LizzyBee Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 (edited) I haven't yet had time to read this entire thread, quick question and I really don't want to hijack this thread, but long, long ago when I was pregnant with dd, dh and I read one of James Dobson's books and he, if my memory serves me correctly, suggested going for a very specific area at the base of the neck when punishing a child. I think he also said that using a wooden spoon to discipline a child is fine. I think ... does anyone know or remember any of this? I'm sure this isn't as bad as the Pearls. They scare me. I'm just glad to not read any of this rubbish anymore. I'll stick to fiction and hopefully common-sense. I'm not a Christian, but I am deeply religious. I have a friend who used to be Christian but was so very much against spanking, etc. He had absolutely no idea that some Christians advocate this horrible stuff. He was shocked and asked if Jesus went around beating up kids. :confused: The whole thing just sickens me. I've read some of Dobson's books (a long time ago) and I don't remember anything about going for the base of the neck. I can't imagine in what context that would be helpful or safe! I would not be surprised if he said a wooden spoon is fine; however, he advocates spanking only for direct disobedience or defiance. For "kids being kids," he specifically advocates giving grace and not spanking or otherwise punishing. I also remember very specific examples of how to redirect a small child's attention which included no spanking or hand smacking. I think being a psychologist, he gives a more realistic picture of what to expect of kids at various ages than many other parenting "experts." Edited August 19, 2011 by LizzyBee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abigail4476 Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 I haven't yet had time to read this entire thread, quick question and I really don't want to hijack this thread, but long, long ago when I was pregnant with dd, dh and I read one of James Dobson's books and he, if my memory serves me correctly, suggested going for a very specific area at the base of the neck when punishing a child. I think he also said that using a wooden spoon to discipline a child is fine. I think ... does anyone know or remember any of this? I'm sure this isn't as bad as the Pearls. They scare me. I'm just glad to not read any of this rubbish anymore. I'll stick to fiction and hopefully common-sense. I'm not a Christian, but I am deeply religious. I have a friend who used to be Christian but was so very much against spanking, etc. He had absolutely no idea that some Christians advocate this horrible stuff. He was shocked and asked if Jesus went around beating up kids. :confused: The whole thing just sickens me. I don't remember the exact title or quote, but when I was pregnant with our first child, my mother gave me a Dobson book. Actually, I do remember--it was Dare To Discipline. I hated it. One of the things that threw me off was a quote (again, sorry, this isn't exact) about not being *too* affectionate with your kids. I need to see if I can find it. I think another poster was onto something when they said that these books teach you to ignore instinct. Conservative Christian parents in particular need to remember that our first instructions come from the Bible (because a true conservative consults the Word first and adheres to it as closely as possible), and there is nothing in the New Testament in particular that could even be construed to support abusive behavior. First and foremost, Christians are to exhibit the fruits of the spirit found in Galatians 5, and obviously that would extend to parenting. Secondly, there's a scripture in Ephesians that says, "Fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord." The New Testament seems very clear on this topic of how we treat children. The same passage in Ephesians 6 (just prior to "Fathers, provoke not....") alsosays, "Honour thy father and mother....", and "honour [timao]" means "to prize; fix a valuation upon; revere." How on earth could a child prize, value or revere parents that harmed him physically and emotionally? It's interesting that "honour" does not mean "obey." The best book I ever read that positively affected my parenting but really wasn't intended for that purpose was John Maxwell's leadership book Becoming a Person of Influence. Chapter 1 is on nurturing those who you seek to influence. This is parenting 101. If you want to influence and shape your children's lives, you must first nurture them. Your words, actions and decisions must be made for their benefit. This is truly why parenting is such a difficult job--because it requires us to live our lives for the benefit of these little people. It requires unselfishness and a lack of self-centeredness. Many of the parenting books offered on Christian bookshelves are selfish in nature, wanting to train the child to behave in a way that is convenient for the parent, when in fact this is the antithesis of an unselfish Christian mindset. Regarding the Christian conservative label--I find it odd that so many call themselves conservative when they give so little attention to scripture. They give more credence to what other Christians or Christian leaders say than to the Bible. Yes, we should listen to our leaders, (and to authors who we feel have something good to offer), but everything should be filtered through the scriptures. Paul said that if anyone, even an "angel from heaven" preached any other gospel unto [us], they should be "accursed." Why do so many Christians seem so hesitant to step up and say, "This isn't biblical. This is wrong. This isn't so." ????? Galatians 1:6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Galatians 