"Growing Kids God's Way"

October 20, 2005

Bravus' comments in the men's retreat thread about this program have piqued my interest.

My children have used this program in raising their children (now ages 7 and 9), and they are really happy with it. The initial steps, when the baby is a newborn, is called "BabyWise" and there are several books and videos for the program at that level.

My daughter-in-law attended some meetings when their older child was a newborn, and learned to feed the baby on a schedule rather than on demand, and to put the baby down for her naps on schedule even if the baby has to cry herself to sleep. Some of those rules could (and were) a little harsh in their enforcement. It's emotionally wrenching for a parent to have to listen to the little tiny baby cry and cry its heart out until it finally is so weary it falls asleep.

But, on the other hand, both their children are turning out to be model children.

My son even brought one of the leaders of that program to their church (I think it was Ezzo himself) who lectured to their parents' group, and showed videos of how to tell your children about "the birds and the bees" starting with a very young age, when going on nature walks, by showing about the stamens and the pistils in flowers, etc.

I'm interested in what you did, Bravus, in your church, for a "BabyWise" group. And what it took to make it successful.

October 20, 2005

We actually did the later 'Growing Kids God's Way' program, which is after the baby stuff. I actually diagree with Ezzo on some of the more draconian parts of his baby philosophy, or at least on how people often end up implementing them. We actually did quite the reverse with our kids - were quite laissez-faire about feeding them and cuddling them and so on when they asked for it. What we did do, though, was not build our lives around them, but let them participate in our lives, and that had some of the same benefits of helping the child see their role.

I like the 'Growing Kids God's Way' stuff very much, although we still adapted it somewhat for our own circumstances. We did the course when our kids were about 5 and 2, and definitely credit it with helping us do a much better job of parenting.

The basic concept is 'filling the moral storehouse' of the child, by requiring right actions, but always explaining the *moral reasons* why those actions are right. Laissez-faire parenting misses the mark by not requiring right behaviour from children, and authoritarian parenting misses it by not explaining the reasons, just requiring thoughtless obedience. Neither fits the child for a moral adult life.

Highly recommended: we actually did the program at another Christian church, not an Adventist church, with a large group, watching the video series then working through the workbooks and materials with other couples. We talked our Adventist church in Perth into buying the materials, but then couldn't get a group together to study them...

I hope we'll end up being able to do this with some families once we get back to Australia.

October 20, 2005

Did you discipline your children with an "implement"?

My son told me, "Mom, hands are for loving. We never spank with our hands. We use the implement." And the "implement" is a piece of what looks like indoor/outdoor carpeting about 12 by 2 inches.

After much loving and explaining, and always in private, the parent will use that "implement" for swats on the thigh or tush of the child. It stings, and they do remember it.

After they reached the age of reason, however, my son and daughter-in-law never spanked unless the children intentionally disobeyed. Never for an "accidental" wrongdoing.

Another phase of this program is a total absence of television in their lives. They are allowed about an hour of one or two carefully selected and screened Bible story videos, or even something like "Sound of Music", once a week.

The problem with this is that the parents don't have TV either, and my son loves to keep up with golf.

October 20, 2005

Yeah, we used a fly swatter - good sting, no damage! Used very rarely, and only for intentional disobedience.

We also have no TV, but not due to the Ezzos, due to other reasons that I've discussed here before, and I definitely think that has contributed to how good our kids are.

We also liked the 'first time obedience' principle: kids come when they're called, and say 'yes mummy' or 'yes daddy' when they're asked to do something. No nagging, asking five times, arguing etc. If they're in the middle of something important they can say 'may I appeal to....?' The parent judges the appeal, and may grant it or not, and if it's not granted the child then accepts that decision and does as s/he's told.

That sounds rigid, but it actually works really well. Kids are malleable and will fit into what you accustom them to, and this gets rid of a huge amount of parental frustration, leading to much more positive relationships.

The other principle is 'discussing things in a time of non-confrontation': if there's an issue, take a time-out and come back to it when everyone is calm, and explain the moral reasoning to the child then.

Apart from anything else, explaining the moral reasons for things (e.g. don't run in the supermarket because you might crash into an older person and hurt them) requires the *parents* to think about whether what they're asking of the child *has* a moral reason behind it, or is just a whim or something to make the parent's life easier...

October 20, 2005

Isn't that the truth! Some parents are nagging at their children constantly! The kids soon begin to turn it all off.

