Gary Ezzo parenting methods--problems?

[Lang Syne Boardie]

I won't go into all the damage I've seen from the Ezzos work. I just can't believe anyone is still recommending it, or that any new parent would want to take parenting advice from people who don't have good relationships with their grown children. Who wants those results?

[ktgrok]

Oh, okay,  So one can breastfeed as needed during the day and then sleep at night as long as the baby sleeps?  Babywise was popular when my kids were small at least the youngest.  (20 years ago),   I really didn't see a reason to feed on a strict schedule.  I mean, I fed in the morning when baby woke up and also right before going to sleep at night but the rest of the time was played by ear.

 

With a very young newborn you should wake them after 4 hours. But later, yes, let them sleep. But during the day it would be more often. Played by ear. You know, feed the baby when the baby is hungry. But Ezzo says that leads to tyrants who will become sociopaths or something dumb. 

[ktgrok]

My biggest thing with this and other "eat/play/sleep" schedules is it steals from the mother and baby those prescious times of rocking or nursing or singing an infant to sleep. We've snuggled/nursed/held our babies for a millennia, and now these things are "bad habits" and "spoiling". Bull poop!

 

Can you imagine never ever having rocked your little baby to sleep, or had them fall asleep in your arms? That's a travesty. And yet, that's what so many parenting books say - NEVER rock/nurse/etc your baby to sleep or you are dooming them to a life of poor sleep, bossiness, and bullying. 

 

Bull poop. 

 

Damn, I'm hormonal and pregnant and now I'm going to cry. 

 

I've never met a great grandma that regrets holding/nursing/rocking her babies. 

[dirty ethel rackham]

My biggest thing with this and other "eat/play/sleep" schedules is it steals from the mother and baby those prescious times of rocking or nursing or singing an infant to sleep. We've snuggled/nursed/held our babies for a millennia, and now these things are "bad habits" and "spoiling". Bull poop!

 

Can you imagine never ever having rocked your little baby to sleep, or had them fall asleep in your arms? That's a travesty. And yet, that's what so many parenting books say - NEVER rock/nurse/etc your baby to sleep or you are dooming them to a life of poor sleep, bossiness, and bullying.

 

Bull poop.

 

Damn, I'm hormonal and pregnant and now I'm going to cry.

 

I've never met a great grandma that regrets holding/nursing/rocking her babies.

Yeah. This. And ... there are hormones that the mother creates during nursing that help induce sleep. Some in the milk that help a baby sleep and some in the mom that relax her and help her sleep. The eat/play/sleep routine disrupts those natural hormones.

 

I don't regret a minute of holding my sleeping babies. They were never tyrants, but little people who needed to feel secure in the world. The neediness of my children ended up having special needs.

 

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

[Bluegoat]

My biggest thing with this and other "eat/play/sleep" schedules is it steals from the mother and baby those prescious times of rocking or nursing or singing an infant to sleep. We've snuggled/nursed/held our babies for a millennia, and now these things are "bad habits" and "spoiling". Bull poop!

 

Can you imagine never ever having rocked your little baby to sleep, or had them fall asleep in your arms? That's a travesty. And yet, that's what so many parenting books say - NEVER rock/nurse/etc your baby to sleep or you are dooming them to a life of poor sleep, bossiness, and bullying. 

 

Bull poop. 

 

Damn, I'm hormonal and pregnant and now I'm going to cry. 

 

I've never met a great grandma that regrets holding/nursing/rocking her babies. 

 

I don't know, I've really rethought my earlier assumptions on regularly nursing to sleep - that it made no difference and longer or easier sleep routines were totally just internal developmental issues. 

 

  No, I don't think it creates bossy bullies or will ruin their lives.  I do think though that it may contribute significantly in many children  to night waking and very long bedtime routines where parents have to stay with kids until they fall asleep.  Which is fine for some I guess but a lot of parents are totally burned out after two years of that.  And sure, some kids sleep well no matter what - but I think that is not the norm.

 

I personally had three kids who all followed a pattern where they became worse sleepers as nursing to sleep became the norm, and they could not go to bed along until I night weaned, which was super-stressful for all of us when it happened.  It was also really stressful when they were tired and couldn't sleep without mum and I wasn't around, or I had some pretty bad parenting moments brought on by lack of sleep. 

 

At the time, I thought my kids were unusual at responding the way they did, I guess because I accepted the premise.  Now, having seen the difference night weaning made to them no matter what the age, and also seeing a lot more of other people's kids and how they responded, I'm sure that it affects the sleep cycle for a lot of them, and the idea that it doesn't actually seem pretty improbable.  And I'm sure people have loving nursing relationships even when they don't nurse their kids to sleep.

[Heathermomster]

My issue with Ezzo is the legalism and his general attitude towards children.  I read the 2nd book where he kept referring to babies as foolish.   :cursing: He is opposed to AP practices.  I could care less about that.  What I do care about is making a baby cry it out.  Two of my friends have children with major food allergies, reflux, and sensory issues.  I don't recall Ezzo ever addressing those issues.  If those babies were left to cry it out, that would be terrible as their basic medical and dietary needs would not be addressed or delayed.  I just think his attitude stinks.  

[maize]

Sounds like my 19 yo. I never read Ezzo, but we had a pediatrician who tried to get me to put him on a very strict feeding schedule (his exact words were "It's good for them to go hungry sometimes) and use the cry-it-out method at night. We left that practice rather quickly.

 

Anyway, later when he was diagnosed with ADHD we learned that it's common for people with it to have trouble sleeping. ADHD is present from birth, you just usually don't know it. Most likely his sleep issues even as an infant were related to his condition. I can't imagine how awful it would have been for him if I had followed that doctor's advice.

This may explain my children, I have four with diagnosed ADHD.

[maize]

Anxiety also runs in my family, and I think plays a big role in how children sleep and how much need they have for attachment and comfort. My infants' need to be close to me is very strong and I am grateful I have always listened to my instincts and sense of their needs; anxiety doesn't go away just because it is ignored.

[Laurie4b]

I believe Babywise is the secular, sanitized book. Growing Kids God's Way was the real deal.  His Christian writings are what created so much danger to children because he asserted that 1) people don't have instincts; thus mother's shouldn't "trust their instincts" (not that that term is about technical instincts, but what the heck) . This shamed mothers who clearly had reason to question the effect of his methods on their infants into refraining from acting on her own "carnal" judgment and 2) any deviation from "his" way was deviating from God's way and would lead to the child's sin nature becoming dominant.  (Yep. The easy way to get rid of a sin nature. Just follow Gary Ezzo.)  It went beyond breastfeeding on demand (pretty much of the devil) to abusive child discipline practices.  

 

It's the conflating of his way and God's way that was sucked up by so many churches and fed to their congregants. Our church did not, but a woman in our church had been influenced by friends who were Ezzo followers. Her baby was like 3 months old and didn't weigh much more than mine did at birth. The pediatrician had been urging her to feed on demand but her dh was saying that her pediatrician wasn't a Christian and she should follow the Christian recommendation. Someone had suggested that she call me (no idea why) to encourage her to keep up the Ezzo program. When I heard the program explained, I remember replying (with an utter lack of tact), "That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! The Bible doesn't teach that!"  

 

Truly, whether Babywise itself is abusive or not, that man and his wife have caused so much anguish to Christian families who cannot take back some of the stuff they did to their kids; some failure -to-thrive cases have been attributed to Ezzo advice, etc. that I would not want one penny of my money to go to them. 

 

 

Edited January 10, 2017 by Laurie4b

[Lady Florida.]

My biggest thing with this and other "eat/play/sleep" schedules is it steals from the mother and baby those prescious times of rocking or nursing or singing an infant to sleep. We've snuggled/nursed/held our babies for a millennia, and now these things are "bad habits" and "spoiling". Bull poop!

 

Can you imagine never ever having rocked your little baby to sleep, or had them fall asleep in your arms? That's a travesty. And yet, that's what so many parenting books say - NEVER rock/nurse/etc your baby to sleep or you are dooming them to a life of poor sleep, bossiness, and bullying. 

 

Bull poop. 

 

Damn, I'm hormonal and pregnant and now I'm going to cry. 

 

I've never met a great grandma that regrets holding/nursing/rocking her babies. 

 

I'm out of likes but  :001_wub:  :001_wub:  :001_wub:

 

Though I suspected I didn't know when I had ds that I wouldn't be able to have more children. While I would cherish memories of rocking any number of children to sleep, having had only one I can't imagine having missed out on my one chance at those bonding times. 

 

This may explain my children, I have four with diagnosed ADHD.

 

It's possible.

 

Anxiety also runs in my family, and I think plays a big role in how children sleep and how much need they have for attachment and comfort. My infants' need to be close to me is very strong and I am grateful I have always listened to my instincts and sense of their needs; anxiety doesn't go away just because it is ignored.

 

It's not uncommon for ADHD and anxiety to occur together, especially social anxiety (SAD). While I'm a strong supporter of science and modern medicine, I dislike how so many doctors dismiss a mother's instincts. 

[Scarlett]

I believe Babywise is the secular, sanitized book. Growing Kids God's Way was the real deal.  His Christian writings are what created so much danger to children because he asserted that 1) people don't have instincts; thus mother's shouldn't "trust their instincts" (not that that term is about technical instincts, but what the heck) . This shamed mothers who clearly had reason to question the effect of his methods on their infants into refraining from acting on her own "carnal" judgment and 2) any deviation from "his" way was deviating from God's way and would lead to the child's sin nature becoming dominant.  (Yep. The easy way to get rid of a sin nature. Just follow Gary Ezzo.)  It went beyond breastfeeding on demand (pretty much of the devil) to abusive child discipline practices.  

 

It's the conflating of his way and God's way that was sucked up by so many churches and fed to their congregants. Our church did not, but a woman in our church had been influenced by friends who were Ezzo followers. Her baby was like 3 months old and didn't weigh much more than mine did at birth. The pediatrician had been urging her to feed on demand but her dh was saying that her pediatrician wasn't a Christian and she should follow the Christian recommendation. Someone had suggested that she call me (no idea why) to encourage her to keep up the Ezzo program. When I heard the program explained, I remember replying (with an utter lack of tact), "That is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard! The Bible doesn't teach that!"  

 

Truly, whether Babywise itself is abusive or not, that man and his wife have caused so much anguish to Christian families who cannot take back some of the stuff they did to their kids; some failure -to-thrive cases have been attributed to Ezzo advice, etc. that I would not want one penny of my money to go to them. 

Not directed to you Laurie.....just to everyone who hates the book.

 

Heres the thing that bugs me.  I didn't read Growing Kids Gods Way.  I wouldn't buy a religious book on parenting.  I bought a book called On Becoming Babywise  that I read in a day and implemented a few things that helped me.  I remember nothing dangerous in it.  It isn't Growing Kid's Way even if it did stem from that book in some way.  So I hate that everyone here keeps equating one with the other.  It is really very confusing because if you read OBBW and then everyone tells you 'oh that book is evil'.....it makes you doubt your sanity because OBBW is NOT an evil book.  If you don't want any of your money to go to the people you think wrote an evil book then I guess say that.....but OBBW is just a fairly mundane book.

[Scarlett]

My biggest thing with this and other "eat/play/sleep" schedules is it steals from the mother and baby those prescious times of rocking or nursing or singing an infant to sleep. We've snuggled/nursed/held our babies for a millennia, and now these things are "bad habits" and "spoiling". Bull poop!

 

Can you imagine never ever having rocked your little baby to sleep, or had them fall asleep in your arms? That's a travesty. And yet, that's what so many parenting books say - NEVER rock/nurse/etc your baby to sleep or you are dooming them to a life of poor sleep, bossiness, and bullying. 

 

Bull poop. 

 

Damn, I'm hormonal and pregnant and now I'm going to cry. 

 

I've never met a great grandma that regrets holding/nursing/rocking her babies. 

 

 

Rocking baby to sleep isn't the only time a mother can rock her baby.  I held my son a lot.  We were quite bonded.  But I didn't do well sleeping with him or rocking him to sleep.  Very early on I could put him in his crib and he would go to sleep if it was time for him to sleep.  I don't feel like I missed out at all by not holding him every time he went to sleep. 

[IfIOnly]

Rocking baby to sleep isn't the only time a mother can rock her baby. I held my son a lot. We were quite bonded. But I didn't do well sleeping with him or rocking him to sleep. Very early on I could put him in his crib and he would go to sleep if it was time for him to sleep. I don't feel like I missed out at all by not holding him every time he went to sleep.

Seriously. Although I did cosleeping, extended breatfeeding, baby wearing, no pacis, etc.

 

But I disagree about BW. As mentioned up thread, it is the only book spoken against by the *APA*, specifically regarding fail to thrive in infants. The internet has lots of stories from moms out there very upset that they lost their milk supply following it's breastfeeding schedule. I know some of these moms in real life. There are some on this forum. Some moms did it differently (breastfeeding more often) with following babies, and breastfeeding went great.

Edited January 10, 2017 by ifIonlyhadabrain

[MotherGoose]

I followed Babywise to a degree with all my kids. I didn't breastfeed, and so I can't speak to that. I had absolutely NO experience with babies before having mine, and it was the only book that gave me some idea of what babies might do all day. The hospital sent both mine home with strict feeding schedules as they were small, and so it went along with it. They both ate and slept quite well. I think, as Previous posters have said, that the best thing I got out of it was eat, play, sleep. Getting my babies into that pattern early (they were all pretty calm, easygoing babies, who took to pacifiers and thumbs) helped them get to sleep and stay asleep: they learned very early, when they were still comatose newborns, that it's okay to fall asleep without mama. I have seen folks with different patterns who still have to rock their two or three year old to sleep and I didn't want to do that, I knew for sure. Now, as I said before, I had calm, easygoing babies, and they would probably be fine either way. I do think you can create a 3 year old who feels he can't sleep without mama though by never allowing him to figure it out in infancy. I never allowed mine to cry for a long time, either, but usually a pat and a visit or two settled them down. So, I started doing in infancy what people recommend doing for three year olds who won't go to sleep alone. I also read baby whisperer, and as pp have said, I think it's a more gentle way of doing Babywise. I do love holding a sleeping baby, but I also like the freedom of being able to put my baby in the bed and have him go to sleep alone. That's a lovely thing!

[IfIOnly]

I followed Babywise to a degree with all my kids. I didn't breastfeed, and so I can't speak to that. I had absolutely NO experience with babies before having mine, and it was the only book that gave me some idea of what babies might do all day. The hospital sent both mine home with strict feeding schedules as they were small, and so it went along with it. They both ate and slept quite well. I think, as Previous posters have said, that the best thing I got out of it was eat, play, sleep. Getting my babies into that pattern early (they were all pretty calm, easygoing babies, who took to pacifiers and thumbs) helped them get to sleep and stay asleep: they learned very early, when they were still comatose newborns, that it's okay to fall asleep without mama. I have seen folks with different patterns who still have to rock their two or three year old to sleep and I didn't want to do that, I knew for sure. Now, as I said before, I had calm, easygoing babies, and they would probably be fine either way. I do think you can create a 3 year old who feels he can't sleep without mama though by never allowing him to figure it out in infancy. I never allowed mine to cry for a long time, either, but usually a pat and a visit or two settled them down. So, I started doing in infancy what people recommend doing for three year olds who won't go to sleep alone. I also read baby whisperer, and as pp have said, I think it's a more gentle way of doing Babywise. I do love holding a sleeping baby, but I also like the freedom of being able to put my baby in the bed and have him go to sleep alone. That's a lovely thing!

Maybe they would have slept anyway, or maybe not. ;)

 

We didn't do crying it out either. A bit of swaddling at sleep time for littles (not during awake time the association is there), fussing, patting, or picking up until baby stops fussing and laying them down again- at that point they're even more tired from a bit of fussing and will settle. The point is the routine from very early of settling to sleep when babe is sleepy.

Edited January 10, 2017 by ifIonlyhadabrain

[Scarlett]

Seriously. Although I did cosleeping, extended breatfeeding, baby wearing, no pacis, etc.

 

But I disagree about BW. As mentioned up thread, it is the only book spoken against by the *APA*, specifically regarding fail to thrive in infants. The internet has lots of stories from moms out there very upset that they lost their milk supply following it's breastfeeding schedule. I know some of these moms in real life. There are some on this forum. Some moms did it differently (breastfeeding more often) with following babies, and breastfeeding went great.

 

 

Are you SURE it is OBBW that is named by the APA?  Because I can't for the life of me remember that stuff.

[MotherGoose]

Maybe they would have slept anyway, or maybe not. ;)

 

We didn't do crying it out either. A bit of swaddling at sleep time for littles (not during awake time the association is there), fussing, patting, or picking up until baby stops fussing and laying them down again.

I agree! I know that all of mine were on the "easy" end of things.

 

Ezzo and something like attachment parenting are on two ends of a continuum: one says that If you hold your baby too much, it will have problems. The other says if you don't hold your baby basically all the time, cosleep, breastfeed for ??, it will have problems. The truth, as with most things, lies somewhere in the middle.

Edited January 10, 2017 by MotherGoose

[debinindy]

Yeah. This. And ... there are hormones that the mother creates during nursing that help induce sleep. Some in the milk that help a baby sleep and some in the mom that relax her and help her sleep. The eat/play/sleep routine disrupts those natural hormones.

 

I don't regret a minute of holding my sleeping babies. They were never tyrants, but little people who needed to feel secure in the world. The neediness of my children ended up having special needs.

 

Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk

 

This and what ktgrok said (don't know how to multi quote  :huh: )!

 

I will never regret rocking and snuggling my children to sleep.  And they grew up to be pretty great people despite what Ezzo would say.  

 

Now if I'd had multiples, it might have been a different story ;)

Edited January 10, 2017 by debinindy

[IfIOnly]

Are you SURE it is OBBW that is named by the APA? Because I can't for the life of me remember that stuff.

Very sure. If a baby is eating only when waking every three hours or just every three hours after naps start decreasing AND not breastfeeding at night, that is just not enough stimulation for the breast.

 

I don't expect an answer, but what I have found when digging is mamas who do the three hours during the day and no night nursing and rave about BW:

 

1. Formula fed

2. Had to supplement some with formula

3. Couldn't due to low supply or didn't exclusively breastfed for the first 6 months -recommended by the APA

4. Their didn't or couldn't due to supply issues breastfeed at least for the first 12 months-recommended by the APA

Edited January 10, 2017 by ifIonlyhadabrain

[shawthorne44]

Thing is, I can see it working with an occasional child.   For example, a mother in MOPS talked about how she was anti-schedule.  But, her DD set her own 4-hour schedule.  She said she started to tell the time based on her infant's cries.  As in, 'Oh, it must be X o'clock because DD is crying and she'll want food."  

 

I am anti-scheduling for babies.  This follows that which follows the other thing, yeah, I can get behind that.   DD decided to be toilet-trained as a baby (long story, it hadn't been on my radar).   When I was reading about it, I learned that people had been toilet-training their babies for a long time successfully and without trauma.   But, then doctors aka experts started telling people that not only should the babies/toddlers be toilet-trained, but that they should be on a schedule.   And if the baby didn't produce poop on schedule that you were supposed to insert a soap shard to induce it.  People went heck-no and swung in the other direction.  

 

[Scarlett]

Very sure. If a baby is eating only when waking every three hours or just every three hours after naps start decreasing AND not breastfeeding at night, that is just not enough stimulation for the breast.

 

I don't expect an answer, but what I have found when digging is mamas who do the three hours during the day and no night nursing and rave about BW:

 

1. Formula fed

2. Had to supplement some with formula

3. Couldn't due to low supply or didn't exclusively breastfed for the first 6 months -recommended by the APA

4. Their didn't or couldn't due to supply issues breastfeed at least for the first 12 months-recommended by the APA

 

 

I will take your word for it.  I didn't limit my son bf'ing....I guess I just tossed that suggestion out the window. 

[ktgrok]

Rocking baby to sleep isn't the only time a mother can rock her baby.  I held my son a lot.  We were quite bonded.  But I didn't do well sleeping with him or rocking him to sleep.  Very early on I could put him in his crib and he would go to sleep if it was time for him to sleep.  I don't feel like I missed out at all by not holding him every time he went to sleep. 

 

Oh, I'm not militant. I don't care if sometimes a mom puts them down awake, sometimes asleep, whatever. My objection is to books that say NEVER EVER EVER let them fall asleep nursing or rocking or whatever, or you ruin them for life. It's insanity. 

[IfIOnly]

Scarlett, here an article, if you're interested, about BW and it's link to dehydration and fail to thrive from the APA. http://www.aappublications.org/content/14/4/21

[ktgrok]

I will take your word for it.  I didn't limit my son bf'ing....I guess I just tossed that suggestion out the window. 

 

LOL, then you didn't do Babywise. One of the main parts of it is limiting feedings. 

[ktgrok]

I also find it crazy that a baby suckling to sleep on a thumb or pacifier is "right" and "Independent" and whatever, but suckling to sleep on mom's breast or with a bottle is "wrong" or "spoiling". It's the same thing from the babes perspective...mine hated pacifiers, so they nursed to sleep. That didn't make them more spoiled or dependent or whatever than my sister's kids that needed a pacifier to go to sleep. 

[IfIOnly]

I actually wanted to print the summary from the AAP from the link above because it needs to be said, I think.

 

"Expectant parents often fear the changes a new baby will bring, especially sleepless nights. What new parent wouldn't want a how-to book that promises their baby will be sleeping through the night by three to eight weeks?

 

0ne such book, On Becoming Babywise, has raised concern among pediatricians because it outlines an infant feeding program that has been associated with failure to thrive (FTT), poor milk supply failure, and involuntary early weaning. A Forsyth Medical Hospital Review Committee, in Winston-Salem N.C., has listed 11 areas in which the program is inadequately supported by conventional medical practice. The Child Abuse Prevention Council of Orange County, Calif., stated its concern after physicians called them with reports of dehydration, slow growth and development, and FTT associated with the program. And on Feb. 8, AAP District IV passed a resolution asking the Academy to investigate "Babywise," determine the extent of its effects on infant health and alert its members, other organizations and parents of its findings."

[maize]

I also find it crazy that a baby suckling to sleep on a thumb or pacifier is "right" and "Independent" and whatever, but suckling to sleep on mom's breast or with a bottle is "wrong" or "spoiling". It's the same thing from the babes perspective...mine hated pacifiers, so they nursed to sleep. That didn't make them more spoiled or dependent or whatever than my sister's kids that needed a pacifier to go to sleep.

Agree!

 

Though it is less convenient for mom :)

 

Signed,

 

An experienced human pacifier ;)

[cintinative]

As a box checker type person, Babywise was really bad for us. I was waking my child up to nurse and he was not getting enough sleep. It was a vicious cycle of an overtired baby.  Perhaps I didn't implement it well. When we switched it up and nursed around his sleep schedule, things went so much better.  I did like the Healthy Sleep Habits, Healthy Child book a lot.  

 

As books go, this is a YMMV situation. I know people who loved Babywise and I have met people who hated Healthy Sleep Habits, Healthy Child.

 

Edited for clarity

Edited January 11, 2017 by cintinative

[Happy2BaMom]

Two of my friends have children with major food allergies, reflux, and sensory issues.  I don't recall Ezzo ever addressing those issues.  If those babies were left to cry it out, that would be terrible as their basic medical and dietary needs would not be addressed or delayed.  I just think his attitude stinks.  

 

My son had MAJOR food allergies that went undiagnosed from birth until about 6 weeks old (BTW, I was nursing him - it was what I ate that he was allergic to, so this was not a formula issue.) He rarely slept more than 60-90 minutes EVER his first three weeks of life. The only time he would stop fussing when awake was when he was nursing. I could tell he was miserable, and he was my only at the time, so I could get by by just sleeping when he did, round the clock. It took him two years to totally sleep through the night (and another 10 for us to figure out the other health issues he was having). There were more than a few people around me who thought I was just "catering" to him. 

 

BW was still popular then but thankfully I knew enough to ignore it, despite those well-dressed mothers who confidently claimed it was the reason their babies were so low-need. I used to look at my son's little scrunched up, pained face and think, "my god, if I were to listen to that jacka$$ (Ezzo), I'd be letting this baby scream for hours and hours on end, day after day, while ignoring every distress signal he is trying to send."  

 

I mean.....foolishly making declarations that every mother has to treat every infant a certain rigid way regardless of circumstances.....sorry, in my book, that's evil. Truly. 

 

 

Postscript - my son is 14 now. He and I remain extremely close. He's working on his Eagle rank in Scouts, and he's always been a very sensitive, compassionate and considerate kid. 