1:7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. Galatians 1:8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. Acts 17:10 And the brethren immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night unto Berea: who coming thither went into the synagogue of the Jews. Acts 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. I love that the Bereans didn't just swallow preaching hook, line and sinker; they checked it against scripture, to find out if it was really true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeacefulChaos Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 I've read some of Dobson's books (a long time ago) and I don't remember anything about going for the base of the neck. I can't imagine in what context that would be helpful or safe! I would not be surprised if he said a wooden spoon is fine; however, he advocates spanking only for direct disobedience or defiance. For "kids being kids," he specifically advocates giving grace and not spanking or otherwise punishing. I also remember very specific examples of how to redirect a small child's attention which included no spanking or hand smacking. I think being a psychologist, he gives a more realistic picture of what to expect of kids at various ages than many other parenting "experts." :iagree: I love Dr. Dobson's books, I have many of them. I think he's great. I don't follow any one author 100%, but out of all of them that I've read, I agree the most with him. (much better than the Parenting with Love & Logic nonsense. :ack2: ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kristinannie Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 This story actually made me lose my appetite. Anyone that could beat their child for 7 hours is not acting in the name of God. I am not completely against spanking. We do spank occaisionally, but that case is just abuse plain and simple. Thanks for posting this to stop me from eating a snack though. I am trying to lose baby weight! :tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ByGrace3 Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 (much better than the Parenting with Love & Logic nonsense. :ack2: ) Interesting. I am actually quite a big proponent of Love and Logic. :confused: Talk about appealing to common sense. Reality discipline makes complete sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TravelingChris Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 What interests me as a social scientist by training, is how these deaths are really very similar to other deaths where the Pearls' writing was not implicated. THat doesn't excuse the Pearls' vile and despicable writings. They seem like thoroughly unpleasant people. But in the first case, the child died from being bound too tightly. There were a number of cases like that- particularly with autistic children being bound, I think about ten years ago. Sometimes the kids were bundled in blankets, sometimes people piked up on them. Always the goal was to stop rages or out of control behavior and the thought was that by tightly binding, the child would feel secure like he or she did in the womb. I think that methodology fell out of favor after a number of these deaths but maybe not. I also really agree with Joanne's post about the many failings in the system that led to the deaths of these girls and actually many more deaths of adopted children (almost all by parents who have never heard of the Pearls). Now do I think that the Pearl's writing may be dangerous? Absolutely- you combine admonitions of if you don't do this, you aren't following GOd with an older adoptive child who comes with lots of baggage and parents who have a personality to be led by cults (the parents were also Bill Gothard followers), and you have a tragedy. BUt I also agree with Tibbie when she writes that the theology is wrong and that leads to wrong results. Neither the Pearls nor Bill Gothard follow anything that I can see as traditional Christianity. But even more importantly in terms of cultic behavior is the extreme forms of legalism that both camps follow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abigail4476 Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 Interesting. I am actually quite a big proponent of Love and Logic. :confused: Talk about appealing to common sense. Reality discipline makes complete sense. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellesmere Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 , Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tabitha Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 Wow.....wow...I have no words. Those parents are not spanking. They are torturing their children. There is a HUGE difference. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
funschooler5 Posted August 19, 2011 Share Posted August 19, 2011 Interesting. I am actually quite a big proponent of Love and Logic. :confused: Talk about appealing to common sense. Reality discipline makes complete sense. :iagree: My favorite aspect of Love & Logic is how they recommend putting the responsibility on the child and focusing on the positive (not "Clean your room or no computer" but "You can play the computer as soon as you clean your room") A simple change in wording and attitude has worked wonders on my kids. Somebody recommended a Dobson book, to me (The Strong-Willed Child) because I was having difficulty with my son with ADHD. I couldn't even make it through the thing. The parts about spanking disturbed me, and the whole thing sounded like it was written in the 1950s. I didn't like how he implied that some kids just naturally try to be bad or lazy. I knew that my son had good intentions, he just needed some guidance and help with impulse control. Love & Logic has worked for him...he finds it hard to argue with a consequence he knows makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LizzyBee Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 :iagree:I love Dr. Dobson's books, I have many of them. I think he's great. I don't follow any one author 100%, but out of all of them that I've read, I agree the most with him. (much better than the Parenting with Love & Logic nonsense. :ack2: ) I like Love and Logic better than Dobson. My favorite is the Hormones and Wheels CD. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeacefulChaos Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Interesting. I am actually quite a big proponent of Love and Logic. :confused: Talk about appealing to common sense. Reality discipline makes complete sense. Well, ok, I actually didn't mind Love & Logic in general. But I was infuriated when they said that a teenager should get to decide whether or not to attend church with the family. It kinda just made me decide I hated the whole book. :tongue_smilie: (yep, completely irrational overreaction :lol: ) In general, Love & Logic seems like common sense (In fact I do many of the things listed in the book, and had been doing them long before I read it). Sometimes I felt that it didn't help the child have any respect for their parents' authority, though. But I only read it once, in a moms group, about a year and a half ago. Then I put it on my top shelf of 'books I don't really care for but if I had to I'd read again' ... :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ByGrace3 Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 Well, ok, I actually didn't mind Love & Logic in general. But I was infuriated when they said that a teenager should get to decide whether or not to attend church with the family. It kinda just made me decide I hated the whole book. :tongue_smilie: (yep, completely irrational overreaction :lol: ) In general, Love & Logic seems like common sense (In fact I do many of the things listed in the book, and had been doing them long before I read it). Sometimes I felt that it didn't help the child have any respect for their parents' authority, though. But I only read it once, in a moms group, about a year and a half ago. Then I put it on my top shelf of 'books I don't really care for but if I had to I'd read again' ... :lol: gotcha. I actually have only read the one for young children. As much as I really do love the book, I always refer it to Christian friends with a disclaimer. The book is great, with wonderful practical advice, but it is not Christian and in my opinion has a grave flaw, so be warned! ;) My one issue with it is the way the author says he is practically happy when his dc have a transgression so he can use these techniques. Kind of a tragic attitude towards sin imho... but if you can get past that, it is a great book! ;) I can see having similar issues as you do with the book for older children. As Christians, we choose some things to not be a "choice," so we pull that card then. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeacefulChaos Posted August 20, 2011 Share Posted August 20, 2011 gotcha. I actually have only read the one for young children. As much as I really do love the book, I always refer it to Christian friends with a disclaimer. The book is great, with wonderful practical advice, but it is not Christian and in my opinion has a grave flaw, so be warned! ;) My one issue with it is the way the author says he is practically happy when his dc have a transgression so he can use these techniques. Kind of a tragic attitude towards sin imho... but if you can get past that, it is a great book! ;) I can see having similar issues as you do with the book for older children. As Christians, we choose some things to not be a "choice," so we pull that card then. :iagree: I've found that there are good things to be gleaned from many different books (maybe not the Pearls lol, I've never read it), and with every author we just have to pick and choose. No one is perfect, nor does any one man/woman have the exact art of raising kids down. :) I have read a lot of parenting books (mostly in said moms group, which I'm not a part of anymore due to hs), and while I haven't loved all of them, I can't think of one that didn't have at least some useful advice. It's opened my mind a little, I think, to look at different parenting books, just to see if there will be some morsel in them (that I haven't seen before) that aligns with what I believe God wants for our family. I find a lot of them - even those I don't care for in the end - to be rather enjoyable. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FO4UR Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 God sees mothers of infants as ever patient, loving, gentle, and protecting of their little ones. You will not be able to see biblical motherhood in the same light again. God's mothers, as portrayed by the imagery and symbolism of Holy Scripture, do not carry plumbing supply line. I may memorize this bit and quote you, if you don't mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lang Syne Boardie Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I may memorize this bit and quote you, if you don't mind. Of course I don't mind. :grouphug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather in Neverland Posted February 28, 2012 Author Share Posted February 28, 2012 A thread of mine was resurrected? Really? That has never happened to me before. Cool. :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandy in Indy Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 The saddest baby I ever saw in a church nursery was an Ezzo baby. He didn't cry; he didn't laugh and I never saw him smile. He sat on cue, ate on cue and slept on cue...but he wasn't a happy baby. I'd be really happy if the Ezzo and Pearl parenting advice