SortaCrunchy

Various and Sundry (the BRRRRRR! edition)

photo by Manu gomi

There are some fairly significant issues on which Kyle and I have to agree to disagree, but I'll tell you this much - one thing we are absolutely agree upon is that we simply must retire some place warm and tropical.

After a delightful autumn that was quite nearly Indian Summer, the bitter cold of the season has settled on us, and I am just barely functioning.  I have gotten zero accomplished this week (although I was inspired by Wednesday's AMAZING discussion to actually put on some real clothes and make-up before 8 AM each morning!).  While my body and mind have been fighting the urge to hibernate, I've spent (way too much) time puttering around online. 

Here are some things worth mentioning:

1) May I invite you to become a fan of SortaCrunchy on Facebook?  I'm not totally sure how I'll utilize the fan page, but I have some ideas for polls, giveaways, etc.  Come on over and let's hang out.

2) We're sort of hobbling together a private celebration of Advent this year.  I'm making a Jesse Tree.  Consider how anti-talented I am when it comes to crafting, this could be interesting.  I'll post pics next week. 

In the meantime, make sure to read Ann Voskamp's 3 Simple Practices for a Peaceful Advent and Ann Kroeker's Something to Ask Ourselves (which reflects the same idea I had earlier this week at Simple Kids).

3) Baby Week may be over here, but I always enjoy all-things-baby.  I LOVED this short piece at the API blog called "Bad Sleepers."  Where was this kind of support in early 2005 as I had my own "bad sleeper"?  Also, I am highly interested in this Baby Led Weaning approach to introducing solid food.  In fact, it's pretty much exactly what I did when AJ transitioned to table food.  I had no idea it's a movement.

4) The opportunities to give abound this time of year, don't they?  Organizing Your Way and Deal Seeking Mom are joining forces to support Feeding America.  Go over and check it out - you'll be amazed at what $5 can do!

5) Finally, have you signed up yet for ChristmasChange?  Next week, I'll be sharing about the organization I'm supporting this year.  Oh, and make sure to subscribe to the ChristmasChange blog.  Lots of inspiring words from some of your favorite bloggers over there!

We did it! We raised 1 G for Princess G!!!

photo by Pink Sherbet

Just a quick note to let you know that through your amazing, outrageous, staggering generosity, we were able to raise $1,000 in less than 48 hours for the Vega Family!!!

For some reason, ChipIn ended the event four hours earlier than it was supposed to and the widget's final total says $991, but we had one contributor for whom the widget would not work, so she donated directly bringing our total amount raised to $1,001. 

I'm just floored.  Absolutely, unspeakably floored.

I'm probably going to have to somewhere and cry for a little bit, but before I do, allow me to say one more time - THANK YOU!  Thank you for contributing, thank you for blogging and tweeting and Facebooking, thank you for praying.  Thank you for your patience and your loving support.

My heart is so full.

Some of My Favorite Books Are Banned

So what does that say about me?

photo by takomabibelot

Last week, the lovely Laura alerted me to the fact this is Banned Books week.  It  concludes tomorrow, and I've just been too stinkin' busy to give it proper attention.

As a former English teacher, one-time Library/Media Science grad student, and current practicing writer, you'll find me pretty firmly entrenched in the anti-censorship camp.  (Does this surprise anyone?)  I am all about discussion of age-appropriate reading, but I think those limitations should come from parents and caregivers, not from institutions.  

(and yes, I know, there are parents and caregivers who will not issue restrictions on their children's reading.  I can't control what happens in the home of others.) 

(And don't try to pin me down with some "but what about this <insert extreme real or made-up situation or example.>"  There are extreme examples, I know.  I'm just saying generally, I am opposed to censorship.  Generally, people.)

I was given a lot of freedom in my reading selections as a kid.  Maybe a little too much.  The Flowers in the Attic series is probably not really age-appropriate for a seventh grader, but my parents tended to not be aware of my reading material.  They were raising four kids and more than one of them was a handful, so I'm gonna cut them some slack there.

I do plan on carefully involving myself in the reading choices my children make.  Ideally, it's about conversation.  What is appropriate, what is not, and why.  I want to equip them to make wise reading choices for themselves.

But on to my favorite banned books.  Each of these have been challenged or banned in previous years for a variety of reasons, yet they are still amongst the books for which I hold fond and dear affinity:

The Great Gatsy, F. Scott Fitzgerald
To Kill A Mockingbird, Harper Lee
Of Mice and Men, John Steinbeck
The Catcher in the Rye, J.D. Salinger
Beloved, Toni Morrison
Deenie, Judy Blume
Like Water for Chocolate, Laura Esquivel
Bridge to Terabithia, Katherine Patterson
The Joy Luck Club, Amy Tan
How to Eat Fried Worms, Thomas Rockwell

and, of course, last but in no way least

The Bible

I would love to know - what are some of your favorite banned books?

(You can find lists here and here and here.)

"Keep information flowing, even if it makes you uncomfortable.  This week, any week, read a banned book - and be glad you can."  -- RON DZWONKOWSKI, "Banned Books Week is a good time to read one"

You Tell Me: Best Nursing In Public Comebacks

I have been immensely enjoying the chronicles of life with a new babe from Sarah at Becoming Sarah.  Now that my baby baby has turned two, I find I have to relish the life-with-newborn moments vicariously through others.

Earlier this week, Sarah wrote about embracing nursing in public sans cover which was not how she had planned for things to go.  The topic of whether or not to cover in public is hotly debated amongst lactivists.  There are those who insist a mother should do whatever she feels comfortable with when nursing a child in public.  Others insist that covering up further perpetrates the notion that breastfeeding is - at best - a "sacred" or "intimate" or "private" moment between mother and child and therefore should be covered up, or it is - at worst - indecent.