[cintinative]

My son had MAJOR food allergies that went undiagnosed from birth until about 6 weeks old (BTW, I was nursing him - it was what I ate that he was allergic to, so this was not a formula issue.) 

 

 I should have mentioned this. We had this also with both our children.  My 1st was a silent refluxer and had an allergy to milk. He did not sleep well, but we compounded it by waking him to feed.  His sleep and temper did improve when I eliminated all dairy from my diet (I was exclusively breastfeeding/pumping). With DS#2, we had the sleep/nurse thing handled better. That said, he had the traditional GERD (think vomiting) and blood in the stool and I went off of dairy, wheat, eggs and soy and it did improve. Neither slept through the night until many many months in. It might have been six months or later.  Definitely not at eight weeks. Sometimes GERD babies nurse to ease the GERD.  

 

I guess my biggest takeaway is there is no one size fits all solution for babies' feeding and sleep schedule.  

 

ETA:  I had to hold both babies upright against my chest for 20 minutes after feeding because of GERD and they absolutely did fall asleep. To try to keep them awake when they need developmentally to sleep is crazy to me.

Edited January 11, 2017 by cintinative

[IfIOnly]

Not justifying the awful advice in BW, but it does cover high needs babies (food allergies, GERD, etc.) and flexibility with the "program" now. I read that many years ago though and can't remember any of the details.

[MSNative]

As a box checker type person, Babywise was really bad for us. I was waking my child up to nurse and he was not getting enough sleep. It was a vicious cycle of an overtired baby. Perhaps I didn't implement it well. When we switched it up and nursed around his sleep schedule, things went so much better. I did like the Healthy Sleep Habits, Healthy Child book a lot.

 

As books go, this is a YMMV situation. I know people who loved Babywise and I have met people who hated Healthy Sleep Habits, Healthy Child.

 

 

 

Edited for clarity

That was my favorite book. (Healthy Sleep Habits not BW) I gave it to good friends when they had their first babies. I still remember being stunned that my kids could go to bed at 7 and wake up at 6 or go to bed at 10 and wake up at 5. Seemed so counterintuitive!

 

 

I'm not a box checker. I was given BW. I liked the idea of a loose schedule: eat, play, sleep. It helped me figure out why my kiddo was crying. But I wasn't militant about schedule. If my baby work up after 2 hours or whatever we just started the cycle again. i can see how it could cause problems if someone tried to follow it to the letter.

Edited January 11, 2017 by MSNative

[Bluegoat]

Agree!

 

Though it is less convenient for mom :)

 

Signed,

 

An experienced human pacifier ;)

 

Less convienient, if she can do it.  I've talked to quite a few moms whose babies just won't sleep without the breast or in arms, so they are crawling into the crib or going to bed at 7 or trying to figure out how to deal with a nursing toddler and baby.  Two of mine were like that.  It was incredibly stressful. 

[Harriet Vane]

Some interesting parallels in our experience:

 

 

My son had MAJOR food allergies that went undiagnosed from birth until about 6 weeks old (BTW, I was nursing him - it was what I ate that he was allergic to, so this was not a formula issue.)

 

Same here. My son was lactose intolerant. All the cheese and milk I was eating was causing him terrible pain.

 

He rarely slept more than 60-90 minutes EVER his first three weeks of life. The only time he would stop fussing when awake was when he was nursing.

 

It was awful. Just a nightmare. He nursed constantly. When he wasn't nursing, he was screaming. All. the. time. And he couldn't sleep--he woke often, and when he woke, he was screaming.

 

I could tell he was miserable, and he was my only at the time, so I could get by by just sleeping when he did, round the clock.

 

Yes, me too. I knew there was something terribly wrong. 

 

It took him two years to totally sleep through the night (and another 10 for us to figure out the other health issues he was having). There were more than a few people around me who thought I was just "catering" to him. 

 

Everyone I spoke with, including my doctor, said some version of, "Yeah, too bad you have a colicky baby. Nothing you can do." Thank God for my midwife--she was the only one to suggest food eliminations to see if it would help. Turns out her son had been lactose intolerant as well. When I gave up dairy, I had a completely different baby within a week. Such blessed relief for all of us. Poor little guy had been in terrible pain. After a month you would never have guessed what a difficult newborn he had been. Once there was no more dairy in my diet, my son became mellow, calm, easy. No more screaming. And he slept much better.

 

BW was still popular then but thankfully I knew enough to ignore it, despite those well-dressed mothers who confidently claimed it was the reason their babies were so low-need. I used to look at my son's little scrunched up, pained face and think, "my god, if I were to listen to that jacka$$ (Ezzo), I'd be letting this baby scream for hours and hours on end, day after day, while ignoring every distress signal he is trying to send."  

 

I thought similar thoughts. Ezzo was quite popular in my church at the time, and I thank God I did not cave in to the pressure. My baby was physically suffering, and a schedule like that would have made his suffering much worse. He needed all the comfort we could give him while we tried to figure out what was wrong. 

 

I mean.....foolishly making declarations that every mother has to treat every infant a certain rigid way regardless of circumstances.....sorry, in my book, that's evil. Truly. 

 

Yes. This.

 

The other thing that bothered me enormously about the BW book (I read it when dd was a baby) was Ezzo's assertion that Jesus had almost certainly been a scheduled baby. I couldn't get past the sheer hubris of that totally unverifiable statement.

 

 

Postscript - my son is 14 now. He and I remain extremely close. He's working on his Eagle rank in Scouts, and he's always been a very sensitive, compassionate and considerate kid. 

 

My son is 15 now and he is also working on his Eagle rank. What a coincidence! He hopes to get his project done this summer. I, too, am proud of the kind, considerate person he is.

 

[Happy2BaMom]

@Harriet (& a few others):

 

The parallels continue. The main allergen for my son was dairy (cow's milk). Any form - milk, cheese, yogurt. When we eliminated that (no thanks to the ped's office, who were completely clueless about food allergies, but rather to the brand-new-at-that-time book, "Happiest Baby on the Block" which discussed them specifically), my son greatly improved within 48 hours. He still was a 'challenging' baby, but he would sleep at least one ~4-hour stretch at night, and usually at least one other ~2-hour one, and have some periods of relative mellowness, which helped me greatly. As we went on, we figured out that he was also allergic to beans, almonds, and soy (again, through me, since I was nursing). Keep in mind I was vegetarian at the time! Talk about a limited diet!

