Wednesday, April 6, 2011

#212 Growing Kids God’s Way aka Babywise

96% of parents in Christian culture own a copy of Growing Kids God’s Way by Gary and Anne Marie Ezzo. The alternate version, On Becoming Babywise, is the secular edition, written by the same people but with all the God stuff taken out.

Growing Kids God’s Way enters your house by way of a church friend who loans it to you with ecstatic recommendation. “You can finally get some rest once your baby sleeps through the night! It just takes some discipline at first but it pays off!” The exhausted parent likes the sound of this. That baby sure is needy. Wakes them up every few hours to eat and stuff. The parents would like some sleep too so they don’t feel like fried hell all day. Plus, it’s God’s way. It says so right in the title. The Ezzos’ infant management plan (as they call it) enacted that very night.

It sounds reasonable enough. Put your baby on a schedule, what’s wrong with that? Schedules make children feel secure. But to schedule-ize your newborn you must let it cry. A lot. The Ezzos instruct you to be strong and not give in. They believe babies begin to show their sin nature early by crying for multiple feedings and encroaching on the parents’ schedule. They say that if you feed the baby when she cries, you are teaching her that the family revolves around her. And that’s not God’s way. (Or is it?)

Earnest Christians in the subtle trappings of Christian culture want to follow everything their church recommends, especially if it’s deemed to be God’s way. Per the counter-intuitive Ezzo guidelines, the baby is not fed when hungry but is woken from sound sleep so it will get on the mom’s schedule. The Ezzos reassure you that eventually the baby won’t cry so much and you’ll get eight hours of sleep a night by the time she’s two months old. But…why? The book’s implication is that the rest you get and control you’re exerting over your household will make it worthwhile. No validation is given to the primal mothering instinct. You can’t explain instinct. To the black-and-white thinking that sovereign in Christian culture, instinct is to be mistrusted and if at all possible, disregarded. There is no discussion about why God would endow mothers with such a strong instinct, either. No thought seems to be given to the emotional connection between parents and their children that is formed through “inconvenient” nighttime feedings and the like. No assertion that Jesus said serving others, especially the least of them, is serving him. No credence is given to the ways parents grow as people through the trials of parenting. Christian culture wants themselves a schedule and by golly, a schedule they shall have.

People enjoy books on what the Bible says in lieu of reading the Bible itself. It’s a daunting study, the original languages and contexts at all. People are content to believe what they are told about contexts and interpretations rather than go to the actual texts themselves.

Babywise may be the epitome of Christian culture mentality, coaching you to change your instincts or at least ignore them.

Further reading: Reviews and professional analyses of Babywise, Growing Kids God's Way and other Ezzo-authored material here. LHJ article here. Salon article here. Two YouTube videos from Babywise-endorsing mothers here and here.


Melmac said...

I'm pretty sure the Bible doesn't say anything about crying it out. But, as always, people will use it to back up whatever philosophy they subscribe to.

Abby Normal said...

How do the folks writing these books explain how a little critter with a stomach the size of a walnut is supposed eat enough to last eight hours without feeling hungry?

Also, while the "getting up at night" phase is hellish, it's also pretty short-lived in the grand scheme of things. (My own little guy was sleeping a good six hours at night by two months, and regular nights of sleep didn't come too long after that.)

Seems to me that the majority of folks doing this method will just find out that they can't keep up with it--and when they do it'll be because THEY were doing it wrong or were less-than-Godly parents, not that the method is flawed (also a very Christian culture mentality!)

Katsicle said...

Oh no, for once I'm not sure I agree :)

The GKGW thing is a bit iffy I reckon, but not for the bubs. Babies do cry a whole lot less when they're on routine, and it normally only take a couple of nights to get them on it (so it's not decaded of crying....and of course you can cuddle your baby, it's not sin nature). My mum and dad used to teach GKGW and I didn't like it because there was a lot of smacking in it...but I actually do like the baby schedule, because then life and kids etc. can be planned and baby is much happier! :) I'm trying to explain it in practical sense, not in religious if I'm unclear...sorry...

brackman said...

katsicle, i totally agree with you about the schedule. it made a huge difference and is actually better for the baby. we used it for both our boys and they are now 7 and 5, both in the 97th percentile for height and weight and they were on a feeding and sleeping schedule. obviously there are times you may need to alter it but i wouldn't be quick to throw the baby out with the bath water...sorry ;). the trick is getting past the religious hoodoo and seeing how practical it really is. your baby won't starve or become sleep deprived. i promise.

urname said...

