Being a stay at home mom had always been something I wanted to do. My mom stayed at home and she really showed me the value of it and she encouraged me to do the same. My husband and I were very intentional to arrange our life in a way that would allow me to stay home with our kids. Now any stay at home mom knows how hard of a job it actually is. No leisure days with Bon bons that's for sure. I honestly don't think it always feels that rewarding when your kids are small. Sure there are blessings along the way, but I think the rewards come later in life once you see the fruit of your hard work in your kids.
There are a lot of challenges to being a stay at home mom. We have society telling us that women need to fulfill there own dreams and desires first, then find a way to fit family into that. There is pressure to "do something" or "be someone" other than just a mom. The way of self sacrifice is never easy, but being a mom who chooses to give up her own pursuits for a time so that she can give that time to her children is a beautiful thing. I believe God made women to find their greatest fulfillment in the role of wife and mother. Now of course there are women who can't stay home for whatever reason (single parent, financial problems, etc.). I am in no way implying that they are bad mothers. So please do not misunderstand me.
Another challenge that some stay at home moms face is the boredom (for lack of a better word) that comes with being in the same place doing the same thing day after day. They long for some kind of change or some freedom for a little while. Now I will be very honest. I too have longed for this freedom from responsibility, but I feel that my greatest struggle with being a stay at home mom is quite different than this. I always felt a pressure to be doing things or going places. Surely I should be going to ballet and soccer and some church function every other day right? And if I don't have 3 play dates a week my kids will end up being unsocial won't they? Forget that my oldest is only 3 we need to be busy busy! I could some up the pressure this way... "Being a stay at home mom is good, but to be a really good stay at home mom you had better be so busy with activities that your not ever really home. Keep up your social life and make sure kids have a social life too!"
My husband and I have tried to arrange our life to be as unhurried as possible. We want to live simply, but this seems to fly in the face of our society, even in the church. Most of the stay at home moms i knew were always doing things and going places. My life at home looked so different from theirs that i thought maybe i was doing something wrong at first! When I was pregnant with our second child I had begun to pull out of all the various ministries I was involved in. When I was about 6 months pregnant I had finally pulled out of all my ministry responsibilities. It was only a few weeks later that I was asked to help out in a different ministry area. The phrase they used was "since your not doing anything else...". I thought "that is exactly the point!" If I truly want to focus on my kids I can't be doing tons of extra things. I felt a pressure to be always doing something else than just staying home.
Now I know that some of this is my personality. I prefer to stay home than be going tons of places, but it is also intentional. I want to be in our home majority of the time especially when my kids are little. Home is where I the parent have the time to teach, train, and discipline. I want to be my kids primary instructor in life, but that will only happen if we have a solid relationship together and that relationship takes lots of time to develop. There is always time later for activities, but if you miss the time to create a lasting relationship, you can't get that back. There is nothing wrong with getting out of the house, or going to see friends, play sports, etc. I just think these things should not consume the majority of our time with our kids.
So when the pressure comes to go go go, I have to remind myself that it is ok to live slowly and simply. God loves me even if my kids aren't in 4 different sports at once. And then when the feeling of needing some freedom comes, we will find creative ways to get out and have fun. In our family it isn't about balance, but about focus. Choose wisely where you want to spend your time. It is time you can never get back.
For those moms who read this I would love to hear some of your stories/struggles of motherhood. Feel free to leave a comment!
Monday, November 14, 2011
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
Children need touch and attention
My husband and I had decided that we were not going to use any form of "crying it out" with our kids. We felt that it was a cultural practices that we did not want to embrace. I also believed that it could be hurtful rather than helpful. I then found this article which helped to strengthen my resolve in this area. This is from the Harvard Gazette, the April 9th edition, 1998.
Children Need Touching and Attention, Harvard Researchers Say
By Alvin Powell
Contributing Writer
America's "let them cry" attitude toward children may lead to more fears and tears among adults, according to two Harvard Medical School researchers.
Instead of letting infants cry, American parents should keep their babies close, console them when they cry, and bring them to bed with them, where they'll feel safe, according to Michael L. Commons and Patrice M. Miller, researchers at the Medical School's Department of Psychiatry.
