s/o parenting book .... Growing Kids God's Way

[Colleen in NS]

Hi Colleen,

This is such a sensible way to approach this book. However, because the Ezzo's suggest through their title and in their text that this is "God's way", it is really hard for a lot of people to approach this information so sensibly. It starts to have the ring of 'thus spake the Lord,' and that really puts a lot of pressure on doing everything exactly correctly.

 

I have one of the Babywise books, and I agree that there was lot of stuff to like about it. But, it was a bad book for me, because it brought out my inner control freak so much. Now, that doesn't say that it's necessarily a bad book, just that it was more bad than good for me. It's the way that they present the downside risk that is so harmful TO ME. The book talked like if you, for instance, nursed your baby to sleep and didn't put her down awake, you would never be able to get your child to learn to sleep on her own. It talked like if you redirected your child instead of punishing them, you would never teach them to have morals. And, I'm susceptible to this line of thinking, because I grew up in a household where the parents were violent and verbally abusive, and control freaky. That mode is more 'normal' to me than not. So to be different, which, with great difficulty, I have chosen to be, I have not not feed that 'natural' side of my head.

 

From my reading here on these boards, I am convinced that I'm not alone in this. And adding the weight of 'thus says the Lord' to the already dangerously control freaky style of the books, makes them bad for people like me, and for others who for various reasons are inclined or terrified not to follow them absolutely.

 

I hear you, Carol. The title annoys me, too, LOL (and I really do hear you about the other things you mentioned)! And I used to be very influenced by stuff like that, because of a church I went to a long time ago for a few years. I still have to fight to *think* about what something or someone is telling me, esp. if it has "thus saith" attached to it. This sounds silly, but the grammar I'm learning (and logic) really is helping me to sort through some of these weightier issues from my past N. American church experiences. I filter a lot more now.

 

I guess I'm just trying to address the OP, to encourage her to look at the course/books herself and decide for herself. I've seen over the years the vehement reactions against the course/books/author, but I think it's important that people decide for themselves (like you articulated about yourself) instead of just going by what others think.

[mommaduck]

Actually, "Growing Kids God's Way" does not concern infants. Teaching children who are old enough to learn to start thinking of others before themselves is not abusive. "Baby Wise" does address infants, and "Baby Wise" teaches the mother how to feed her baby on a schedule. This can be abused, or it can be used as a tool to know when a baby needs to be fed. It's not abusive to feed your baby on a schedule, unless your schedule is too long and drawn out between feedings, which the book does not tell you to do. So, it's all in how you take the information and use it. They in no way intend for parents to abuse their children, as far as I know from reading their materials and taking the class. I don't know them personally, however. So, I can't speak to that. And, everyone I know who has taken the class uses the information and materials wisely and lovingly.

 

 

Preparation for Parenting is (was) the first in the GKGW series...it DOES concern infants. It taught that babies were self-centered creatures and we had to teach them that their concerns were secondary as they were "welcomed as only a part of the family". This was part of the scheduling ideas...to "train them".

 

Next was The Toddler Years followed by Growing Kids God's Way and the Teen Years.

[cin]

Dh and I took this class a few years ago with some good friends. We did get some good principles out of it. Mostly what I remember is gaining the mindset that parenting is not a set of techniques, it's teaching your kids to regard other people instead of being self-focused all the time. It's the principles I keep in mind, not so much the specific techniques. You could probably read the Ezzo Childwise, Pre-teen, and Teen books and get the same principles.

 

Sure, there is a lot of controversy over them, but there are some good things that can be gained from them, too. You just have to *think* your way through them, instead of accepting everything for your family. Just like everything else in life.

 

:iagree:

 

For example, they have you put the baby on a feeding schedule. Our Dr. told us our oldest dd was malnourished and she wanted her to get 6 bottles of formula a day. I agreed with the Dr. and ditched that part of the Ezzo book. Common sense told me that my baby's health was more important the a book's feeding schedule.

[kmacnchs]

I don't know how old your baby was but mine is 3 months old and is feeding 5-6x/day...and I follow prep for parenting. He is eating every 3-3.5 hrs and then about 10.5 hrs @ night.

