s/o What about the Ezzos?

[Rosy]

All this Pearl-talk has made me wonder what people think of Gary Ezzo (Babywise/Growing Kids God's Way). IIRC, there have been babies that have died from hyperscheduling. I benefitted from Babywise personally, though I did take a less rigid approach than what he describes, but I know there have been cases where common sense wasn't used and newborns (mostly) have gotten sick or died.

 

Anyway, I'm just curious--do you hold Ezzo responsible? To be fair, I think he has adjusted his recommendations over the years to be a little easier on mom & baby.

[hornblower]

as someone in the field of human lactation, yes, I do hold him responsible for giving very unsafe advice. Yes, he has moderated it a bit - I think it was due to a lot of pressure from heath professionals and statements from various associations which warned of the dangers of his methods.

[smrtmama]

All this Pearl-talk has made me wonder what people think of Gary Ezzo (Babywise/Growing Kids God's Way). IIRC, there have been babies that have died from hyperscheduling. I benefitted from Babywise personally, though I did take a less rigid approach than what he describes, but I know there have been cases where common sense wasn't used and newborns (mostly) have gotten sick or died.

 

Anyway, I'm just curious--do you hold Ezzo responsible? To be fair, I think he has adjusted his recommendations over the years to be a little easier on mom & baby.

 

I do hold him responsible. He's despicable, has no knowledge of physiological breastfeeding, and I think his books should be pulled from shelves. Even his former publisher agrees, as they dumped him.

[BakersDozen]

I also benefitted greatly from Babywise/Prep for Parenting. I never had a single issue with BFing except for #3 whom I demand-fed...that was a nightmare until I bagged the idea and went back to a routine (using flexibility and context, of course ;)). I don't hold any author responsible for the actions of those who read their book because IMO it is the reader's responsibility to use common sense and decide for themselves/their family what to use and what not to use.

[ThatCyndiGirl]

Yep, just as culpable in my book. His books are dangerous trash that new moms/parents should never be subjected to.

[TXMary2]

I am not very familiar with the Ezzos.....what exactly do they advocate? I have a friend who rigidly followed their books and today their daughter has serious health problems. I am just wondering if there is a connection.

[smrtmama]

I am not very familiar with the Ezzos.....what exactly do they advocate? I have a friend who rigidly followed their books and today their daughter has serious health problems. I am just wondering if there is a connection.

 

If her health issues are related to eating or weight gain in any way, it's very likely it's related.

[NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too]

I also benefitted greatly from Babywise/Prep for Parenting. I never had a single issue with BFing except for #3 whom I demand-fed...that was a nightmare until I bagged the idea and went back to a routine (using flexibility and context, of course ;)). I don't hold any author responsible for the actions of those who read their book because IMO it is the reader's responsibility to use common sense and decide for themselves/their family what to use and what not to use.

 

:iagree:

 

BTW, we had great luck following the sleep/eating/scheduling advice in Babywise. Worked with both boys. I never had trouble with b'feeding or weight gain/thriving and I started out with 6-7 lb babies.

[smrtmama]

:iagree:

 

BTW' date=' we had great luck following the sleep/eating/scheduling advice in Babywise. Worked with both boys. I never had trouble with b'feeding or weight gain/thriving and I started out with 6-7 lb babies.[/quote']

 

It's great that you two didn't have problems with your babies, but most babies need to be demand fed. Failing to do so can create serious problems.

[Pip]

Where we lived in CA, the Ezzos were very popular. We had their books and even took a class on their methods. They seem to completely miss the point that babies are not robots but little people. They couch their philosophy in calls to not be cruel, but many people miss that and they didn't seem to realize that. They also failed to realize that babies go from a warm secure environment where they are fed whenever they want to putting them on a ridgid schedule using their methods. I found it funny that they made their videos with another couple that ultimately ditched them and their methods. I also am under the impression they were kicked out of their church (John MacArthur's maybe?)

 

The only things I thought were valid were common sense things (don't forget to feed your marriage so you have enough to give to the kids, make sure your kids are polite and are aware that their actions can affect others) that we could have figured out ourselves but the rest seemed Draconian and arrogant.