Umm... please read the following article - published in 1998 by the American Academy of Pediatrics - on "failure to thrive," infant malnutrition (etc.
etc.) and the Ezzo's books/regime:

See this, too:

stephy said...

katsicle and brackman,

Just please look at the links I put at the bottom of the post. There are many more links here: for more information, where it also says "Babywise has been criticized by tons of professionals in pediatric medicine, human lactation, psychology, anthropology, child development, and theology. Problems have been associated with these programs -- cases of slow weight gain, failure to thrive, depressed babies, even hospitalization. Its feeding recommendations were the subject of a warning sent out by the AAP."


Lorelei said...

besides all the problems listed above, there's Attachment Disorder, which i've also seen associated with babywise. :\

Janie said...


For all the same reasons the couple in the LHJ article hates Babywise, I love Babywise. I understand the issues you have but it makes me wonder if you've read the book. The Ezzo's really aren't hardnosed about scheduling.

Perhaps what all mothers need is not to feel as though they have no brains. Why do perfectly smart, well educated women check their brains at the labor and delivery room door? While I may not have been endowed with great motherly instinct I do have a brain. Why are any of us letting GKGW or La Leche League tell us what to do? We can read up on the approaches, decide what works best for our kids, and adjust accordingly.

My son didn't sleep through the night after 8 months of demand feeding. Who need 8 months of sleeplessness? (It wreaks havoc with a marriage) He only slept through the night after I incorporated the Ezzo's principles into his life. I was determined to start a little earlier with my daughter.

I credit the Babywise schedule with saving her life. Why? Because she would not eat and she never cried. She wouldn't latch on to the breast. She would literally turn her head away when I tried to feed her. (On top of that I was not producing enough milk.) Due to some ice storms and office closings, I couldn't get her to the pediatrician for several days. In that time I was spending a good hour trying to feed her even an ounce, determined to get something into her. She would then immediately fall asleep. I would wake her over and over, every 2.5 to 3 hours to try feeding her again.

Let's talk about how LaLeche League...which had convinced me I was a bad mother if I gave her formula. A bottle at this point would have been extremely helpful! (easier to suck on than a mother with little milk to offer) But, no! Formula and bottles were for selfish mothers. They were the enemies! The only way to bond with baby according to LLL was to breast feed. So while I had perfectly good bottles of formula sitting right next to me, the guilt from LLL kept me from giving it to her.

By the time I got her to the doctor she had gone from a birth weight of 8 lbs to 6 lbs. That's a 25% drop in 2 weeks. Drs are alarmed at a 10% drop. She was immediately hospitalized, terribly dehydrated, failure to thrive, and was in danger of stroke! Which I'm convinced would have happened if I hadn't stuck with force feeding her every 3 hours. Why? Because my pathetic motherly instinct would have been thinking she was a "good baby".

I would agree that people get all "black and white" about GKGW. The principles of Babywise really aren't that hardline--the baby is a welcome member of the family to the Ezzos, not an intrusion as you seem to imply. And, I'm only talking about Babywise, not the stuff for older kids.

I missed out on 8 months of sleep with one baby because I listened to the demand feeders. My daughter's life was spared thanks to a schedule.

My kids are now 17 and 21. Perfectly heathly tho one was demand fed breast milk and the other was bottle fed formula. Most babies will live through either approach. The problem is that the demand feeding really just turns into demanding children. When, oh when, do you finally parent the kid? When do they stop getting what they want when they want it? At some point, you have to be the parent! Maybe you don't want to start when they're newborns, but you WILL have to start eventually. And it's much harder to retrain a child then to train them.

James said...

Not a parent so I don't have the experience, but I learned recently that in most countries around the world that children sleep with their mothers (and oftentimes fathers) sometimes as long as for five years.

Doesn't solve the sleepless problem but probably helps mitigate the effects.

Kari Ann said...