 

Whenever I go to the doctor and they ask how often my babies are eating, I tell them and the doctor has always said they were eating as often as they should. They were surprised at how long they were sleeping at night (so soon) but I'm not sorry for that one! I'm a much happier mommy now that I get to sleep through the night :D

 

Oh, and by the way, the shrimp of my 3 kids is 80% (others are 98%+) and I nurse until they are 1 (or until I get preg). I say that only because many who are against "scheduling" (such an ugly word these days) say they are because they tried it and stopped producing milk. I have never had this problem and the Ezzos even address this problem and say to pump after you nurse, nurse more, etc. I just think it is a book full of very practical and helpful ideas ;)

[katemary63]

Infants CAN'T 'learn how to think of others first'. I think that is the whole point of the controversy. Infants have basic needs and they should be honoured. These authors really don't have the wisdom that one would expect from something called "God's way".

 

:iagree::iagree:

[JenniferB]

Preparation for Parenting is (was) the first in the GKGW series...it DOES concern infants. It taught that babies were self-centered creatures and we had to teach them that their concerns were secondary as they were "welcomed as only a part of the family". This was part of the scheduling ideas...to "train them".

 

Next was The Toddler Years followed by Growing Kids God's Way and the Teen Years.

 

 

I didn't take that class, so I would not have known that. My only experience is with the class titled "Growing Kids God's Way", and Babywise.

 

I'm sorry for your very negative experiences with your church and it's members. My church and GKGW experience has been just the opposite. The kids that were raised in our church, who's parents took the GKGW class, are now getting married, and they are such wonderful adults, who adore their parents, and serve in the church. They are exemplary adults. I know their parents, and they are very loving people. One thing our pastor said to us when we were about to embark upon taking the class was something like this, "this class teaches many techniques, but what it all boils down to is to think of others higher than yourself, and before you can teach that to your children, you need to walk that out in your own life." So, that is the filter upon which I learned everything I learned from GKGW. This could have skewed what I got out of the class for the better, and for this I'm grateful. If I hadn't read this thread I would have never suspected the GKGW class to be a catalyst for child abuse, because my experience has been very positive. I'm sorry for you mamaduck, and I'm glad you have found a better way for you and your children. :grouphug:

 

FWIW, regarding Babywise, scheduled feedings worked with 1 out of my 4 children. That one child slept through the night around 3 months old, and the rest of my children didn't sleep through the night in their own cribs until 9+ mos. I took this book as a tool that is really great if it works, and nothing more than that. I didn't even try it with my last baby, because I wanted to get all the snuggles I could get with him. So, I let him sleep in bed with me, and nursed him to his heart's content. Some would call that spoiling, and some would consider that the only way to mother a baby. It's not for one mother to judge another in little nuances like this. If a mother chooses to schedule feedings, or nurse her baby to his/her heart's content, then I believe they are both within the boundaries of good mothering.

[SonshineLearner]

"I did AP and my kids turned out just great!" or "I never used a schedule, nursed on demand, and it worked for me."

 

Maybe instead of calling it "AP" you could not refer to it as anything. Maybe instead of "nurse on demand" it would be called "nursed when the baby's tummy was empty."

 

I wouldn't be quiet, but that may be my problem. I don't see that Mary had a watch.... to watch! How would she know he was hungry? When he started moving around, and her mama instinct told her to put him to the breast, I bet that's just what she did.... And, if seems too much to use Jesus as an example.....you can use his siblings.

 

How did the siblings know when they were hungry, needed their diaper changed, etc?? Mary either looked, heard, smelled:-), etc.... No need to watch a clock or ask someone else.

 

Attachment Parenting has a bad rap for families who are into their children not demanding. I nursed on request, if that's a better term. When my children fussed, it was my job to find out why?? Why were they fussing??

 

I believe that Ezzo babies have that spark when you walk in the room (see the book...at least the Ezzo one I read) because they are still hopeful that there are open arms to hold them, warm br**asts to snuggle up to...and lovely mamas or gentle papas to coo to them.

 

Carrie:-)

[LarlaB]

Wow.

 

Just like any parenting book there is both good & bad. I think its unwise to categorically denounce or embrace the entirety of a book/author.

 

Laura

[Ellie]

My church and GKGW experience has been just the opposite.

Count yourself lucky. More than one church has split over GKGW.

 

If someone at my church brought up GKGW, I'd print the dozens of pages from the links I've shared here and give them to all the board members, pleading with them not to sponsor the class. If they did it anyway, it would be a deal breaker for me: I'd leave the church.

