s/o What about the Ezzos?

[Mrs Mungo]

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.

 

I don't think anyone is saying that having a schedule that meets mom and baby (or babies) needs is inherently wrong.

[HRAAB]

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.

 

I breastfed my twins on demand. It was my choice, my dh and I were committed, and he helped as much as he could. It was not easy, and looking back, with a clearer mind, I see how hard it was on me physically due to lack of sleep. (My memory is rather muddy.) I don't regret it, but I would never, ever tell another mother she should be doing the same. Common sense and what is best for mom and siblings has to enter into the picture. I'm sure you made the right choice for your family.

[teamturner]

I guess I thought that might be the case when I read this post:

 

Quote:

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.

 

Reply:

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.

[Mrs Mungo]

I guess I thought that might be the case when I read this post:

 

Quote:

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.

 

Reply:

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.

 

I didn't say it but I think I can see where she's coming from and I'll try to rephrase it from *my own* POV.

 

Demand feeding helps ensure that there is adequate supply. Babies nurse more frequently when they are going through a growth spurt, which stimulates supply as necessary. *However* as long as moms are aware of this and adjust schedules accordingly, if/when needed, scheduling is not a problem.

 

However, the Ezzos dismiss demand feeding as "child-led parenting" and un-Biblical because you're allowing the child's sin-nature to control you. This is why they are so often compared with the Pearls. They insist in their early books and lectures that extremely strict scheduling is the ONLY way to go and one should never deviate, even if the child cries because you'll be giving in to the child's inherently sinful nature.

[teamturner]

I breastfed my twins on demand. It was my choice, my dh and I were committed, and he helped as much as he could. It was not easy, and looking back, with a clearer mind, I see how hard it was on me physically due to lack of sleep. (My memory is rather muddy.) I don't regret it, but I would never, ever tell another mother she should be doing the same. Common sense and what is best for mom and siblings has to enter into the picture. I'm sure you made the right choice for your family.

 

I didn't realize it at the time (muddy memories and all), ;) but it's a miracle I was able to breastfeed at all. I was in ICU for a few days following my twin's birth with liver failure. Once I was getting better, I started using a pump (while still in ICU). My twins were very much used to the bottle and the first time I nursed one of them, he lost weight during the nursing. After we got home, I had to build up my milk supply w/the pump and make sure they got nurished properly w/formula. I had to use bottles in the beginning which IMO is much more difficult than b'feeding. Then after they were settled back in bed, I still had to pump. I rented a scale so I could weigh each baby before a nursing and would top him off w/formula or pumped milk. I was getting about 30-45 mins. of sleep in between each feeding. This lasted for about 4-5 weeks until I finally had enough milk to just b'feed.

 

So I understand about being tired while caring for twins. Many in my position would have given up on b'feeding altogether.

[Haiku]

My oldest child was put into danger by.... my local la leche consultant.

 

I'm not a big fan of LLL either. My first child had some medical issues that affected breastfeeding (or that breastfeeding affected) and they simply would not take me at my word or my instinct. It took visits to a breastfeeding medicine doctor (an MD specializing in the field of breastfeeding) to recognize that my dd had allergies, reflux, and an abnormally arched palate. I was able to successfully breastfeed her until she was two because of my visits to the doctor when she was 9 months old. Nothing LLL told me before that helped. It's not that their advice failed that makes me leery of them. It's their failure to take me seriously and their condescending head-patting to the "fretful new mother" that I don't excuse.

 

And (to the topic at hand) yes, I hold Ezzo responsible for giving bunk advice.

 

Tara

Edited March 4, 2010 by TaraTheLiberator

[teamturner]

I didn't say it but I think I can see where she's coming from and I'll try to rephrase it from *my own* POV.

 

Demand feeding helps ensure that there is adequate supply. Babies nurse more frequently when they are going through a growth spurt, which stimulates supply as necessary. *However* as long as moms are aware of this and adjust schedules accordingly, if/when needed, scheduling is not a problem.

 

However, the Ezzos dismiss demand feeding as "child-led parenting" and un-Biblical because you're allowing the child's sin-nature to control you. This is why they are so often compared with the Pearls. They insist in their early books and lectures that extremely strict scheduling is the ONLY way to go and one should never deviate, even if the child cries because you'll be giving in to the child's inherently sinful nature.

 

Yes, I agree that all that sin-nature stuff is garbage. I appreciate your POV and I think I agree with it, especially with the growth spurts. I do remember nursing more frequently when they were gowing through those. :001_smile:

[squirtymomma]

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

 

:iagree: I have now become wary of *any* parenting book/system that uses a lot of "we vs. them" language. The Ezzos (and the Pearls, from what I understand... I've never read their books), create a false dichotomy, making it sound like anyone who doesn't follow their method is going to have out-of-control children, a terrible marriage, etc., etc., and is never going to recover from it. I thought I would do the Babywise-type scheduling until my first arrived and wouldn't fit their mold.