Babies are all different, as are their parents, as are their families. What works for one baby/family may not work for another.
Can we please avoid all of the debate over different child-rearing approaches and just agree that it's okay to be different?

Parenting is difficult enough without added guilt about schedules vs on-demand, formula vs breastfeeding, spanking vs not, etc.
As long as the child is content, healthy, thriving, and is in a loving, stable environment, the little differences really aren't that important.

(Note: this comment is NOT directed at the post's content or anyone else's comment. It's an attempt at a preventative plea that this comment section will not turn into a massive debate of "XXX method is better than XXX method".)

Anonymous said...

I actually think a bigger problem than what method is best is that the Ezzo's are selling their method as "God's" method. This makes them impossible to argue with. It takes critical thinking out of the equation.

Anonymous said...

If there's one thing that Mary and Joseph had when they had Jesus, it was totally a scheduled stop in a pre-reserved hotel. :)

Anonymous said...

I'm absolutely with Kari Ann. Each child/mother/family is different. Intuition, experience and education can vary- it can offer many results.

Equally with the anonymous post directly below that. I think the worst of their offenses is selling it as "THE Biblical approach" to rearing Children. This goes beyond polarization... into possible abuse. Suggest it as a method. Back it with research. Explain opinion. Sure. However, do NOT suggest this is God's only truth. There are many Godly parents on both sides of the parenting spectrum. There are much more important issues the Bible speaks to in parenting.

Still Breathing said...

The best bit of advice we were given, by a wise old mid-wife, was to put a hotwater bottle in the babies cot when they woke for a night feed. If you don't do that the baby goes from a nice warm snuggle back into a cold cot the shock of which makes it wake up! We hit on a routine that worked for us - the baby would wake us, I'd go and get the baby while my wife sorted the pillows out so she could feed, I'd give baby to Mum and go and get a hotwater bottle, fill it and put it in the cot. At this point I would return to bed and fall back to sleep. My wife would return the baby to a warm cot and bring the hotwater bottle back to warm up the bottom of the bed so she didn't get cold feet.

reborn1995 said...


Maybe you already saw this, but i read it and thought you'd really appreciate some of the criticisms:

i thought the one about choosing a church because of its music was particularly good.


The Rodney said...

I am suspect of anyone claiming to know "God's Way" about anything. Mother's instinct is there because God put it there. The idea that children who feed on demand grow up to be poor behaved children is nonsense. Not catering to your babies needs on his/her schedule, for your own sake, makes you selfish. What's next... training them to only wet a diaper when you're ready to change them? I haven't read the book but I am pretty sure there is very little in the scriptures about how to care for a baby. These two authors just jumped on the Christian Culture band wagon and made out like thieves. Good for them. Kinda like the moron who wrote the Jabez book then people made small fortunes selling coins with Jabez on them..... silly people... fads aren't for thinkers! Besides if they can still sell their book in a secular book shelf is it really God's Way?
Father of FIVE

j.p. said...

Janie, It sounds like you had a really rough experience with your daughter when she was little. I'm so sorry to hear that, it must have been very frightening. And I'm very sorry you were made to feel that formula feeding would have been so awful.

I don't know who from LLL would have made you think that not feeding your baby often would have been good. I have a 1yo, and the advice I got from everyone including LLL (here's a link show that newborns should be fed every 2-3 hours. Feeding them often isn't usually what people mean by "scheduling" as "scheduling" is usually code for getting a baby to sleep through the night. Most newborns still need to eat every 2-3 hours--even overnight (though some can wait 3-4 hours)--and the criticism toward GKGW/Babywise is that they suggest every 2-3 hours but then expect babies to sleep through the night with no feedings. Just like your little one needed regular feedings, many need them overnight as well.

As far as when kids stop getting what they want when they want it, in my opinion it's not an all-or-nothing deal. For a newborn there is no "want" there is only "need." Newborns need diapers changed, they need to be held, they need to be fed (often!). As babies mature, some needs and wants begin to be distinguishable (ie. wanting a toy vs. needing food) and as that develops, so does the parent's ability to say "no" to some things sometimes. And, I would also argue that being a parent is more about nurturing and teaching a child than about establishing rules.

Annie said...