 

One of my kids put herself on a schedule basically. The rest, not so easy. They slept through the night more quickly being demand fed during the day. My pediatrician and the time said that was the best way to encourage sleep at night. Again, they are little people.

 

They've kinda dropped off the radar, haven't they?

Edited March 4, 2010 by Pip

[Mom-ninja.]

as someone in the field of human lactation, yes, I do hold him responsible for giving very unsafe advice. Yes, he has moderated it a bit - I think it was due to a lot of pressure from heath professionals and statements from various associations which warned of the dangers of his methods.

 

:iagree:

 

The Ezzos are idiots. A baby is born with the instinct to listen to its own hunger/thirst cues, and the Ezzo method destroys that. A lot of eating problems are based on that people don't recognize real hunger cues. People treat thirst as hunger and/or eat according to what the clock says and not what their body says. It's not a healthy way to eat at all. Especially for children.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Kleine Hexe

[smrtmama]

.

 

They've kinda dropped off the radar, haven't they?

 

Well, after the AAP issued a statement that schedule feeding was dangerous and linked with FTT and infant death, he really stopped being quite so vocal. He was also dropped by his publisher and now self-publishes his books (though he's created a vanity press to make it appear that another publishing company picked him up).

[AuntieM]

I also benefitted greatly from Babywise/Prep for Parenting. I never had a single issue with BFing except for #3 whom I demand-fed...that was a nightmare until I bagged the idea and went back to a routine (using flexibility and context, of course ;)). I don't hold any author responsible for the actions of those who read their book because IMO it is the reader's responsibility to use common sense and decide for themselves/their family what to use and what not to use.

 

I am another that benefited from the Ezzo's ideas that one could actually have a manageable plan for caring for your newborn. Other mothering books I read as I awaited the birth of my first child seemed rather vague about exactly what to do. There was a whole lot of "your natural instincts will kick in," but nothing like the plan that I (my own personality and way of doing things) needed. On top of that, I was an utter failure at breastfeeding. I was uptight, my first baby was calm and undemanding... he was losing weight and would have starved if left on his own schedule.

 

However, like any plan, Babywise must be administered with common sense. Unfortunately, I have met/heard of many new parents who have been so dedicated to the plan as written that they failed to let logic and good sense prevail.

 

I will admit that I never had 100% peace about some of the theological reasons given to support their positions. But I must say that I survived 3 in diapers at the same time with a calm attitude due in part to their methods. I haven't read any of their stuff, though, for about 10 years now.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I read one of their secular books which I hear are less stringent and dogmatic. But I don't know if that is actually true since I've never compared it to the religious version. I benefited from the basic idea of having a schedule but did not check out my common sense to feed my baby if he/she really needed it.

[Suzanne in ABQ]

Just so you know, this topic has been banned, and deleted, and harshly "moderated away" in the past. Folks get very heated, very quickly. Reasonable dialogue seems to be impossible regarding the Ezzos.

 

Tread lightly, that's all I'm saying. . .

[Rosy]

I read one of their secular books which I hear are less stringent and dogmatic. But I don't know if that is actually true since I've never compared it to the religious version. I benefited from the basic idea of having a schedule but did not check out my common sense to feed my baby if he/she really needed it.

 

That was me too. I needed some structure and I needed to know that I could put my kids to bed when they were still awake and let them fall asleep on their own. It seems silly now but I wasn't hearing that from anyone except a few friends who had also read Babywise. I know some people who swear by Growing Kids God's Way, and frankly, their kids didn't turn out the way I want my kids to turn out, with a few exceptions. Their kids had some good external behaviors down pat but were sneaky and disrespectful, and didn't listen to anyone who wasn't holding a paddle.

 

Interesting. Gary Ezzo doesn't seem as bad as the Pearls to me, and I can't figure out why.

[BakersDozen]

Just so you know, this topic has been banned, and deleted, and harshly "moderated away" in the past. Folks get very heated, very quickly. Reasonable dialogue seems to be impossible regarding the Ezzos.

 

Tread lightly, that's all I'm saying. . .

