The other night as we were eating dinner, we had Dylan in his bouncy chair and he was starting to fuss. So I went to go get him and Eric said "Let him fuss. He needs to learn to be patient." I told him I agreed but at 3 months it was too early to teach him that lesson, when he is fussing now he needs something and he is not trying to manipulate us.

So at what age does baby's fussiness turn into "wants" vs. "needs"?

I'm not a big fan of CIO but at some point when you know baby is fine when do you let them fuss?

I'm not one to let them fuss too much. I guess it would depend how long they would have to wait. If you were almost done, then maybe let him fuss, but if you've just sat down, I would get him.

I was just reading WTE the first year the other day to find something to help me with Jeremy's lack of sleeping at night. Anyway, around the 7th month it says that babies are beginning to understand the cause and effect of picking up a child when he/she is fussing.

I'd personally say that 3 months is too young for them to understand that. But if Dylan is fussing, you could always change where he's sitting (highchair to bouncy to lying on the floor). Sometimes kids need a change of scenery just like adults.

And I'm not a big fan of CIO either, but we're getting to the point where J is NOT sleeping and I need to let him cry at night. Sorry for the tangent. :blush:

I'm not one to let them fuss too much. I guess it would depend how long they would have to wait. If you were almost done, then maybe let him fuss, but if you've just sat down, I would get him.
I agree.

I am of the opinion they are only small once and I want them to know they are loved and cared for and if it means having Graham on my knee while I'm eating after he's done, then I will because it's not forever.

I don't care at this point if it is manipulation (which I don't think it is, and besides if a kid wants our attention shouldn't we give it to them?) because I love him and want him to know he can come to me any time for comfort/love even if it is inconvenient for me. :)

Make no mistake, I do let him fuss and if I'm cooking dinner or whatever I'm not picking him up all the time, but I do give him attention and a snack or something to make him happier.

He's much older than Dylan of course, but there are always times they are going to be fussing and you have to figure out what works for you. If it works for you, then to heck with anyone else and their opinions. :)

I personally don't buy the whole "manipulation" theory when it comes to infants. When they fuss, it is for a reason. The only time I will let Harper fuss is if I KNOW she is super tired and just fighting it for some reason. I will let her fuss very very briefly in her swing as long as I can tell that she is basically settling herself down for sleep. If she starts increasing the volume, I immediately pick her up.

I think at 3 months there's no baby in the world that knows how to be patient! I also don't think there's any manipulation. When they're fussing there's something they need and it may just be a change of scenery like a PP said. However, I would let my babies fuss (not all out cry) if I tried the whole litany of possibilities (diaper, hold, food, bouncy, etc.) and none of it made them happy - then I figured they just needed to fuss. I also was okay if they were crying in my arms - I was doing the best I could for them!

I'm not a fan of CIO either but since I have more than 1 child, there are times when Kallan has to wait longer than either of us would like. One several occasions I knew he was just sleepy and was fussing because he wanted to be nursed to sleep or rocked. That's fine and I don't mind doing that but I wasn't able to get to him right away and after several minutes he went to sleep on his own. Had he been my only child, I would have never known.

I think it's up to you. If he is not in pain (gassy) he is fed and changed and otherwise ok, you might see what happens after a minute or two. If it stresses you out to let him fuss, don't do it. If he fusses and ends up going to sleep, I think he's learning how to soothe himself and that will be a helpful thing for you in the future.

I don't think a baby is seriously harmed if they have to wait and cry a bit now and then. I don't know that you can teach patience at such a young age. I would never let my baby cry endlessly but I'm not able to immediately respond to every cry.

I agree with the others. He's way too young to be manipulative.

One thing I can clearly remember when Sarah was that age is that fussiness in the bouncer meant she was tired. She used to sit in the bouncer while we ate and if she started crying, I'd hurry up and put her in the crib or rock her to sleep. She generally would end up conking out pretty quickly and it became one of the first big signals that she was tired and really helped me get a routine down with her.

Obviously, every baby is different. I just thought I'd offer that piece of advice and see if it helps you.

Please note, I wasn't saying Dylan was being manipulative but that Graham at age 16 months could be considered by some "experts" as manipulative by doing certain things or crying etc. to get me to give him his way. Which, if his way is having me hold him, I'm all for that anyway. :)

There's no way on earth a 3 month old could be considered manipulative and I don't want anyone to think that's what I was thinking. Thanks! :)

I agree that he is too little to have any manipulation on his mind. :nod: