or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › I bought "Baby Wise" AND a James Dobson book....
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

I bought "Baby Wise" AND a James Dobson book.... - Page 4

post #61 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
Its their free will to read what they want and parent as they want - as you do. I magine If I came to your house and removed all pucblications relating to parenting methods you use to "save you from reading or follwing those techniques" as I didnt believe in them.
I think you're off the mark here. People can always get those books from book stores, public libraries, borrow from friends or relatives if any have a copy; the original poster is not physically preventing someone from reading books, just because she sees them in a thrift store and decides she hates them enough to buy them and destroy them. It's a form of social protest, she's not lobbying Congress or physically restraining someone, or breaking into their homes or even destroying library books. I don't see what the big deal is.
post #62 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
its the intent to stop others reading books SHE doesnt approve of.

Who presumes that the way they do things is the way EVERYONE should do things ..... thats how cults get started!
Is that how cults get started?

Extending the benefit of the doubt to the OP, I really didn't get the feeling she was trying to start a cult, but to protect babies. Personally, I find telling someone how they may or may not spend their money a lot scarier than buying an Ezzo book for kindling.
post #63 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by kamilla626 View Post
MomTwice and sapphire - you get where I'm coming from. I'm extremely anti-censorship. But I'm not travelling the country pulling these books out of retail stores. I pulled FOUR books of the shelves in a thrift store.

I know how impressionable new moms can be, and some new parents will grab up any parenting book that looks like it might have something to offer, especially if it's only $1 at a thrift store. Maybe what I did was childish or borders on censorship, but what the books advocate borders on abuse and neglect. My childishness and censoring is certainly the lesser of those evils IMO.
I don't think what you yourself did is such a big deal. You bought the books, you can do whatever you want with them. End of story. I myself am way more creeped out by some of the posters who think it's perfectly reasonable behavior to hide books with which they don't agree on retail bookstore shelves. If these books are so hideously evil, let them speak for themselves and let other people make up their own minds about them. I am a new mom and certainly impressionable at times--I understand that sentiment--but that doesn't mean I want total strangers deciding what books I have access to.
post #64 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by kamilla626 View Post
Well if you were to come into my house and remove things that belong to me...? I'm pretty sure that's a felony.

What I did was buy some books that I have no intention of using. Is it just as wrong to buy books and then never get around to reading them? (I do that all the time, too!) I didn't steal them. I didn't prevent anyone from finding the same information at a bookstore or on the internet. I didn't specifically confront ANYONE and say, "What you are reading is wrong". I did not infringe upon anyone's "free will". I don't have that much power.
your whole point of this thread and you original post is that your sole purpose for buying them was stopping some new moms reading them.

I fully agree with your position on thinking their methods are awful - I did not and will not parents my kids like that - but I also don't try and ensure other moms don't read about it.
post #65 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapphire_chan View Post
I wish you'd put down the name of the book and the author.
I believe the book is Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child by Marc Weissbluth.

Lots of CIO, and if baby doesn't get X amount of sleep at Y age, then they are "irregular" and will have ADD, etc. The book contradicts itself so many many times... I wish I could remember it all, I just read it. But alas, sleep deprivation has gotten the better of me..
post #66 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by sapphire_chan View Post
I wish you'd put down the name of the book and the author.
http://www.chop.edu/consumer/jsp/div...c.jsp?id=77607 So it'd be Dr. Mindell who addresses "non-pharmacologic treatment of sleep problems in infants and toddlers" or the head of the department, Dr. Marcus, whose work is exclusively in the area of respiration effects on sleep?

Ah, it's Mindell. And here's the relevant study: http://www.journalsleep.org/ViewAbstract.aspx?pid=26636 (full text downloadable to pdf through the link on the right side)

From the study, which, it occurs to me is actually a literature review:
"combining sedative medication (antihistamine) with Extinction may produce a more immediate
response with reduced infant distress." This is her magical sleep cure? Drugging babies?

"The data, however, appeared equivalent until approximately week 4 of treatment when Positive Routines continued to produce additional improvement as Extinction reached a plateau."

Still reading through, trying to find an indication of why sleeping through the night is something to be desired in babies over 6 months (the first age mentioned in the article, although it also deals with studies mentioning babies sleeping through the night at 3 weeks. I would prefer to find evidence that sleeping through the night at 3 weeks is a good thing, but I'll be happy with them just giving evidence that it's positive at 6 months.)