Thanks for the reminder. I am walking away from the computer for a while between reading posts as I don't want to upset this apple cart. I had to laugh at the tag on this post, too. :D

 

I just flipped through my book again (my dog-eared, much highlighted, notes on most pages book) and was struck again by the word "flexibility" (in italics) and rigidity (spoken against, btw). Babywise isn't for everyone yet it isn't for no one, either, IMO (hope that made sense). When I had serious nursing issues with my firstborn it was the information I got from the book (not LLL) that helped get my milk supply back. There are a lot of things I appreciate in the book: history of feeding philosophies, focus on marriage (love couch time!), suggestions for BFing/milk supply. There are things I do not like in the book (time for letting baby cry).

 

Unfortunately, I have met/heard of many new parents who have been so dedicated to the plan as written that they failed to let logic and good sense prevail.

 

I've run into parents like this, too, and it is frustrating.

[Ellie]

Yes.

 

I find the Ezzos' "recommendations" in Babywise and Growing Kids God's Way to be more abhorrent than anything I read in the Pearls' books.

 

::puts on the Xena Warrior Princess flame-proof armor and steps back to wait for the flame thowers::

[BakersDozen]

I find the Ezzos' "recommendations" in Babywise and Growing Kids God's Way to be more abhorrent than anything I read in the Pearls' books.

 

::puts on the Xena Warrior Princess flame-proof armor and steps back to wait for the flame thowers::

No flames here but thanks for the laugh - not from your opinion of the Ezzos but the image of Xena warrior. :D

[KnitWit]

Absolutely NOT an Ezzo fan here.

[Mrs Mungo]

All this Pearl-talk has made me wonder what people think of Gary Ezzo (Babywise/Growing Kids God's Way). IIRC, there have been babies that have died from hyperscheduling. I benefitted from Babywise personally, though I did take a less rigid approach than what he describes, but I know there have been cases where common sense wasn't used and newborns (mostly) have gotten sick or died.

 

Anyway, I'm just curious--do you hold Ezzo responsible? To be fair, I think he has adjusted his recommendations over the years to be a little easier on mom & baby.

 

 

YES!!! Especially if you have every listened to the lectures they used to give in churches. UGH!

 

as someone in the field of human lactation, yes, I do hold him responsible for giving very unsafe advice. Yes, he has moderated it a bit - I think it was due to a lot of pressure from heath professionals and statements from various associations which warned of the dangers of his methods.

 

:iagree:

[Mrs Mungo]

Just so you know, this topic has been banned, and deleted, and harshly "moderated away" in the past. Folks get very heated, very quickly. Reasonable dialogue seems to be impossible regarding the Ezzos.

 

Tread lightly, that's all I'm saying. . .

 

On other parenting boards I've been on in the past the ezzos, the pearls, spanking, debating working moms v. sahm, debating breastfeeding v. bottlefeeding, debating extended breastfeeding were all topics that were banned as discussion topics.

[LisaKinVA]

My oldest child was put into danger by.... my local la leche consultant. I wasn't producing milk. I started off fine, without issues, but by the time my son was 3 months old I had a very sharp decline. I was told,

 

"just because you don't "feel" like you producing, the baby is getting enough."

 

"it's a growth spurt."

 

"don't supplement, at all breastmilk is enough." So, I dropped the one bottle a day I was giving him.

 

"take these herbs, drink this tincture... that should fix the problem." However, the tone was that she thought it was all in my head.

 

"he's probably got gas" to my complaints about him latching on, nursing hard, giving up and crying... then trying again.

 

He was my first baby... I had never BF before. And all of these things sounded "okay."

 

However, the last one really had me concerned. The child didn't act like he had gas, he seemed HUNGRY.

 

I had read the Ezzo books, and used the charts religiously those early weeks (the charts which you used to track the # of wet, or dirty diapers). Using those charts I *knew* -- not just suspected -- that my gut instinct was right, and my baby was HUNGRY. Not gassy, not just a "growth spurt."

 

I grabbed the bottles, and the formula and FED my baby. He became happy and content. No amount of finger-wagging, scornful, head-shaking lactation consultants, sister in laws or mothers changed my mind. It was LONELY out there, I tell you.