As Janie said, if we wouldn't check our brains at the door we'd be fine. Call it instinct or common sense, there are parts of every parenting book that work for some and don't work for others. It's the insecure who attach to one way and only one way (God's Way, in this case) and are sure to raise some interesting children!

Our infinitely wise and creative God made every snowflake different and surely he made every child unique too. His way is to make each one a unique challenge when it comes to being raised so that a parent must depend on Him for guidance.

Kevin said...

Baby-smacking AND unhealthy baby-scheduling? Sounds like the plan for me. "Oh, baby doesn't like starvation?" SMACK! Now that's what Jesus would do.

TulipGirl said...

While some babies "fit" with the BW schedule (as it seems Janie's did), manymanymany more don't -- because it goes against what we know about the design for breastmilk production, infant sleep, growth and development. For every one mother who has older children who still likes Babywise, I know a DOZEN mothers who ditched BW and found out it was harmful in the long run. Just a few:

The Ezzos have a "new" copy of the "Prep for Parenting" coming out with some significant revisions. The Ezzos still don't acknowledge that their critics have valid points -- but at least they do modify the materials to address the most serious concerns.

But. . . beyond Babywise. . . I think the point of the article is the more serious concern. . . the attitude that one man's ideas are "God's Way" (especially a man who is so sloppy with Scripture.)

I would posit that the materials for toddlers and older children are more harmful to a family (spiritually and emotionally) than the infant stuff. . .

It's a shame this stuff is still around, being "discovered" by a new generation of parents. . . getting trapped in its moralism and losing sight of the Gospel.

Anonymous said...

The most striking and terrible thing to me about this post is that these supposed " christian parenting experts" have the audacity to claim that it is a baby's sin nature that is emerging, if they try to disrupt the parents' set schedule. Routine is the key , in my experience the schedule is more about the parents' pride not the baby's well being. " look little Aiden can fall asleep in his crib in five minutes ". Babies are not trying to manipulate us with their sin nature but using their God given ability to cry to let us know that they need love , are hungry or are tired etc. A book like this sounds like it does more harm than good.

the Hawks said...

Gosh, I'm glad you wrote this. If only those individuals read your blog. A brand new mother myself, I can't imagine viewing my newborn son as sinful, manipulative, or the subject of my schedule. You HIT IT ON THE HEAD when you compared the so called inconvenience of parenting to the service Jesus demands of His followers. Total other-centeredness. Total self-gift. Total sacrifice.

And how glorious it is, man, to image God to my kid by giving without counting the cost.

On another note, this sh*t reminds me of the recent Diane Sawyer interview with the IFB churches that tell their parents to start spanking their 2 month old babies when they won't stop crying.

Jesus, You can't come fast enough.

the Hawks said...

okay, for those who might condone such books, I highly recommend the Sears Parenting Library. Christians, level-headed, plenty of practical and medical experience.

Never involves "smacking" or crying it out. Tons of explanation as to why both practices may not be raising the best kids.

Another: Parenting with Grace. It's Catholic (as am I), so I'm sure that's a turnoff for some people, but I have a feeling it's rather in line with the Bible.

Just sayin'.

gaypet said...

I have been trying to think of something constructive to say here but the rage I feel about this parenting method overtakes me. There certainly are cases when "crying it out" is necessary for the parents sanity. But it's not because humans are evil and you need to teach them that you will not be there for them if they don't shut up.

Most kids raised with these methods will have attachment issues. There is no right way to parent. But there are wrong ways to parent.

Anonymous said...

Oh my gosh, I LOVE your blog. This is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time and sooo true!

Ruth said...


Great "Waiting for Guffman" reference at the end!

I spent many months feeling like a shitty mother because of that book. And then someone reminded me that my job as a parent was to TAKE CARE OF MY BABY. Which is exactly what I was doing at 2:00 am.

Spot on.

Anonymous said...

I don't understand how it is that these books are still being published. The AAP has concerns about it, I believe James Dobson has expressed concern. But there's also a credibility issue--the Ezzos have been excommunicated from their church, and are estranged from their adult children. Hmmm...