Oh, I see... "sleeping through the night (5 hours or more)"
It's pretty clear to me you absolutely aren't interested in the point I'm trying to make or that you are completely misunderstanding me. Or maybe you are just interested in discrediting all CIO experts. Hey, that is fine, but nobody here agrees with CIO so I can't understand your point in doing so. I DON'T ADVOCATE CIO. I DON'T AGREE W/MINDELL. SHE IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT SOME PEOPLE (NOT ME, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD) CONSIDER AN EXPERT. And this is why I don't believe warnings would work. And again, do you believe in putting warning on everything one group of people believes is bad or wrong? Because if you did that than it wouldn't be a hot minute before Jame Dobson and cronies crap themselves with joy over putting warnings on AP books. Or warnings on Gay and Lesbian literature: Warning, reading this may turn you and your loved ones homosexual. And yeah, they would find some expert to back them up. I'm not big on experts of any kind. Anyone can be paid to say anything. Of course, you don't seem interested in debating the merits of warning people, you just want to point out how bad CIO, which EVERYONE on here already agrees with you on.
post #67 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by radishes View Post
I sort of assumed people were upset about CIO books in general, not just Babywise, but I get your point. I totally understand the damaging psychological affects of CIO, but I really have to question the brain damage issue. I have a high needs baby. She is 7 months now and getting much easier in some respects, but when she was younger, she could and would scream. For hours. While I was holding her, rocking, on top of me, next to me, on dad, in the swing, getting a bath, shushing, patting, babywearing, you get the idea. High needs babies have a notoriously difficult time falling asleep. They are intense and easily overstimulated. Sometimes you can do everything, hold that baby close, and they still scream their brains out from exhaustion. For hours. Are all those babies brain damaged?
I have a high needs baby as well... find some of my posts and u will see..

the point of the article was that when babies were left ALONE to scream, that the cortisol levels were significantly increased, and that is what caused the brain damage.
post #68 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
your whole point of this thread and you original post is that your sole purpose for buying them was stopping some new moms reading them.
I think her sole purpose for buying them was to remove those particular copies from distribution. She is legally allowed to buy them and keep them in her home so that they are not available to others. That is not the same as stopping new moms from reading them. You may have issues with her doing this, but it's her legal right to express herself in this manner.
post #69 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie View Post
Is that how cults get started?

Extending the benefit of the doubt to the OP, I really didn't get the feeling she was trying to start a cult, but to protect babies. Personally, I find telling someone how they may or may not spend their money a lot scarier than buying an Ezzo book for kindling.
Its her intent on stopping others making a free will choice thats wrong.

and cultism - yes thats exactly how cults get started by bringing in people to believe in your set beliefs, to remove information of anything outside of what the cults beliefs are, therefore totally restricting their free will to read and be informed of all points of view. And of course she isnt trying to start a cult - no need to be sarcastic with your reply.

If I were to buy up all the books I could in my town relating to unschooling - which I don't believe in - to stop moms reading them .... I'm sure you would have a different outlook on that - infact I'm pretty sure you'd vilify me for that!.
post #70 of 158
Quote:
Its her intent on stopping others making a free will choice thats wrong.

and cultism - yes thats exactly how cults get started by bringing in people to believe in your set beliefs, to remove information of anything outside of what the cults beliefs are, therefore totally restricting their free will to read and be informed of all points of view. And of course she isnt trying to start a cult - no need to be sarcastic with your reply.
I wasn't being sarcastic. I really have no experience with starting cults, but I'd never heard of one being started by buying a couple of used paperbacks at the Salvation Army.

Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
If I were to buy up all the books I could in my town relating to unschooling - which I don't believe in - to stop moms reading them .... I'm sure you would have a different outlook on that - infact I'm pretty sure you'd vilify me for that!.
I'm not out to villify you. I would think it was pretty silly of you to waste your money like that when I could just order the book from Amazon.com or a billion other places.
post #71 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viola View Post
I think her sole purpose for buying them was to remove those particular copies from distribution. She is legally allowed to buy them and keep them in her home so that they are not available to others. That is not the same as stopping new moms from reading them. You may have issues with her doing this, but it's her legal right to express herself in this manner.
read the OP - it says "to stop new moms reading it"

It cant be any clearer.
post #72 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
Its her intent on stopping others making a free will choice thats wrong.
How is her purchase of these books impeding the free will of others? And why is your belief that she not be allowed to purchase these books paramount to her belief that she should?
post #73 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by AutumnAir View Post
It's only censorship if done by the authorities and effectively preventing people from buying/reading these books and possibly punishing them for owning/reading them into the bargain. Let's not get carried away!
As a librarian I have to strongly disagree with this. Most efforts at book banning/ censorship nowadays come from individuals or groups of individuals who attempt to get items removed from libraries etc. through petitions, defacement, stealing, or other means. With a thriftstore, it is a little more "grey" to me (especially since Ezzo has revised his methods and books in thriftstores are likely to be extra problematic). But I still would not personally do what the OP did. And I think it is easy for those of us who frequent an AP board to forget that there is strong public opinion that things like cosleeping and extended breastfeeding are abusive.
post #74 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
read the OP - it says "to stop new moms reading it"