 

He eventually outgrew the almond and soy allergies, but not the dairy, although it is not life-threatening (thankfully). 

 

As far as the claim that Jesus was a scheduled baby....I just don't even know what to say. That's just a whack-job thing to say. Too bad people actually are influenced by things like that, as opposed to standing up and shouting "WT_?" the very instant they come across it.  

 

 

Edited January 11, 2017 by Happy2BaMom

[Ellie]

 

As far as the claim that Jesus was a scheduled baby....I just don't even know what to say. That's just a whack-job thing to say. Too bad people actually are influenced by things like that, as opposed to standing up and shouting "WT_?" the very instant they come across it.  

 

:lol:

[Suzanne in ABQ]

I'm sure it's different for everyone and also depends on what you mean by "sleeping through the night." My breastfed girls slept 6 hours per night at 6 weeks, 7 hrs at 7 wks and 8 hrs at 8 weeks. I loosely followed the baby whisperer method which has some similarities to ezzo but I'm not familiar enough with ezzo to really comment on that.

 

 

I must have followed baby whisperer methods as well, even though I never read the book.  All three of my kids slept exactly like this (8 hrs at 8 weeks).  I did read the Babywise books (old version with older kids, new version with youngest).  I followed the routine, but not any schedule.  I breastfed successfully all three times (11 months with first, 30 months with second, and 18 months with third).  I would have gone longer with the first, but I was pregnant, and my milk must have changed, because she rejected it.  

 

Anyway, I have recommended Babywise to others.  I always explain that it's controversial, and why, and tell them to use what works and dump the rest, and not to get all strict and stressed about it.  It works for some babies/moms, and doesn't work at all for others.  I loved it because it worked so well for us.  I kept a log of feeding/sleeping times, but I didn't ever wait to feed.  I always fed the baby as soon as she/he woke up (including the nighttime, which usually occurred around 3 am).

 

(Main downside is that by having a baby sleep through the night, my body "rebooted" and I started menstruating again at six weeks.  Not much of a break.)

[Scarlett]

LOL, then you didn't do Babywise. One of the main parts of it is limiting feedings.

Lol.....maybe I didn't follow any of it.

[Murphy101]

You mean that all of you who breastfed didn't get to sleep most of the night until at least six months post partum? Or did you all start feeding food at 4 months? I used soy formula for all three kids and they were all sleeping through the night (basically 11 or 12 midnight to 6 am) by about six weeks. I also started food with them at four months, My reasons for not breastfeeding were health related (my health) but if you can't ever sleep more than three hours, I don't think I would want to breastfeed anyway. That sounds like a way to make sure you get sick- long term sleep deprivation. Do most breastfeeding moms really get up every three hours?

I have always fed my babies (under 3 yrs old) on demand regardless of what I fed them. Breast, bottle or solids.

 

With some they seemed to naturally sleep more or better at night and some just didn't. I'd love to say it was all my awesome amazing mothering, but I suspect motheirng was only a contributing factor.

 

I don't think I slept a solid 8 hours in one block from '95-2013. Lol

 

And I'm back to that now. Baby is 10 weeks and she wakes up 3-5 times a night. Sometimes she just cuddles in my bed with me and sleep nurses, sometimes she decides she's in the mood to nurse and chat and nurse back to sleep. She does some of her longest nursing sessions at night and also w have some of our most engaging "conversations" at night too. Obviously if I had to be at work at 8 and have her at daycare by 7am, then whether any of that is beneficial in my opinion or anyone else's wouldn't matter bc work. And I think that's the driving force for many women more than whether they want to or think it best. I find that sad but understandable.

 

But for whatever reason my baby seems to really display her developing during those late night sessions. She chats and plays and smiles during the day, but when all the kids are in bed and the house is quiet? She is a big time night bloomer.

 

I do stay in my bedroom. Lights and sounds are muted or off entirely. No lighting or noise making toys. Lots of wrapped in blankets cuddled up together. I whisper to her when talking and say things like how it's night-night time or bedtime. So I've set the environment for sleep friendly. And eventually I'm sure she will sleep better at night and I'm sure she will transition to her own bed and her own room just fine too. But for now, this is just life with a baby. And at 43, unlike when I was 22 and having my first, it's not like I'm staring down the barrel of doing this for the next 20 years. One, maybe 2 years tops and maybe not even one. And also unlike my 20 yr old past self, I'm not going to feel bad if I sleep until 9am tomorrow or take a nap in the afternoon.

 

I do wish American would get its head out its butt and give tremendously longer maternity leaves. 6 weeks is really very young and far far too early to start demanding schedules of babies imnsho. There is a ridiculous amount of pressure on moms of very young babies to make those babies be a certain way by certain very arbitrary and not always developmentally appropriate time frames.

[Suzanne in ABQ]

Very sure. If a baby is eating only when waking every three hours or just every three hours after naps start decreasing AND not breastfeeding at night, that is just not enough stimulation for the breast.

 

I don't expect an answer, but what I have found when digging is mamas who do the three hours during the day and no night nursing and rave about BW:

 

1. Formula fed

2. Had to supplement some with formula

3. Couldn't due to low supply or didn't exclusively breastfed for the first 6 months -recommended by the APA

4. Their didn't or couldn't due to supply issues breastfeed at least for the first 12 months-recommended by the APA

 

 

Sorry, but this is just not true.  You can't be "very sure".  You may have "done some digging", but you didn't ask me or many, many women who had great success with eat/play/sleep routine.  It's true that three hours isn't frequent enough for some babies (my good friend's baby gorged every hour and doubled his weight in two months).  But a 3 hour routine is just fine for many others.  Saying it never works is just the same as saying it always does.  Every baby is different.

 

I had three babies.  They didn't need to feed more than every three hours after the first couple weeks.  During the day, I fed them when they woke up, had wakeful play time, then put them down awake when they got sleepy.  I only nursed them to sleep if it was the middle of the night.  As they got older, the wake times increased in duration, and the naps got longer and less frequent.  They all slept at least six hours by the time they were 8 weeks old.  I kept a log during the early weeks, just to help me see trends, but I didn't try to enforce a schedule.  They all naturally settled into about a three hour cycle during the day.