The pair examined childrearing practices here and in other cultures and say the widespread American practice of putting babies in separate beds -- even separate rooms -- and not responding quickly to their cries may lead to incidents of post-traumatic stress and panic disorders when these children reach adulthood.
The early stress resulting from separation causes changes in infant brains that makes future adults more susceptible to stress in their lives, say Commons and Miller.
"Parents should recognize that having their babies cry unnecessarily harms the baby permanently," Commons said. "It changes the nervous system so they're overly sensitive to future trauma."
The Harvard researchers' work is unique because it takes a cross-disciplinary approach, examining brain function, emotional learning in infants, and cultural differences, according to Charles R. Figley, director of the Traumatology Institute at Florida State University and editor of The Journal of Traumatology.
"It is very unusual but extremely important to find this kind of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research report," Figley said. "It accounts for cross-cultural differences in children's emotional response and their ability to cope with stress, including traumatic stress."
Figley said Commons and Miller's work illuminates a route of further study and could have implications for everything from parents' efforts to intellectually stimulate infants to practices such as circumcision.
Commons has been a lecturer and research associate at the Medical School's Department of Psychiatry since 1987 and is a member of the Department's Program in Psychiatry and the Law.
Miller has been a research associate at the School's Program in Psychiatry and the Law since 1994 and an assistant professor of psychology at Salem State College since 1993. She received master's and doctorate degrees in human development from the Graduate School of Education.
The pair say that American childrearing practices are influenced by fears that children will grow up dependent. But they say that parents are on the wrong track: physical contact and reassurance will make children more secure and better able to form adult relationships when they finally head out on their own.
"We've stressed independence so much that it's having some very negative side effects," Miller said.
The two gained the spotlight in February when they presented their ideas at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's annual meeting in Philadelphia.
Commons and Miller, using data Miller had worked on that was compiled by Robert A. LeVine, Roy Edward Larsen Professor of Education and Human Development, contrasted American childrearing practices with those of other cultures, particularly the Gusii people of Kenya. Gusii mothers sleep with their babies and respond rapidly when the baby cries.
"Gusii mothers watching videotapes of U.S. mothers were upset by how long it took these mothers to respond to infant crying," Commons and Miller said in their paper on the subject.
The way we are brought up colors our entire society, Commons and Miller say. Americans in general don't like to be touched and pride themselves on independence to the point of isolation, even when undergoing a difficult or stressful time.
Despite the conventional wisdom that babies should learn to be alone, Miller said she believes many parents "cheat," keeping the baby in the room with them, at least initially. In addition, once the child can crawl around, she believes many find their way into their parents' room on their own.
American parents shouldn't worry about this behavior or be afraid to baby their babies, Commons and Miller said. Parents should feel free to sleep with their infant children, to keep their toddlers nearby, perhaps on a mattress in the same room, and to comfort a baby when it cries.
"There are ways to grow up and be independent without putting babies through this trauma," Commons said. "My advice is to keep the kids secure so they can grow up and take some risks."
Besides fears of dependence, the pair said other factors have helped form our childrearing practices, including fears that children would interfere with sex if they shared their parents' room and doctors' concerns that a baby would be injured by a parent rolling on it if the parent and baby shared the bed. Additionally, the nation's growing wealth has helped the trend toward separation by giving families the means to buy larger homes with separate rooms for children.
The result, Commons and Miller said, is a nation that doesn't like caring for its own children, a violent nation marked by loose, nonphysical relationships.
"I think there's a real resistance in this culture to caring for children," Commons said. But "punishment and abandonment has never been a good way to get warm, caring, independent people."
Children Need Touching and Attention, Harvard Researchers Say
By Alvin Powell
Contributing Writer
America's "let them cry" attitude toward children may lead to more fears and tears among adults, according to two Harvard Medical School researchers.
Instead of letting infants cry, American parents should keep their babies close, console them when they cry, and bring them to bed with them, where they'll feel safe, according to Michael L. Commons and Patrice M. Miller, researchers at the Medical School's Department of Psychiatry.