[CLHCO]

This is what I can tell you. Many, many mothers at my church use Babywise. They all have the book, they talk about it all the time and THIS is what they do....?? What more can I say. In my opinion, these babies are being abused. I have a very hard time holding my tongue, but I do except to say every so often, "I did AP and my kids turned out just great!" or "I never used a schedule, nursed on demand, and it worked for me."

 

Try reading this scripture to them. In Isaiah 66:10-13 God talks about Jerusalem as a nursing mother.

 

"Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad for her, all you who love her; rejoice greatly with her, all you who mourn over her. For you will nurse and be satisfied at her comforting breasts; you will drink deeply and delight in her overflowing abundance." For this is what the LORD says: "I will extend peace to her like a river, and the wealth of nations like a flooding stream; you will nurse and be carried on her arm and dandled on her knees. As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you; and you will be comforted over Jerusalem."

 

That's parenting God's way, when we actually see how He views the infant/mother relationship.

Edited July 14, 2009 by CLHCO

[Oak Knoll Mom]

Count yourself lucky. More than one church has split over GKGW.

 

If someone at my church brought up GKGW, I'd print the dozens of pages from the links I've shared here and give them to all the board members, pleading with them not to sponsor the class. If they did it anyway, it would be a deal breaker for me: I'd leave the church.

 

Thankfully, when someone tried to get our church to start teaching GKGW, we had a pediatrician on our session who nixed it right away.

[SonshineLearner]

Wow.

 

Just like any parenting book there is both good & bad. I think its unwise to categorically denounce or embrace the entirety of a book/author.

 

Laura

 

But, they have NO medical background. They have done a TON of damage. I really find NO good in their book. And this is from a person who can read the Pearl's book and smile at some of the sweet stories.

 

Leave feeding and sleeping infants to those who know them best. Their mamas!

 

The Ezzo's book it....well....not good. And, I'd leave a church if they did a class on it after being warned.

 

Carrie:-)

[BakersDozen]

I believe that Ezzo babies have that spark when you walk in the room (see the book...at least the Ezzo one I read) because they are still hopeful that there are open arms to hold them, warm br**asts to snuggle up to...and lovely mamas or gentle papas to coo to them.

I really hope I am reading this wrong. Are you saying that Ezzo babies are desperate for affection/attention? Or that they are neglected by unlovely mamas/papas? I've read and reread this and hope you will clarify what you are saying because if I read it right, I would offer you my 8 secure, happy, cuddled, nursed "babies" who know there are always open arms (can't claim the lovely mama thing but my dh is quite a looker ;)) and who were cooed to. If I am wrong in my interpretation of your post then please forgive me.

 

With regards to the schedule/clock thing, what we teach (gasp, yes we teach the Ezzo's books!!!) is balance, context, etc. We never, never teach CIO. We never teach to let the clock be the master. For us it is a guide (ie: "Megan is fussing, what time is it? Oh, she's been up for about an hour and a half, must be time for nap!"). I don't offer nursing as the first response to her fussing because that isn't always what she wants. This is what Prep teaches. If she's hungry, I feed her; if she's sleepy, she goes down for nap. Because of the predictability of her day (predictability combined with lots of flexibility and context) I can deduce her needs and act accordingly. My babies were chubby little cherubs, too; no supply issues with milk, either. :D I've had parents go to the extreme of scheduling and I call them on it harshly, then point them back to the book where it clearly states to not let the clock be the master.

 

My Ezzo baby just woke up...happy, too. And since she is hungry I will go feed her. ;)

[kmacnchs]

With regards to the schedule/clock thing, what we teach (gasp, yes we teach the Ezzo's books!!!) is balance, context, etc. We never, never teach CIO. We never teach to let the clock be the master. For us it is a guide (ie: "Megan is fussing, what time is it? Oh, she's been up for about an hour and a half, must be time for nap!"). I don't offer nursing as the first response to her fussing because that isn't always what she wants. This is what Prep teaches. If she's hungry, I feed her; if she's sleepy, she goes down for nap. Because of the predictability of her day (predictability combined with lots of flexibility and context) I can deduce her needs and act accordingly. My babies were chubby little cherubs, too; no supply issues with milk, either. :D I've had parents go to the extreme of scheduling and I call them on it harshly, then point them back to the book where it clearly states to not let the clock be the master.

 

Thank you! I think you said it perfectly. I guess I am just not one of those "natural" mothers so the clock helped me a lot. I use it the same way you described...