[G5052]

What I object to is the "stick with this approach until the child caves in even if it's hours/days and it's not working at all." That sends up huge red flags to me. There has to be some flexibility and compassion in parenting, and I just don't see that in some of these books.

[Sandy in Indy]

I once sent an 80 page packet to every board member in our church because they were considering teaching Ezzo's methods. I was appalled when they ignored my concerns and taught the program anyway.

 

I will concede that the church versions as so much worse than the secular ones, but I still find the whole thing disturbing.

 

Very much NOT in the Ezzo camp here.

[Cricket]

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:

 

:iagree: I think books like these give permission for naturally controlling people to give free reign to that side of their personality when it comes to their children. I don't think there is anything wrong with schedules even for babies but when that schedule becomes a "god", then there is a big problem. And I have a big problem with a one-size, fits-all child rearing manual. Isn't that part of why we all homeschool?

 

Like someone else said, far more important than a book is an older woman who has raised amazing children. I got great advice from a woman at my church who had raised 8 children. She was never pushy or a know-it-all, just a kind, loving woman who loved her children and was willing to share her experiences with me and just listen to me. Nothing can replace that!

[Daisy]

Absolutely not an Ezzo fan.

 

Sat through the brainwashing classes (Growing Kids God's Way). Felt the guilt applied by the collective brain that I was going to raise evil heathen children if my children didn't have first time obedience by the age of 5 (because we all know children's fates are sealed by that age. eyes rolling).

 

Spanked my daughter for every single infraction. Hated myself. Felt frustration that my daughter wasn't behaving the way the book explained she should be behaving. Guilt trip, frustration, spanking, crying, more guilt trip, bad parent... Remembered being beaten with a white leather belt as a child for not sitting still in church.

 

Decided I would never spank my children again because **I** can't live with myself when I do. Still get scathing guilt trips from christian friends because I don't spank. Worry, horribly sometimes, whether I turned my daughter into an anxious perfectionist who lives for a schedule or if she'll turn out better than I did.

 

Do I blame the Ezzos? Not totally, although I think their books are garbage. I blame the culture that we've created within the church that preaches grace but models works-based religion. That says we are forgiven but beats a child for disobeying. I blame Christians who sit in Sunday school classes and accept whatever psychological drivel is fed to them as long as it is couched in Christian terminology. I blame the sheep for acting like stupid sheep. So maybe I blame myself.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Daisy

[BlsdMama]

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 put my .02 into the Pearl discussion and I try to NEVER go back and read, lol. It just causes uproar.

 

Which is why I'll only post my .02 here and not read what everyone wrote.

 

I despise Ezzo's books. Which, when you think of it, is odd, because I really, really like Pearl's books.

 

But here's the thing, when I read Baby Wise and Child Wise, I got the distinct impression that there was no attachment between Gary Ezzo and his two children. It was almost as though he had them so he could experiment and write a book. Sigh.

 

With the Pearls, especially if you've seen the Pearl videos, you can see that Michael's children are his absolute joy. His training was only for his accountability to God and for love of his children... Wanting them to grow up good, strong, and capable. The tone, the idea, the goal, totally different. I really believe that Gary Ezzo just wanted his children to be... Well, convenient.

 

Oddly, I do believe that Debbie Pearl co-slept, wore a sling, and breastfed on demand when they were infants. I say this and can't remember where I read it or if it was from bits and pieces. I get the feeling the Ezzos would have considered all of that giving in to the demands of the infant. Sigh. Whateva'.

 

Nope, not a fan of Gary Ezzo. Or the Baby Whisperer. Oddly I don't like the radically attached books or the radically unattached books.

I think I'm this weird cross between Dobson, Sears, and Pearl. :P

[Pip]

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?

 

HEHEHEHE. I don't know how to feel about this. My friend who so strongly recommended the Ezzo stuff and was my mentor during my brief tenure doing their routine went to church with their kids. She said they had such a good relationship and were a very close knit family.

 

Obviously the scales fell from their eyes.

 

I wonder if my friend is still doing this. She had her 6th baby last year. We are on Christmas card terms now. She has seemed more relaxed in what she has been writing, so I can only hope she has seen the light.

[BlsdMama]

 

Spanked my daughter for every single infraction. Hated myself. Felt frustration that my daughter wasn't behaving the way the book explained she should be behaving.

 

Isn't legalism an ugly thing? The funniest thing I find is that as Christians we are called to recognize that we are fallible human beings. We have a tendency towards sin and we as parents are far less than perfect. But somehow, as young parents, we firmly believe that we can train it out of them. If that were true, we'd be perfect. We wouldn't need the blood of Christ.

