Easy baby, lazy mama?

I started theorizing that Laurel was an "easy baby" over two months ago, when she was just nine days old. Was it too soon to tell? Apparently not. She has continued to be an excellent sleeper, she seldom cries, and she is content in nearly every situation. (Although considering that she's not quite three months old now, it might still be too soon to tell!)

But is an easy baby really something to be desired?

At the time, I thought Isaac was a pretty easy baby, with the sole exception of his having a hard time staying sleep. We could usually keep him happy -- even if it did mean never setting him down while he was awake. This had two aspects: (1) if it was time for him to sleep, he needed to be put to sleep before he was set down, and (2) if it was time for him to be awake, he needed to be held because he would complain if he was set down. I don't remember him being content for more than five minutes at a time whenever he was separate from us, whether in a swing or a stroller. So we wore him in the sling a lot, we usually took turns eating dinner, and my showers were short. That kept him happy.

Was Isaac truly "easy," or did we simply learn to adapt to his needs? Easy or not, he was a smart baby -- he knew what he needed, and he knew how to ask for it. And we were smart parents -- we understood what he needed, and we gave it to him. All that holding and cuddling didn't make him emotionally needy, either. At three and a half he is secure, loving, independent, and adaptable.

Compared to her brother, Laurel isn't getting as much holding and cuddling.* Sometimes I even worry that I'm failing to give her enough holding and cuddling. She likes to be held, but she also doesn't seem to mind the stroller or swing, so that's where she spends a lot of her time. Will she ask for what she needs? She is such a restrained crier, so quiet when making her demands, that I fear I am overlooking her requests partly because they are not as insistent as her brother's were. Is her "easiness" actually cheating her out of the nurturing she needs?

Let's check with the guru of attachment parenting, Dr. Sears, and his handy list of the seven principles of attachment for parenting an infant:

1. birth bonding: Laurel was born at home and was never separated from us.
   
2. breast-feeding: She nursed right after birth and has never had a bottle.
3. babywearing: I think this issue is the main source of my worry, since when we're out of the house I push her in the stroller more often than I wear her in a carrier, and at home she usually sits in the swing or bouncy seat. Dr. Sears says of babywearing, "Because your baby is so close to you, you get to know baby better. Closeness promotes familiarity." Am I parking her in these artificial contraptions for the sake of convenience? Will this make us emotionally distant?
   
4. bedding close to baby: For her first week or two, at night she slept in my bed next to me, and now she sleeps in a co-sleeper bassinet next to my side of the bed.
5. belief in the language value of your baby's cry: I absolutely do believe this, and if she cries, I listen. But she doesn't cry very much. What if she is trying to tell me what she needs in more subtle ways, but I just don't understand her?
6. beware of baby trainers: She sleeps when she wants to sleep, and she is nursed completely on demand. She is never left to cry in the hopes that she'll learn how to soothe or control herself. (This would have been more of an issue with Isaac, anyway.)
   
7. balance: "In your zeal to give so much to your baby, it's easy to neglect the needs of yourself and your marriage." Hm.
   

Anyway, I think it's #3 that is making me feel guilty. A friend recently joked that although she had never seen Isaac in a stroller, that's the only way she has seen Laurel. But #5 complicates the issue, because I am afraid that I don't understand Laurel's communication style.

- - - - -

*Although I am holding her right now as she sleeps in my lap, which means I've typed this entire post one-handed.