pregnancy books

[mommax3]

I have always used and liked the books I have read by James Dobson and/or Focus on the Family. The Dobson book "Bringing Up Boys" is excellent, in my opinion -- but for the most part, I have used those books once I had children, and not so much when during pregnancy or when I had babies. I would echo what everyone else said -- The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding is a great reference, and The Nursing Mother's Companion as more of a day-to-day guide, and the Sears books and Girlfriends' Guide books are also good. I also enjoyed the Touchpoints books by T. Berry Brazelton.

A little off topic -- I read a book several years ago about ethnopediatrics that dealt with how different cultures raise their children. It was fascinating, especially when it talked about what character qualities different cultures value and describe as "good" when they are talking about their babies. It was also neat to read about sleep styles and potty training in different cultures, and it gave me a sense of perspective as I was trying to determine the "right" way to do everything with my first. I can't remember the title (it may have been "Ethnopediatrics") but I would definitely recommend it.

Sally

[peggyfromwastate]

I liked the babywise book. I read the hysterical reviews about it, and found that as long as you have common sense, you can avoid "serious dehydration yadda yadda". I had twin infants, and without a sense of schedule I would not have made it. I nursed them to 10 months! There is no way I could have demand fed them because it was just too difficult. The Babywise book advocates feeding on a schedule, but not a "rigid" schedule. We didn't follow his exact advise for getting them to sleep through the night, and they didn't sleep through the night until 4 months or so, which is a little later than he says is typical for "babywise" feeders. As far as malnourishment, when my daughter left the hospital, she weighed 4 lbs. My son weighed 6. they both did great. The only time they had trouble was when nurses told us to "force feed" my daughter milk through a syringe, just to get an extra 1/2 ounce in. And she immediately would spit it all up. Nursing sessions lasted about 45 minutes, then they didn't eat for about 1:45, then they started eating again. Nobody starved, everyone thrived, it worked for us.

Please please please don't call me an abusive parent! I'm tired of people personalizing the Babywise method and attacking the parents. I did demand feeding with my singleton, and that method works too.

A book I really really LOVE (my favorite parenting book for infants) is the Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Children book (it's yellow and there's a new version out that's much thicker than the one I have). This has great, sound medical advice about sleeping patterns for infants through children. He advocates an "attachment" type of parenting for the first 4 months, but he doesn't really go into feeding. Great advice with respect to sleep, though.

Again, please don't attack me! I know people feel strongly against Babywise, but I just read a lot of parenting books and take what makes sense for me and what I'm comfortable with. I never follow a book down to the letter. But many mothers of twins need a schedule. I believe that not only would I have given up nursing, but I would have missed someone's feeding had I done demand feeding back then.

Peggy,
Please know that I wouldn't consider you an abusive parent. The problem that I have with the Babywise book is that some parents would take it for the gospel truth and follow it to the letter. I think that, like you said, reading a variety of books and taking a path that works best for you and your family is the way to go. It sounds like that worked very well for you.

I really do disagree with some of the information presented by Babywise and feel that parents would do well to consult other breastfeeding books. But that is just my opinion!

[mommax3]

I don't consider you an abusive parent either, but the key is that you used common sense. Some parents look at those books as the definitive "how-to" and that is where they get into trouble. I KNOW I would have been in trouble had I attempted to follow those recommendations to the letter with any of my kids.

Sally

[Rapunzel]

I don't know you personally, Peggy, so I cannot and will not label you an "abusive parent". I will, however, stick by my opinion (supported by medical evidence) that Enzo's "God's Way"/"Babywise" methods are abusive. Of course, I believe they are abusive on more than just a physical level. Some of the things that man advocates (such as placing your baby on a small rug and punishing him/her if they try to crawl off in order to "break their will") are pschologically abusive. I suppose if one ignores the craziness of the book one would find some redeeming advice in it - after all there is usually a grain of truth in all things. As a mother of twins myself I never followed Enzo's advice because I don't believe motherhood is a matter of convenience nor do believe that my children were born inclined to be bad. Enzo states that from birth the parent/child relationship is a struggle for control - if the parent is not "controlling" the child then the child must be controlling the parent. That is the philosophy he bases his feeding schedules within. I followed a demand feeding schedule with my twins the same as I did with my singletons. Why? Because the babies know when they are hungry and will tell you! To deny an infant a meal because it isn't "time" for it is abusive (and that is exactly one of Enzo's recommendations btw - based on his philosophy that you are allowing the baby to "control" you if you "give in" and feed the poor thing.) I nursed my twin daughters until they were five months old at which point I had to wean them because of my son's time in the hospital (two neurosurgeries).

