Touching other people's babies

But you are also someone she knows.

Not a random person in the supermarket touching her child.

Reasons shouldn’t really matter in my opinion. Reasons only serve to give people cause to argue that the reasons are invalid, or not.

A mother having agency over her child is the end result either way

So am I Summerlove but I can also disagree with the reasons for the choices. The reason I posted about my daughter's friend was because upthread someone suggested it was old vs young attitudes. I was pointing out that a well read, caring/doting mum made a different choice.. to illustrate it is not necessarily about age difference!

When I was visiting my daughter her friend called over and she had her baby with her. She was very happy for me to hold her child and play with her.. handing her to me. She is a young, modern, well-educated, professional & socially aware mother from NZ but living in UK.

That’s super! She chose to hand you the baby!

That’s all we are saying. Mothers should have a choice!

Hithere my post acknowledges a parent's right to make choices for their child... I just disagree with the choice.

Pecs,
Aggressive or assertive?

As for your background and credentials - it doesn't mean I don't follow my instincts as a mother

I have gone to pediatrician's appointments and disagreed with their recommendations- never putting my children in danger.
Yes, they are experts in child health but it does not invalidate other ways of parenting.

I have let a daycare provider go for giving me an ultimatum - she didn't agree with cloth diapers and how they were hindering my child's development. It was disposables at her daycare or nothing.
It was not the first time she challenged me, against doctor's recommendations.
I picked another daycare who didn't say I was a first time mother and she knew better than me.
She was shocked of my "sudden and drastic" decision. Too bad. You do not call me bad mother and I get to bend to your will.

I am not saying you are a bad professional in your field. I just gave examples how professional recommendations did not fit my parenting style

I think this is about an individual mother's angst.

I don't agree. It's not an angst it's a preference and a choice PECS.
In most cases I honestly don't think the concern is about harm either.

Hithere FYI I am a childcare and early education professional of many years experience. I have had training specifically to teach and support little children to know how to say no to any touch they do not want. I have also worked with families, mostly mothers but some fathers too, about good ways to support their children to develop confident and assertive behaviour to avoid becoming victims of bullying etc. My comments are not just plucked from the air but are based on much experience.

Gracious me! A lot of aggressive language here.

When I was visiting my daughter her friend called over and she had her baby with her. She was very happy for me to hold her child and play with her.. handing her to me. She is a young, modern, well-educated, professional & socially aware mother from NZ but living in UK.

I think this is about an individual mother's angst. She is absolutely entitled to care for her child as she feels best but I think creating un proven concerns about a child being harmed is unnecessary.
Just say "I don't like anyone but immediate family to touch my baby." That is her right. I just disagree with the reasoning.

The man's normal, your normal, my normal, is not everybody's normal.

Whose normal rules over the others?
Who has the authority to make decisions over the child? The mother or the man?

His feelings are hurt because his expectations are not met. Not the mother's problem.

It looked like a perfectly normal interaction to me and I'm sure the man would have been very hurt if the mum had told him not to do that.

It might have been.

Mum might not have minded. The child might not have minded.

However, if they had, they shouldn’t be silenced so as to not hurt the mans feelings. His feelings aren’t the only ones who matter.

I saw an elderly man pat a little boy of about 5 on the head and say "thanks love" when he gave him his seat in the doctor's waiting room recently. It looked like a perfectly normal interaction to me and I'm sure the man would have been very hurt if the mum had told him not to do that.

I wasn't talking in my op about strangers going up to babies and touching them, or relatives forcing hugs and kisses onto reluctant children. That's a different matter.

Perhaps it is some of the mothers who have issues that need taking care of, before they pass on unnecessary fears to their offspring.

Dear Lord, so now people who don’t want strangers or near strangers touching their children have issues they need taken care of? May be, the people who need to touch small children are the ones who have issues they need to take care of. Get a grip. What one person chooses to do with raising their child has absolutely nothing to do with you

Hithere I am a mum "of the past" but it was wrong then and is still wrong now.
I hated it, did my best to avoid it, and find it really surprising how many of my generation are still doing it.

Are they the same people who are happy to "pass the parcel" with a baby... or touch other women's pregnant bellies?

Please please be happy, friendly, chatty, interested in babies and toddlers - but (unless there is an actual emergency) you do not need to touch!