 

Oh for the day when I learn the lesson well enough to train my children as I'm called by God to do AND do it fully with compassion and love as He shows me daily. Still learning... But awfully glad the younger children are benefitting.

[caitlinsmom]

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.

 

I agree with you nearly word for word!

[GESTEP]

I did not read all of the replies so sorry if someone already said this. Don't believe everything you read or hear. I read his Babywise book and it helped me to not be a slave to my firstborns every whim, however I did not follow alot of his advice. As with any book, advice of others IRL, my own mother's and MIL's advice, TV show, magazine, etc I take what makes sense to me and works and ignore the rest. I don't think an author or anyone else is responsible for bad advice in child-rearing (except maybe a doctor directly treating your child), you are the parent and have ultimate responsibility for your child(ren). If my mother gave me bad advice and I follow it, is she responsible for what I actually do? Remeber the old saying growing up, "If your friends told you jump off a bridge would you do it?" Same lesson applies here.

 

Gina

Edited March 5, 2010 by GESTEP

[Lovedtodeath]

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

:iagree:The breastfeeding advice absolutely wrong, as most women will not produce enough milk doing that. In addition the whole attitude of children and how they work is completely wrong. Our children are not evil and manipulative from birth.

 

Alternatives:

 

The Baby Whisperer has much better advice for getting infants and toddlers on good sleeping and eating schedules and her love for children really shows, though some of her breastfeeding advice in the books is outdated, her website and forums corrects some of that.

 

Boundaries for Kids is an excellent discipline book for all ages as the psychiatrist who wrote it really seems to understand children and definitely does not believe the above about their behavior.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Lovedtodeath

[Slartibartfast]

I did not read all of the replies so sorry if someone already said this. Don't believe everything you read or hear. I read his Babywise book and it helped me to not be a slave to my firstborns every whim, however I did not follow all of his advice. As with any book, advice of others IRL, my own mother's and MIL's advice, TV show, magazine, etc I take what makes sense to me and works and ignore the rest. I don't think an author or anyone else is responsible for bad advice in child-rearing (except maybe a doctor directly treating your child), you are the parent and have ultimate responsibility for your child(ren).

 

Gina

 

The American Academy of Pediatrics states his methods are DANGEROUS

 

I do not believe I have know more than the AAP and I certainly do not believe someone WITHOUT ANY SORT OF DEGREE IN MEDICINE OR CHILD DEVELOPMENT is being at all responsible or ethical or un-evil in recommending methods that are contrary to the ideal health, welfare and safety of a child.

 

You edited to add:

Remeber the old saying growing up, "If your friends told you jump off a bridge would you do it?" Same lesson applies here.

So if the American Academy of Pediatrics said not to feed your baby bleach would you do it anyways? How about if a preacher told you to feed your child bleach?

 

I don't believe preachers are infallible. I believe many are wrong and some are very bad people. Some are great but that doesn't make them always right.

 

The people listening to the opinion of the medical community are not the ones jumping off the bridge..

Edited March 5, 2010 by Sis

[GESTEP]

The American Academy of Pediatrics states his methods are DANGEROUS

 

I do not believe I have know more than the AAP and I certainly do not believe someone WITHOUT ANY SORT OF DEGREE IN MEDICINE OR CHILD DEVELOPMENT is being at all responsible or ethical or un-evil in recommending methods that are contrary to the ideal health, welfare and safety of a child.

 

You edited to add: So if the American Academy of Pediatrics said not to feed your baby bleach would you do it anyways? How about if a preacher told you to feed your child bleach?

 

I don't believe preachers are infallible. I believe many are wrong and some are very bad people. Some are great but that doesn't make them always right.

 

The people listening to the opinion of the medical community are not the ones jumping off the bridge..

 

I am not debating if his methods are dangerous I am simply stating that as parents we are responsible for our children not some author.

The point is don't follow BAD advice from books, or anywhere else, just because someone else says to do it (jumping off the bridge). I am not saying his all of his advice is good, I am saying use common sense in what advice you accept. Anyone can publish a book that does not make it good or helpful. I just think people need to take responsiblity for their actions.

It has been almost 10 years since I read Babywise so I don't remember much of it. I do remember dismissing many suggestions but also found reassurance as a new mother to not run in the room every 10 seconds and to sometimes let her cry it out. Take what works and ignore the rest.

 

Gina

[Lymeade Mom]

Babywise and Toddlerwise were really blessings for us. My kids didn't have trouble being nudged into a schedule. The main thing I did was change the diaper after I nursed one side to wake them back up. Then, they nursed the other side (I needed that too--had lots of milk!) And then, when reasonable, I kept them awake after feeding for a bit, before putting them down. It made all the difference in them sleeping well and through the night. When they woke to eat, I fed them. And I don't think that's different from what the book teachs. BUT, I could see it taken legalistically and being a problem. And compared to a couple specific friends that demand-fed, my kids were much happier, so I really had no desire to switch over to that method. At least one of those friends now has 2 very difficult kids who need boundaries. There are always other factors, but I feel like it's best to see a method lived out before you decide if it "works". I'd love to see a live, more positive demand-feeding, attachment parenting ex., but so far, I haven't seen it with my own eyes.