Most breastfeeding advocates simply want to work towards the common purpose of normalizing breastfeeding in our culture.  Breastfeeding is, after all, normal.

Anyway, in this post, Sarah talks about her experiences in nursing without a cover-up, and she shares some gorgeous photos, and then the brave soul opens up comments for thoughts on nursing in public.

Amongst the comments, I read a statement that absolutely drives me batty.  Someone stated "yeah its natural, but so is pooping, and I would rather just not see it."  Rather than engage in comment box debate, I figured I'd just bring it over here to discuss.

That statement drives me insane because it is biologically ignorant.  Breastfeeding and pooping are completely opposite.  While the common element of food is shared, the actual processes are, you know, completely different.  Breastfeeding = food in.  Pooping = food out.  It's a pretty basic concept.

I have not personally been confronted with this commentary on nursing in public, but I've been practicing my comeback for years:

People who do not understand the difference between eating and pooping are not allowed in my kitchen.  And they probably shouldn't be allowed to do the grocery shopping, either.

Ohhhhhhh, I'm just waiting for the day when I can pop off with that comeback.  (yet knowing my propensity for tongue-tied-ness, I'm sure I'll mess it all up and leave everyone involved in hysterics.  The possibilities for how that can be messed up are quite endless.)

I would love to hear from you - what is the best comeback you've used or heard to counter the critiques of nursing in public (with or without a cover)?

photo (isn't it lovely?) courtesy of Daquella

Closing thoughts: Ezzo, Grace, and Redemption

Bless your hearts. 

All of you - every single person who takes the time to stop by here and read or to subscribe via email or feed reader . . . I am just laid low with the honor of it all.  Y'all have responded with such grace and conviction as I have talked through all of my Ezzo issues.  Those who agree with my take and those who do not have shared their own stories and experiences and have just made the conversation so much more interesting.

I've put this last post off long enough.  Part of it is my Gemini mind which has already spun out in a thousand different directions since I started this series two weeks ago.  (two weeks? gah!) But part of it, too, is that this last post is not one I thought I would have the courage to write.  It is something that I have known I should write, but I wasn't sure that I would write it.

A few years ago, I serendipitously connected with another blogger through one of those rounds of bloggy giveaways.  She's a wonderful, godly woman who is gifted with humor and a lovely way with words.  She doesn't blog anymore, but she does still pop by with great insights in response to some of the things I share here.  I'm just going to call her J for now, but she can step forward in the comments if she wants to. 

Anyway, in the midst of this Ezzo series, J shared some perspectives with me that I needed to hear.  She is intimately familiar with the materials offered by Growing Families International and was able to fill in some blanks for me.  To begin with, she wrote me to say this:

In my view, the biggest failing of Babywise is that it started out as a mentorship between the Ezzos and other couples at their church, and it doesn't transfer well to a book. These things (and by "these things" I mean caring for infants, raising children, etc) ideally are passed on from mother to daughter, friend to friend, and you take into account their specific circumstances when you give advice. I truly believe that the reason my experience was so positive was because of the group of contact moms in my area. The book was a guide, not a bible, for us and the mentorship of the mothers was so good.

I thought she made a great point about the mentorship aspect - not only in the context of the Ezzos and Babywise, etc., but in parenting in general.  First-time parents are desperate for someone to come alongside of them, hold their hands, and tell them how to do this thing.  Many of us are missing that sense of community in our lives, and so we turn to books or websites or message boards for guidance. 

J wrote this later to me later in the series, and I wanted to share it as well (this is, of course, with her permission):

Years ago, women learned how to take care of babies through their families. It was the norm to have lots of children AND families tended to stay in the communities where they were raised so girls learned young how to care for a baby by caring for younger siblings, nieces and nephews, cousins, etc. When a young woman had her own children there were mothers, grandmothers and sisters to show her how to care for them. Even in the pioneer communities where there weren't extended families, the communities filled in by acting as extended family.
 
Our current society is fractured by comparison. Mom may live thousands of miles away along with the rest of the family. Or maybe mom isn't really good with babies--she only had one or two so she didn't get much experience, or she's not a baby person so she just got through the first few weeks and then went back to work, or Mom bottle fed and Daughter wants to breast feed. Young women aren't as prepared to take care of babies, and they don't have the support system they once did.
 
Parenting books fill in the gap -- or attempt to -- and Christian parents tend to want a Christian author. I can't think of another well-known Christian author who has written a book on infant care -- can you? (Note from Megan - well, yes, there is this one author for whom I have a bit of a soft spot.  Now, carry on.)
 
Additionally, the first course (Preparation for Parenting) was an in-depth, Bible-based course which had already started to gain momentum through word of mouth. The Ezzos released Babywise in an attempt to reach unchurched families. (Many families, so I've heard, read Babywise, found a Contact Mom and/or signed up for GKGW and eventually accepted Christ.)
 
But there were some advantages to Babywise for Christians too: One, it's cheap. Prep was, as I recall, about $40 for the course notebook and tapes, whereas Babywise was about $10. It was cheap enough that you could buy a few copies and give them to your pregnant friends. Two, Babywise is shorter so people are more likely to read it.
 