There may be some good stuff in the books. Personally, I am a fan of Dr. Sears and the Gentle Christian Mothers website. I strongly believe God has given mothers instincts. Many of our ideas about parenting are just cultural. I would imagine that Mary slept right next to baby Jesus at night, probably nursed him until he was a toddler or beyond, etc.

brackman said...

i see what you mean but let me make my point. both of my boys, 5 and 7, were raised using a part of baby wise. we used the part that dealt with scheduling. we never denied them. they quickly learned and were on the schedule and both were sleeping through the night in a few months. maybe we were lucky in that they adapted quickly but there hasn't been any issue, developmentally or socially since. as far as discipline, we did start out spanking but quickly realized that they better responded to other forms of punishment. our boys are very well behaved. we have no worries about taking them anywhere. we tell them we love them often and give them a crazy amount of hugs! we have never just given them what they wanted. we established at a healthy age how the family was going to work. there were consequences when a "no" wasn't listened to the first time. i believe god gives us children so we can mirror his love to them. his love isn't always a yes. sometimes its a no and that no hurts, but he's still there for the hug. in no way am i saying that my wife and i are perfect parent or that our way was the best way. we give god all the glory for his blessings. what i'm saying is that there is another way. read a the whole book. decide for yourself. there are good ideas in some sh*itty books. i love this site and i love that we get to talk about this.

Mary said...

Just a little devil's advocate for ya... there is a really great book called "Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child" written by Dr. Marc Weissbluth, M.D. He is coming from a strictly scientific viewpoint and after MANY studies and years of practice, he came to the same conclusions about babies being on a schedules. This book was HUGELY helpful in getting both of my boys into great sleeping routines. They are happy, well-rested little guys who've certainly benefited from this method. You may not agree with letting your kiddos "cry it out" (which is totally fine), but it's not just Christian culture that condones it.

stephy said...

I'm glad you said that. I loved "Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child." There was some crying-it-out involved which was super hard for me (especially with my first) but at least they didn't condone a feeding schedule - that's where I really draw the line. :)

bdb said...

Just found this, and I'm glad you posted about this craziness.
I think of Ezzo as sort of a 'Driscoll' for the parenting world. He is very similar in his manipulative tactics.
It is incredible to me how many millions have trusted Ezzo as some sort of authority on parenting, without knowing he actually has no professional background on child development or breastfeeding whatsoever. (again like Driscoll, with no real professional background)
Here is an interesting book on the developmental stages an infant goes through and how I believe using Ezzo methods can actually cause some damage-

TealRose said...

I am almost 57 - and 'crying it out' and scheduling babies feeds went out of use around that time! By the time I had my own children in the early 80's - we were taught/told how babies should be nursed on demand - because it was healthier for them as their stomachs are so small etc ... Feeding on a schedule just is so unreasonable to a tiny soul who cannot 'eat more because I am going to have to wait 4 hours!' I cannot believe that anyone in this day and age this practise still goes on .. and as for Crying it Out ... that is cruel and unnatural !

Anonymous said...

As a mental health professional with a specialty in infant development, I can tell you that the scientific and psychological community does not support the types of strategies put forth by the Ezzos as divinely instituted. Why? I could go into a lot of biological, psychological, and developmental reasons for this, but the short version is that early childhood (ages 0-3) is first and foremost about relationships. It is in these key years that babies and toddlers make their 'blue print' for how relationships work (see Attachment Theory). While these blue prints can and are changed, it is difficult, and that is why it is SO important for infants and young children to have positive relational experiences during these formative years. Unfortunately, going hungry and 'crying it out' on a regular basis do not teach positive things about what it means to be in relationship. They instead teach that the world is not a safe place, that others are indifferent to my needs, that I, the infant, am unable to do anything to ease my own suffering (the one thing I can do, my crying, being useless, as no one comes), and most of all, that being oriented towards relationship with other human beings is pointless.
For this reason, along with many, MANY others (including but not limited to those given here by other commenters), the scientific and psychological community has serious reservations regarding the Ezzo's 'divinely inspired' parenting methods. Please take the time to consider the links provided above by the author of this blog.

April said...

I'm sorry, but I've read Babywise and totally missed all the God stuff. I didn't see any religious philosophy in there at all.