The pair examined childrearing practices here and in other cultures and say the widespread American practice of putting babies in separate beds -- even separate rooms -- and not responding quickly to their cries may lead to incidents of post-traumatic stress and panic disorders when these children reach adulthood.
The early stress resulting from separation causes changes in infant brains that makes future adults more susceptible to stress in their lives, say Commons and Miller.
"Parents should recognize that having their babies cry unnecessarily harms the baby permanently," Commons said. "It changes the nervous system so they're overly sensitive to future trauma."
The Harvard researchers' work is unique because it takes a cross-disciplinary approach, examining brain function, emotional learning in infants, and cultural differences, according to Charles R. Figley, director of the Traumatology Institute at Florida State University and editor of The Journal of Traumatology.
"It is very unusual but extremely important to find this kind of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research report," Figley said. "It accounts for cross-cultural differences in children's emotional response and their ability to cope with stress, including traumatic stress."
Figley said Commons and Miller's work illuminates a route of further study and could have implications for everything from parents' efforts to intellectually stimulate infants to practices such as circumcision.
Commons has been a lecturer and research associate at the Medical School's Department of Psychiatry since 1987 and is a member of the Department's Program in Psychiatry and the Law.
Miller has been a research associate at the School's Program in Psychiatry and the Law since 1994 and an assistant professor of psychology at Salem State College since 1993. She received master's and doctorate degrees in human development from the Graduate School of Education.
The pair say that American childrearing practices are influenced by fears that children will grow up dependent. But they say that parents are on the wrong track: physical contact and reassurance will make children more secure and better able to form adult relationships when they finally head out on their own.
"We've stressed independence so much that it's having some very negative side effects," Miller said.
The two gained the spotlight in February when they presented their ideas at the American Association for the Advancement of Science's annual meeting in Philadelphia.
Commons and Miller, using data Miller had worked on that was compiled by Robert A. LeVine, Roy Edward Larsen Professor of Education and Human Development, contrasted American childrearing practices with those of other cultures, particularly the Gusii people of Kenya. Gusii mothers sleep with their babies and respond rapidly when the baby cries.
"Gusii mothers watching videotapes of U.S. mothers were upset by how long it took these mothers to respond to infant crying," Commons and Miller said in their paper on the subject.
The way we are brought up colors our entire society, Commons and Miller say. Americans in general don't like to be touched and pride themselves on independence to the point of isolation, even when undergoing a difficult or stressful time.
Despite the conventional wisdom that babies should learn to be alone, Miller said she believes many parents "cheat," keeping the baby in the room with them, at least initially. In addition, once the child can crawl around, she believes many find their way into their parents' room on their own.
American parents shouldn't worry about this behavior or be afraid to baby their babies, Commons and Miller said. Parents should feel free to sleep with their infant children, to keep their toddlers nearby, perhaps on a mattress in the same room, and to comfort a baby when it cries.
"There are ways to grow up and be independent without putting babies through this trauma," Commons said. "My advice is to keep the kids secure so they can grow up and take some risks."
Besides fears of dependence, the pair said other factors have helped form our childrearing practices, including fears that children would interfere with sex if they shared their parents' room and doctors' concerns that a baby would be injured by a parent rolling on it if the parent and baby shared the bed. Additionally, the nation's growing wealth has helped the trend toward separation by giving families the means to buy larger homes with separate rooms for children.
The result, Commons and Miller said, is a nation that doesn't like caring for its own children, a violent nation marked by loose, nonphysical relationships.
"I think there's a real resistance in this culture to caring for children," Commons said. But "punishment and abandonment has never been a good way to get warm, caring, independent people."
Thursday, September 15, 2011
Hindsight
Well it has now been about 9 months since my last post. Looking back I see that I did not achieve one of my goals for this blog. I wanted this blog to be a place to share my views on motherhood based on the research I have done and experiences I have had. In my haste to do the blog, I failed to give my research/evidence for my opinions. And now I can see why I was misunderstood. I also see that it was hard to have people disagree with me, because the people who did disagree were friends and people I had hoped would understand where I was coming from. Now I realize that there would be no way for them to know where I was coming from since they have not read what I have read or experienced what I have experienced. I assumed too many things. In trying to speak out against culture, challenge parents, encourage mothers, and throw everything into a spiritual light I took on too much at once.
