Originally Posted by BrklynMama
This is to shooflymama, who felt it was wrong to move or hide copies of Babywise. This is not a case of censorship. This is a book that sells in the millions, so us doing what we can to hide the books or put brochures inside may make us feel better, but it's not going to prevent people from getting access. It's also not censorship. I hate it when that word gets tossed around. Censorship would be if the government did not allow this book to be published.
Babywise is not just "controversial". It doesn't present one more babyraising alternative, like co-sleeping or whatever. It tells parents to do things that will outright harm their kids and endanger their lives. Babies are getting starved and dehydrated. Babywise is NOT just about CIO (even Ferber is anti-Babywise!) Babywise is about DENYING your child sustenance and PHYSICALLY PUNISHING children as young as SIX MONTHS.
A hot-button babyraising issue is one thing, and child abuse is another.
Shoofly, I hear your concerns on censorship, I really do. I feel the same way, and I am adamantly outspoken when I hear, for example, that school districts want to 'censor' a book for one reason or another.
But this doesn't qualify as censorship. Censorship in and of itself is a governmental action, not the action of a private citizen. If the government BANNED the printing of Babywise, THAT would be censorship, and I would disagree with it (even if I was secretly thrilled
But, for example, if Barnes and Noble decided to stop selling Babywise, that would NOT be censorship. It would be the business decision of a private retailer. See?
And a private citizen making the book a little less accessible doesn't even come close to the idea of censorship.
I think the difference between the example you presented about co-sleeping is as follows: say someone is specifically looking for a book on co-sleeping. They are going to find one regardless of whether or not someone is creatively redestributing them or defacing them.
OTOH, a person is fairly unlikely to be *looking* for a book on how to physically and emotionally abuse and neglect a newborn. But if a desperate, sleep craving mother SAW it while looking for a book on infant sleep, she might try it. See?
A baby won't necessarily be permanently harmed or scarred by not-cosleeping, but anyone of Ezzo's methods could permanently harm or scar an infant.