It cant be any clearer.
Yes, but she probably wasn't careful with her word choice. The bottom line is that she cannot stop new moms from reading those books just by buying them from a thrift store. All she can do is see a book that she thinks is wrong, and buy that copy hoping that some new parent doesn't happen to come across it and buy it without knowing much about it. If people want to read those books, they can find them at the public library or in a book store.

Ahh, I just looked back. She said: but I feel as though maybe I stopped 3 new moms from reading - and following - their "techniques". I think the key for me is I don't believe she did what she said she did--stopped 3 new moms from reading the books and using them. I think very likely even if a new parent came across this book and bought it, they wouldn't necessarily read the books and follow the techniques. So for me, I see it more as a kind of social protest, as I said earlier. There is no way to remove all of these books from circulation, and honestly, I would never advocate that sort of thing. But I truly believe she has a right to do what she did that is as strong as anyone's right to read the book in the first place. They are both kinds of free speech.
post #75 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by annettemarie View Post
I wasn't being sarcastic. I really have no experience with starting cults, but I'd never heard of one being started by buying a couple of used paperbacks at the Salvation Army.


I'm not out to villify you. I would think it was pretty silly of you to waste your money like that when I could just order the book from Amazon.com or a billion other places.
I would say we have a healthy difference of opinion

I am a very strong supporter of freedom of speech and will - many of which I do find abhorent, but I believe its right to allow it as a person can see it and make decisions on their issues themselves. I think having ALL the information availbale to us gives us the best position from which to make our lifestyle choices.

I read those books - and from them I knew this was not a way I could ever parent, but I made my choices from a huge amount of information I collected from many sources. Every mother should be allowed the same.

If we all did what the poster did we would be restricting access to that information.
post #76 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post

If we all did what the poster did we would be restricting access to that information.
But only in thrift stores.

And only in thrift stores that happened to have this book donated.

Well, only in thrift stores that happened to have this book donated and happened to have it not bought by someone else. Because every thrift store I have ever been to has extremely fluid inventory.
post #77 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by Viola View Post
I think her sole purpose for buying them was to remove those particular copies from distribution. She is legally allowed to buy them and keep them in her home so that they are not available to others. That is not the same as stopping new moms from reading them. You may have issues with her doing this, but it's her legal right to express herself in this manner.
ditto. and I agree, its a form of protest. which I support anyone who protests these forms of legal abuse. For me its not a matter of one right way, but there are things that are clearly not safe or healthy for children that continue to be allowed because children are seen as property to parents. Much like women were once seen as property to men. We didn't overcome oppression by not protesting these things in one way or another. I am on board with you Viola

Perhaps the OP could have better worded it "so that these few copies will never reach the hands of well intentioned lost new parents" or something along those lines. I really like the idea of the ezzoinfo website though!
post #78 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
I
If I were to buy up all the books I could in my town relating to unschooling - which I don't believe in - to stop moms reading them .... I'm sure you would have a different outlook on that - infact I'm pretty sure you'd vilify me for that!.
You would just be increasing their sales, and they'd publish more. That's one reason why I would never buy books I hate, except maybe in a thrift store situation. I actually would like to read those books in order to know what they say, so that is the only way I'd buy them. Hey, kamilla, could you send them to me? I'll pay you for your cost and for the shipping.
post #79 of 158
If someone objects so strongly to unschooling and comfort nursing that they buy the books up from the thrift stores so be it.

I will continue to buy up books that advocate hitting babies and destroy them.

I'm a free speech advocate and firmly believe I have the right as a private citizen to do that. I'm okay with people buying up books on how to make bombs as well. And I think of them in the same category.
post #80 of 158
Quote:
Originally Posted by alwayshappy View Post
because its their right do do those things as parents - none of it is against the law, its not my right to impose my parenting decisions and choices on others. The fact I find them to be detrimental to a child is my personal view and one not shared by the law. In my eyes its wrong, but I wouldnt presume to ensure everyone raises their children as I raise mine.

No need to apologise for being classist - you hadn't reached that yet.
Actually, neglect is against the law. There are babies that have died because their prents believed everything in the Ezzo books.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › I bought "Baby Wise" AND a James Dobson book....