All in all, I stick by what the American Academy of Pediatrics states about the physical neglect associated with this "parenting" method and I add to that my belief that Enzo advocates psychological abuse.

[peggyfromwastate]

Rapunzel- I read and reread the Babywise book when my kids were infants, and I really didn't get any of the things you've mentioned from there. I don't recall him getting into punishing a child if he tries to crawl off of a blanket. And I don't recall him going into the spirituality/philosophical angle of raising kids, either. In fact, in my edition of Babywise he was pretty careful about saying that being on a rigid schedule isn't the key, and that a problem with demand feeding is that sometimes parents feed their babies when they cry without first determining if they are crying out of hunger. So he advocates the "schedule" so that you can prevent your baby from getting so hungry that he needs to call out for a feeding. The thing that resonated with me from his book was the suggestion to do the routine feeding-playing-sleeping-feeding-playing-sleeping... That was nice to be able to feed then play because I felt more secure that my babies were getting all they could from each feeding since they had just gotten up from a nap and were actually hungry, not just bored or tired. I didn't have problems with them falling asleep midway through a feeding using this pattern, but when I did follow the wake-play-feed to sleep pattern with my first (a demand-fed infant) she would frequently fall asleep before finishing a feeding... I have found that the advice he gives about feeding toddlers is really not helpful, and I never read any of his discipline books (that's probably where the "controlling" thing comes in more).

Are you certain that the quotes you speak of come from the recent edition of Babywise-the book that concentrates on "getting babies to sleep at night"? What I took from the book was a "general schedule", "flexible schedule", and the pattern I mentioned above. Like I said, this worked for me. I get tired of hearing about the American Academy of Pediatrics- they are fine with lots of things that I find aprehensible which I dont' care to go into. Basically, I think I'm intelligent and fair enough to find what I need from an information source and throw away the rest. The only book I take for gospel is The Gospel!

Anyway, Rapunzel, As you know, life with twins is stressful, and I'm sorry to know that you also had to deal with a sick child when your babies were so young. You must have a great deal of love for your children and strength to come through those ordeals! What stage were you in as a medical spouse, if I may ask? I can't imagine being pregnant with twins, and having twin babies when my husband is in medical school.

As far as parenting issues in the realm of playing with your baby, helping your baby reach developmental milestones, developing a relationship with your baby, I enjoy the advise from Dr. Brazelton so much. He does
Touchpoints books, Infants and Mothers, and Toddlers and Parents (?title?) along with many others. He is so great.

Dr. Sears' baby book is good, but it didn't have enough information for me. It really seems like a thesis in defense for the family bed. We tried the family bed for 1 night, until my husband almost rolled over our daughter. That was too scary. Family bed won't work for us ever, but I still got lots of helpful information from Dr Sears.

Dr Ferber's book wasn't very helpful, but I like some of the charts in it.

As to the OP, there are so many parenting books from pregnancy onward. If you find one on Amazon or at a bookstore that you want to read (someone suggested the library which is great if yours is stocked- ours is pathetic!) I would suggest buying it from Ebay. They sell lots of parenting books for all stages and at great deals.

As I have also read the Most recent edition of Babywise over a couple of times, and the idea that is consistent through the entire book is that you use the clock to be a guide as well as your baby. You may be on a schedule, but a somewhat flexible schedule. I really did not see anything in the book that was abusive, but that is just my opinion. I also wanted to add that sometimes it is hard for adults to discern between just wanting to eat, and needing to eat. So why should we assume that babies automatically know when they need to eat. Possibly they may just want to eat out of boredom or something else. I do not have any children yet, but I have read the book and talked to many mothers that use this book as a guide. They do not take it word for word, but I would say that you shouldn't take anything word for word, even the American Pediatrics! The only think I take for complete truth is the gospel, as Peggy already stated.
Lauren Clark

As I have also read the Most recent edition of Babywise over a couple of times, and the idea that is consistent through the entire book is that you use the clock to be a guide as well as your baby. You may be on a schedule, but a somewhat flexible schedule. I really did not see anything in the book that was abusive, but that is just my opinion. I also wanted to add that sometimes it is hard for adults to discern between just wanting to eat, and needing to eat. So why should we assume that babies automatically know when they need to eat. Possibly they may just want to eat out of boredom or something else. I do not have any children yet, but I have read the book and talked to many mothers that use this book as a guide. They do not take it word for word, but I would say that you shouldn't take anything word for word, even the American Pediatrics! The only think I take for complete truth is the gospel, as Peggy already stated.
Lauren Clark

[Rapunzel]