The downside to the shortness is all the misunderstandings. A LOT of the objections I see to Babywise are ideas that the Ezzo's never meant to convey (or possibly the text had changed by the time I took the course--mine was not the first edition, and I know they got a lot of feedback and made some alterations as they went)--such as "never feed your baby if it's not a scheduled time". I can't tell you how many times I heard Anne Marie or another leader say, "If your baby is obviously hungry, FEED HIM. The tips we give you help you move toward a schedule but it doesn't happen all at once." I also remember an entire section on growth spurts and how there would be spans of time where we would need to feed more often, but usually after a week or so milk supply would catch up and we could get back to a more predictable routine. I remember reading that the average Prep baby slept through at around 8 weeks, but not all, and that this was by no means a rigid expectation.
 
All of this to say, I remember all these things because I took a 6 week class, and went to Contact Mom meetings, and became a CM and got supplementary tapes, and met the Ezzo's in person more than once. For me, it worked more like a mentorship so I caught more. In a condensed version, there are fewer examples, fewer exceptions, just the basics--and that's where the trouble starts. Even if they say, "There are exceptions" it's only said once, so the reader may miss it.
 
Another example--in all the courses I took, Gary addressed in the beginning how we should resist the urge to push it on other parents. "You're not the parenting police!" he said. He encouraged us to share the material only if people asked, and he and Anne Marie both talked about living in humility with others. Still, people who use this method have gotten a reputation for being pushy and dogmatic, when really that's just a really common thing among parents.

Part of my email reply back to J said, "What I think is interesting about your insight is that clearly if you were working through this material as a class/community, there would be opportunity for someone (leader or class participant) to say, "Oh, hey, you know my cousin feeds her babies on demand and they are truly Christ-centered and have a solid marriage blah blah blah" so that there isn't this FEAR FACTOR of what MIGHT or WILL happen if you don't follow the Ezzo's advice."  J agreed and shared that even as a Contact Mom, she had counseled a mother to switch to demand feeding her baby because the scheduling factor was creating a lack of peace in their home.

Something that many of you all have said over and over in the comments is that we must remember that there is no perfect system that will work perfectly for every family, and that even within the same family, babies and children can vary wildly in their needs.  And for those of us who are believers, I think we can all agree that the only perfect book we can look to for guidance is the Bible. 

To that end, I loved what Ali (Blessed Treehouse) said at the end of her comment on the Part 4 post: "But God does not command us to let our babies cry it out nor does He command us to rock our babies to sleep. Those are the issues that we must approach prayerfully, and I have faith that the good Lord will guide us."  Yep.  Laura and I have written a bit on that idea as well.

So.  Speaking of the Bible and prayer.  

* * * * *

As I've thought and talked and thought some more and talked some more as this series unfolded, God kept calling me to quiet.  You'll notice I did reply to some comments in this series, but I held back a lot, too.  One night, I was sketching out some notes, and I noticed how when the topic of Gary Ezzo and Babywise comes up, I can just go off.  I mean really.  Go off.  I felt God kind of kept pinning me down with some big "Why?" stuff.  Why so angry?  Why so bitter?  Why so impassioned? 

After no small amount of squirming, I recognized that a lot of my bitterness stems from my perception that Gary Ezzo robbed me of some precious time in Dacey's earliest days and weeks.  I could have been snuggling that round little spitfire of a baby, counting her Michelin Man rolls instead of filling out detailed sleep journals and waking up every morning preparing for battle.  I was really mad because I felt like in the pages of Babywise, Gary Ezzo promised me peace and my inaugural months of motherhood were anything but peaceful.   

God asked me in my heart of hearts, "Whose Word is infalliable?  Who is full of grace and full of truth?  Who is your Prince of Peace?"  Not Gary Ezzo.  Nowhere at any time has he claimed to be any of those things.  Only my Lord Jesus.  Is it Gary Ezzo's fault I was cast my anxieties onto the pages of Babywise instead of at the feet of my Lord?  No.  Just . . . no.

You know, I am still not a big fan of the way Babywise is written.  The insights J offered to me softened my heart towards some of the things I thought I knew to be true about this whole topic.  Once my heart was tendered, He breathed His Word into my heart and I heard the truth in Hebrews 12:15

See to it that no one misses the grace of God and that no bitter root grows up to cause trouble and defile many. (NIV)

I've been letting a bitter root grow for a long time towards all things Ezzo.  I've tried pruning it back some, but I certainly have not seen to it that I offered him grace.  Gary Ezzo is a believer, and even if I disagree with him (at times vehemently), I am still called to love him and forgive him and extend grace to him.

Grace.

The other person who was having grace withheld from her was that Shiny Brand New Mama. Couldn't I extend some grace to her as well?  It is impossible for me to go back in time to recapture and relive those first days with Dacey.  If I could, I would whisper to my first-time mom self: be gentle with yourself, mama.  You are doing just fine.  Everything is going to be okay.  You just love that baby now, okay?  Just love that baby.  I know it doesn't feel like it right now, but you are gonna just blink and the next thing you know, you're buying school supplies and going to Meet The Teacher Day.  So just breathe.  Just rock.  Just pray.  It really will be okay. I promise.

I cannot go back and time and speak that truth over her as she worries with each creak of the rocking chair, but what I can do is take her story and lay it on top of my copy of Babywise and wrap it all up in a brown paper package, get out my trusty black Sharpie, and on top of it all write this word:

Redeemed.

What I love about God's Word and His truth is that it is a story of redemption from beginning to end.  God is redeeming my early struggles as a new mom in ways I never could have dreamed He would.  Because of those hard days, I had a story in common with my dear, amazing friend Laura.  From our similar stories grew a shared dream and perfectly paired passion: to minister to other new moms with a new message of motherhood.  Laura and I truly feel called to this message, and how could we have been called to it without walking through some hard stuff at the beginning of our own journeys in mothering? 

