жінка поклала би спати немовля в інший бік печери, вчила його повзати чи ходити і т.д. І ніби як є певні основні потреби у дитини, закладені природою ще з тих далеких давніх часів, які загубилися, забулися в урбанізованому суспільстві.
Тільки от зараз жінка не лежить в печері і не чекає, поки чоловік принесе їй шубу мамонта; ми не живемо по 30 років і не народжуємо по 30 дітей; діти живуть довше, здоровіше, не вмирають в таких кількостях під час пологів жінки та діти. Це все не скасовує того, що дитина потребує любові і контакту.
Тут протиставляться сучасне західне суспільство, де мама може покинути немовля і піти на манікюр � так не має бути, і коли дорослі аргументують це тим, що вони мають право на своє життя, автор ставить таких на місце: так, життя з дитиною. Чомусь, коли народжується дитина, це нормально хотіти хоча б іноді "жити парою", а коли людина одружиться, то її тягу пожити "самостійне життя для себе хоч трошки" � не зрозуміють.
І таких думок тут багато.
Книгу я рекомендую, але обов'язково читати повністю. Частину ви відкинете як неприйнятну для себе. Щось вас конкретно тригерне � мене, наприклад, потреба бути поруч з дитиною відразу після народження. І тут я така, яка взяла на руки вперше маля на 7 день після народження, до того � перебування на різних поверхах, в різних будівлях, різних містах. Якщо вірити таким експертам, то там травма на все життя в дитини, чи як?
Але щось ви і візьмете для себе.
February 28, 2021
Puiki knyga. Ypač tinka tiems, kurie neturi ar nemėgsta skaityti knygų - tad užtektų perskaityti šią vieną!
Arba tiems, kas skaitė daug ir jau nebežino kuom tikėti, ką atsirinkti :)
Knygoje aptariamos pagrindinės temos : apie miegą, verksmą, vaikų norą būti nešiojam, apie bausmių ir apdovanojimų pasekmes, apie tualeto reikaliukus ir kt...
Taip pat kalba apie vaiko raidą ir atitinkamą elgesį, kuris yra NORMALUS tam tikro amžiaus vaikui. Pavyzdžiui, jei vaikas jau moka vaikščioti, tai nereiškia, kad jis moka eiti šalia suaugusiojo ir kad prašosi ant rankų ne dėl to, kad mumis manipuliuoja...
Pusė knygos skirta populiarioms teorijoms paneigti. Ir visą tai autorius perteikia per palyginimus su suaugusiaisiais. Tad viską daug lengviau suprasti ir įsivaizduoti!
Baisu skaityti kai kurių "specialistų" patarimus ir dar baisiau įsivaizduoti vaikus, kuriems reikėjo iškęsti tiek daug smurto, tiek fizinio, tiek psichologinio...
Skaitydama šią knygą taip pat nemažai sužinojau ir apie mūsų protėvius, kaip atsirado mūsų instinktai, kodėl mamas taip veikia vaiko verksmas arba kodėl naktį norisi tikrinti ar vaikas vis dar kvėpuoja..
Taip pat patiko palyginimai su kitais gyvūnais ir jų jaunikliais.
Buvo įdomu ir naudinga. Tikrai rekomenduoju!
Arba tiems, kas skaitė daug ir jau nebežino kuom tikėti, ką atsirinkti :)
Knygoje aptariamos pagrindinės temos : apie miegą, verksmą, vaikų norą būti nešiojam, apie bausmių ir apdovanojimų pasekmes, apie tualeto reikaliukus ir kt...
Taip pat kalba apie vaiko raidą ir atitinkamą elgesį, kuris yra NORMALUS tam tikro amžiaus vaikui. Pavyzdžiui, jei vaikas jau moka vaikščioti, tai nereiškia, kad jis moka eiti šalia suaugusiojo ir kad prašosi ant rankų ne dėl to, kad mumis manipuliuoja...
