Looks like actual experts in the field disagree with you. [1]
Also, deny a child affection and you have a mentally ill adult. Sadly, there is now an entire generation of parents who have been advertised things like the "cry-out" method. [2]
[1] http://developingchild.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/0...
[2] https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/192222.Solve_Your_Child_...
For sleep training? It’s a somewhat rough 2-7 nights when they’re in the 8-12 week age range, or way, way worse later and a ton of bad nights until then. Probably some kids don’t take to it, but that’s true of anything you try. We’re 3-for-3 on it, with the worst taking three nights. A+++++, would not accustom my kids to someone coming in and rescuing them from learning how to chain REM cycles every time they wimper again. Only way I’ve seen it go wrong with ours or with friends’ kids is 1) inconsistency on the part of the parents, or 2) illness getting in the way.
Having traveled a bit in Northern Africa, I noticed baby sleep problems are virtually non-existent there. They do what humans have done for eons: co-sleeping and breastfeeding. They do it so naturally, mothers are never fully awake while they breastfeed during the night (wife had to sleep in a room full of women and children on several occasions).
Biologically, this makes a lot more sense than giving the signal to the most immaturely born placental mammal that she can't rely on the mother's care.
Denmark sends their kids to nursery school early too and because many women work full time there it means most children aren't with their parent's for a long duration of the day (used ot be much earlier).
What you think about it morally isn't interesting to me. Unless you can prove it's somehow making them worse of then my original position is intact.
Leaving babies to cry or separating them from their mothers for extended periods of time is primarily a health issue which I believe should concern society. [1][2][3] Unfortunately, it fits our economic model very well -- so there is that.
[1] http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.432...
[2] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/development-and-psyc...
If you want it to concern society perhaps first you need to make clear what it is you are trying to avoid.
I don't see any evidence which proves some larger societal problem.
However, saying "unless you can prove it" shows ignorance. Not everything is known. Lack of proof does not indicate a hypothesis' invalidity. and I'm not aware of solid proof against it either.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
With modern insight it seems more likely that moms somewhere on the autism spectrum themselves were being blamed because they seemed odd to neurotypical medics.
My dad is likely autistic, so there's the link for me. I don't know him at all, but genetics are a whacky little code system and I've magically taken a liking to electronics and computers with the same degree of passion that he supposedly applies to his work with ham radio! I was raised in a highly artistic community, and although I have developed a decent creative ability and do art as a hobby, my career path is in maths and computer science. Interesting!
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/autism-it-s-diffe...
"Early-Experiences-Can-Alter-Gene-Expression-and-Affect-Long-Term-Development.pdf"
http://developingchild.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/0...
"In children, we think slower epigenetic ageing could reflect less favourable developmental progress"
And this is the crux of the matter.
I don't doubt that children who are being cuddles more could have their genetics changed. Whether it actually has an effect on their prospects later in life I highly doubt.