* * * * *

This series, this whole process, has been extremely cathartic for me.  Thanks for bearing with me, for enduring, for speaking up and speaking out and participating.  Thank you for listening and responding.  Thank you again, Tulip Girl, for the inspiration, encouragement, and courageous example.

If you have come here for the first time through this series, I assure you I don't normally publish 2000 words posts.  Really, I don't. 

Thank you for stopping by and for sharing your hearts with me and allowing me to share myself with you.

image courtesy of CarbonNYC

Points to Pick with Ezzo: Part 4

(This is the third installment in a series I originally envisioned as two posts.  Posts preceding this one include Part 1, Part 1.5, Part 2, and Part 3.)

With many apologies, I simply have to say one more thing before I move into my closing thoughts on Mr. Ezzo, Babywise, and something significant the Lord revealed to me about this whole topic in the past week.

I've noticed as I've read through the comments and feedback from the few brave and admirable souls who have shared their families' positive experiences with incorporating the Babywise methods into their approaches for baby care: most of the positive feedback had to do with the benefits of a feeding schedule.  As I have shared earlier, I personally have little argument against this concept.  I've seen it work just fine for my oldest child, and I know from my personal experience that demand-feeding can work just fine, too.

But.

There is one aspect of the Babywise method that I simply and utterly cannot - will not - stand in agreement with, nor am I able to close this series without speaking to it: cry-it-out infant sleep training.

As I look over the past four and a half years and the passionate interest in all things parenting that has grown in my heart since I became a mama, I am filled with gratitude that God sent to me a high-needs, non-independent sleeper for my first child.  Had He sent me Aliza Joy first, I know my thoughts on this matter would have been decidedly more smug.  Ironically, AJ would have been a model Babywise baby.  Although as a toddler she is gloriously wild and untamed soul, she was an extremely easy, laid-back, "angel" baby.  I could have (and sometimes did) put her down to nap or for the night fully awake and she would have been content to drift off to sleep on her own.  This was not a result of anything I did - it was simply her temperament.

It was with her big sister, however, that I earned my stripes in the trenches of infant sleep.

Beginning at two weeks old, she simply would not nap longer than forty-five minutes at a time.  This threw our whole Eat-Play-Sleep schedule completely out of whack.  I read every infant sleep book recommended to me - no kidding, every single one, except for The No-Cry-Sleep-Solution, which puzzlingly no one told me about - and I tried a myriad of suggestions to get her to sleep longer than forty-five minutes at a time.  Had I been a veteran mom, I would have known that The Dreaded Forty-Five Minute Naps is actually quite common, and that I could just go with it and her naps would consolidate into longer stretches when she was an older baby (six months was the magic milestone for Dace).

So not only did we have the nap issue, there was also the going to sleep issue.  Every single time I tried to lay her down to sleep when she was drowsy but still awake, absolute desperate screaming would ensue.  What Babywise didn't prepare me for was the physiological reaction that would manifest itself in me each time I walked out of her bedroom as she lay there, screaming for me - my heart would race, my hands shook, I absolutely could not think about anything else other than the overpowering and overwhelming urge to go in and pick her up and soothe her.  The only things that worked for Dacey were the three things that Babywise labels as "potentially harmful" - nursing, rocking, and sharing sleep.

You know, as a more experienced mama, I can look at that paragraph and think, "So what?  So you have to rock her to sleep?  Big deal.  She was fine!  Look at her - she is a totally normal, completely developmentally on track preschooler now.  It's FINE!"  As a brand new mama, as I rocked her in that rocking chair, an internal battle raged.  I knew I could get her to fall asleep peacefully if I rocked her.  Yet in my head, a voice-over reminded me of everything Mr. Ezzo had said about these techniques.  Things like, "Parents don't need to be in bondage to their baby's sleep needs," and "None of the sleep manipulation methods offer any healthy advantages" and "Why use sleep association props in the first place, when a basic routine will naturally enhance restful sleep?"

Oh yes.  There it was.  The heart of my struggle.  I was faithfully following our Eat-Awake-Sleep schedule.  Faithfully.  That part was working fine.  Mr. Ezzo writes in the chapter on "Hunger and Sleep Cycles" that, "There is a direct relationship between regular daytime feeding periods and nighttime sleep patterns."  Poor little Marissa, the demand-fed baby, will have great difficulty sleeping through the night because of the unpredictability of her daytime feeding.  But, Chelsea, on the other hand sleeps great! 

On page 51 of the 1995 edition of Babywise, Mr. Ezzo writes

One of the most obvious benefits of parent-directed feeding is the establishment of stable nighttime sleep patterns.  That means your baby sleeps all night, along with the rest of the family.  Healthy, full-term babies are born with the ability to sleep continuously for seven to eight hours during the night, usually within eight weeks.  Much of your success will depend on your parenting philosophies and feeding practices.  (emphasis mine)

I was following the schedule but having no success.  The only part of his approach to parenting an infant I couldn't force myself to do was leave her to cry alone.  It didn't work.  There was no self-soothing, there was only increased hysteria. 

I became consumed with sleep and lack thereof.  Instead of treasuring what I now know are fleeting and precious days of newborn sweetness, I filled out painstakingly detailed sleep journals and read book after book and website after website that offered all manner of solution for her "problems."  I was bitter and resentful of my baby and her inability to just do what the book said she would do and I was drowning in self-loathing for not being tough enough to let her cry it out.

I have written tons on this.  Many of you have read it before from me.  I just want to make clear that when many people hear Babywise, they think scheduled feeding.  When I hear Babywise, I think baby screaming.