 

Because in their minds, I had given up. It took my tracking the actual wet diapers (decline in #) to get ANYONE to really pay attention. Even still, they found ways to say, "well, I bet if you had just given it one more day... your milk supply would have been just fine, but I understand." :tongue_smilie:

 

Later, I discovered that I had a hormone issue, which took four children to get passed. It had nothing to do with scheduling or demand feeding -- it was an imbalance.

 

But, as a result, I won't walk in or recommend la leche to any one. Now, to be fair, the la leche site has very qualified statements "most people..." kind of thing. However, when dealing with my particular consultant, she hadn't seen anyone who had this problem and was "unwilling" to consider it might be something out of the norm.

 

In sum... extreme views can be dangerous, no matter who is spouting them. And new moms, who have zero support systems are vulnerable to those views REGARDLESS as to their level of education, whether they are demand feeding, or follow a flexible schedule.

[Jennifer in MI]

My oldest child was put into danger by.... my local la leche consultant. I wasn't producing milk. I started off fine, without issues, but by the time my son was 3 months old I had a very sharp decline. I was told,

 

"just because you don't "feel" like you producing, the baby is getting enough."

 

"it's a growth spurt."

 

"don't supplement, at all breastmilk is enough." So, I dropped the one bottle a day I was giving him.

 

"take these herbs, drink this tincture... that should fix the problem." However, the tone was that she thought it was all in my head.

 

"he's probably got gas" to my complaints about him latching on, nursing hard, giving up and crying... then trying again.

 

He was my first baby... I had never BF before. And all of these things sounded "okay."

 

However, the last one really had me concerned. The child didn't act like he had gas, he seemed HUNGRY.

 

I had read the Ezzo books, and used the charts religiously those early weeks (the charts which you used to track the # of wet, or dirty diapers). Using those charts I *knew* -- not just suspected -- that my gut instinct was right, and my baby was HUNGRY. Not gassy, not just a "growth spurt."

 

I grabbed the bottles, and the formula and FED my baby. He became happy and content. No amount of finger-wagging, scornful, head-shaking lactation consultants, sister in laws or mothers changed my mind. It was LONELY out there, I tell you.

 

Because in their minds, I had given up. It took my tracking the actual wet diapers (decline in #) to get ANYONE to really pay attention. Even still, they found ways to say, "well, I bet if you had just given it one more day... your milk supply would have been just fine, but I understand." :tongue_smilie:

 

Later, I discovered that I had a hormone issue, which took four children to get passed. It had nothing to do with scheduling or demand feeding -- it was an imbalance.

 

But, as a result, I won't walk in or recommend la leche to any one. Now, to be fair, the la leche site has very qualified statements "most people..." kind of thing. However, when dealing with my particular consultant, she hadn't seen anyone who had this problem and was "unwilling" to consider it might be something out of the norm.

 

In sum... extreme views can be dangerous, no matter who is spouting them. And new moms, who have zero support systems are vulnerable to those views REGARDLESS as to their level of education, whether they are demand feeding, or follow a flexible schedule.

 

I am SO sorry you went through this with LLL. Your Leader definitely should have listened to you regarding the number of wet and dirty diapers. That's one of the basics! :grouphug::grouphug: When I counsel women going through this sort of thing, a basic rule is to feed the baby!!!! If your baby wasn't gaining and didn't have the right number of wet/dirty diapers, then you should've been told to supplement first. Getting baby fed is the number one priority. Maintaining the breastfeeding relationship is second. I'm glad you went with your instinct! :grouphug:

 

Now, do you mind sharing with me what the hormonal imbalance was and how you found out about it? I want to keep myself educated so I can be more helpful to the next woman I meet who may be in your situation. PM me if you'd prefer!

[MelanieM]

I have owned about 20 copies of Babywise. This is because I buy it any time I see it in a used bookstore so I can recycle it and save some poor unsuspecting soul from the horrible advice it contains. I have a dream of someday repurposing all that wasted paper by using it to make my own handmade sheets and writing love lists on the pages. A much better use of trees.