 

My 3 mo

"Why are you so fussy? Oh, well you have been up for a little over an hour. I think you're tired..." He is! He goes right to sleep and wakes up happy! Actually, now that he is rolling over, sometimes he wakes up crying and if it has not been 3 hrs yet, I just roll him back over in the position he started and he goes back to sleep right away (no crying). If I did not look at the clock, I may have felt he needed to be fed and that is NOT what he needed at that time. The clock/nor GKGW is not the enemy...it is just a TOOL to use.

[tefulbright]

I have been lurking on this forum for a while, but this is my very first post. I just wanted to say that a dear friend gave me BabyWise when I was pregnant with my first--with the encouragement to use common sense. I read the book and it made sooo much sense to me. I used it as the book suggested--as a guide, and my girl was sleeping through the night at 6 weeks. At 3 months, 12 hours. Hallelujah! It made so much difference in my ability to care for her when I could have a full night's sleep.

 

My next two boys were the same, though they were about 9 weeks when they slept through the night. None of my babies were undernourished, they were happy babies. Flexibility is the key. I didn't sit and stare at the clock, waiting for the next feeding. It's just a guide. I could plan my trips out, because I knew when the next feeding time would approximately be, when they would be ready for a nap,and when they were ready to play. It just made being a mama a whole lot more enjoyable.

 

One friend has six kids, another four. They were all babywise kids. They are great kids, happy, growing into beautiful young adults. I don't think being on a schedule as babies has hurt them one bit.:)

 

Thanks for listening. I love this board, even though I only read.

[Peek a Boo]

Try reading this scripture to them. In Isaiah 66:10-13 God talks about Jerusalem as a nursing mother.

 

"Rejoice with Jerusalem and be glad for her, all you who love her; rejoice greatly with her, all you who mourn over her. For you will nurse and be satisfied at her comforting breasts; you will drink deeply and delight in her overflowing abundance." For this is what the LORD says: "I will extend peace to her like a river, and the wealth of nations like a flooding stream; you will nurse and be carried on her arm and dandled on her knees. As a mother comforts her child, so will I comfort you; and you will be comforted over Jerusalem."

 

That's parenting God's way, when we actually see how He views the infant/mother relationship.

 

How does that conflict w/ Babywise or nursing when they wake up as opposed to go to sleep??????

 

This is exactly how these books get a bad wrap...there is NO place in their books where it says to let your child cry that long! I says to let your child cry a little bit when you put them down because some children need to cry a little to get some energy out before they settle down for a nap. The only time it talks about waking a baby up is when they are newborns and they should not go very long without eating or when they are toddlers and taking afternoon naps...to wake them up so they will be ready to go to bed at night at a decent time. This is very frustrating and makes me wonder what book they read and if they ever went to a GKGW class!

 

I agree. If they are letting their children cry for an hour and 45 minutes they need to re-adjust their schedule.

 

 

 

But, they have NO medical background. They have done a TON of damage.

 

Leave feeding and sleeping infants to those who know them best. Their mamas!

 

but lots of mamas have NO medical background either.

and lots of mamas have affirmed the scheduling. Including this one. That doesn't mean that everyone HAS to schedule, but to claim ABUSE simply because a child gets FED at a different time is pretty ........bad.

 

 

eta: and Mary didn't have a WATCH, but they had plenty of ways of keeping track of the hours of the day.

[CLHCO]

How does that conflict w/ Babywise or nursing when they wake up as opposed to go to sleep??????

 

 

It doesn't. The line of questions I believe I was responding to were to some women who have seen it applied to an extreme because mom turns off the brain and follows the book so not to spoil the child. She was discussing some of the neglect to be almost child abuse in her eyes and the personal hostility towards other ways of doing it. This verse simply shows that God does indeed consider nursing a form of comfort as much as just a method for food. It's a joy, not "just what you need and no more so get over it."

 

I never have a personal problem with someone gaining some insights from any book, even BabyWise. Shoot, I've gained from reading the Pearl's magazines, though I don't follow their methods. I do have an issue with it being implied firm scheduling is God's way without better evidence, especially regarding infants because very little in the Bible refers to that and none of it seems to suggest firm scheduling. We can quibble over Mary's lack of a watch but we don't know either way for certain. So, one can argue it's good from a pediatric or parenting expert point of view, but followers should never claim those that see otherwise as less godly. I don't know that Ezzo does, just some of the extreme followers most certainly believe that. The pressure to turn off the brain in church where it's practically gospel is high or you will be looked at as a "failure". Not all moms are that strong and some will parent out of fear of failing so such pressure is unkind at best, dangerous at worst.