So where does that leave us now? I still want to continue the blog, but I will be doing things differently. It will now be primarily a place for me to share my experiences and post any research articlies I have found interesting. I will let the research and experience speak for themselves and allow people to make their own opinions. I have much less time now days with two little girls, so my post will be fewer but I hope to continue the blog. For those of you who enjoyed my blog in the past I hope you will continue to do so!
Carrie
So where does that leave us now? I still want to continue the blog, but I will be doing things differently. It will now be primarily a place for me to share my experiences and post any research articlies I have found interesting. I will let the research and experience speak for themselves and allow people to make their own opinions. I have much less time now days with two little girls, so my post will be fewer but I hope to continue the blog. For those of you who enjoyed my blog in the past I hope you will continue to do so!
Carrie
Thursday, January 27, 2011
The end... For now.
I'm am sorry to say that this will be my last blog post. It seems this blog as stirred up more controversy then I intended. Though I have received some support and positive feed back I feel as if the negative has out weighed the positive. This makes me very sad because I had a lot of other topics i wanted to talk about, but feel that for now it is best to stop.
I have learned some things through this experience. First is that blogs are very poor ways to communicate. No matter how open and honest i felt i was about my opinions, i was misunderstood and assumptions were made. This is a primary reason I am stopping the blog. I feel that too many assumptions have been made about what I am trying to say. I fear that I have not communicated my purpose clearly enough and I don't want more misunderstandings to occur.
The second thing I learned is that when your opinions are outside the norm, they are not always received kindly. I suppose I should have excepted it, but it caught me off guard. I never expected people to take this so personally. I know I have dealt with some personal topics, but to me it is just a blog. A place to vent my opinions as I said in my very first post. I did not intend for anything to sound like "thus saith the lord". My fear is that culture has been informing how we mother (including birth) too much. I wanted to speak out against what I saw as possible dangers in all areas of motherhood, but that seems to have been interpreted as me pointing the finger at people. This was not my intent.
Despite all things things I hope that my bigger purpose behind this blog was achieved. That purpose was to challenge christian mothers (and fathers) to think critically about all aspects of raising kids. I don't want people to just follow the norm, or go with the flow if you will. For a mother there is nothing more profound than having the opportunity to shape and mold a young soul. I want moms to believe that how they choose to mother from pregnancy on really does matter. I want moms to trust in their God given abilities and instincts when it comes to motherhood. I have always wanted parents to evaluate, ponder, and research what is going to be best for their children, starting from in the womb. This doesn't mean you have to share my opinions. It just means I want parents to make informed and educated choices. I hope that purpose may have been achieved, and for now this will be the end of my blog. Thank you to those who have supported me. I will continue to strive for being the best mom I can be, and I hope that for all of you as well.
I have learned some things through this experience. First is that blogs are very poor ways to communicate. No matter how open and honest i felt i was about my opinions, i was misunderstood and assumptions were made. This is a primary reason I am stopping the blog. I feel that too many assumptions have been made about what I am trying to say. I fear that I have not communicated my purpose clearly enough and I don't want more misunderstandings to occur.
The second thing I learned is that when your opinions are outside the norm, they are not always received kindly. I suppose I should have excepted it, but it caught me off guard. I never expected people to take this so personally. I know I have dealt with some personal topics, but to me it is just a blog. A place to vent my opinions as I said in my very first post. I did not intend for anything to sound like "thus saith the lord". My fear is that culture has been informing how we mother (including birth) too much. I wanted to speak out against what I saw as possible dangers in all areas of motherhood, but that seems to have been interpreted as me pointing the finger at people. This was not my intent.