I like what you tell about the Ezzo program. I wish more churches used it. It would help the parents so much.

But not too many families have *both* parents so much involved in parenting -- sad to say!

October 20, 2005

Quote:

My daughter-in-law attended some meetings when their older child was a newborn, and learned to feed the baby on a schedule rather than on demand, and to put the baby down for her naps on schedule even if the baby has to cry herself to sleep. Some of those rules could (and were) a little harsh in their enforcement. It's emotionally wrenching for a parent to have to listen to the little tiny baby cry and cry its heart out until it finally is so weary it falls asleep.

Just a side note: my parents used this "method" with me. To be blatantly honest, it is something that has ruined me for life. I am constantly seeking this nurturing that I did not receive as an infant. It would a most fascinating study of it's affects on the adult life...

October 20, 2005

I am always suspicious of people proclaiming God's way to do anything.

The description I'm hearing of the Ezzo materials confirms my skepticism.

The notion of nursing infants on a schedule has nothing to do with God. It overlooks some fundamental truths about child development.

The only real power that parents have is moral suasion, sometimes called influence. If we squander it on non-essential issues, if we do not build trust, we will not have it when it really matters.

Children learn to love God as their needs are met. When infants go hungry because of an arbitrary schedule which has nothing to do with their needs, the foundation of trust suffers.

These rigid approaches may produce an external compliance, but in the long run, they have a high cost, either in later rebellion, or loss of creativity.

Having worked closely with over 600 families, I have seen these methods used quite often.

You can find a case study of a young person typical of this in "Daisy" whose story begins about halfway down the page.

http://showcase.netins.net/web/nurture/Success.html

October 20, 2005

Well, perhaps I should elaborate.

My own children did not go to the scheduled feedings until the babies were at least three months old. Before that time, an infant must be fed on demand.

Also, in the case of my newest grandbaby, who's now six months old, her mother (my daughter) steadfastly refuses to enter into any "rigid" feeding and sleep schedules. However, her baby has --on its own-- developed a three-hour feeding schedule during the day, and already sleeps 8 to 10 hours at night--without any "forcing" by its parents!

But, about the loving. Ezzo's program is full of loving for the babies. It's just that the parents must do the loving when the child is already awake -- not wake it up to love it, and definitely not pick it up every time it cries. Sometimes a baby just whimpers a little bit as it's going off to sleep; that's no problem at all!

And, on the other hand, walking with a baby while cooing to it and comforting it as it cries is NOT bad!

October 20, 2005

Let me further elaborate on the Ezzo materials.

Ezzo is the psychologist, I believe. And there's a pediatrician partnered with him in the program. They're both Christians. But they have thorough medical and psychological foundation for what they say.

For instance, the medical reason for establishing a feeding schedule rather than feeding an ounce here and an ouce again in an hour, is that the baby's digestive system needs time to rest. All this is pointed out in the book.

I believe there's plenty of loving of the child prescribed in the program. At least my son and family do love their children -- a LOT. And spent a LOT of time with them.

My son says, "We realize we'll only have these children with us a short time. We want to instill all the Godly qualities while we still have them with us at home."

October 20, 2005

Yeah, that's what I meant about the difference between the total packge of what the Ezzos describe and the way people interpret and implement that (and then the way others who are not the parents and do not understand the baby's whole life describe that)... But yes, I agree with Ed that meeting the baby's needs as they arise is what reassures him/her of love and safety and security, and is very important.

I do also see young parents who feel as though they can never go out in the evening because the baby has to be home in bed by 7 pm, and so on and so on, and who totally build their lives around the baby. We kind of did the reverse, letting the baby come with us and continuing our lives, while of course always making sure that she had her needs for food, sleep, changing and play met. Babies are hugely malleable (not literally!) and will fit in with you - if you end up jammed up around the baby's schedule, it's because you created it...

October 20, 2005

Okay, I know I said I was leaving C/A, but I can't leave this topic untouched. Sorry.

For those majority of parents with NT (neurotypical) children, you can totally fit the child within your schedule. Good for you, and more power to you.

HOWEVER, there are parents with children with "invisible" special needs who will NEVER fit into an outer schedule, and telling these parents that they MUST make their child fit into an external schedule is telling these parents that they will fail with their children.