[Mrs Mungo]

but also found reassurance as a new mother to not run in the room every 10 seconds and to sometimes let her cry it out.

 

 

Even Dr. Sears (the father of AP, the one supposedly making moms slaves to their babies) specifically says there will be times that your baby cries, there will be times that it's OK to let them cry for a bit while you are doing something, sometimes they need to cry and settle themselves. Nowhere does Dr. Sears say you should run to your baby the second they make a peep.

[Jennifer in MI]

Crying it out - I simply cannot imagine allowing a child to do this!! Yes, it meant I dealt with sleepy babies who could not fall asleep by themselves. But, I would rather err on the side of caution on this one.

 

I currently have a just-turned-4yo dd. who is VERY afraid of the dark. She wakes up during the night crying and saying, "Please keep me safe!!!" I'm in tears here thinking of her, or any child, having to cry her way through these fears!!! She has some legitimate FEARS and needs mommy to help her through them.

 

Heck - I had an issue last night where I was dealing with a panic attack. Dh stayed up with me and held me until I fell asleep. I don't know how I would have dealt with it without him. I offer the same to my children. Always.

 

These one-type-fits-all philosophies are so sad. Children are individuals.

[msjones]

I don't remember anything horrifying in the Babywise book. :confused: Maybe I'm remembering a different book? It was at Barnes and Noble -- not part of any religious teaching that I recall.

 

I remember it advocating scheduled feedings (within reason) and a flexible naptime/playtime schedule instead of exclusive demand feeding.

 

I tried that advice and I believe it kept me from going over the edge with postpartum depression. I was struggling mightily with the demand feeding -- none of the LLL advice made a whit of difference to my cracked, bleeding, nipples, or my desperate, persistent feeling that I was doing everything wrong.

 

I felt incredible relief as soon as I tried the flexible schedule. My poor nipples began to heal, and the anxiety subsided. My babies gained plenty of weight and seemed very happy on the schedule. There was no misery for them. I had plenty of milk on the schedule, too, and nursed for about a year.

 

Just my 2 cents on the Ezzo book that I recall. I'm sure it wouldn't be for everyone (like any parenting/baby advice).

 

I must be missing something?

[Paz]

When the Ezzo teaching was popular in our church we didn't buy into it so all of a sudden we really weren't good enough parents and our family was basically shunned. Others did not allow their children to play with ours. I remember working with a mother on a bible school project and she worked as quickly as possible and then left abruptly to avoid her children being aparently influenced badly by spending too much time with mine. I think there is something about being "unequally yoked" with parents who are sinfully not following the program.

[kmacnchs]

I appreciate your POV and I think I agree with it, especially with the growth spurts. I do remember nursing more frequently when they were gowing through those. :001_smile:

 

me too...and I was following the Ezzos' advice by doing so.

[Jean in Newcastle]

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

 

But see, most people who see a book on the shelf are not going to research the history of the book. They're going to look at the current edition (hopefully the secular one) and are going to flip through it to see if it might help them. And hopefully if they do buy it, they are not going to check their brain at the door. Or if they are very young and inexperienced, they will consult multiple sources so that they can spot what is a balanced view on these things. I think it helped me that before I had picked up the secular later edition of the book, I had also read numerous LLL books, another book by a pediatrician on breastfeeding, the What to Expect books etc.

 

Obviously do not give a new mom one of the old religious versions of the book. And if you think the new secular one is still bad advice, don't give that out either. Find some good books with good advice and give them that.

[Slartibartfast]

When the Ezzo teaching was popular in our church we didn't buy into it so all of a sudden we really weren't good enough parents and our family was basically shunned. Others did not allow their children to play with ours. I remember working with a mother on a bible school project and she worked as quickly as possible and then left abruptly to avoid her children being aparently influenced badly by spending too much time with mine. I think there is something about being "unequally yoked" with parents who are sinfully not following the program.

 

That sounds more like a cult than a church.

[Daisy]

That sounds more like a cult than a church.

 

The classes become a really big deal. The Ezzo material like GKGW paints anyone who doesn't "agree" with their thinking as "less than Christian" and likely to raise totally horrible children. Total rubbish.

[KnitWit]

I blame the culture that we've created within the church that preaches grace but models works-based religion. That says we are forgiven but beats a child for disobeying. I blame Christians who sit in Sunday school classes and accept whatever psychological drivel is fed to them as long as it is couched in Christian terminology. I blame the sheep for acting like stupid sheep. So maybe I blame myself.