Pusė knygos skirta populiarioms teorijoms paneigti. Ir visą tai autorius perteikia per palyginimus su suaugusiaisiais. Tad viską daug lengviau suprasti ir įsivaizduoti!
Baisu skaityti kai kurių "specialistų" patarimus ir dar baisiau įsivaizduoti vaikus, kuriems reikėjo iškęsti tiek daug smurto, tiek fizinio, tiek psichologinio...
Skaitydama šią knygą taip pat nemažai sužinojau ir apie mūsų protėvius, kaip atsirado mūsų instinktai, kodėl mamas taip veikia vaiko verksmas arba kodėl naktį norisi tikrinti ar vaikas vis dar kvėpuoja..
Taip pat patiko palyginimai su kitais gyvūnais ir jų jaunikliais.
Buvo įdomu ir naudinga. Tikrai rekomenduoju!
December 1, 2019
Prieš pradedant kalbėti išsamiau apie knygą, pasakysiu tik tai, jog kiekvienam privaloma ją perskaityti! Iš vis, jei tik būtų galima � dalinčiau visiems tėvams kartu išeinant iš ligoninės su kūdikiu 🙂
Tai knyga apie meilę, apie meilę savo vaikui ir kaip jos nevaržyti. Manau pagrindinė mintis � tėvam išsilaisvinti iš tų visokiausių mokymų ir aiškinimų kaip daryti, o tiesiog klausyti savo širdies.
Man visos autoriaus idėjos labai priimtinos ir visomis jomis aš naudojuosi. Nuo dukrytės gimimo buvau pasiryžusi elgtis taip kaip sako mano širdis, o ne kaip siūlo “profesionalai� ir atrodo neklydau taip pasirinkdama, nes ši knyga būtent apie tai kaip mylėti ir negailėti tos meilės.
O pabaigai tik pasakysiu, jog autoriaus teigiamas požiūris į vaikus tiesiog spinduliuoja iš knygos ir man tas labai imponavo (gal, kad mano požiūris panašus) 🙂 Ir paskutiniam “užsikandimui� tarsi desertui paliksiu citatą, kuri mane prajuokino 🙂
Man jau iki kaklo tų imigrantų, atplaukia čia valtimis ir užima mūsų čiuožyklas.
P.S. labai išsiplėčiau su apžvalga, tad čia tik dalis, o visą galima rasti mano tinklaraštyje - knygugurmane.com
Tai knyga apie meilę, apie meilę savo vaikui ir kaip jos nevaržyti. Manau pagrindinė mintis � tėvam išsilaisvinti iš tų visokiausių mokymų ir aiškinimų kaip daryti, o tiesiog klausyti savo širdies.
Man visos autoriaus idėjos labai priimtinos ir visomis jomis aš naudojuosi. Nuo dukrytės gimimo buvau pasiryžusi elgtis taip kaip sako mano širdis, o ne kaip siūlo “profesionalai� ir atrodo neklydau taip pasirinkdama, nes ši knyga būtent apie tai kaip mylėti ir negailėti tos meilės.
O pabaigai tik pasakysiu, jog autoriaus teigiamas požiūris į vaikus tiesiog spinduliuoja iš knygos ir man tas labai imponavo (gal, kad mano požiūris panašus) 🙂 Ir paskutiniam “užsikandimui� tarsi desertui paliksiu citatą, kuri mane prajuokino 🙂
Man jau iki kaklo tų imigrantų, atplaukia čia valtimis ir užima mūsų čiuožyklas.
P.S. labai išsiplėčiau su apžvalga, tad čia tik dalis, o visą galima rasti mano tinklaraštyje - knygugurmane.com
August 29, 2016
Flojísimo y prescindible.
Es realmente impresentable que se dedique un 65% del libro a criticar otras tendencias pedagógicas para dedicar el resto a las suyas propias. En cuanto a su posición es defendida de manera ridícula: intenta explicar todo comportamiento del niño 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 práctica de su posición de dar amor a los niños apenas da ninguna directriz práctica salvo coger al niño en brazos o que duerma en la cama con los padres. En este último punto el libro es lamentable: en vez de aportar estudios donde esta práctica se demuestre beneficiosa se limita a criticar a los estudios que no la recomiendan. Así como su libro "Mi niño no me come" podía aportar algo, este es totalmente prescindible. Una pérdida total de tiempo.