[Mrs Mungo]

I am SO sorry you went through this with LLL. Your Leader definitely should have listened to you regarding the number of wet and dirty diapers. That's one of the basics! :grouphug::grouphug: When I counsel women going through this sort of thing, a basic rule is to feed the baby!!!! If your baby wasn't gaining and didn't have the right number of wet/dirty diapers, then you should've been told to supplement first. Getting baby fed is the number one priority. Maintaining the breastfeeding relationship is second. I'm glad you went with your instinct! :grouphug:

 

I agree. Some LLLLeaders cannot grasp that there *are* times things just don't work the way they should. Feeding the baby is always rule number one if baby is showing obvious signs of hunger.

[KnitWit]

I have owned about 20 copies of Babywise. This is because I buy it any time I see it in a used bookstore so I can recycle it and save some poor unsuspecting soul from the horrible advice it contains. I have a dream of someday repurposing all that wasted paper by using it to make my own handmade sheets and writing love lists on the pages. A much better use of trees.

 

:) And I thought I was the only one who did stuff like that. ::snicker::

[Heather in WI]

I haven't read any of his religious books, so I can't comment on that, but when you actually read Babywise, it's very different from what is portrayed by many people on the internet.

 

It worked awesomely for me and my three boys ... all of whom I breastfed exclusively for the first year. They are all happy and healthy. :-)

[KnitWit]

I just want to say, for the record, I read Babywise, just to see if anything changed for the better, because 19/20 years ago, my church did GKGW and actually had the Ezzo's COME.

 

I gave them a fair chance...and I am NO fan.

 

I just thought I'd share that, since it seems that sometimes if we disagree with something, it's assumed we don't really KNOW what it is.

 

:)

[Joanne]

The parenting advice is awful.

 

The baby advice is developmentally innappropriate.

 

The sleep training expectations are awful and produce stress hormones in babies.

 

The "Christian" rhetoric on the primacy of the marriage relationship is icky (the choices aren't either or)

 

The Biblical\Scriptural perspective is warped and twisted.

 

The biomedical advice is counter to the functioning of God's design for breastfeeding.

 

The classes, groups and leadership have cultish elements.

 

His character is not respectable.

[Guest Dulcimeramy]

I don't care how much good they may have done someone, or how wise their teachings sound to some people. I don't take parenting advice from people who have zero relationship with their adult children. Why would I use their methods if I am 100% unimpressed with their results?

 

The Ezzo's daughters have confirmed that they have no relationship with their parents. One daughter said that they had the same issues that others have raised with her father's character.

 

How do you have a family ministry with no family? What other credentials would matter?

[rockermom]

In a fit of sleepless frustration (and many internet recommendations) I read and subsequently tried to implement the scheduling from Babywise. My son let me know that he had different ideas. (He was born strong-willed, lol.)

 

I b/f him on demand and have no regrets. He didn't want to eat when he woke.. he wanted to eat and then sleep. He was at ease with a full tummy. I was at ease (although sleep-deprived) with a happy, healthy baby.

[Jean in Newcastle]

I really wonder if the disconnect between people who hate it and thought it somewhat helpful isn't because he has a religious version and a secular one? The secular one that I read did not have Christian rhetoric or scripture verses or perspective. It had recommended a loose schedule and went out of its way to say that you should not be religiously tied to it. What I've heard of the religious version and classes is not something I would be for at all.

 

P.S. even though I followed the schedule somewhat when my babies were older, I did not follow it when they were tiny because it didn't fit their needs.

[swimmermom3]

I am SO sorry you went through this with LLL. Your Leader definitely should have listened to you regarding the number of wet and dirty diapers. That's one of the basics! :grouphug::grouphug: When I counsel women going through this sort of thing, a basic rule is to feed the baby!!!! If your baby wasn't gaining and didn't have the right number of wet/dirty diapers, then you should've been told to supplement first. Getting baby fed is the number one priority. Maintaining the breastfeeding relationship is second. I'm glad you went with your instinct! :grouphug:

 

Now, do you mind sharing with me what the hormonal imbalance was and how you found out about it? I want to keep myself educated so I can be more helpful to the next woman I meet who may be in your situation. PM me if you'd prefer!