 

Wow Daisy. Great post.

[NicksMama-Zack's Mama Too]

I don't remember anything horrifying in the Babywise book. :confused: Maybe I'm remembering a different book? It was at Barnes and Noble -- not part of any religious teaching that I recall.

 

I remember it advocating scheduled feedings (within reason) and a flexible naptime/playtime schedule instead of exclusive demand feeding.

 

I tried that advice and I believe it kept me from going over the edge with postpartum depression. I was struggling mightily with the demand feeding -- none of the LLL advice made a whit of difference to my cracked, bleeding, nipples, or my desperate, persistent feeling that I was doing everything wrong.

 

I felt incredible relief as soon as I tried the flexible schedule. My poor nipples began to heal, and the anxiety subsided. My babies gained plenty of weight and seemed very happy on the schedule. There was no misery for them. I had plenty of milk on the schedule, too, and nursed for about a year.

 

Just my 2 cents on the Ezzo book that I recall. I'm sure it wouldn't be for everyone (like any parenting/baby advice).

 

I must be missing something?

 

Me too. I don't remember any heavy-handed religion in my copy of the book (circa 1996). I just met a couple with a toddler that was scheduled and happy and his parents recommended the book. I'm always surprised by the uproar.... I guess I have a toned down copy. Well, I don't have it, I gave it away to another expectant mother....

[Colleen in NS]

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.

 

:iagree: and dangerous no matter what is being spouted.

 

I had an experience with a LLL fan that was somewhat negative - a woman came and visited me right after my first baby was born, and plopped down a huge stack of LLL literature. She had never had children, but had helped her mother with younger siblings while growing up. So she sat and told me that I needed to nurse on demand, etc. etc., while I was suffering through PPD and zero sleep, and recovering from an unplanned c-section. But I had plenty of milk all the time!

 

But I don't think LLL is *bad.* It was just one negative experience, and I decided not to follow her advice.

 

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.

 

A friend of mine sent me Babywise when my oldest was 3 weeks old, and it was very timely for me. I had been nursing all the time, getting an hour here and there of sleep, was depressed and miserable. I talked with my doctor one night on the phone at 11:30 p.m., crying and desperate - she said, "Just use common sense, Colleen!" I had no idea what she meant. I needed concrete guidelines, and Babywise was that for me. My baby became much more content and rested when I started up a routine. And that's what I interpret Babywise as - a routine, not a rigid schedule. It's the routine that greatly helped us - kinda like a WTM routine instead of a rigid WTM schedule.

 

I remember it advocating scheduled feedings (within reason) and a flexible naptime/playtime schedule instead of exclusive demand feeding.

 

I tried that advice and I believe it kept me from going over the edge with postpartum depression. I was struggling mightily with the demand feeding -- none of the LLL advice made a whit of difference to my cracked, bleeding, nipples, or my desperate, persistent feeling that I was doing everything wrong.

 

I felt incredible relief as soon as I tried the flexible schedule. My poor nipples began to heal, and the anxiety subsided. My babies gained plenty of weight and seemed very happy on the schedule. There was no misery for them. I had plenty of milk on the schedule, too, and nursed for about a year.

 

This was pretty much my experience, too.

 

The thing is, there are probably plenty of "expert" books out there, with different people's favourite authors. Yet none of those authors is perfect. None. You really do have to think through any book yourself and evaluate it. Ideally you'd read parenting books before having a baby. But I did, and then I changed my ideals after I had a baby - decided that demand feeding and slings just wouldn't work for me, though I thought they would. Same with unschooling - I was all gung ho about unschooling, until my oldest turned about 6 years old, then I did some more evaluating and said, "nope. we need something different." We are given brains and we must evaluate for ourselves.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Colleen in NS
rephrase needed

[Mrs Mungo]

:iagree: and dangerous no matter what is being spouted.

 

I had an experience with LLL that was somewhat negative - a woman came and visited me right after my first baby was born, and plopped down a huge stack of LLL literature. She had never had children, but had helped her mother with younger siblings while growing up. So she sat and told me that I needed to nurse on demand, etc. etc., while I was suffering through PPD and zero sleep, and recovering from an unplanned c-section. But I had plenty of milk all the time!

 

Woah. I don't know who that woman was but she could not POSSIBLY have been a LLL Leader. Leaders *must* have successfully nursed at least one child for at least one year before they can even be invited to be Leaders. So, that's an experience with some random person who had some pamphlets, that's *not* an experience with LLL. Just saying...