Es realmente impresentable que se dedique un 65% del libro a criticar otras tendencias pedagógicas para dedicar el resto a las suyas propias. En cuanto a su posición es defendida de manera ridícula: intenta explicar todo comportamiento del niño 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 práctica de su posición de dar amor a los niños apenas da ninguna directriz práctica salvo coger al niño en brazos o que duerma en la cama con los padres. En este último punto el libro es lamentable: en vez de aportar estudios donde esta práctica se demuestre beneficiosa se limita a criticar a los estudios que no la recomiendan. Así como su libro "Mi niño no me come" podía aportar algo, este es totalmente prescindible. Una pérdida total de tiempo.
September 17, 2024
Не дивлячись на позитивні відгуки, особисто мені книжка не сподобалась зовсім.
Головна думка, як на мене, хороша і корисна: дітей своїх потрібно любити, обіймати і дбати про них, формувати здорову привʼязаність, давати відчуття безпеки, формувати довіру. Бо батьківство дуже залежить від сприйняття, хтось скаже «дитина маніпулятор», а хтось «вона потребує допомоги/турботи/обіймів». І автор усіма силами намагався донести що діти не вередують бо злі маніпулятори, і на ручки хочуть не тому що у них там підступний план, а банально тому що потребують захисту і турботи батьків.
Але це все дуже нудно розтягнуто, а постійні посилання на те що «ну от в прадавні часи» не те щоб дуже викликали довіру і бажання читати далі. Тому книжка залишилась недочитаною.
Головна думка, як на мене, хороша і корисна: дітей своїх потрібно любити, обіймати і дбати про них, формувати здорову привʼязаність, давати відчуття безпеки, формувати довіру. Бо батьківство дуже залежить від сприйняття, хтось скаже «дитина маніпулятор», а хтось «вона потребує допомоги/турботи/обіймів». І автор усіма силами намагався донести що діти не вередують бо злі маніпулятори, і на ручки хочуть не тому що у них там підступний план, а банально тому що потребують захисту і турботи батьків.
Але це все дуже нудно розтягнуто, а постійні посилання на те що «ну от в прадавні часи» не те щоб дуже викликали довіру і бажання читати далі. Тому книжка залишилась недочитаною.
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.
September 21, 2024
Estoy de acuerdo con la mayoría de las afirmaciones que el autor hace en este libro: no se debe pegar a los niños, es importante fomentar el vínculo con los padres, no dejar llorar al bebé...
El problema es que no da argumentos, la mayoría son falacias. Tampoco da alternativas. Básicamente ridiculiza y trata de desmontar teorías de otros autores (los hay hasta del siglo XVIII) sin dar razonamientos.
En definitiva, yo me lo he leído y sigo sin saber cómo criar a mis hijos con cariño y respeto. Sé las cosas que ya opinaba antes, pero no me ha aportado nada. 236 páginas vacías con algún chiste de por medio.
El problema es que no da argumentos, la mayoría son falacias. Tampoco da alternativas. Básicamente ridiculiza y trata de desmontar teorías de otros autores (los hay hasta del siglo XVIII) sin dar razonamientos.
En definitiva, yo me lo he leído y sigo sin saber cómo criar a mis hijos con cariño y respeto. Sé las cosas que ya opinaba antes, pero no me ha aportado nada. 236 páginas vacías con algún chiste de por medio.
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 terminé. Me aburrió. Si bien entrega datos científicos (basadas en los orígenes de la especie) que respaldan tópicos tan importantes cuando uno es madre como el apego, el colecho, las necesidades emocionales del niño, lo único que da es eso. Datos científicos. Esperaba como mamá primeriza que me diera más info de como lograr un apego eficiente. Qué errores no cometer. Que hacer cuando volviera al trabajo. Esta última respuesta no me la contestó ni en su charla en vivo. Lectura poco práctica cuando es eso lo que uno busca en los primeros meses de maternidad.
