Friendly conversations on Ezzo... - Page 5

[~*~MamaJava~*~]

maya43, I have had the same experience with my two boys. both of them *acted* hungry every hour, but if I fed them that often - or even every two hours - they really had tummy troubles. Both times I have had oversupply issues for the first few weeks and they were drinking it all! It was too much. So I have to make sure there is a two hour or so interval between feedings or else they are miserable. I didn't watch the clock exactly, but the occasional longer stretch between feedings really settled their tummies. They both had such a strong need to suck, not so much feed, but suck.
JMHO, schedules are *not* the devil. I don't stick to a rigid schedule but I have found both my kids thrive on a mostly regular schedule of waking, feeding and napping. They are much happier that way. Sometimes they need to vary that schedule, they are extra hungry or whatever. Obviously the Ezzo's 4 hr schedule is too hard on BF babies. And again, it has more to do with following baby's lead. If your baby thrives and is happy nursing on a totally random schedule, than great. If baby is screaming all the time, you need to change something.

[Too Busy]

Originally Posted by maya43

Well, every 2 hours was as much as my first dd could bf without becoming ill. At first I thought she was wanting to eat every 45 min to hour, but she was then crying all of the time in between and seemed to be in pain and would spit up HUGE amounts.

Then I decided to just let her suck on my fingers and only eat every 2 hours. This seemed to make an immediate difference. She stopped crying so much and started to gain more weight.

I considered it that her demands were only to eat every 2 hours and that what she was demanding before that was to suck not to eat.

So I was trying to meet her demands not schedule her.

Ditto, that. Your DD sounds just like mine.

[KermitMissesJim]

So on this thread we've figured out that no one thing is perfect for every baby...which we all already knew.

I think *my* problem with Ezzo is his books suggest it is the *only* way to go. And that if you are not successful using Babywise, it is implied that you are doing it wrong. New moms are so unprepared...a book like this at the wrong time can do a lifetime of damage.

[maya44]

Originally Posted by Beanie Mama

Ditto, that. Your DD sounds just like mine.

Except mine is now 11 years old!!!!!!!

[jkstewart]

I know I said I was going to clam up

I have been reading all of the posts since I backed out a few days ago, and
I am very happy to see the discussion that followed.

The only other thing I have to say is that Ezzo starts newborns out at feeding every 2 hours and it isn't until they are 6months that they go to 4 hours....

anyway... I think Darsmama said it best when she said that we all have to watch to see what our babies need and it may be a combination of AP and schedule or whatever.... as long as the childs needs are met, the method should not matter... okay I am done :-)


Julia

[heartmama]

You cannot separate Babywise from it's theme of putting the baby "in it's place", of Ezzo's clear, unequivocal, unwavering message of detachment from the baby.

An intelligent person can extract wisdom from corruption, and your ability to do this does not rest on redefining corruption as effective.

If you found some bit of wisdom in Babywise, it is because you applied your own wisdom too it. It was NOT because Gary Ezzo is a wise man who wrote an intelligent respectful book.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day as someone said.

Babywise is a terribly anti AP book. It isn't just different than ap, it openly condemns the fate of parents who allow demand feeding, co sleeping, positive discipline. Ezzo is AGAINST those things. He does not say "if it works for you, your child will thrive if you respond to his every cry and feed him whenever he is hungry!". He is against it, and thinks it is harmful. Period.

Recognize what the book IS; don't identify it with what you managed to extract and apply gently from it. Your gentle interpretations are a credit to yourself. They are not a credit to Ezzo, or the babywise approach.

To the OP, I usually raise a few thoughtful points if babywise comes up IRL. "Oh I heard the AAP issued a statement of concern about his books" "Oh I heard Ezzo was asked to leave the church he started" and let people respond to that.

[famousmockngbrd]

Well said, heartmama.

[Too Busy]

Originally Posted by maya43

Except mine is now 11 years old!!!!!!!

:LOL

[Divina]

nak
i think some people actually do feeding on demand witin a loose routine and call it scheduled ... forsome inexperienced people, the phrase
'feeding on demand' sounds kind of scary--'demand' 'demanding' y'know?

