To speak plainly, I wasn't terribly interested in my son until he turned 3 years old. Then he started talking, started developing a personality with interests of his own, and fatherhood then became much more interesting. But I was intentionally quite uninvolved in those very early years. I don't regret this, don't see how else it could have been, and indeed I feel that some degree of fatherly aloofness towards infants is natural.
I feel sorry for the mother or whoever was taking care of your child for the first 3 years.
Someone has to guide the small children towards being functional human beings and it's a lot of work. I found they have interesting personalities and ways of expressing themselves by 1 at the latest.
One does the best one can. But I guess "intentionally detaching" doesn't convey the best.
Even ignoring the extra work for the mother or whoever is actually providing the care, this conscious decision is not cost free for the future of the relationship with the child. It makes it harder to straighten the ship later.
I wasn't too interested in my son till 1 yr old but I did all the housework ( cooking, cleaning, laundry), taking my son to all doctors appointments, taking him with me to grocery shopping, outdoor walks and to the park.
I’m not going to shame you for your parental experience, but it does not mirror mine as a father.
When my daughter was born I was crying with joy. And while her infancy was enormously challenging, especially as she was born right when COVID lockdowns began (which prevented ANY assistance), I was immediately and profoundly in love with her.
It was very important to me to be extremely engaged when she was an infant. I wanted to - and did - earn her trust as a caretaker and source of comfort. And now, as a 4 year old, the relationship I have with her is utterly priceless.
That's really interesting to read. I'm a man who has absolutely zero interest in interacting with babies and infants, but kids who can talk and ask questions can be pretty funny and cute even. My wife doesn't understand this at all.
When the mother breastfeeds, and dad just fills in around the cracks without directly “providing care” beyond holding the kiddo and changing diapers, how can they be judged for feeling aloof? When are they bonding?
You should consider softening your tone, being a dad is fucking hard.
Yes, the baby is in fact not feeding most of the time. You can easily find several hours a day during which you can bond with the baby, I'm pretty sure your wife is going to be supportive in this effort.
> some degree of fatherly aloofness towards infants is natural.
That may have been your experience, but I would push back hard against generalizing that notion.
For my first child, we bottle-fed formula, and I was very involved in her routine: night feedings, diaper changes, counting days since the last poop, all of it. I felt very invested in every tiny milestone. It was a lot of problem solving, and I was very invested in her progress.
For my second child, because my wife breast-fed that time, I felt a little bit more like an outsider. I jumped in to help where I could, but it took longer for me to feel the same kind of connection. I also got much less paternity leave the second time around, which is likely the bigger factor.
All that to say, I think there are a lot of environmental factors that can play into infant attachment. No one should feel guilty for not having attachment right away, but it should still be pursued.
To speak plainly, I wasn't terribly interested in my son until he turned 3 years old. Then he started talking, started developing a personality with interests of his own, and fatherhood then became much more interesting. But I was intentionally quite uninvolved in those very early years. I don't regret this, don't see how else it could have been, and indeed I feel that some degree of fatherly aloofness towards infants is natural.