I now believe some of the advice and assurances Mr. Ezzo offers about leaving a baby to cry to sleep is misleading and dangerous.  The main issue I have is that he makes absolutely no distinction between a nine day old and a nine month old baby.  The methods he prescribes when it comes to infant sleep are developmentally inappropriate. 

Some closing thoughts:

• Excessive crying (such as is produced by leaving a newborn to scream by himself) is dangerous. 
• You can understand the importance of infant sleep without insisting on implementing cry-it-out m methods.
• Night waking in infants may serve important biological functions.
• Schedule or no schedule, breastfed babies will sleep different and have different needs than formula-fed babies.  There is a body of research that supports this.

In all honesty, I could a series on cry-it-out infant sleep training itself, but I think I'll stop here.  Just know that while there are parts of Babywise that I find no argument with, this is one area where I wholeheartedly disagree.

I welcome discussion on this topic, but as always, please remember to direct your thoughts towards the practice of sleep training, NOT TOWARDS PARENTS WHO PRACTICE IT.  This means please refrain from using words like "barbaric," "unloving," and "cold-hearted" to describe parents who choose this practice.  It is fine to disagree with a concept.  It is not fine to attack or be hateful towards other parents.

photo courtesy of Kekka

Points to Pick with Ezzo: Part 3

(This is the third installment in a series I originally envisioned as two posts.  Posts preceding this one include Part 1, Part 1.5, and Part 2.)

Thank you for your gracious patience while I spent some time thinking, praying, and reflecting through the weekend.  God has provided me with some insights that, frankly, have caused me to squirm a bit.  I am thankful that (for once) I took the time to sit in quiet with Him before I continued throwing up my thoughts on Mr. Ezzo and Babywise all over the place.

At the end of Part 2, I said I wanted to move forward with speaking on the culture of fear in Christian parenting and the non-scheduling family portrayed in the pages of Babywise.  Let's pick up right there.

One of the most frequent commands in all of Scripture is the command to "fear not."  Quite literally from Genesis to Revelation, we are told by our loving and sovereign God over and over again, "Fear not!"  But we are not perfect, and we are prone to believing only what our eyes and our present circumstances tell us is true.  I myself am a believer prone to fear, and I rather suspect I am not alone. 

Within many Christian communities, the sickness of fear manifests itself in a specific way: fear of man.  And to be even more specific than that, many of us suffer the infirmity of fearing another's assessment or appraisal of us.  In my experience, nothing can make you feel more like you have just been measured by The Yardstick Of The Approval Of Others like parenting can.

The behavior of your children when they are interacting with others (no matter how formal or informal the environment may be) is often viewed as a direct reflection of the quality of parenting that child is receiving.  This is, frankly, a rather false assessment tool because as we all know, on any given day, there could be a myriad of factors playing into the behavior others are seeing.  And yet I think that for Christians who are interacting with one another in a community, there is great pressure to have perfectly behaved children - all the time.

Come with me for a moment to the book of Proverbs.  This book is filled with all manner of practical advice to give "prudence to the simple, knowledge and discretion to the young" (chapter 1, verse 4, NIV); essentially, it's a handbook for life of sorts, with the ultimate purpose being that of a happy life lived in the pursuit and practice of wisdom.

Proverbs provides many insights into parenting, and how to nurture your child towards the pursuit of wisdom.  One such proverb that gets a lot of play in some Christian parenting materials is found in Chapter 22, verse 15, and it states:

Folly is bound up in the heart of a child, but the rod of discipline will drive it far from him.

(Folly = foolishness)

(I am not - I will say it again - AM NOT going anywhere near an interpretation of the latter part of that verse.  If we try to talk about Ezzo and Babywise AND corporal punishment all in the same week here?  I know for a fact that both my brain and this blog will implode.)

There are several ways to look at the first part of that verse.  In Eugene Peterson's paraphrase The Message, he interprets the proverb like this:

Young people are prone to foolishness and fads; the cure comes through tough-minded discipline.

Notice how he went with the "young people" phrase here rather than "child"?  There is some question amongst scholars and interpreters whether the word should be "child" or "youth."  (Some interesting thoughts on the proverbs and "training a child" here.)  Regardless, the message here is one that speaks of that theological concept of Original Sin.  I love Matthew Henry's commentary on it:

Sin is foolishness, it is in the heart, there is an inward inclination to sin: children bring it into the world with them; and it cleaves close to the soul. We all need to be corrected by our heavenly Father.

See how he spins it around on you?  Oh yes, your children are prone to sin.  We all have an inward pull towards sin and we all need to be corrected by God our Father.  I know it seems like I'm really spinning of course, so let's get back on track.

The latter part of this proverb says that correction is needed to drive sin from the child. 

A child misbehaving (acting foolishly) = (perception) that parents aren't correcting child
and
A child misbehaving (acting foolishly) = judgment not from God (the only One equipped to judge) but from others in faith community
and
Judgment from others = not good feeling
then
not good feeling = fear of other's assessment of parenting choices
and then
fear of opinions of others = parenting from a place of fear of man rather than leadership from God through His Word and the movement of His Spirit within

Does this make any sense at all?  Sometimes even I cannot follow my own thought patterns.

Basically, many Christian parents live in fear of being embarrassed by their children's behavior around other Christians because children who act up must have parents who don't discipline, right?

** ED. NOTE: If you have kind of zoned out (and who can blame you?) we will start talking about Babywise again NOW **

What on earth does this have to do with babies and Babywise?

Well, I've long felt that as someone who is intimately familiar with the culture and climate of Christian parenting, Gary Ezzo exploits the fears of many Christian parents by portraying families who don't follow Babywise as families where the children usurp the authority of the parents and bring shame on them with their selfish, demanding behaviors.