Despite all things things I hope that my bigger purpose behind this blog was achieved. That purpose was to challenge christian mothers (and fathers) to think critically about all aspects of raising kids. I don't want people to just follow the norm, or go with the flow if you will. For a mother there is nothing more profound than having the opportunity to shape and mold a young soul. I want moms to believe that how they choose to mother from pregnancy on really does matter. I want moms to trust in their God given abilities and instincts when it comes to motherhood. I have always wanted parents to evaluate, ponder, and research what is going to be best for their children, starting from in the womb. This doesn't mean you have to share my opinions. It just means I want parents to make informed and educated choices. I hope that purpose may have been achieved, and for now this will be the end of my blog. Thank you to those who have supported me. I will continue to strive for being the best mom I can be, and I hope that for all of you as well.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Parenting Materials
Just wanted to give a few more parenting resources. These are the ones I have most recently read.
The Complete Book of Christian Parenting and Child Care, by Dr. William Sears and Martha Sears
This book has been my very favorite parenting resource! I feel like I no longer need to write my own book, because this book contains just about everything I would have written! Great parenting advice for pregnancy, birth, infants, and beyond all through the eyes of love and grace. Contains lots of medical research and stats. I did not agree 100% with his discipline section, but he still gives very good advice for parents who choose to spank and those who choose not to. Highly recommend to all Christian parents!
Bring Up Girls, by Dr. James Dobson
This is a great book for parents of girls. It is a sobering read about what our culture can do to girls, and what parents can do to protect their girls. Deals with girls at all ages and explains a lot of scientific studies in easy to understand terms. Very helpful and eye opening to what girls need to be strong and heathly physically and emotionally. (I have heard great things about Bring Up Boys as well, but I have not read it, since we have girls! But I wouldn't be afraid to recommend it to parents with boys!)
Evaluating Christian Parenting Models
When it comes to Christian parenting methods or models, you find two extremes. The most popular models are that of attachment parenting, and detachment parenting. Oddly enough they are opposites yet both claim to be Christain. I find this hard to reconcile. I want to give my evaluation of these parenting models (one inparticular). I have made these opionins because of my experience as a mother, my experience with other mothers, and my own personal research on the subject.
The first model of attachment parenting is from Dr. Sears. Now to be honest I haven't read alot of his material. What I have read I liked. I think attachment parenting gets at the heart of how babies and parents should interact, how children feel secure and loved, and how to raise older children that have a healthy bond with and respect for their parents. My one problem with Dr. Sears is that I cannot find any statement of faith or claim that he himself is a Christian. He does have a book called the Christian Parenting Handbook, but the title does not necessarily mean that he is a Christian. So if anyone knows of where I could find this statement of faith, or any info on his theological background please let me know.
The second parenting model is detachment parenting. This is found from the Ezzo's (Along the infant way, Growing Kids God's way, Babywise). This is the method that I want to give most of my critique to. This method is used so often by Christians because I think they believe that if you are a Christian you have to parent this way. It seems to be packaged that way at times. I couldn't disagree more. I know many people will not agree with me and that is fine. I personally have a number of problems with their parenting model, but I will stick to the 4 or 5 that I think are the most relavent to all parents. My first problem with the Ezzo's model is their theological stance. The Ezzo's started their organization while attending the churh of John McArthur. McArthur is a very well known Calvinist. Based on this fact, and the things I have read from their books I believe that the Ezzo's themselves are also Calvinists. Their entire parenting model is based on the idea of depravity (I hope to do a post later on about if we are sinful or innocent at birth, so I will not discuss that here). I would sum up their model this way: Your children are sinful and depraved at birth, and you the parent must whip them into shape starting at birth! I believe their entire starting point is wrong. Their system of parenting is based on something that I do not believe to be Biblical. So if you are not a Calvinist you may want to think twice before starting their methods.