Yes, some mothers wouldn't mind.
Some will call you out.
Others will slap your hand.
Others will freeze and regret it later why they didn't say anything

Children are not communal properly. Stop treating them like that.

My reaction may seem extreme because I am getting gaslighted -
Stroking the cheek is not touching, for example.
Their socialization skills will suffer....
Etc.

I mentioned old vs new generation because now we speak up vs having to grin and bear it in the past.
I did not generalize 2 whole generations at all.

Also, I really don't think it's necessarily anything to do with 'new vs older generation' ... there are plenty of young mum's out there who don't hold such extreme views. Just as there are as many grans who do. We can't all be the same.

To all the mothers out there who hold different views to some of us, with all due respect, I think you'll find that there are many people who would deem it totally ridiculous that a simple, innocent, friendly interaction with a baby/child, could be thought of as inappropriate communication.

I'm not one to go out of my way to deliberately interact with babies I don't know, but I'm glad to say that on the odd occasion I've been in that kind of position (on a flight/train/etc.), I've never had a problem with a mum being annoyed. On the contrary, they have been very friendly, and happy for me to interact with their child - I would certainly have the common sense (and learned social skills!), to realize if someone is not happy, and steer clear.

Pecs,
Are you telling me that you, a stranger or not, have a role in my child's socialization skills?
That without you stroking the cheek, my child wouldn't develop properly in society?
If so, please get down your high horse.
You are devaluating or invalidating the work of the parents, daycare providers, teachers, etc. You are not needed. My child's future does not depend on you.

Not wanting my kid to be touched is not being overprotective.

It is seriously delusional to compare it with not letting a kid develop their own personality and own social skills.

It has to do with people not wanting to control their impulses and wants and taking advantage of a child who cannot consent to be touched.

You are an adult - You are able to control tour actions if you want. You can show your appreciation by waving hi to the kid, telling the mother "how cute is the kid", for example

A baby making eye contact with you is not an invitation to be stroked on the cheek.

As usual, this is a standstill new vs old generation
Old generation doesn't understand how their wants are no longer tolerated and parenting has changed.

My children are not here to fulfill your expectations of appreciation.

I'm sorry PECS and others...
?
This is totally ridiculous. We don't want no communication we just want appropriate communication.

I don't know how many times we need to say this - it is primarily about the "ownership" (for want of a better word) of our bodies and those of our babies.

hithere my experience
tells me overprotection of children can be as damaging as insufficient protection. Children not allowed to develop their own likes/ dislikes, develop a sense of safe/ unsafe for themselves are , in my opinion, left more vulnerable not less vulnerable. A known neighbour, invited into the home and demonstrating her fondness for her friend's grandchild..in the company of mother & grandmother.. is not an intrusion or a worry to me. More of a worry is the mother's heightened protection for her 10 month old child..who should be being social, making eye contact & communicating with people beyond immediate family. Sounds like the child could have struggles to come because of this. Maybe the mum.has had an unhappy experience herself which is making her, understandably, super sensitive?

I agree nansnet. Balance is everything.

PECS, finally, a voice of reason. We've all had an 'Auntie Gladys', and I'd respect any parent who gave her a bit of telling off if her over-exuberance upset their child. But, really, there is a gross difference between what the OP mentioned, and what some others seem to be interpreting it as, which, frankly, all sounds rather over the top in some cases.

Perhaps it is some of the mothers who have issues that need taking care of, before they pass on unnecessary fears to their offspring.

As PECS said, children need to develop social skills, and they won't develop those fully with only having contact/interactions with their immediate family. It seems that even some grandparents are not allowed close contact with their grandchildren these days, because of over-protective mothers. Every mother wants to protect their child, but some really do need to lighten up a little.

"However a friend/ neighbour of the family gently stroking a cheek of a 10 month old child that she has met a few times does not feel unreasonable."

Furthermore, I see gaslighting in this statement.

Stroking somebody's cheek is still touching the person.

Touching is touching, period, when the person being touched did not give consent or is unable to.
It is still a violation.

Hithere, Janeainsworth, Summerlove,
thank you so much for your support and kind words of encouragement.
i guess there's none so blind as those who will not see...

"However a friend/ neighbour of the family gently stroking a cheek of a 10 month old child that she has met a few times does not feel unreasonable."

It is unreasonable because the mom is bothered by it