(Notice how I used the past tense "felt" there?  It's going to get really interesting in the next section of this series.)

For those not familiar with the text of Babywise, Mr. Ezzo describes two families.  The babies in these families are cousins born within one week of each other - Chelsea and Marissa. Chelsea's parents follow Babywise guidelines while Marissa's do not.  Mr. Ezzo is careful to point out that "although these are fictional characters, the differences stated in their development are factual."

Chelsea comes into this world and experiences instant calm and emotional security by observing the strength and healthiness of her parent's marriage.  Chelsea's mother loves her, but she realizes that if she sacrifices time meant to be spent with her husband by being on-call to meet Chelsea's needs as they arise (around the clock), she won't be able to meet Chelsea's internal need "to know that her dad and mom love each other."

And let's don't forget we are, presumably, talking about a newborn here.

Throughout the book, Chelsea and her parents are presented as the calm, orderly, peaceful, joyful family.  Chelsea's parents are firmly in control.  They insist on her compliance.  No unnecessary sleep props for Chelsea - she is not manipulated into falling asleep. She is laid down to nap and if she must cry for a while before she falls asleep, then so be it.  She sleeps through the night by no later than twelve weeks of age, can be easily comforted by anyone, and is essentially a joy to be around.

Oh, but poor, poor Marissa.  You see, quickly after Marissa was born, she became the center of her parents' universe.  She is fed on demand, gets picked up when she cries, she won't ever be cared for by a baby-sitter, her parents run themselves ragged meeting her many needs, and they are about to pay the ultimate sacrifice for all of this time and attention showered on Marissa: their marriage is in trouble.

The vivid contrasts go on and on and on throughout the book: Chelsea is calm, Marissa is fussy.  Chelsea's days are predictable, Marissa's are erratic.  Chelsea's mother is healthy and even has time to exercise!  Marissa's mother is perpetually exhausted.  Chelsea is being raised into emotional healthiness, Marissa is being raised with an "emotional disability." Chelsea will want to be considerate of others, Marissa will be selfish.  Chelsea will grow up respecting her parents' authority.  Marissa will call her parents by their first names because her parents want to be her friend.

Marissa's mother has been assured that you cannot spoil or hurt a new baby by picking her up too much.  Mr. Ezzo is quick to correct that by saying, "Of course you can hurt a baby by picking him or her up too mich!"  Marissa's mother has no discernment about why her baby is crying; she operates under a "block that cry" mentality.  She offers her the breast at every whimper and "wears her in a sling all day so that she won't cry." 

And then, in the one line from this text that I find to be the most outright shocking, Mr. Ezzo makes the statement that Marissa's mother doesn't take the time to assess why her baby is crying, but simply reacts "to her feelings when she hears her baby cry," and that "emotional mothering can set the stage for child abuse."  Why?  Because "a common characteristic found among abusive parents is a tendency to direct thoughtless, impassioned responses towards their innocent children."  My blood runs cold reading that again.

(I honestly could point out many more examples of the way the other approaches to parenting are presented, but I gotta think at some point I'd be playing with copyright infringement.)

Coupled with Mr. Ezzo's very clear descriptions of what life looks like for attachment parenting families is the fact that the person who gave me this copy of Babywise is someone who has children who are, in every sense of the word, a delight to be around (happy, healthy, loving, helpful, considerate, generous, kind . . . I could go on) and the person who gave me my copy of Dr. Sears' The Baby Book has children who are, oh, how can I say this? not delightful to be around, and my pre-mama self was utterly terrified to consider any alternative to the Babywise concepts.  Even though the person who gave me a copy of Babywise said very, very clearly, "take from this whatever works for you and don't worry about the rest," I just could not shake the fear of what my family would turn into if i strayed from the pages of this book.

Before Dacey was born, I grinned at the prospect of starting off my mothering journey in such a neat, tidy, orderly way.  No sweat!  After Dacey was born, for the first four or five months of her life, I sobbed at my inability to parent in a godly way and grew depressed over what the future held for my child, for myself, and for my marriage.  In the meantime, my marriage was beginning to buckle a bit under the weight of fear and hopelessness I carried. 

For the noble few who have dared stick with me through this post which is quite clearly not much more than free therapy for me - this is my chief concern about Babywise:  It's not the idea of scheduling (although I cannot get on board with cry-it-out infant sleep training as part of that schedule), it's not the way orderliness and predictability are lauded and practically guaranteed, and it's not the sketchy breastfeeding advice/information.  No, it's the inaccurate and incendiary portrayal of demand-feeding/attachment parenting and the fear this picture breeds that bothers me the most.

And thus ends the longest post ever in the history of SortaCrunchy.

Oh, I guess now I should mention that I am closing comments on this post - at least for now.  I'll be away from the computer for much of the day, and I just don't think it is wise to allow a free-for-all in the comments section on a topic like this.  If you want to share feedback with me, you can email me at sortacrunchy at gmail dot com, but I am not quite sure how timely or lengthy my responses will be.  Just sayin.

Don't forget, there will be one more post in this series, and I'll be talking about some things that God has revealed to me in the past few days - things which have to do with grace, forgiveness, and proper perspective that comes from knowing the context.

Points to Pick with Ezzo: Part 2

Before I can fully move forth with my assertion that Gary Ezzo's word choice and word pictures in Babywise cater to and perpetuate a climate and culture of fear-based parenting, I'm going to need to back up a bit.