 

So, I fed every three hours during the day, and only once during the night (after 6-8 hours, so around 3 am).  Yet,

1) None of them ever had a drop of formula.  

2) Ever.

3) All three breastfed exclusively for at least six months, then continued breastfeeding along with solid foods until 11 months, 30 months, and 18 months, respectively.  

4) My first dd only breastfed for 11 months, but it wasn't a supply issue.  I was four months pregnant at the time, and my milk must have changed somehow.  One day, she just rejected my milk, and never went back.

 

One thing no one told me was that not feeding at night makes census start sooner.  I started my periods again at six weeks, with all three of my kids.  That would have been nice to know.

[IfIOnly]

Sorry, but this is just not true. You can't be "very sure". You may have "done some digging", but you didn't ask me or many, many women who had great success with eat/play/sleep routine. It's true that three hours isn't frequent enough for some babies (my good friend's baby gorged every hour and doubled his weight in two months). But a 3 hour routine is just fine for many others. Saying it never works is just the same as saying it always does. Every baby is different.

 

I had three babies. They didn't need to feed more than every three hours after the first couple weeks. During the day, I fed them when they woke up, had wakeful play time, then put them down awake when they got sleepy. I only nursed them to sleep if it was the middle of the night. As they got older, the wake times increased in duration, and the naps got longer and less frequent. They all slept at least six hours by the time they were 8 weeks old. I kept a log during the early weeks, just to help me see trends, but I didn't try to enforce a schedule. They all naturally settled into about a three hour cycle during the day.

 

So, I fed every three hours during the day, and only once during the night (after 6-8 hours, so around 3 am). Yet,

1) None of them ever had a drop of formula.

2) Ever.

3) All three breastfed exclusively for at least six months, then continued breastfeeding along with solid foods until 11 months, 30 months, and 18 months, respectively.

4) My first dd only breastfed for 11 months, but it wasn't a supply issue. I was four months pregnant at the time, and my milk must have changed somehow. One day, she just rejected my milk, and never went back.

 

One thing no one told me was that not feeding at night makes census start sooner. I started my periods again at six weeks, with all three of my kids. That would have been nice to know.

Of course it works for some. I said many times (several) on this thread that some but not all women can go that long between nursing sessions. If you care to research the science behind it, it's really interesting why. There really is no arguing with the AAP warnings and the pseudoscience behind the truly awful advice of BW advice for many women that has caused harm to mama and baby. That is NOT what is questionable. Edited January 11, 2017 by ifIonlyhadabrain

[kiwik]

All kids are different. One size fits all is not going to work for everyone. I tried a 3 hour schedule with my oldest - unfortunately a combo of c section, not great nipples, jaundice, poor latch and poor milk supply meant it took him about 2 hours to feed and was constantly tired and hungry. For me it was what seemed a constant cycle of feed and pump for months. He did improve but only because I persisted through bleeding nipples and bottle fed pumped milk and one formula feed a day. The second came out after a 3 hour labour, latched on, fed and went to sleep.

[eternalsummer]

You mean that all of you who breastfed didn't get to sleep most of the night until at least six months post partum?  Or did you all start feeding food at 4 months?  I used soy formula for all three kids and they were all sleeping through the night (basically 11 or 12 midnight to 6 am) by about six weeks.  I also started food with them at four months,  My reasons for not breastfeeding were health related (my health)  but if you can't ever sleep more than three hours, I don't think I would want to breastfeed anyway.  That sounds like a way to make sure you get sick- long term sleep deprivation.  Do most breastfeeding moms really get up every three hours?

 

We co-sleep.  I have had an infant or toddler (and/or been pregnant) for the last decade or so.  I have not slept a full night through often during that time, but I also don't get up much at all during the night (except to pee when pregnant or change newborn diapers).  I formula fed DD1 after about 4 months and all the making and cleaning of bottles was a ton of work.  She never wanted a cold one, so I had to manually warm them at night (no fun!) and instead of just feeding right away the second I woke from her first hunger signals and drifting back to sleep, I had to get up, make the bottle (or warm one up if I still had breastmilk stored), feed her, burp (because she digested formula not as well as breastmilk and had to be burped every time -or maybe it was a bottle issue? not sure) and by then she took a bit to get back to sleep, and then so did I since I'd gotten out of bed and turned on a light and etc.

 

I loathe breastfeeding as I have let-down dysphoria (when my milk lets down I feel a strong sense of impending doom) but it is massively easier, and massively more conducive in my experience to sleeping at night, than bottle feeding.

 

If you don't co-sleep, though, it might be more of a wash, since you have to get out of bed, turn on a light, settle the baby back down, etc. etc.  

[DawnM]

Sounds like my 19 yo. I never read Ezzo, but we had a pediatrician who tried to get me to put him on a very strict feeding schedule (his exact words were "It's good for them to go hungry sometimes) and use the cry-it-out method at night. We left that practice rather quickly.

 

Anyway, later when he was diagnosed with ADHD we learned that it's common for people with it to have trouble sleeping. ADHD is present from birth, you just usually don't know it. Most likely his sleep issues even as an infant were related to his condition. I can't imagine how awful it would have been for him if I had followed that doctor's advice.

 

I think I have told this story before on these boards, but it bears repeating.

 

We decided to do the cry it out method one night.  Into the crib he went, he was maybe 12-18 months old.  He cried and screamed for an hour.  I finally decided it wasn't worth it and went in there.

 

He was COVERED in diarrhea.  He had had a major blow out, turned out to have a fever, and needed to be changed, his sheets needed changing, he needed a bath to actually clean up, and he was miserable.

 

I decided right then and there that those who prescribed this method were nuts.  Can you imagine if the poor kid had slept like that all night?

[Lang Syne Boardie]

As far as standing up in a religious setting and reacting with a look of disbelief and a question of WTAF (especially regarding the concepts that Jesus was Ezzo'ed and all these ideas are biblical), I did that. Got thrown out of a church and lost about 20 of my closest childhood friends who had all grown up to believe in Ezzoism at almost cult-like levels of devotion. Fun times!!

[poppy]

I think I have told this story before on these boards, but it bears repeating.

 

We decided to do the cry it out method one night.  Into the crib he went, he was maybe 12-18 months old.  He cried and screamed for an hour.  I finally decided it wasn't worth it and went in there.