 

Jennifer, thank you for adding this in. For my first experience with the LLL, I had the Nursing Nazi and the experience was belittling and unhelpful. For the second child, I was hiding under the covers when the LLL person came in. She was wonderful. It took her all of 2 seconds to grasp that a baby that was over 3 weeks early needed to up his glucose level immediately. She personally fed my son his bottle and chatted with me all the while. She had so much common sense and the natural ability to put people at ease, that it wows me to this day. Sorry about the sidetrack. Your post just brought up old memories.

 

Also, in those early days, schedule feeding and severe jaundice do not go together.

[lovetobehome]

This book (along with TTUAC) was given to me before my first child was born. I was young and clueless, and everyone told me this was the BEST book and to just follow it and I would get rest and sleep and it would be good for the baby. I let my poor firstborn cry and cry and cry, alone in his crib, determined that if I did not teach him a schedule from early on, it would be bad for everyone. I wish I had that time back. I parented my other children very, VERY differently. I go out of my way to warn new parents about this awful book. This one, and the TTUAC. Both were given to me by older moms who I respected, and I thought they had all the answers.

Now, when I know someone who is having a baby, I make them a baby carrier or direct them to http://www.thebabywearer.com. Hold that baby!!!

I am saddened that so many new, young moms read this garbage and take it to heart, as I did.

[TravelingChris]

I have never read any of those Ezzo books. I never breastfed because of my own medical issues. That said, with at least one of mine, I had to schedule feedings to make sure she was eating, not to deprive her of anything. My third was my smallest and while full-term, she wasn't that interested in eating. SHe was a very content baby and didn't cry much. If I waited for her to cry for food, she would have been FTT. As it was, I made sure I fed her enough by making sure she ate at least every _ hours.

 

Another one of mine, my biggest (6lbs. 11 oz.), ate more than the doctors recommended. She wanted more and she wasn't gaining too much weight. In fact, she was and continues to this day to be about 20% in weight. Back then and even today, she eats more calories than could be expected. She is severely ADHD and she used those calories up and I guess she did as a baby too. I didn't listen to the doctor who recommended feeding her less and I am glad I didn't.

 

Then I had doctors who wanted me to alter my somewhat older kids (toddlers and pre-schoolers) diet so that instead of OJ they drink grape juice and instead of whole milk on cereals, they have half and half. I didn't do that either. They were skinny, not losing weight, just low on the curve. I hate one size fits all recommendations.

[kmacnchs]

I think it is insteresting that people lump the Pearls & Ezzos into the same camp. I can see why but for me, they are TOTALLY different! From what I've heard, (take note I have *never* read the Pearls' books) the Pearls tell you to spank from an early age. The Ezzos say NOT to until they are 18 mo at least (they give other recommendations that are more suitable for pre-toddlers).

 

As far as bfing, I am getting ready to wean my 11mo (I am tired of wrestling w/him to sit still long enough to bf - I don't know how you all do it with toddlers bfing!). I bf'd my dd1 until I got pg (10 mo) and dd2 until I got pg (12 mo). I followed the Ezzos' book and I have FAT babies and children whose weight is from 80-95+%.

 

I am a very scheduled person and it was difficult for me to follow the Ezzo's advice to NOT watch the clock! They have a whole chapter on using the clock AND hunger clues (*not* just the clock) and they give a whole LIST of reasons why to feed before it is "time" (growth spurt, for example). I was reminded many times by the book that my kids are *not* robots and I cannot expect them to go 3hrs just because that is what I want.

 

I truly don't understand how/why people say that Ezzos promote hyper scheduling when that is what their book *explicitly* teaches against!

[G5052]

There is huge danger in parenting by a book, not by what you know in your heart or what wise people who truly know the situation can advise you.

 

I'm still thankful for the doctor who told me, "Yes, he's fussier than some babies, but we're all different, he's thriving, and this is not forever. Accept who he is and go with it."

 

When have you seen that in a book?

[Mrs Mungo]

am a very scheduled person and it was difficult for me to follow the Ezzo's advice to NOT watch the clock! They have a whole chapter on using the clock AND hunger clues (*not* just the clock) and they give a whole LIST of reasons why to feed before it is "time" (growth spurt, for example). I was reminded many times by the book that my kids are *not* robots and I cannot expect them to go 3hrs just because that is what I want.