I haven't read the latest edition of Babywise - it is possible some things have been changed given the medical uproar over it in recent years. Rather, the portions I am familiar with are from the original "Growing Kids God's Way". Enzo originally published his parenting advice as a very religious text specifically (mis)using scriptural passages to justify his philosiphies. He later toned down the religious parts of his text and published the same advice under the name "Babywise". So, the Babywise book you see today does not include a lot of his reasons for the advice he gives. Babywise is a watered-down version of Enzo's religious views of parenting - which does include discipline along with feeding schedules, etc. My speculation is that he toned down his message a bit to appeal to a wider audience - if one goes to the original text one sees WHY he advocates certain feeding schedules - and they aren't pretty reasons.

Additionally, Enzo misses a major point of breastfeeding for an infant: comfort. Yes, sometimes a baby wants to nurse when he/she is not hungry. Is this wrong? Absolutely not. Both the baby's and the mother's bodies respond in a positive way to nursing and Enzo entirely misses the emotional/hormonal/comforting aspect of nursing - which is secondary to the physical nourishment aspect of nursing yet still an essential part of it.

Let me add that babies DO know when they are hungry. Let me repeat this: Babies DO know when they are hungry. No1kate, a newborn's only form of communication is to cry, therefore they will cry when they have a need. It is necessary to go down a list of standard "needs" when a baby is expressing discomfort. Included at the very top of that list is the need to be physically nourished. Adults do not necessarily eat because they are hungry (ie for boredom, etc) and that is a problem. To imply that a newborn is the same way is ignorant to say the least. Go to my above paragraph on the duel nature of nursing for example. What applies to an adult DOES NOT apply to a newborn. Babies DO know when they are hungry. Babies cry when they need to eat, they cry when they need comfort - and the breast is a natural comforter for a child. Witness children sucking pacifiers, their fingers, or the nearest object when they need to calm themselves down or be comforted. It is a basic human need that newborns exhibit and to deny them comfort is not only wrong, it is potentially devastating.

Additionally, adults who eat out of boredom tend to be overweight. There are many adults who don't know how to respond to their bodies natural signals that their stomachs are full. There is absolutely no correlation between that and nursing on demand. In fact, the opposite has been shown to be true: children who were nursed as babies tend to be LESS inclined later in life to be overweight. In summary: the only correlation shown to date between nursing on demand and weight later in life is that those who were breastfed are less inclined to be overweight. Enzo's advice is based not on medical reality or even common sense - instead he bases his advice on twisting of the meaning of scripture - read "Growing Kids God's Way" and you will witness this first hand.

Peggy, I had my twins at the end of my husband's second year of medical school. The third year is generally regarded as the most difficult time-wise. It was difficult, but doable. I now have four beautiful children and my husband is in his second year of a five year radiology residency. Twins are not an easy blessing, but they are wonderful nonetheless!

BTW: While I agree that statements made by medical groups must often be examined with a skeptical eye, the AAP based their findings on (1)actual cases of children malnourished and/or dying or dead due to Enzo's advice and (2)current, solid information on babies' physical needs. Enzo bases his beliefs regarding babies' feeding schedules on his uninformed opinion alone. He then finds whatever he can in the Bible and attempts to support his opinions regarding parenting with Biblical passages that are used entirely out of context. There are some excellent parenting books out there that are based on religious beliefs - don't get me wrong on that! Enzo, however, is not an author of any of those books.

I do not think that my comment about babies eating when they are bored is IGNORANT! Since I do not have any children, I do not know first hand any information. The only reason I brought it up is because my Professor of Infant Development lectured on this exact topic last week. I do not think that she is ingnorant either, considering she has her PHD in infant development, and has been doing research for twenty years at the University of Kentucky. What I am taught throughout my education I think is merit worthy, and definately not ignorant! I am a little bit offended at the mention of my statement being ignorant.

[Rapunzel]

I do not think that my comment about babies eating when they are bored is IGNORANT! Since I do not have any children, I do not know first hand any information. The only reason I brought it up is because my Professor of Infant Development lectured on this exact topic last week. I do not think that she is ingnorant either, considering she has her PHD in infant development, and has been doing research for twenty years at the University of Kentucky. What I am taught throughout my education I think is merit worthy, and definately not ignorant! I am a little bit offended at the mention of my statement being ignorant.