 

He was COVERED in diarrhea.  He had had a major blow out, turned out to have a fever, and needed to be changed, his sheets needed changing, he needed a bath to actually clean up, and he was miserable.

 

I decided right then and there that those who prescribed this method were nuts.  Can you imagine if the poor kid had slept like that all night?

 

 

The Cry It Out method is not "leave the baby for an hour in isolation, screaming". That is nuts. Is that what Ezzo says to do?

 

The Cry It Out method mostly commonly refers to advice in Richard Ferber's book (which is why it's also known as "Ferberization".)   It includes checking on the baby regularly. It's been a few years, but if I remember right, it's every 3 minutes in the beginning. You don't want the baby to think you have left him, or he'll never feel safe enough to fall asleep.

 

I don't think it works for everyone or is always a good idea, I'm not the Cry It Out champion, I just want to say that Ferber is worlds different than Ezzo.

[maize]

I think I have told this story before on these boards, but it bears repeating.

 

We decided to do the cry it out method one night. Into the crib he went, he was maybe 12-18 months old. He cried and screamed for an hour. I finally decided it wasn't worth it and went in there.

 

He was COVERED in diarrhea. He had had a major blow out, turned out to have a fever, and needed to be changed, his sheets needed changing, he needed a bath to actually clean up, and he was miserable.

 

I decided right then and there that those who prescribed this method were nuts. Can you imagine if the poor kid had slept like that all night?

A friend of mine used cry it out methods. One night she heard her baby (probably about 12-15 months old) crying in the middle of the night but he did eventually stop. When she went in in the morning she found that he had vomited all over his bed and had to sleep that way the rest of the night.

 

Crying is a baby's way of signalling distress; I cannot fathom how adults can think that ignoring a distress signal is the healthiest thing to do.

[Bluegoat]

The Cry It Out method is not "leave the baby for an hour in isolation, screaming". That is nuts. Is that what Ezzo says to do?

 

The Cry It Out method mostly commonly refers to advice in Richard Ferber's book (which is why it's also known as "Ferberization".)   It includes checking on the baby regularly. It's been a few years, but if I remember right, it's every 3 minutes in the beginning. You don't want the baby to think you have left him, or he'll never feel safe enough to fall asleep.

 

I don't think it works for everyone or is always a good idea, I'm not the Cry It Out champion, I just want to say that Ferber is worlds different than Ezzo.

 

Yeah, that is what Ferber reccomends.  There are some who find tough that going back in makes their baby stay awake a lot longer.

[Bluegoat]

I actually don't think it is so much a problem with babies, for many people.  Many are quite willing to go settle a baby every time she wakes up and they probably have help or some expectation that life is going to be disordered with an infant.

 

It's when the same sleep habit carries on when the child is a toddler or even a pre-schooler that I see parents getting really frantic.  So, between about one and five.  I hear people say "well don't have kids ten" and I think that is incredibly unfair, that is a lot of sleep deprivation, and also a lot of life deprivation when you are having to lay down with a child for hours every night before they go to sleep, or you are sleeping every night in a different room from your partner. It seems to be a bit of a cascade effect - they nurse baby to sleep consistently so there is more night waking than there might be.  To manage this they end up co-sleeping full time, which is often delightful with a baby.  But then the baby will only sleep in arms or with an adult, and gets bigger so it requires laying down.  And suddenly you can find yourself with a small child who isn't a baby who needs you to lay with them all night, starting at bedtime, and also for naps. 

 

Then they may start thinking about sleep training, even if they hate the idea, because they aren't functioning well.  Plus, they've probably spent a lot of time trying to change the sleep habit which becomes very stressful and a source of conflict for everyone, and sleep training, even if they hate the idea, at least seems better than a nightly battle.

 

I think this sort of experience is where the idea of avoiding the nursing/sleep association in the first place comes from.  No, not every kid will have the same experience, but its common enough, and of course with a baby you don't know what sort she will be.  If you hate the idea of sleep training, avoiding what might put you in a position where it seems the only option seems like a good idea.

[maize]

I actually don't think it is so much a problem with babies, for many people. Many are quite willing to go settle a baby every time she wakes up and they probably have help or some expectation that life is going to be disordered with an infant.

 

It's when the same sleep habit carries on when the child is a toddler or even a pre-schooler that I see parents getting really frantic. So, between about one and five. I hear people say "well don't have kids ten" and I think that is incredibly unfair, that is a lot of sleep deprivation, and also a lot of life deprivation when you are having to lay down with a child for hours every night before they go to sleep, or you are sleeping every night in a different room from your partner. It seems to be a bit of a cascade effect - they nurse baby to sleep consistently so there is more night waking than there might be. To manage this they end up co-sleeping full time, which is often delightful with a baby. But then the baby will only sleep in arms or with an adult, and gets bigger so it requires laying down. And suddenly you can find yourself with a small child who isn't a baby who needs you to lay with them all night, starting at bedtime, and also for naps.

 

Then they may start thinking about sleep training, even if they hate the idea, because they aren't functioning well. Plus, they've probably spent a lot of time trying to change the sleep habit which becomes very stressful and a source of conflict for everyone, and sleep training, even if they hate the idea, at least seems better than a nightly battle.

 

I think this sort of experience is where the idea of avoiding the nursing/sleep association in the first place comes from. No, not every kid will have the same experience, but its common enough, and of course with a baby you don't know what sort she will be. If you hate the idea of sleep training, avoiding what might put you in a position where it seems the only option seems like a good idea.

My mom was a put the baby in the crib to sleep mom. Worked great with her first two.

 

Than she got baby #3 who woke up every two hours all night long demanding to nurse. She ended up co-sleeping out of desperation. That child wouldn't sleep alone for years, when she eventually did she still had sleep anxiety and would sleep curled in a ball at the foot of the bed with all the covers over her head.

 

I was that child, I remember being the three year old who had to sleep with mom. And honestly, I don't think mom had anything to do with "creating" that issue; the sleep approach that worked well for my older siblings didn't work at all for me. I didn't sleep well and didn't feel secure in bed from day one. When my oldest was born, she could not sleep alone--not even in the hospital all swaddled up. She fussed and cried and woke frequently. When I pulled her into bed with me she relaxed and slept.