[Pip]

I had a lactation consultant visit me with each baby. They told me that the baby was latching on wrong and they showed me what to do to get her to latch on, with me holding the baby and the LLL person guiding her. So we had 4 hands. When I asked how to do this when I was by myself, I was told to figure it out. I was a mother and had to deal with inconveniences. I was in so much pain, with my first especially, and I wanted to nurse. I was told this was motherhood and deal with it. By the time my 3d was born I hated, hated nursing.

[G5052]

Woah. I don't know who that woman was but she could not POSSIBLY have been a LLL Leader. Leaders *must* have successfully nursed at least one child for at least one year before they can even be invited to be Leaders. So, that's an experience with some random person who had some pamphlets, that's *not* an experience with LLL. Just saying...

 

My friend who *IS* a superstar lactation consultant (i.e. teaches it at the graduate level to nurses, speaks at international conferences) has told me that some hospitals will hire lactation consultants who have never nursed a child but have the technical training part of it. She has questions about that, but obviously you can't put that in a job description. Seems contrary, but that's the healthcare world!

[Colleen in NS]

Woah. I don't know who that woman was but she could not POSSIBLY have been a LLL Leader. Leaders *must* have successfully nursed at least one child for at least one year before they can even be invited to be Leaders. So, that's an experience with some random person who had some pamphlets, that's *not* an experience with LLL. Just saying...

 

I should rephrase that - "I had an experience with a LLL fan." I was well aware that she was not experienced in mothering or nursing. But she was a huge fan, had been around her Mom who did demand feeding for years, and was quite pressureful about it. My point was not to slam LLL - I know they do great things for breastfeeding - I read their literature and many breastfeeding books. My point was that we need to evaluate everything we hear and read.

 

Some LLL people are zealots, some are not. Some people who like Babywise methods are zealots, some are not.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Colleen in NS

[Mrs Mungo]

My friend who *IS* a superstar lactation consultant (i.e. teaches it at the graduate level to nurses, speaks at international conferences) has told me that some hospitals will hire lactation consultants who have never nursed a child but have the technical training part of it. She has questions about that, but obviously you can't put that in a job description. Seems contrary, but that's the healthcare world!

 

That's absolutely true about lactation consultants. They are often nurses with a single class in lactation. I always suggest women seek out lactation consultants who are certified by the International Board of Lactation Consultants. You have to have a ton of counseling experience before you are even allowed to sit for the test.

 

Earl Grey-I'm sorry that was your experience. :(

[Lovedtodeath]

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...

The Babywhisperer teaches you these things in a more balanced way. The Ezzos get carried away with crazy ideas of babies running the household and turning into self absorbed obese brats if their needs are met.

 

Yes, I agree that all that sin-nature stuff is garbage. I appreciate your POV and I think I agree with it, especially with the growth spurts. I do remember nursing more frequently when they were gowing through those. :001_smile:

Yes. I a little poison in the book is all it takes for me. No thank you.

 

:iagree: I have now become wary of *any* parenting book/system that uses a lot of "we vs. them" language. The Ezzos (and the Pearls, from what I understand... I've never read their books), create a false dichotomy, making it sound like anyone who doesn't follow their method is going to have out-of-control children, a terrible marriage, etc., etc., and is never going to recover from it. I thought I would do the Babywise-type scheduling until my first arrived and wouldn't fit their mold.

Me too. My poor baby needed constant comforting from severe reflux.

[Lovedtodeath]

Crying it out - I simply cannot imagine allowing a child to do this!! Yes, it meant I dealt with sleepy babies who could not fall asleep by themselves. But, I would rather err on the side of caution on this one.

 

I currently have a just-turned-4yo dd. who is VERY afraid of the dark. She wakes up during the night crying and saying, "Please keep me safe!!!" I'm in tears here thinking of her, or any child, having to cry her way through these fears!!! She has some legitimate FEARS and needs mommy to help her through them.

 

Heck - I had an issue last night where I was dealing with a panic attack. Dh stayed up with me and held me until I fell asleep. I don't know how I would have dealt with it without him. I offer the same to my children. Always.

 

These one-type-fits-all philosophies are so sad. Children are individuals.

Gasp! Children have human feelings? I have seen so many parents who don't realize this. Thank you.

[Colleen in NS]

The Ezzos get carried away with crazy ideas of babies ...turning into self absorbed obese brats if their needs are met.

 

What definition of needs are you using here? The Babywise routine, adjusted to our family, helped me to more-than-adequately meet my babies' needs for food, cuddling, cleanliness, and sleep. Those, along with cooking and showering, were my main activities 24/7 for the first few months of having newborns.

[MelanieM]

What definition of needs are you using here? The Babywise routine, adjusted to our family, helped me to more-than-adequately meet my babies' needs for food, cuddling, cleanliness, and sleep. Those, along with cooking and showering, were my main activities 24/7 for the first few months of having newborns.