My Second problem with the Ezzo form of parenting is the age that they suggest to begin scheduling and training. Infants do not have the ability to self-calm, or the ability to manipulate yet. Ezzo encourages parents to let babies cry themselves to sleep, and to schedule their feedings at a very early age to teach them that they can't manipulate the parents and that they need to learn some form of independance. What a rude awakening to a baby! You have been warm, comfortable, and constantly fed for 9 months, then wham you are born and you get no more help to calm yourself, no more food whenever you want, you are to learn to be independant! I think this is a totally unrealistic expectation for young babies, and I think the message of we are not going to respond to your cries is the worst message you can teach your children. We let our daughter learn to put herself to sleep, but it was around 6 months (not 6 week!) when she actually had the ability to try to manipulate, but she also had the ability to calm herself. I have yet to find the idea of becoming independant as a goal in scripture, so I do not think it should be a primary goal for our young children either.
My third problem is that I believe Ezzo's parenting methods do not embrace the idea of scarifice in parenting. It is all about getting the baby/children to fit your schedule and your life. The parents time is not disrupted, the parent gets to sleep through the night, etc. I know they do not say this in their material, but that is exactly how it looks when it is practiced. They never talk about sacrificing your time and your preferences for your child. Sacrifice in parenting can be a huge part of your characer development if you will let it. Giving, and sacrifice i think are essential if we want to parent like Christ. I believe Ezzo has a tendencies to lean towards a more selfish form of parenting.
My final issue that I bring up about Ezzo is the main reason why I will not choose it as model to parent my children. That issue for me is that the risk/reward ratio is not worth it in my opinion. Yes you can put your child on a schdule, and yes you can train them to sleep through the night at an early age, and yes you can train them to not expect you to respond to their cries, but all these things come with a risk. At birth a baby's stomach is the size of a marble. By scheduling feedings you are taking the risk that your child may not be getting enough nutrients consistantly. This can lead to malnutrition, lack of weight gain, or failure to thrive. The way a child's brain develops is very fascinating. It depends on so many things from proper nutrition, to proper emotional attahments, and healthy amount of physical touch, etc. The Ezzo form of parneting tampers with all of these things to some degree, and that poses a risk to babies brain development if they are tampered with too much. Attachment disorders are real, and are terrible. Though they can have many causes, one of the main causes of attachment disorders is a lack of connection between the child and their primary care giver at an early age. You see attachment disorders mainly in adopted children who had little or poor infant care. That is why attachment is so critical when adopting a child, but it is critical with biological children too. Ezzo claims that babies can be spoiled and so they encourage parents to limit how much they hold their baby (specifically when putting them to sleep). If you limit your time of connecting with your baby and you limit your time of touch, and you limit when you respond to your baby you are taking the risk of your baby not attaching to you. That is a risk I will never be willing to take with my children.
Now I am not saying that every child whose parents chose to do Ezzo will end up with underdeveloped brians, or attachment disorders. But I feel that these things are legitament risks with the Ezzo style of parenting that parents need to be aware before they choose this method. I want to encourage parents to do your own research before you choose a parenting model. Do not just choose something because it is popular in Christian circles. Parenting is one of the most signigicant things you will ever do. Take the task seriously and do all the research (biblical, scientific, health, etc.) Then when you choose a parenting model you will know that it is going to be the best for you and your children.
My next post will be a short one on some of the parenting material that I have really liked and enjoyed using as a parent. Please take a look!
The first model of attachment parenting is from Dr. Sears. Now to be honest I haven't read alot of his material. What I have read I liked. I think attachment parenting gets at the heart of how babies and parents should interact, how children feel secure and loved, and how to raise older children that have a healthy bond with and respect for their parents. My one problem with Dr. Sears is that I cannot find any statement of faith or claim that he himself is a Christian. He does have a book called the Christian Parenting Handbook, but the title does not necessarily mean that he is a Christian. So if anyone knows of where I could find this statement of faith, or any info on his theological background please let me know.