And the book hardly advocated just letting babies cry for hours on end. It advised a maximum cry time of 20 minutes, and only when mothers KNEW the baby was fed, well and dry. It also had a chapter on monitoring baby's growth and weight gain to help determine whether baby was getting enough to eat.
Mothers who wrote in to the authors saying they had gotten their 3-week-olds to sleep through the night were told to stop the technique and resume nighttime feedings immediately.

Mothers who refuse to give nighttime feedings or let their children scream for ages aren't following the recommended guidelines. The authors acknowledge that prolonged crying and underfeeding are extremely harmful to babies. I don't know what book you read, but it wasn't Babywise.

Hank Osborne said...


Don't feel bad. You have not missed anything. And you hit the nail on the head, the author probably has not read Babywise or Growing Kids God's Way (GKGW). The BIG clue is when the author called Babywise the secular alternative for Growing Kids God's Way when the two books cover completely different age groups of children. The author of this blog and many commenters are either ignoring this fact or they simply do not know what they are talking about. Babywise is for parents of children ranging form birth to age 5 months. GKGW is written for parents of older kids. Most of the content applies to kids 3 years and older, but some parents begin implementing portions of the principles as early as 18 months.

So back to your main point April. The Babywise book does not contain the scriptural references talked about here. It was written for a secular audience based on the same principles as Preparation for Parenting (PFP) which was also written by the Ezzos and targeted at Christian audiences. PFP is very similar to Babywise in terms of parenting philosophy and principle, but it is distributed as part of a Christian small group study most often offered through churches.

Oh by the way, the secular equivalent to GKGW is called Childwise. GKGW like PFP is generally distributed via a church small group study as well. GKGW and PFP have outlines to go with the videos and the books also give the scripture references talked about in this blog post.

So you will NOT find "Cry it out" or infant sleep issues covered in GKGW or Childwise. You will also not find character training or discipline issued covered in Babywise or PFP. In terms of ages and principles covered:

Growing Kids God's Way = Childwise

Preparation for Parenting = Babywise

To the other issue about the mothers who wrote the authors. You are 100% correct. Parents are taught by the Ezzos to "always feed a hungry baby". That is why they would be told to resume nighttime feedings immediately at 3 weeks. The first few weeks are NOT the time to try and drop a night time feeding but rather to focus on getting full feedings in the baby. A baby that gets full feedings at every meal will eventually fall into a pretty good routine as a result. Then as the child gets to a point where they don't need as many feedings anymore, the parent can use their God given wisdom to choose which feeding to drop and when. Commenters are right in saying that the Bible does not say to use cry it out. It does not say not to use it either. The Bible also does not say to change diapers, see your pediatrician, or whether to use disposable vs cloth. The point is that God gave us the ability to THINK. That is exactly what the Ezzos teach. Become thinking parents. Infants do not leave the womb with the wisdom and knowledge that parents have.

Disclaimer: I am friends with Gary and Anne Marie Ezzo and even worked for them for several years doing web design and system administration. My wife and I actively lead GKGW and PFP classes in our home. We have helped 100's of families implement the principles taught by the Ezzos. I actively look for posts like this where clear misrepresentations or misunderstandings are served up as fact.

Anonymous said...


I followed the links you posted; the Wartburg one made me sick to my stomach. I come from a fundamentalist Christian background, took years to recover from the brainwashing...this is one of the things I found so disturbing. The idea of "original sin" meant that many churchmembers thought of children as being born bad, abnormal, selfish, etc., and they needed to be cured, improved through methods of discipline that I think are quite obviously child abuse. So sad.

Rachel said...

Thanks for posting about this phenomenon, and the dangers of it. My sister in law just had a baby, and when the baby was 2 days old, already her friends were telling her that she needed to start restricting the baby's food so that the baby could learn who was in charge. The baby was already losing weight and having trouble feeding. Needless to say, I was very upset and went on quite a lot of rants about it. People need to know how dangerous this method is to babies.

Anonymous said...

haha, waiting for guffman!
p.s. preach it. those books sound horrible.

John Manuel Marquette said...

I guess throwing in some religion is an unavoidable part of homeschool curriculum. I just hope parents don't make everything they say revolve around it. There's a whole lot more to the world than that.

Anonymous said...

Jamie Gallagher said...

In a child's growth, proper guidance and parenting is important for a kid to become a responsible citizen. As early as now, their mentors should teach them this one.