 

I think the issue with Babywise is when you don't have a baby that is easy going enough to go along with whatever routine you're implementing. Sure, it might be fine if you have a kid that fits the mold, or even comes close to the mold with a parent that is comfortable tweaking. But take a child that needs something a little different and apply the legalistic view that you are allowing a baby who feeds more often than your schedule to run your house and become the boss and ruin your marriage and... it's a recipe for disaster.

 

If the teachings are so risky as to endanger the life of a child who doesn't fit the ideal as defined by the author(s), then they really shouldn't be presenting it to new parents as a viable approach to child-rearing.

[squirtymomma]

I think the issue with Babywise is when you don't have a baby that is easy going enough to go along with whatever routine you're implementing. Sure, it might be fine if you have a kid that fits the mold, or even comes close to the mold with a parent that is comfortable tweaking. But take a child that needs something a little different and apply the legalistic view that you are allowing a baby who feeds more often than your schedule to run your house and become the boss and ruin your marriage and... it's a recipe for disaster.

 

If the teachings are so risky as to endanger the life of a child who doesn't fit the ideal as defined by the author(s), then they really shouldn't be presenting it to new parents as a viable approach to child-rearing.

 

My first was actually a "textbook" baby in many ways. Not high needs, pretty predictable. But, she was absolutely not ready to take regular naps like Babywise defines at 6 weeks old, when I decided I was going to put my foot down and make it happen. She was absolutely not ready to sleep all night at 6 months without nursing when I decided to put my foot down and make it happen. Actually, she pretty closely met the sleep/feeding stages outlined in "Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child", which are based more on brain development than the convenience of the parent (like the recommendations in Babywise).

 

I do not put my breast in my baby's mouth every time they cry. But, I don't let schedules/time determine when I can and can't feed them. I find that my babies were ready to take 2-3 fairly regular naps around 3-4 months. We're pretty religious about that, when they're ready for it, and of course the routine benefits them. Around 9 months to a year, most babies are ready to sleep all night without nursing. A little effort on the parents' part to make that happen is totally reasonable. But, the problem with the Ezzos is that they suggest you push schedules before many babies are ready for them. And, as I said, I'm coming from the perspective of a mom who has had pretty easy going, predictable babies. Never mind families with babies that have reflux, colic, or other issues going on.

[lovetobehome]

I agree with Squirtymama, and I also found "Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child" to be a very helpful book. It gave me an idea of what is typical, based on brain research, but was not teaching a particular method/schedule. It is the book I consult every time I have a new sleep question for a child.

[Joker]

Crying it out - I simply cannot imagine allowing a child to do this!! Yes, it meant I dealt with sleepy babies who could not fall asleep by themselves. But, I would rather err on the side of caution on this one.

 

I currently have a just-turned-4yo dd. who is VERY afraid of the dark. She wakes up during the night crying and saying, "Please keep me safe!!!" I'm in tears here thinking of her, or any child, having to cry her way through these fears!!! She has some legitimate FEARS and needs mommy to help her through them.

 

Heck - I had an issue last night where I was dealing with a panic attack. Dh stayed up with me and held me until I fell asleep. I don't know how I would have dealt with it without him. I offer the same to my children. Always.

 

These one-type-fits-all philosophies are so sad. Children are individuals.

 

 

I was the same as your dd and I vividly remember those nights where I had to tough it out on my own. I think my parents must have thought it was something I was doing on purpose since my siblings didn't have the same problem. It was horrible and so scary. I still have issues sometimes during the night. I also don't let my dds cry it out. My 10 yr dd went through the phase, was comforted, and came out of it not being afraid of anything. I can't imagine having a child that was as scared as I used to be and making them cry it out.

[swellmomma]

I took a growing kids god's way class at my church. It wasn't so bad until we got to the chapter on how to chose the best switch to use on your kids as young as 6 months. I had a huge arguement with the facilitators of the group over that chapter (though there was other times I spoke up and commented on the stupidity of the advice given).

 

The worst of it all was that if you chose to not follow the Ezzo's way in that church you were seen as a poor parent. If you followed the Ezzos and still had troubles with your kids there was supports etc, if you chose not to and had trouble with your kids, you were looked down upon. I was told several times in the class that if I used the switch the kids would get better. It was this class that convinced me to try spanking (though I never used anything other than my hand), and I am still trying to drop that from our list of discipline methods. It became far too easy to turn to that, and as long as I used that as a discipline method my church helped me with the kids etc. When I made the choice to look at other options, I was pretty much shunned(so much so that when I started having all those troubles last fall with that psycho and such, my pastor did not even want to talk to me when I called the church let alone say a simple prayer for me- something he would have done no problem 6 months early when I still was following the Ezzo's)

[MelanieM]

I took a growing kids god's way class at my church. It wasn't so bad until we got to the chapter on how to chose the best switch to use on your kids as young as 6 months. I had a huge arguement with the facilitators of the group over that chapter (though there was other times I spoke up and commented on the stupidity of the advice given).