Some of you may not be totally familiar with the audience to whom Babywise is directed.  In the 1980s, Gary and Anne Marie Ezzo created a parenting curriculum entitled Preparation for Parenting: A Godly Perspective.  This material was based on parenting classes they had been teaching at their church in California, and it contained their philosophy on "Parent Directed Feeding" (scheduled feedings) and how it corresponds to baby's sleep patterns (including that by eight weeks, baby should have dropped the middle of the night feeding - by choice or through cry-it-out sleep training).

They first published On Becoming Babywise in 1993; it essentially contained the same advice and approach to infant care, but because it was to be released to the mainstream (secular) market, they removed the religious terminology that Preparation for Parenting contains.  At the same time, the Ezzos prepared a parenting curriculum entitled "Growing Kids God's Way" that many churches (seemingly many evangelical churches) began to purchase and offer as parenting classes in their own local churches. (more on the Ezzo/Babywise timeline at Ezzo.info)

For the average customer browsing the parenting bookshelf at her local bookstore, she might pick up a copy of On Becoming Babywise: Giving Your Infant the Gift of Nighttime Sleep and think yahtzee!  We haven't been sleeping!  Maybe this man can help.  The text itself mentions church being a part of family life, but there truly are no references to Scripture, Biblical directives, or explicit instructions strictly for Christian parents in the text of Babywise.  At least not the edition I have (which as I mentioned is copyright 1995; please correct me if this is not accurate about future editions).

So, why has Babywise become the model for infant care in many Christian communities?

It is my belief that for many Christians who were parenting in the 1990s when Growing Kids God's Way gained popularity nationwide, the name Ezzo was closely associated with biblical parenting.  These parents then passed their copies of Babywise around within their communities of friends who passed them on to the next crop of parents and the next and the next.  Parents like myself would see these  families who have children who are respectful, kind, and obedient and think, "Well, if this how they handled their infants, it must really work!"  What a not-yet-parent and a brand new parent doesn't fully understand is that there are miles and miles of teaching, guidance, and, well, parenting between the rocking chair and the baseball field. 

And as many a new parent has lamented, babies don't come with instruction manuals.  And yet, here is a book written by a man who claimed to have a handle on how to "grow kids God's way," and so who better to seek advice from when it comes to adapting to those sometimes rigorous and oftentimes scary first weeks as a new parent?  And although Babywise does not contain Scripture references, it does build a foundation on Biblical truths that many Christians (again, particularly evangelicals) hold in great esteem - particularly the importance of a strong and healthy marriage, parental authority, and orderly homes.

In all honesty, I don't have a broad range of knowledge in what is popular in mainstream non-Christian parenting circles.  My friends who tend towards mainstream parenting philosophies are all Christians.  Is Babywise (the text itself, not just the ideas of Parent Directed Feeding and cry-it-out sleep training) a popular parenting handbook outside of Christian parenting communities?

Anyway, I think it's important to note that the same material printed in Babywise is material that was created for an audience of Christian parents - new parents in particular.

Think back to the months leading up to the arrival of your first child.  Did you ever feel fearful?  Perhaps you didn't.  I know I did.  Kyle and I had been married for over six years when we got pregnant with Dacey.  Things were pretty darn good, solid, and steady in our marriage.  I was more than just a little afraid of what parenthood would do to our marriage.  I was afraid of losing sleep.  I was afraid, plain and simple, of messing the whole thing up.

As a mama-to-be, I found comfort in Mr. Ezzo's assurances that by following his directives, my marriage would remain strong, healthy, and vibrant.  I wanted the transition to parenthood to be as uncomfortable as possible.  I wanted order.  I wanted predictability.  And I knew what I did not want - I did not want for my family to in any way to resemble the fictional family portrayed in the first chapter of Babywise.  THAT family fed their baby on demand.  THAT family picked up their baby when she started crying.  THAT family had a quickly crumbling marriage and would eventually allow their children to call them by their first names rather than Mom and Dad. 

More next time on that other family as well as the culture of fear in Christian parenting.

Please remember my concerns and critiques are limited to the text of Babywise.  I intend no disrespect nor negativity towards parents who have found Babywise to be helpful for their families.  I know many loving families who have taken and/or taught the Growing Kids God's Way classes.  I am not critiquing that curriculum or the families who have participated in it.

If you choose to leave a comment, please refrain from making judgmental statements about other parents and their parenting choices.

photo courtesy of limaoscarjuliet

Points to Pick with Ezzo: Part 1.5

Well now.  I feel as though I quite possibly have bitten off more than I can chew.

I applaud you for the way each of you who were brave enough to add a comment to yesterday's post handled yourselves.  Of course, this is a topic which can bring hurt feelings, angry outcries, and general divisiveness to the surface.  Although a few of the responses were more vehement than others, it was all pretty tame in the grand view of Babywise discussions.

In the past twenty-four hours, I've had some internal conflict about whether or not to proceed with this series.  I've pondered whether or not I spoke clearly enough that my purpose here is to cover my concerns with the text of Babywise, not to condemn, belittle, judge, or criticize those who have found it to be helpful and positive in their families.  I've also wondered how much time I want to invest into babysitting comments in a series like this.

I'm just going to move forward with caution and see how things play out.

The most poignant question from yesterday was from Jennifer, who asked regarding the topic of fear:

yes, I'm ready for this portion too... because i am sooooo confused about the whole fear thing. scripture tells us that a certain fear is what we are to have.

Deuteronomy 6:2
so that you, your children and their children after them may fear the Lord your God as long as you live by keeping all his decrees and commands that I give you, and so that you may enjoy long life.

but this whole fear thing seems to be so debated. especially in the AP community. i cant wait for this discussion!

thanks for an opportunity to learn! isn't that what we all want?

Yes, as you can imagine, I'm going to have to do some reading and thinking before I take that on.