October 7, 2016
O autor coloca questões pertinentes e faz algumas comparações interessantes. Mas, por vezes, dá exemplos completamente descabidos e alguns conselhos questionáveis. Tenho a sensação de que se seguisse as suas sugestões à risca não estaria a educar um bebé mas sim a criar uma criança desregrada e sem noção de alguns limites.
January 8, 2022
«А який незгладимий спогад поо себе ви хотіли б залишити в пам‘ят� своїх дітей?»
Мені як мамі було сумно читати як багато стереотипів, дурних «треба», непояснюваних «мусиш» дуже часто керують нашими батьківськими вчинками і словами. Тоді як єдине, що має значення це любов, і розуміння що наша дитина це той дорослий якого ми хочемо бачити поруч.
Мені як мамі було сумно читати як багато стереотипів, дурних «треба», непояснюваних «мусиш» дуже часто керують нашими батьківськими вчинками і словами. Тоді як єдине, що має значення це любов, і розуміння що наша дитина це той дорослий якого ми хочемо бачити поруч.
January 24, 2024
Якась пасивно-агресивна книга. Так і хотілося сказати автору перестати розмовляти таким тоном. Та і приклади часто якісь абсурдні та гіперболізовані.
Не скажу, що вона абсолютно не корисна, але на такі ж теми, на мою думку, є кращі тексти без високомірних виявів власного его автора.
Не скажу, що вона абсолютно не корисна, але на такі ж теми, на мою думку, є кращі тексти без високомірних виявів власного его автора.
February 22, 2019
Excelente. Me ha ayudado a entender mucho más a mi bebé y esposa. Grandioso libro.
July 30, 2020
Dar viena knyga, kurią priskirčiau prie MUST knygų tėvam. Knyga apie meilę, meilę vaikui, stiprų tėvų ir vaikų ryšį. Apie tai kaip mes galbūt tikimės ir reikalaujam iš vaiko daugiau negu jis tame amžiuje gali.
October 27, 2023
Загалом гарно і легко про те, що дітей треба любити, нічого від них не вимагати і не очікувати (бо нам так захотілося).
Пояснюється багато поведінок дітей з точки зору дітей, що справді дає краще розуміння.
Або приклади, коли замість дитини уявити дорослого і як ми зовсім по-іншому реагуємо на ті ж ситуації.
Критикується багато теорій виховання дітей, рання сепарації від мами, не годування грудьми, не спання разом і т.д.
Загалом гарно, але досить багато одноманітного і по колу. А ще багато якихось непотрібних статистик, відсотків, досліджень. Я аж прогортувала по кілька сторінок, бо було нудно читати про оті 13,56% дітей щось там щось там і т.д.
Або цитування якихось книг з 18 ст., щоб показати, які дурнуваті колись були теорії і поради, але навіщо, якщо зараз всі ітак розуміють, що це нісенітниця.
Повна протилежність підходів "Французького виховання", окремому сну, самозасинання, графіків дня.
Пояснюється багато поведінок дітей з точки зору дітей, що справді дає краще розуміння.
Або приклади, коли замість дитини уявити дорослого і як ми зовсім по-іншому реагуємо на ті ж ситуації.
Критикується багато теорій виховання дітей, рання сепарації від мами, не годування грудьми, не спання разом і т.д.
Загалом гарно, але досить багато одноманітного і по колу. А ще багато якихось непотрібних статистик, відсотків, досліджень. Я аж прогортувала по кілька сторінок, бо було нудно читати про оті 13,56% дітей щось там щось там і т.д.
Або цитування якихось книг з 18 ст., щоб показати, які дурнуваті колись були теорії і поради, але навіщо, якщо зараз всі ітак розуміють, що це нісенітниця.
Повна протилежність підходів "Французького виховання", окремому сну, самозасинання, графіків дня.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 311 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.