 

I truly don't understand how/why people say that Ezzos promote hyper scheduling when that is what their book *explicitly* teaches against!

 

This is *only* in more recent editions of the book, after MUCH publicized criticism from the AAP and their own church.

[kmacnchs]

There is huge danger in parenting by a book, not by what you know in your heart or what wise people who truly know the situation can advise you.

 

I get made fun of and shunned all the time for following Babywise b/c of what you are saying but I somehow managed to get pg but never had that "motherly instinct". People say, "why don't you just feed them when they are hungry?" Well, I learned from the Ezzos' book that they may not be hungry just b/c they cry - they may be hungry, have a dirty diaper, are hurt in some way, or just want to be held...I am thankful I had somewhere to learn that common sense that I did not have on my own. I have it now, but then again, I have had 3 babies - not sure what I would have done with my 1st (or 2nd for that matter) if I did not have the Ezzos as a sort of litmus test...

[Murphy101]

I have a very dear friend who follows GKGW to the letter and has since they found out they were pregnant with their first.

 

I love her dearly. I love her kids.

 

We would probably agree that my kids and her kids behave equally as well. (or not pending the moment! ;) )

 

But I really dislike GKGW.

 

My God is a God of comfort and healing. He is also an awesome enginneer. I simply do not believe he created babies to be breastfed on a schedule or created cries just to cry out.

 

I am okay with spanking appropriately and when appropriate.

 

I just can't picture a crying baby Jesus in the bed some night and Mary looking at Joseph and saying, "I just nursed him 20 minutes ago. He'll have to cry it out because I need my sleep!"

 

I have told her my problem starts with the very name of Growing Kids Gods Way.

 

#1. What hubris to presume they know Gods way for every child/parent!

 

#2. God only had two kids with no peers, tv, or grandparents to mess things up and He still couldn't make them obey. I'm sure he did his best to properly train them and was consistant. I can't expect to do better than God.

[Mrs Mungo]

What the experts (of various types) have to say:

 

http://www.ezzo.info/Aney/drmcclain.pdf

 

http://www.salon.com/life/feature/1998/08/cov_06feature.html

 

http://www.ezzo.info/Aney/aneyaap.htm

[KnitWit]

The Ezzo's material has been revised several times over the years, and yes, like Mrs. Mungo (? I think) said, it has been in response to extreme controversy.

 

Here is a timeline showing many changes and issues.

 

http://www.ezzo.info/Timeline/timeline1.htm

[Murphy101]

Sorry baby kicked the phone while nursing and it posted before I was done.

 

My point was that God is perfect but we aren't. He can love and guide perfectly, but that looks different for every child. Some dc just need more or in different ways. The problem with every book, whether secular or Christian, is that they all ignore this fact. They all want you to reduce your view of your child to what they view as the clinical median, hence the oft use proviso word of "most" rather than "all".

 

But not a single one of my kids is "most". They are who they are. All if who they are needs to nurse every 20 minutes - then I have the choice to mother that dc how that dc needs me or not. I choose to meet that need.

[BikeBookBread]

Please don't throw tomatoes at me.

 

I was a scheduler with both of my girls, although I had never picked up a copy of either version of Ezzo's system. It kind of just happened on its own (although I did read Weisbluth's book, "Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child" which did set me in the direction of sleep scheduling initially). Both girls thrived on scheduling, and still remain very organized, and schedule-dependent to this day; they are happiest when they know what is going to happen next. My oldest goes to far as to beg to know what "the surprise is" because she says that surprises make her "nervous".

 

THAT BEING SAID, I think they liked scheduling BECAUSE it fit with their natural rhythms. This fit with my makeup as well. I didn't do "cry it out" to the extreme, but a little bit of crying at naptime, bedtime or the middle of the night didn't send me running into their room to scoop them up; I always checked to see what was the matter, though. I did put them down for naps and bedtime at relatively consistent times every day and night...I watched for their sleep signals and figured out pretty quickly that they had very regular and predictable sleep cycles... Not every child is this way, and I recognize this. Other friends that tried a more scheduled-sleep approach did not have success, and even so, their kids are just fine now.

