Tried and tested. Failed.

Last week I decided to give Alice a go at an earlier bedtime and one less sleep. For those of you who worry about "Poor Stu" and his aforementioned help with looking after her on one day at the weekend and during the now legendary "Four women go to Surry Hills and don't drink that much but can't handle it because they've been sober for a year" night, please be comforted to know that I decided to start this new routine while he was at a work function. Black tie. Held at that posh hotel on Martin Place, the name of which I don't know because I haven't been into the city forever. Trying it this way meant that if it didn't work out, then he wouldn't have to deal with the fallout and also because he is deadset against any changes. He gets to be the smug one amongst all the new fathers at work and is happy with that. I keep referring him to Madison's blog, which is liberally littered with references from Neil to the fact that "Vanessa knows best", but he doesn't seem to think that the same applies to me. So I just went ahead and did it anyway. I think that Vanessa and I might have that kind of approach in common.

Ho hum. So the first night - Thursday - she had all her sleeps (4) but I cut down on a feed to try to cut down the evening awake time and to have her asleep in bed by 8. Would she fall asleep, boys and girls? Oh no she didn't. Oh yes she did, by 9pm, by which time she may as well have had her usual amount of feeding. But she slept all night, so all was well. I'm smug. Stu's out late and up early, so I'm not able to spread the good news, but things are going well.

Next day - Friday - Nonna Keefe e-mails through Facebook (ooh, she is down with the kids, my Mum) and suggests that Alice might like to drop a sleep and play in the afternoon. Hurrah, thinks I. One less time I have to shhh her and more time for playing on the internet. I mean, with Alice. Deciding that this approach would combine nicely with that of the day before and make her easier to put down earlier, Alice and I set forth, minus one sleep and minus one feed again. After all, it had worked the day before.

She went to bed quite nicely. Father grumbled, but I knew best. Or did I? At 10.30pm we heard a waaahhhhh, but she was easily shhh'd back to sleep. And then came the big one - 4.20am - waaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh. I haven't seen the number 4 in a time in the morning since she was 9 weeks old. Stumbled in to see her. As ever, she was delighted to hear me (lights remained determinedly off), but would not go back to sleep. Fed her and burped her, but by then she really seemed to think it was morning. Even in the near pitch black, she was chatting, singing, waving arms and legs about and seemed pretty content. Perhaps I should have just left her to amuse herself, but there was no chance I would have slept while listening to the cooing and gooing and waiting for the inevitable grumbling before she falls asleep, so I persisted in trying to get her back to sleep. FINALLY at 5.30am, she went.

Next day - Saturday - obviously was not having that again. I have my reputation and Alice's to protect around the traps of the Eastern suburbs mothers groups. (None of whom gave me any sympathy for getting up in the night once in 8 weeks). So we went back to the old routine, with all her sleeps and all her feeds. That night she slept until 8am. Same again last night. So I might leave it a while before trying any more changes, although the idea of missing out a sleep is still very appealing.

And anyone worrying about "Poor Stu"...he slept through the whole thing, waking only to tell me that he "told me so".