Elliot Nelson said...

Various social and hospice center should have this kind of manuals to make some improvements on their services. This way, everyone will enjoy the service they will be receiving, and yes, it does require TLC.

Anonymous said...

Bottom line: the babies are happy, mom is happy, dad is happy, grandparents and extended family are happy because they can actually hold the child and develop a relationship with him/her instead of him clinging fearfully to his mother for his first three years. The only people who are not happy are the demand feeding, co sleeping, baby wearers who are getting no sleep and trying to claim martyr status for doing so when its exactly what they want. Sorry you're tired and miserable, but we are all tired of hearing about it on Facebook etc while you simultaneously tell us we don't know how to raise children because we aren't suffering enough. I used the Babywise methods with all three of mine and had no problems, of course I have every intention of taking good care and loving my children so I listened and understood the information for what they were saying. Listening to what people are really saying goes a long, long way. You could take this material, as well as any other material, out of context and abuse your child I guess.

Anonymous said...

I didnt listen to the pediatrician or the GKGW way. I followed my gut instinct in spite of my own strict catholic upbringing that told me never to question authority (which is why I ended up repeatedly sexually abused). In spite of my son nursing every hour, he had no bowel movements for five days. Turned out he wasnt getting enough to eat at 4 months (he was bigger than the average baby)so I started him on rice cereal, against the pediatrician's advice of starting solids that soon and he became a content baby, started sleeping through the night and only nursing every 3-4 hrs. If I would have followed without question the doctor or the GKGW instead of my God-given mother's instincts and brain to make choices and think, I wouldnt have figured out what my son needed,starving him of the nutrients he needed for his growing brain and body, the temple of God.

Anonymous said...

So I've read Babywise cover to cover multiple times and nowhere does it say that the baby cries at an early age because of his/her sin nature. You're misquoting and misdirecting. The Ezzo's are quite clear that every baby is different and every schedule is different. And they say multiple times that "regardless of the schedule, if your baby is hungry, feed him/her." They are very clear that you are not to starve your child.
I personally relied on my instinct along with the recommendations in the book and I have a very happy 8 month old who started sleeping through the night at 8 weeks and is in the 78% for weight.
I guess all I'm saying is, before you degrade something, make sure you read it and understand what the author is saying.

Jennifer Marton said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Jennifer Marton said...

hi guys! if you want to buy men leather jackets at affordable price with quality in material & Stitching, with free shipment on order $200.
Visit Here

achilles2 said...

Hi there,
Just wanted to add my 2 cents!
We have 3 kiddos, and use the babywise method - simply of ensuring that they eat every 2-3 hours during the day when they are infants by waking them, and then letting them sleep as long as they'd like during the night. Our doctors were all behind allowing babies to sleep at night - without intentionally waking them up, sort of thing.
All our kids - on their own - slept through the night at 4 weeks old. No crying it out whatsoever.
If they woke up at night, I would feed them. And then during the day, I'd wake them every few hours to make sure they were getting fed enough.

Never once did I have to let them cry!
And they would wake up in the morning - smiling, and happy as ever! They also don't cry for food during the day even, because they know that it is coming.
They are all happy as clams, and were the most content babies ever.
And thriving - in the 75th percentile, and would grow like weeds.

I'm not against crying it out, but in our case, we just ensured that they had enough in their bellies during the day, and then they'd naturally sleep through the night early on, with no forcing on my part.
Our youngest is 5 months old, and people comment that they've never even heard him cry. He spends most of his waking time smiling, giggling and cooing! And he's quite big for his age - definitely well fed!!!

A book like babywise can be a wonderful resource - as long as you use your instincts as well.
Having a happy, well-fed, thriving, well-rested baby, and a happy and well-rested mommy and daddy is a good foundation for a happy home!

Jennifer said...

Oh my gosh, I LOVE your blog. This is one of the funniest things I've read in a long time and sooo true!
Jennifer Dominquez

Anonymous said...

Someone gave me a copy of BabyWise and after reading it, I threw it in the trash. I am a big book lover, generally donate or sell my old books and am super eco conscious, but, it seemed the only responsible thing to do, lest someone else read that copy and think it was a good idea.