 

On a level of older children, I take issue with those who get arrogant and follow any method mindlessly with the goal in mind of making perfect behaved children, instead of lovingly guiding children with an eternal desire to bring them to God, even when they claim that's the goal. By the way they talk only of outside behaviors, even those bragging of the great behavior of their children here on this thread, it doesn't convince me. NOT saying any are like this in their heart, just that this argument alone will not convince me. I know wonderful, loving children who are perfectly behaved. I know some who are behaving out of fear, and some who remind me of Eddie Haskel from Leave it to Beaver. Such parents remind me very much of the Pharisees who were into righteousness as a show but their hearts were far from God. Well behaved kids are a blessing, but not a showpiece for righteousness.

 

You see extremes on both sides, obviously, including the extreme AP moms with children who eat candy all day because "no" hurts their self esteem. They believe very nugget from a child's mouth is pure gold and innocent. (Uh, no.)

 

But what do I know? No one ever randomly complements me on my children's behavior. Of course, I can't suggest I always behave quietly in public myself. :tongue_smilie:

Edited July 14, 2009 by CLHCO

[Shelly in the Country]

I skimmed most of this thread, but wanted to chime in that my dh and I took the GKGW class years ago and my dh thought Ezzo was arrogant and tried to baptize his personal opinions on childrearing with Scripture. My dh's opinion was that Ezzo was trying to "create" a good heart in his children through the use of discipline. So we didn't care for it. I'm saddened to hear about his estrangement from his daughters.

[Joanne]

I believe that anything of actual parenting benefit in Ezzo materials (for any age) is available in better sources.

 

Sources that are not immersed in an adversarial parenting paradigm. Sources that are not mired in a quagmire of arrogance, controversy, patronizing, mother-dismissing drivel. Sources that are medically sound. Sources without murky, poor and flawed exegisis.

 

I do believe in trying to get something out of everything you read; that does not mean I believe you should read everything. ;)

[Marie in Oh]

I totally keep my mouth shut as I think that is is so devisive for churches to be polarized by this stupid issue of parental preference. If they want to schedule, fine. But don't frown on me for doing it differently-- I often get asked about how we do it and then they look flabbergasted that I don't do Ezzo. There are only a few of us AP types around my circle.

 

I know people look at me funny because my 8.5 mo baby has not been in the nursery yet, but when I go into the nursing mother's room at least once, sometimes twice on a Sunday morning to feed him, ;) I am saddened to hear all of the babies crying in thier cribs. I am not talking about a little fussing. This is full fledged despondant crying. I am sorry, but I will not allow that. After seven babies, you'd think I could write a book-- if so, it would be short-- something like "use your brain and your instinct and hold them while you can because it is such a short time in the scheme of things."

[Peek a Boo]

I I do have an issue with it being implied firm scheduling is God's way ......., but followers should never claim those that see otherwise as less godly.

 

On a level of older children, I take issue with those who get arrogant and follow any method mindlessly with the goal in mind of making perfect behaved children, instead of lovingly guiding children with an eternal desire to bring them to God, ...... Well behaved kids are a blessing, but not a showpiece for righteousness.

 

 

But what do I know? No one ever randomly complements me on my children's behavior. Of course, I can't suggest I always behave quietly in public myself. :tongue_smilie:

 

 

I agree! :tongue_smilie:

[mamamace]

Maybe someone has said this and I skipped over it, but just the title including "God's Way" is enough for me to toss it.

 

Who said there is "God's" way that applies to all parents and all children? Yes, God set up many principles, precepts, and so on, but so much of these parenting philosophies turn PREFERENCES into PRINCIPLES.

 

As a new mom who had never taken care of a baby before, Babywise seemed so great. Now as I look back, it contributed to postpartum issues, anxiety, and depression for me. Wished I'd never read it. I realize that my situation is not what everyone encounters, and that my personality played a role in how I interpreted the book. But I believe there are many unknowing, unprepared parents out there who accept what they read as gospel truth instead of thinking for themselves. When your world is rocked by the arrival of a baby, you just want someone to tell you "how to do it." It's easy to drink the kool-aid I think.