disappeared from the earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkacademy Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I have Hughes net and the bandwith sucks!! The videos won't load :( Can someone just sum it up for me maybe in a few sentences? I cannot stand what I know of these people. This is the only only only bad thing that happened to me when I decided to homeschool, I learned about them. I had never heard of them before then. I feel so sad for the children who grow up like this, the things I have read just break my heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clarkacademy Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 The saddest baby I ever saw in a church nursery was an Ezzo baby. He didn't cry; he didn't laugh and I never saw him smile. He sat on cue, ate on cue and slept on cue...but he wasn't a happy baby. I'd be really happy if the Ezzo and Pearl parenting advice disappeared from the earth. I'm sorry Sandy, but what is an Ezzo baby? Is this some illness or disability? I have never heard of this term before. That makes me sad a little baby who can't cry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parrothead Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I'm sorry Sandy, but what is an Ezzo baby? Is this some illness or disability? I have never heard of this term before. That makes me sad a little baby who can't cry. Ezzo is another monster like Pearl. That poor Ezzo infant was probably beaten into submission from birth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remudamom Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I can't watch. I despise those people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Ezzo is another monster like Pearl. That poor Ezzo infant was probably beaten into submission from birth. It is so interesting to me that Ezzo is lumped with Pearl. I read 'On Becoming Baby Wise' and the ONLY thing I can remember from that book is the 'order' of nursing/awake/sleeping and the recommendation to not nurse a baby to sleep. Which, btw, worked like magic for me and my baby begin sleeping 5-6 hours at 6 weeks within a few days of implenting that order. Maybe that is a natural time table anyway and ds would have begun sleeping that much with a change to his schedule. I don't remember anything about starving my infant (the 'scheduling' I hear about) but I know *I* would never deny my infant the breast for any reason....so if I was told to do that I would smile and wave and go nurse my baby. However, it does seem that if it was IN the book I would have been sufficiently turned off that I would not be finising the book or recommending it. I certainly don't remember anything about 'beating a child into submission' but I've read on this board enough times to know that there must be something in the Ezzo book to cause such an adverse reaction in all you smart people. I don't know. It has been 12 years and I'm sure I forgot a lot.....just seems weird to me I didn't 'pick up on' how abusive the Ezzos were/are. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mommymilkies Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 The Pearls are repulsive and dangerous crack pots to boot. I wish there was some way to slap them in jail for a nice extended period. Faith :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellesmere Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 It is so interesting to me that Ezzo is lumped with Pearl. I read 'On Becoming Baby Wise' and the ONLY thing I can remember from that book is the 'order' of nursing/awake/sleeping and the recommendation to not nurse a baby to sleep. Which, btw, worked like magic for me and my baby begin sleeping 5-6 hours at 6 weeks within a few days of implenting that order. Maybe that is a natural time table anyway and ds would have begun sleeping that much with a change to his schedule. I don't remember anything about starving my infant (the 'scheduling' I hear about) but I know *I* would never deny my infant the breast for any reason....so if I was told to do that I would smile and wave and go nurse my baby. However, it does seem that if it was IN the book I would have been sufficiently turned off that I would not be finising the book or recommending it. I certainly don't remember anything about 'beating a child into submission' but I've read on this board enough times to know that there must be something in the Ezzo book to cause such an adverse reaction in all you smart people. I don't know. It has been 12 years and I'm sure I forgot a lot.....just seems weird to me I didn't 'pick up on' how abusive the Ezzos were/are. I am not a fan of the Ezzos. But (because of the title you mentioned) I think you may have read the version of their work that did not have any Bible references in it. I've seen it in regular bookstores. Someone could pick it up and have no idea what kind of churches use that method and add on a lot to it. That makes a huge difference. And I've seen the basic outline of their feeding/wake/nap idea in completely non-religious books. While I DO NOT agree with their reasoning or what they use to back up their position about feeding routines, I think it's important to clarify they do not advocate fixed schedules. They advocate routine and make it seem like if a parent works hard enough, the baby should sleep through the night in a crib by 8 to 12 weeks old, be very happy, and able to fit into the parents' life. Again, I don't like their work but it's often misunderstood. And I'd say that the "biblical" version of the book plus a vulnerable, tired mom plus a good deal of pressure from a church group could equal a sad situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I am not a fan of the Ezzos. But (because of the title you mentioned) I think you may have read the