 

This is horrible. Is your church aware that it is illegal to strike a child under the age of 2 in Canada, and illegal to strike a child of any age with 'tools'?

 

That's really unfortunate that your community wouldn't provide you with any support.:grouphug:

[Colleen in NS]

I think the issue with Babywise is when you don't have a baby that is easy going enough to go along with whatever routine you're implementing. Sure, it might be fine if you have a kid that fits the mold, or even comes close to the mold with a parent that is comfortable tweaking. But take a child that needs something a little different and apply the legalistic view that you are allowing a baby who feeds more often than your schedule to run your house and become the boss and ruin your marriage and... it's a recipe for disaster.

 

If the teachings are so risky as to endanger the life of a child who doesn't fit the ideal as defined by the author(s), then they really shouldn't be presenting it to new parents as a viable approach to child-rearing.

 

This is why a parent has to think carefully about *any* advice he/she gets from a book or a person or an organization - babies are individuals with individual needs. Babywise is one tool out there among many, and we need to think through our reading!

 

My babies had to go through an adjustment (esp. #1 after demand feeding for three weeks, and neither of us getting long enough periods of sleep - an hour here and there), but our family needed to end a chaotic period, so I did tweak and tweak until a happy medium was reached. My babies were always well-fed (I did all the normal checks for this, regularly) and cuddled through the adjustment to using a routine (which didn't take long to adjust to), though there was crying involved. They became content during and after the adjustment, and I continued to tweak as needed through the first year, for growth spurts, illness, introducing solids, teething comfort, etc..

 

Whether or not we think authors "shouldn't" be presenting ideas, that is what authors do. *We* need to be responsible to evaluate and adjust the advice. As much of an uproar as Babywise and everything/one associated with it has caused, it's still a source that many sane and clear-thinking parents have gleaned useful advice from and have applied responsibly.

 

EDIT: I want to be clear that I don't think Babywise is the be-all end-all. It was something that I came across at that time in my life and it was helpful to me. There are many other great parenting books out there, too (whose authors probably don't have it all together). Know about the author, but evaluate the material in the book (any book), too.

Edited March 5, 2010 by Colleen in NS

[Jean in Newcastle]

This is why a parent has to think carefully about *any* advice he/she gets from a book or a person or an organization - babies are individuals with individual needs. Babywise is one tool out there among many, and we need to think through our reading!

 

 

Whether or not we think authors "shouldn't" be presenting ideas, that is what authors do. *We* need to be responsible to evaluate and adjust the advice. As much of an uproar as Babywise and everything/one associated with it has caused, it's still a source that many sane and clear-thinking parents have gleaned useful advice from and have applied responsibly.

 

Precisely!

[MelanieM]

Whether or not we think authors "shouldn't" be presenting ideas, that is what authors do. *We* need to be responsible to evaluate and adjust the advice. As much of an uproar as Babywise and everything/one associated with it has caused, it's still a source that many sane and clear-thinking parents have gleaned useful advice from and have applied responsibly.

 

Sure, each parent is responsible for what they take or leave from any source of information. I'm all for people having the right to say whatever they want, and others having the right to walk away when they don't like it. But the reality is, new parents are often very impressionable, raw with emotion, and in need of a great deal of support. Authors like Ezzo and Pearl provide heaps of harmful misinformation to these readers; information that can damage the parent-child bond, and lead to serious harm, or even death.

 

So, is it the responsibility of the mother to check her facts before she whips her 6 month old baby with a plumbling line, or refuses to feed her screaming 4 month old because he just ate an hour ago, just because some dude tells her it's the Godly thing to do? Sure. But I feel it's also a kind and loving show of compassion if that woman's community can help keep her from such nonsense in the first place. And even if the parent and child in question aren't going to end up with lasting damage from reading these books, they could still be saved from having to sift through a mountain of BS to perhaps find a grain of gold. There's just so much better out there than this. The potential risk is just not worth the potential reward.

[Colleen in NS]

refuses to feed her screaming 4 month old because he just ate an hour ago, just because some dude tells her it's the Godly thing to do? Sure. But I feel it's also a kind and loving show of compassion if that woman's community can help keep her from such nonsense in the first place. And even if the parent and child in question aren't going to end up with lasting damage from reading these books, they could still be saved from having to sift through a mountain of BS to perhaps find a grain of gold.

 

I'm only talking about Babywise here - not the Pearl's stuff...and again, not everyone interprets this book as "nonsense" or a "mountain" of BS. I am one who got more than just "a" grain of gold from it, though I didn't apply every single idea in it. I didn't get "scheduling = godliness" from it - I got some order out of chaos in my home. For that I am thankful.