Several problems with your response:
1)What I said exactly is that to imply a baby (and I'll be even more specific here: a newborn or infant - a young baby) is like an adult in that they eat out of boredom rather than hunger is ignorant. We may be having a difference in the definition of baby in this case. Please tell me your definition of baby as it applies to your opinion that babies eat out of boredom.
2)You have been arguing in defense of Enzo's methods yet you are in an Infant Development lecture. I would think that your infant development prof would've covered the very real medical issues associated with Enzo's books. Go ask your prof what she knows about Enzo's "advice" as it pertains to a healthy, breastfed infant. If she is as much of an expert in theory as you claim she will be able to give you an earful on what he postulates, how he arrives at his conclusions, and what exactly the effects (both positive and negative) are of the application of his theories. Additionally she will be able to site the exact same medical evidence I have read by the AAP (including the cases). She might need a day to look it all up, but if she's worth her salt she's read it in the past.
3)You are getting your information from an "expert"in theory who is to be trusted over an expert in the field (ie a mom) if it is in regard to the artificial classifications they (the experts in theory) have created to explain their own theories. In other words the person who is an expert because they think and read a great deal on the subject is not necessarily the person who knows the most in the real world. You will learn that once you get out of college only a small portion of what your professors in theory teach you is applicable to the real world - many theories are wrong and are generally solidly proven wrong by the time you complete your course of study. (In summary, when I was in college we referred to it as the "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach." philosophy regarding many professors of psych theory/philosophy). A college education is valuable, but you have to learn to be skeptical and take what you are taught with a grain of salt.

So, you can take offense at me referring to your opinions on child development as ignorant as you wish, but let's first examine the word, "ignorant". It means a lack of knowledge. I think you very much proved my point: you do not have children, have never raised a child, and rely on what your college professor says about young babies' needs. So, here's some questions for your college professor since my argument really seems to be with her (not you since you are admittedly taking your information from that source rather than from your own knowledge and/or experience):
1)What is her definition of "bored"?
2)What is her definition of "baby"? (It is very possible she was referring to "older babies" ie toddlers or children nearing the age of 1 - which I am specifically NOT referring to).
3)How does she establish when a newborn or young baby is "bored"?
4)How does she exclude the possibility that breastfeeding is fulfilling other emotional needs of a baby?
5)What is her theory on the stimulation of endorphins in the brain of both the mother and nursing baby during nursing as it relates to her definition of "boredom"?
6)What studies (preferably published and involving a large subject base) can she point to in order to support her belief that young babies/infants/newborns nurse out of boredom?

These are all questions you should ask your prof before immediately believing what she says on the subject. You should also be skeptical of any other opinions your professors give you. So, get back to me on the answers your professor gives you to the above questions and then we can talk!

Rapunzel, I don't know what exactly you're trying to establish here. That the Enzo/Babywise books are a farce, abusive, or whatever. But let me just say that your method of relaying this opinion, and it is an opinion, is very condescending and harsh to others who care to differ.

As a mother of 3 and one who has nursed my children up to 30 months of age, I don't give a rat's behind about books or Academy of Pediatrics or whatever but I do know that it is just not kind to post what you have been saying throughout this thread to people who either don't agree with you or have experienced otherwise. Everyone has been very tolerant and patient with your posts (although I can't say you have reciprocated) but I for one think it can be very alienating and puts others on the defensive. If that is your mission, then you can ignore me but really, are you here to be right (as you seem to insist) or are you here to offer your perspective?

Post your opinion and leave it at that without having to feel like you have to debate everyone who thinks differently.

[Meenah]

Throw away all of the books and use your God given common sense.
Luanne

the post that is anonymous is from me, Lauren. For some reason when I post at work it says I am anonymous. So Rapunzel, it was me who is offended, and it was me whom you called ignorant! Sorry my identity was not clear in the beginning!
Lauren (no1kate)

Rapunzel, I have been very tolerant of your attitude towards me, but quite frankly I am very tired of dealing with your condecending comments. I do not think that I am ignorant simply because I do not have any children yet. I also think that my education has taught me a lot about feeding methods and infants. My professors are not the authority on everything, but I do think they are very knowledgeable about these topics. I do not think that you are the authority on this topic either. I know you have children of your own, and therefore you are entitled to your own opinion. I also think that I am entitled to my own opinion without being called ignorant. I would hope that you could be understanding enough to offer your opinions and advice without being rude. I am gonig to end this ridiculous aurgument because it seems clear that you are not willing to accept or even listen to anyone else's ignorant opinions. To the rest of you guys, I am sorry for ever mentioning the topic of Babywise, but it was recommended to me by my professors as well as close friends. I thought I would simply share the information that I knew about pregnancy books with all of the pregnant women. I hope I have not annoyed anyone, I had good intentions. I really did not expect this to turn into a hostile topic by some. Thanks!
Lauren (no1kate)