 

But here's the "don't throw tomatoes" part: every single person I know who follows/has followed Ezzo showed signs of pretty serious rigidity and controlling behavior outside/before parenthood. (I know quite a few.) I think perhaps these people sought out and found this child-rearing book/system because it matched their personalities... I witnessed one homeschooling parent in particular who was a MAJOR Ezzo follower and proponent slam her fist into the dining room table commanding her son to "understand" his math. :confused:

 

I'm not going to discuss the "theology" within the books, becauseI just don't know enough about it. However, I don't think I would agree with it, given what I have read about the Ezzos. Also, I didn't know they had revised their beliefs on scheduling feeding until I read Mrs. Mungo's post below. I'm glad they did...the teachings seemed extreme to me. I can understand feeding on a schedule, but never deviating from this schedule, no matter what, was crazy.

 

For those who wish to read further, the highly-regarded Tulip Girl blog has some very good critiques of the Ezzo methods.

 

:leaving: Ducking and running now.

[Laurie4b]

All this Pearl-talk has made me wonder what people think of Gary Ezzo (Babywise/Growing Kids God's Way). IIRC, there have been babies that have died from hyperscheduling. I benefitted from Babywise personally, though I did take a less rigid approach than what he describes, but I know there have been cases where common sense wasn't used and newborns (mostly) have gotten sick or died.

 

Anyway, I'm just curious--do you hold Ezzo responsible? To be fair, I think he has adjusted his recommendations over the years to be a little easier on mom & baby.

 

Babywise, being secular, is less damaging. Growing Kids God's Way makes it clear that you are being disobedient to God if you don't schedule. If you attend a seminar, you're required to sign a paper saying humans don't have instincts (to preempt women from tossing Ezzo ideas based on their inner drive to feed their baby when it was hungry & crying. )

 

I listened to a whole set of tapes after having been approached by two new moms for help with Ezzo. One was being challenged by Ezzo devotees and wanted to know what I thought. The other thought I was going to tell her to stick to Ezzo although her ped had told her the baby was seriously underweight and she had to feed on demand. Her husband said the ped wasn't a Christian and she should listen to Ezzo. (Back then, the Ezzos redefined feeding "on demand" to mean anytime the baby cried., then mocked it. The medical community's definition of "on demand" meant and means "when hungry." ) I got the tapes from a homeschool mother (before I homeschooled) who had gotten them at a conference. Other homeschoolers had the tapes, too, and talked our pastor into a pilot class on Ezzo, but as nonhomeschoolers from the church got in on it, significant critique came out. That was the last time it was taught.

 

BTW, the mocking of alternate points of view is characteristic both of Ezzos and Pearls.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Laurie4b

[kmacnchs]

This is *only* in more recent editions of the book, after MUCH publicized criticism from the AAP and their own church.

 

Oh, well, then I guess I'm glad I had kids when I did :confused::D

 

Isn't it saying something that they reworded/changed some things when they saw people not using their methods properly rather than laughing at the naysayers? (humble(Ezzos) vs. arrogant (Pearls) imo)

[Mrs Mungo]

Oh, well, then I guess I'm glad I had kids when I did :confused::D

 

Isn't it saying something that they reworded/changed some things when they saw people not using their methods properly rather than laughing at the naysayers? (humble(Ezzos) vs. arrogant (Pearls) imo)

 

Changing something because you are threatened with multiple lawsuits, criticized by the medical community and because your own church has disavowed you isn't exactly what I think as humble. It's covering your rear.

[kmacnchs]

Changing something because you are threatened with multiple lawsuits, criticized by the medical community and because your own church has disavowed you isn't exactly what I think as humble. It's covering your rear.

 

I didn't know the ins & outs of *why* they changed some things, much less why they changed them - I was just giving them the benefit of the doubt...the same thing I try to do when everyone bashes the Pearls, though that is a little harder to do as they seem much more abrasive...

[teamturner]

I haven't read all the replies and I don't want to add to any debate. However, I had twins and if I hadn't scheduled them, I don't know how I would have survived. I demand fed my others somewhat, but I was more of a scheduled-type breastfeeder.

 

That said, I did glean some from the Ezzo's, particularly the parts about twins. Although I think they err in trying to put theology in with baby care.