The second parenting model is detachment parenting. This is found from the Ezzo's (Along the infant way, Growing Kids God's way, Babywise). This is the method that I want to give most of my critique to. This method is used so often by Christians because I think they believe that if you are a Christian you have to parent this way. It seems to be packaged that way at times. I couldn't disagree more. I know many people will not agree with me and that is fine. I personally have a number of problems with their parenting model, but I will stick to the 4 or 5 that I think are the most relavent to all parents. My first problem with the Ezzo's model is their theological stance. The Ezzo's started their organization while attending the churh of John McArthur. McArthur is a very well known Calvinist. Based on this fact, and the things I have read from their books I believe that the Ezzo's themselves are also Calvinists. Their entire parenting model is based on the idea of depravity (I hope to do a post later on about if we are sinful or innocent at birth, so I will not discuss that here). I would sum up their model this way: Your children are sinful and depraved at birth, and you the parent must whip them into shape starting at birth! I believe their entire starting point is wrong. Their system of parenting is based on something that I do not believe to be Biblical. So if you are not a Calvinist you may want to think twice before starting their methods.
My Second problem with the Ezzo form of parenting is the age that they suggest to begin scheduling and training. Infants do not have the ability to self-calm, or the ability to manipulate yet. Ezzo encourages parents to let babies cry themselves to sleep, and to schedule their feedings at a very early age to teach them that they can't manipulate the parents and that they need to learn some form of independance. What a rude awakening to a baby! You have been warm, comfortable, and constantly fed for 9 months, then wham you are born and you get no more help to calm yourself, no more food whenever you want, you are to learn to be independant! I think this is a totally unrealistic expectation for young babies, and I think the message of we are not going to respond to your cries is the worst message you can teach your children. We let our daughter learn to put herself to sleep, but it was around 6 months (not 6 week!) when she actually had the ability to try to manipulate, but she also had the ability to calm herself. I have yet to find the idea of becoming independant as a goal in scripture, so I do not think it should be a primary goal for our young children either.
My third problem is that I believe Ezzo's parenting methods do not embrace the idea of scarifice in parenting. It is all about getting the baby/children to fit your schedule and your life. The parents time is not disrupted, the parent gets to sleep through the night, etc. I know they do not say this in their material, but that is exactly how it looks when it is practiced. They never talk about sacrificing your time and your preferences for your child. Sacrifice in parenting can be a huge part of your characer development if you will let it. Giving, and sacrifice i think are essential if we want to parent like Christ. I believe Ezzo has a tendencies to lean towards a more selfish form of parenting.
My final issue that I bring up about Ezzo is the main reason why I will not choose it as model to parent my children. That issue for me is that the risk/reward ratio is not worth it in my opinion. Yes you can put your child on a schdule, and yes you can train them to sleep through the night at an early age, and yes you can train them to not expect you to respond to their cries, but all these things come with a risk. At birth a baby's stomach is the size of a marble. By scheduling feedings you are taking the risk that your child may not be getting enough nutrients consistantly. This can lead to malnutrition, lack of weight gain, or failure to thrive. The way a child's brain develops is very fascinating. It depends on so many things from proper nutrition, to proper emotional attahments, and healthy amount of physical touch, etc. The Ezzo form of parneting tampers with all of these things to some degree, and that poses a risk to babies brain development if they are tampered with too much. Attachment disorders are real, and are terrible. Though they can have many causes, one of the main causes of attachment disorders is a lack of connection between the child and their primary care giver at an early age. You see attachment disorders mainly in adopted children who had little or poor infant care. That is why attachment is so critical when adopting a child, but it is critical with biological children too. Ezzo claims that babies can be spoiled and so they encourage parents to limit how much they hold their baby (specifically when putting them to sleep). If you limit your time of connecting with your baby and you limit your time of touch, and you limit when you respond to your baby you are taking the risk of your baby not attaching to you. That is a risk I will never be willing to take with my children.
Now I am not saying that every child whose parents chose to do Ezzo will end up with underdeveloped brians, or attachment disorders. But I feel that these things are legitament risks with the Ezzo style of parenting that parents need to be aware before they choose this method. I want to encourage parents to do your own research before you choose a parenting model. Do not just choose something because it is popular in Christian circles. Parenting is one of the most signigicant things you will ever do. Take the task seriously and do all the research (biblical, scientific, health, etc.) Then when you choose a parenting model you will know that it is going to be the best for you and your children.
My next post will be a short one on some of the parenting material that I have really liked and enjoyed using as a parent. Please take a look!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)