version of their work that did not have any Bible references in it. I've seen it in regular bookstores. Someone could pick it up and have no idea what kind of churches use that method and add on a lot to it. That makes a huge difference. And I've seen the basic outline of their feeding/wake/nap idea in completely non-religious books. While I don't agree with their reasoning or what they use to back up their position about feeding routines, I think it's important to clarify they do not advocate fixed schedules. They advocate routine and make it seem like if a parent works hard enough, the baby should sleep through the night in a crib by 8 to 12 weeks old, be very happy, and able to fit into the parents' life. Again, I don't like their work but it's often misunderstood. And I'd say that the "biblical" version of the book plus a vulnerable, tired mom plus a good deal of pressure from a church group could equal a sad situation. This is true of their books NOW. It was not always true. BTW, Ezzos lectures were WAY worse than anything that ever appeared in print. They aren't as dumb as the Pearls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamajudy Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 About 15 years ago, the church we attended was all into the Ezzo's Preparation for Parenting course. Everybody was all excited about training their babies when to eat, sleep, etc. They had the attitude that babies are little sinners that want to control our lives, and we'll show them who's boss! The pastor and his wife couldn't understand why we wanted nothing to do with it. During those years, every single mother who had a baby after attending the class stopped nursing her baby shortly after birth because she "didn't have enough milk." Strict scheduling and breast feeding don't work well together. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joanne Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 About 15 years ago, the church we attended was all into the Ezzo's Preparation for Parenting course. Everybody was all excited about training their babies when to eat, sleep, etc. They had the attitude that babies are little sinners that want to control our lives, and we'll show them who's boss! The pastor and his wife couldn't understand why we wanted nothing to do with it. During those years, every single mother who had a baby after attending the class stopped nursing her baby shortly after birth because she "didn't have enough milk." Strict scheduling and breast feeding don't work well together. They've since radically changed the breastfeeding advice. The problem with Ezzo is his character as shown through his behavior towards/with his former church, the way he set up his sub-culture to respond to critics, and the lack of authenticity. The parenting paradigm is *extra*Biblical - not Biblical. It elevates the importance of parents above children - creating a false and icky hierarchy. It imposes "sin" onto developmental realities such as crying, issues of ownership ("mine!"), and moments of "willfulness". The arrogance involved in Growing Kids God's Way is inherent. The irony is that the theology is terribly flawed. It's also misgynistic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mom4him Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I think it is important to recignize regardless of where you stand on spanking that those parents didn't spank their child with the result of the child dying, they beat their child. There is a difference. I spanked my older children. I do not spank my two youngest. If a parents feel that is how they are to discipline it is their choice as long as they know what a spanking is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joanne Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I think it is important to recignize regardless of where you stand on spanking that those parents didn't spank their child with the result of the child dying, they beat their child. There is a difference. I spanked my older children. I do not spank my two youngest. If a parents feel that is how they are to discipline it is their choice as long as they know what a spanking is. I'm against spanking, but I think in most cases talking about it is non-productive. Let's Not Talk About Spanking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotSoObvious Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I've read most, but not all of the comments, so I hope this hasn't been said yet, but was anyone else alarmed by the fact that there are just as many people who LOVED the book on Amazon as there were that hated it? I was shocked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joanne Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I've read most, but not all of the comments, so I hope this hasn't been said yet, but was anyone else alarmed by the fact that there are just as many people who LOVED the book on Amazon as there were that hated it? I was shocked. It's common for extreme/alternative types to use Amazon as part of the war. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peaceful Isle Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I don't have time to read the posts, so I hope I'm not redundant. :D A while ago I commented on a legalism post etc.. I just think so many people are caught up in so many rules, they forget the love of God. I think that the way the Pearls present "breaking" the will of the child is not the way God wants it to be. It is totally twisted. The Lord wants us to train and guide our children, not "break" their spirits. As I have said before, I understand all about strict, man made rules, etc.. and have had personal experience with it growing up and beyond. I am so thankful I now live under grace and not under the law. I am sick for the children who are affected by the Pearls books and I feel just as bad for those blind parents. I am so glad God does not "beat" us, but lovingly teaches us. It has definitely had an impact on how I guide my kiddos, and I have to say... they are turning out pretty good so far! ;) Love reaches farther than any beating will even come close to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellesmere Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 This is true of their books NOW. It was not always true. BTW, Ezzos lectures were WAY worse than anything that ever appeared in print. They aren't as dumb as the Pearls. Ah, I see. As I said, I'm going on fuzzy memory. Thank you. True, and he was "smart" enough to market a non-religious version of whatever he called the book that had all the talk about babies as little sinners and using verses to back up their ideas about feeding and napping. I never heard an Ezzo lecture but I heard a devout follower give a sickening talk about parenting according to the book. I can only imagine what an Ezzo lecture would be like. No, a book alone probably isn't going to make someone do something stupid, but I watched a worn-out, vulnerable, trusting mom wither under the spiritual talk and fear of raising unruly, immoral terrors if she didn't follow their advice. I didn't know her well, but she was troubled by what she heard -- but didn't have a lot of outside support, either. And the class leaders genuinely believed they were doing the right, moral, "biblical" thing.:banghead: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abigail4476 Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I'm against spanking, but I think in most cases talking about it is non-productive. Let's Not Talk About Spanking. Great post and great blog, Joanne. :thumbup1: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woolybear Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 I'm very tired and when I first read your post I thought it said, "I love the Pearls." I had to read it a second time and then saw it said "loathe". Anyway, I haven't followed the links yet, but I don't like them either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelli Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 It is so interesting to me that Ezzo is lumped with Pearl. I read 'On Becoming Baby Wise' and the ONLY thing I can remember from that book is the 'order' of nursing/awake/sleeping and the recommendation to not nurse a baby to sleep. Which, btw, worked like magic for me and my baby begin sleeping 5-6 hours at 6 weeks within a few days of implenting that order. Maybe that is a natural time table anyway and ds would have begun sleeping that much with a change to his schedule. I don't remember anything about starving my infant (the 'scheduling' I hear about) but I know *I* would never deny my infant the breast for any reason....so if I was told to do that I would smile and wave and go nurse my baby. However, it does seem that if it was IN the book I would have been sufficiently turned off that I would not be finising the book or recommending it. I certainly don't remember anything about 'beating a child into submission' but I've read on this board enough times to know that there must be something in the Ezzo book to cause such an adverse reaction in all you smart people. I don't know. It has been 12 years and I'm sure I forgot a lot.....just seems weird to me I didn't 'pick up on' how abusive the Ezzos were/are. :blink: I didn't realize that On Becoming Babywise was the Ezzo guy that everyone on here talked about. I LOVED that book! I recommend it to new moms all the time. It helped me get all of my children into a great awake/eat/sleep schedule. I fed them if they were hungry (milk supply did not run out BTW), but tried very hard not to nurse them to sleep instead letting them fall asleep on their own. My two dds slept throught the night at 12 weeks and my ds slept throught the night at 8 weeks. My babies were all very happy and busy little things as well. The routine actually helped them to be happier I think. If the book had said anything about beating the sin out of a baby, then I would have dropped it like a hot potato. Now I'm totally embarassed and ashamed that I've been recommending that book for so long, even buying it as baby shower gifts. Ughhhhh! :willy_nilly: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 :blink: I didn't realize that On Becoming Babywise was the Ezzo guy that everyone on here talked about. I LOVED that book! I recommend it to new moms all the time. It helped me get all of my children into a great awake/eat/sleep schedule. I fed them if they were hungry (milk supply did not run out BTW), but tried very hard not to nurse them to sleep instead letting them fall asleep on their own. My two dds slept throught the night at 12 weeks and my ds slept throught the night at 8 weeks. My babies were all very happy and busy little things as well. The routine actually helped them to be happier I think. If the book had said anything about beating the sin out of a baby, then I would have dropped it like a hot potato. Now I'm totally embarassed and ashamed that I've been recommending that book for so long, even buying it as baby shower gifts. Ughhhhh! :willy_nilly: IKR!! I was the same way! I don't recommend it anymore just because of the association with the Pearl's AND apparently the Ezzo's 'other' version is icky AND as Mrs. Mungo just pointed out the Ezzos also have icky lectures. Sooooo glad you also didn't remember 'beating the sin out the baby' parts to that book.:tongue_smilie: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 Here is an extensive report on Gary Ezzo. It includes quotes from videos. This might help. http://www.ezzo.info/Aney/drmcclain.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.