* * * * *

In the meantime, I do want to say one issue I will not be covering in this series is the topic of the effects of Babywise and scheduled feedings in general on the success or failure of breastfeeding.

This is one of the most hotly debated aspects of Babywise, but I cannot with any accuracy or authenticity speak to this topic.  To begin with, I'm not a lactation consultant or an LLL leader.  I have no formal training in the science of breastfeeding.  All I have is my own experience as a breastfeeding mother.

Our oldest, Dacey, was fed on a schedule, though I didn't push the three hour span between feedings until she was closer to four months (rather than eight weeks, which my edition of Babywise instructed).  She was born at 9 lbs, 12 oz., and continued to just grow exponentially from there.  I mean, seriously, look at the child at four months:

Cuh-LEAR-ly we had no failure-to-thrive issues.  LOOK AT THOSE ARMS!  Good heavens.

Anyway, my only breastfeeding issue/problem was overabundant supply and overactive letdown.  It was sometimes painful, often messy, and in general just inconvenient, but eventually everything evened out and I continued to nurse her on a schedule until she was about twelve months old.  At that point, I began nursing her only first thing in the morning, before naps, and before bedtime.  She self-weaned at just past two.

Our youngest child, Aliza Joy, was fed on demand from birth.  Like her sister, she was born on the bigger side of newborn averages (8 lbs, 8 oz) and continued to grow at a reasonable pace.  Eventually (I would say by two months), she had found her own predictable schedule for when she wanted to eat.  Again, the only breastfeeding issue I had was overabundant supply, and again, it worked itself out.  She breastfed until she was twenty-one months old when I initiated weaning.

So who am I to speak on the challenges that feeding on demand or feeding on a schedule can bring?

Many others have voiced their concerns over the possibility that scheduled feedings can be harmful for babies.  If you would like to do more reading on the matter, here are some resources:

Ten years ago, the American Academy of Pediatrics released an official statement on scheduled feedings versus demand feedings.

AAP News Release: Babywise linked to dehydration, failure to thrive.

Many parents have shared their stories of how adherence to a strict schedule resulted in a failure to thrive diagnosis.  I was particularly moved by the one titled Just In Time.

Kellymom joins the AAP in recommending newborns be fed on demand to increase milk supply.  From Kellymom's page on low milk supply:

Scheduled feedings interfere with the supply & demand cycle of milk production and can lead to a reduced supply, sometimes several months later rather than immediately. Nurse your baby whenever she is hungry.

Here are more resources from Kellymom that address breastfeeding and scheduled feedings.

NOW, having said all of that, don't forget that I have a happy, healthy four and a half year old who is still in the 95th percentile for weight and height who was schedule-fed as a baby.  Some babies WILL take to a feeding schedule just fine; it will not work for others.  Common sense and maternal instinct must prevail.

Alright, care to weigh in?  My only request is that if you do share your feedback as a comment, please, please limit your response to criticism or support of the ideas of Babywise and/or scheduled feedings.  Please do not criticize or use inflamatory, unloving, or unkind words to describe parents who schedule feed. 

Points to Pick with Ezzo: Part 1

After Monday's post, Missy called me out as a "wimp" (privately and jokingly of course, because Missy is not one for the public name calling) for invoking the name of Ezzo and then closing comments.  So, here we go then.  I trust you all enough to share some of my thoughts on Mr. Ezzo and On Becoming Babywise in particular, and I'll just know that your comments won't stray towards personal attack.  Agreed?

Before I begin, I want to say with sparkling clarity that in this series of posts, I am in no way criticizing parents who have chosen to adopt parts or all of the Babywise philosophy.  I hope you know me well enough to know that I advocate families seeking out and discovering what works for them. 

Missy and I have different takes on Babywise, and we've discussed this at times through the years.  (I'll tell you what - you know you have a solid friendship when you can discuss everything from Babywise to abortion to President Obama to reformed theology with someone and still love them dearly and call them friend at the end of the day!)  After Monday's post, Missy and I talked briefly about Babywise again and she said, "I guess my whole thing on Babywise is that everyone I know who did it is a great mom. Many of them much greater than I, you know?  So the way I was "trained" was to use it very lovingly."  And in speaking about moms I know who do use Babywise, I wholeheartedly agree with her observation.  I would never, ever, ever imply that a mom who chooses this approach is unloving or a bad mother.  Like Missy, many of the moms I know who incorporate elements of Babywise into their approach to parenting infants are women whom I truly would consider to be amazing mothers.

I needed to get all of that said so that you'll fully know that the points I am picking at when it comes to Babywise have to do with Mr. Ezzo and his book. 

Further, I need to state that I have not read any of Mr. Ezzo's other books nor have I personally taken part in any of his parenting classes.  My point of reference is a 1995 edition of On Becoming Babywise.  I've spent a lot of time with that book, both as a new mom and as a veteran (does mothering two children under the age of five make you a veteran?  Be gracious with your answer), and left unchecked, I could prattle on and on and on with deconstruction of the entire text. 

What I hope to do in this series of posts is present some of the main points of the Babywise philosophy with which I take issue.  As a teaser of what is to come, I'll say this: the aspect of Babywise that that gets me riled up more than anything else is how (in my opinion) Gary Ezzo's philosophy caters to and perpetuates a climate and culture of fear-based parenting.

Start loading your ammo if you wish.  As long as we can speak respectfully on the topic, I welcome feedback from both sides of this divide. 

This post is part of the Ezzo Week(end) 2009 series hosted by Tulip Girl which serves to raise awareness about the concerns with the parenting philosophy promoted by Gary Ezzo.

photo courtesy of tostadophoto.com