I have one of these kids, and was absolutely convinced I was the worst parent in the entire world because everyone told me, you must do this, you must do that. I let him "cry it out" once. That was wayyyyy too long, and I never did it again. Feeding on schedule? Sure, every 2 hours. Longer than that, and he would scream and not be able to nurse because he was so upset. Not picking him up when he cried? Not even going there--just one word for those who have experienced it--total meltdown. Putting the child down to sleep? Yeah, right, I'd like to see ANYONE try that. He slept on or with someone for a year, not for lack of trying, but because that's what he needed. Stay out late? Don't even get me started there. Miss bedtime because of "our" concerns? Sure, if I wanted to regret it for a day. Leave him with a sitter so that I could go out with my DH? Well, at 18 months we finally left him with someone, went out for ice cream, and when we came back 45 minutes later he was just starting a meltdown. Tantrums? Well, the difference between tantrums may not look like much from the outside, but there is a world of difference between them, and they cannot be treated the same way.

So you know what, some people have to schedule around their kids if they want their kids to develop in a healthful way. The biggest help for me was Dr. Sears' book, The Baby Book (and his little book The Fussy Baby), both of which advocate attachment parenting, and both of which deal with kids who are not "normal."

Advocating a one-size fits all approach to parenting means that the ones who fall into that size grow up okay, but the ones who fall outside the boundaries of "normal" are lost. I am so forever grateful that I hadn't gone through a "God's Way" parenting class before I had kids. I would have thought that my kids were forever doomed and that I was an utter failure as a parent.

Okay, now I'm off again.

M

October 20, 2005

You're right, Michelle, and I apologise for not clarifying that. Of course the child's needs are crucial, and not all kids are the same.

I didn't think I was advocating a one size fits all approach, but if that's how it sounded I apologise. I meant to just share what worked for us, and perhaps challenge one size fits all approaches like the Ezzos is sometimes seen as...

October 21, 2005

Quote:

like the Ezzos is sometimes seen

That's certainly a fair distinction. Certainly the people I've known who promoted the Ezzo approach were rigid anyway. It might be more the type of people they generally attract, and less what they actually teach.

But my experience with those who tout the Ezzos has been uniformly negative.

October 21, 2005

Heh, but the grammar is pretty 'orrible when it's excerpted like that! You may well be right about the Ezzos' 'Babywise' stuff, Ed. And even with 'Growing Kids' we adapted rather than adopted, but our experience has been good, and it seemed that the foundation was Biblical and sound.

October 21, 2005

Quote:

the foundation was Biblical

Perhaps. Usually purportedly Biblical regimes like that are largely notional, not exegetical.

My M.A. is in Religious Education, so this is a field I've studied for thirty years or so. The Bible doesn't say a great deal directly about child-rearing. Most of this type of material is based on inference, and inference is only as valid as the process used to arrive at it. Generally, such people are not very rigorous in their approach.

It's the old, "here's the rule, now find texts to support it" approach.

October 21, 2005

Well, Michelle certainly has my sympathies and my encouragement for her ability to deal with a special child. You've done great, Michelle! And he'll be all the stronger as an adult for having had you and your husband as parents.

Of course, one size never fits all.

But it's nice to learn about Bravus' family. Which, when paired with the results I've seen in my own grandchildren, make me very pleased with the Ezzo way. The families are Christ-centered, but NOT child-centered. The kids have to grow up with good manners but not believing they're the center of the universe.

--Oh, I did know one other family which used the BabyWise techniques, before my son had any children. They're still doing well, and their little BabyWise baby is now more than ten years old and a good youth member of his church (not SDA). He spoke and understood American Sign Language before he could talk. The words for "please," "thank you," "I want more," "I've had enough," and "I need to speak to you" were learned. This enabled the child and the parents to converse across a room without bothering the adults. It was especially good when the child was in his high chair during a meal.

P.S. Michelle. You're not really leaving C/A are you??

October 22, 2005

I just had to post some links about this program. As you can probably see, I am against it. I'm not a good at writing, however, so if you're interested, the links can speak for themselves .

http://www.fix.net/~rprewett/shadow.html

http://www.nwrel.org/cfc/frc/beyus3.html

http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/discipline/bible_sayeth.html

http://www.ezzo.info/voices.htm

http://ezzo.info/Timeline/timeline1.htm

http://ezzo.info/Voices/attachment.htm

http://ourworld.cs.com/kent1750/GKGW/complete.htm?f=fs

http://www.breastfeeding.com/advocacy/ezzo_fied.html

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/moodyfamily/gfi.html

http://www.angelfire.com/md2/moodyfamily/casestudies.html

Toni