[mommaluv321]

I completely agree w/ you heartmama. since I started reading this thread I've been doing alot of research on the subject, and I have actually read/skimmed babywise when my first dd was born and tossed it because I hated it so much ( i just didn't remember the authors name till recently) I think one of the major hurdles that needs to be overcome in AP is the justifcation of things (like swatting your baby) that have no right to be justified. most ppl have a tendancy of making excuses for things that deep down they are unsure of, because our society has ingrained in us that we can't admit failure in most things, especially not in parenting. just my 2 cents, not said very eloquently, JMHO.

[sunnmama]

Originally Posted by heartmama

Your gentle interpretations are a credit to yourself. They are not a credit to Ezzo, or the babywise approach. .

Beautifully said, heartmama!

[townmouse]

Thank you, heartmama. I spend an awful lot of time in anti-Ezzo activism, online and IRL, and I just don't have the heart to debate it at MDC! This is my safe place.

Nevertheless, this thread has bothered me greatly. I am thankful for your gentle post.

I have read Babywise, Babywise 2, materials from Prep for Parenting and Growing Kids God's Way. Also the one about birth, I forget the name. I have personally had a discussion online with Anne Marie Ezzo. I've perused the GFI website. I belong to two yahoo support groups concerning Ezzoism, one is just for parents who need support after leaving Ezzo's ways. I recently left a church (actually it was more like a cult) in which every family with a baby followed Babywise.

I can not see Ezzoism and attachment parenting, co-existing in any way. I'm very surprised to find mothers at MDC, who can see some good in Ezzo's ideas!

[Kathryn]

Originally Posted by townmouse

I have personally had a discussion online with Anne Marie Ezzo.

Wow. I would love to know what you said if you don't mind sharing.

[mommabear]

To heartmama and townmouse: Well said, thank you so much.

I cannot believe that this thread is carrying on in this capacity on Mothering. The entire Ezzo philosophy, if one can call it that, is so counter to everything this board stands for (I thought). I am truly at a loss for words. Of course we all want to feel that what we are doing is the best for ourselves and our children, but Babywise???? On Mothering???? Give me a break. I am sick.

[jkstewart]

Why is it so difficult to imagine AP and BW being able to be blended. Yes the philosophies are completely different but I am just talking about methods. I think the human mom is quite capable of being imaginative enough to find what works best for her and her children, and if it is a blend, then so be it.

necessity is the mother of invention....

-julia

[famousmockngbrd]

Originally Posted by jkstewart

Why is it so difficult to imagine AP and BW being able to be blended. Yes the philosophies are completely different but...

I know I took you out of context but you answered your own question right there. Heartmama really said it the best, I'm going to just ditto her post again. It's hard for me to imagine an AP mom finding anything of value in BW because the philosophies are so different.

[nikirj]

No, I don't think that Babywise and AP are blendable, at all. They just...aren't...think about it, at the core of Babywise is the belief that if you practice AP, you are going to ruin your child - thus they are unblendable.

Now, tell me that scheduling and AP are blendable, and I'll believe it. But only if you leave the lunatic-ideas of Babywise out of it. Just because there's some validity to creating schedule/rhythm to your and baby's life, does not mean that the Babywise method is at all compatible with AP. And there is NO WAY in HECK I am recommending or even tolerating a book based on approximately two sentances worth of good advice and another 200 pages of absolutely disgusting misinformation and bad advice.

[jkstewart]

I guess when I read BW I knew that there were going to be ideas that I disagreed with. I left emotion at the door and just concentrated on the method. It is very hard to explain... I wish I could do better. Alot of AP just did not work with me and my son, some of the BW stuff did. I did what worked for the both of us from both books. I just wanted to share that a natural mom, could (and did) find use/good out of BW.... Call me what you will. I felt that it was important to share my story. - Julia

[phathui5]

I think it's like nikirj said, scheduling and ap can blend. Gary Ezzo and ap cannot. He is fundamentally opposed to it. He says in his books that ap'ing is a BAD thing to do.

I believe that you could have pulled a schedule that works for your family out of the Babywise book. But I also think that there are better places to get the information from where you don't have to filter out so much crap.

[jkstewart]

I guess that all I got out of the BW book was scheduling. So when I think of BW I think of just scheduling and nothing else. I guess I am just not as passionate about either method as to see good and evil in either one. - j