feeding schedules - a question

[klpmommy]

I used BW2001 and the feedings were 2.5 to 3 hours from beginning to beginning. And with snacks (BW2, not sure of the year, but most recent edition to my knowledge) were optiional, they were not to be given every day. Of course since you are training thier "metabolism" to eat at certain times that makes about as much sense as a baby waking at the same time to eat in the night being from a "habit" rather than from hunger.

So glad that I don't stress out about all that any more! My kids eat when they are hungry, I keep healthy (well, mostly lol) snacks around for when they need to eat.

Of the people I know who use Ezzo, many are very controlling with food. I'm not sure what Ezzo actually says about feeding toddlers and preschoolers, but I know that many of these people have very rigid snack and meal schedules (if they allow snacks at all) and they do not allow their children to eat after certain times. For example, they might feed them dinner at 5 pm and then "close the kitchen" until 7 am breakfast. I'm not sure about you, but I know that I personally can't go 14 hours without eating!

I also see a lot of other rigid and unhealthy ideas about food among some of these people who follow Ezzo, in general. Not allowing children to have foods that they dislike, taking snacks and meals away as punishment, forcing children to finish entire plates of food (and punishing them if they don't), withholding dessert as punishment, etc. People on the homeschool board I used to frequent often suggested things like taking dessert away from the child and then making the child watch the rest of the family eat the dessert while the family oohs and aahs over the how delicious the dessert is and how it is too bad that the "offending child" doesn't get any. That actually kind of sounds like something out of Creative Correction. Sounds like a very passive aggressive form of emotional abuse.

[katiekind]

The idea that if you control your child's caloric intake you can make them a Christian is UNBiblical at best

I should step in and explain this better!

The booklet in which Ezzo wrote about the concept of spiritual inertia did not specifically mention feeding schedules, and it's possible he didn't have them in view when he wrote the booklet (in 1985)

But the idea of parental behavior creating spiritual inertia without which the child "will ultimately limit the influence of God in his life"...strikes me as a very unusual doctrine indeed. There are too many very fine Christians who had no Christian influence in their lives in their childhoods...and it seems doubly unbiblical when you consider that the parental behavior in view has nothing to do with imparting Christian faith to the child.

[TulipMama]

Maybe not all Ezzo parents do that, but I was one of the legalistic, perfectionist ones...

I would argue with that, Amy. You were basing your decisions on materials that *stressed* the importance of being "consistent" and returning to routine and having the parent in control. You were not being overly-legalistic or overly-perfectionistic yourself--you were applying the materials as intended. (Which, in spite of warnings not to be legalistic, when you apply the materials as intended--is legalistic.)


An interesting essay on legalism as Gary Ezzo defines it and legalism as found in Ezzo's materials can be read here:
http://ourworld.cs.com/kent1750/GKGW/legalism3.htm

[Mothering by Heart]

Originally Posted by TulipMama

I would argue with that, Amy. You were basing your decisions on materials that *stressed* the importance of being "consistent" and returning to routine and having the parent in control. You were not being overly-legalistic or overly-perfectionistic yourself--you were applying the materials as intended. (Which, in spite of warnings not to be legalistic, when you apply the materials as intended--is legalistic.)


An interesting essay on legalism as Gary Ezzo defines it and legalism as found in Ezzo's materials can be read here:
http://ourworld.cs.com/kent1750/GKGW/legalism3.htm

I'll accept that

[illinoismommy]

Hmmmm well I haven't seen any of this in my SIL's relationship with her son and she is a babywise mom. I sent her some links to some sites, but she said she wasn't worried about it. i do remember her trying to get her newborn son to wait to eat by distracting him, but that's about it. Now he is 1 1/2 years old. She gave me the book when I was pregnant and I guess I didn't get the whole legalism thing out of it, but someone else told me I read it with a good mommy filter so...

[katiekind]

Good point, illinoismommy. There are many differences in the way it plays out in families. One factor that makes a big difference is whether the parents are reading it with a group that keeps each other accountable for following the material, and what background the group brings as well. That can bring out the legalism whereas a mother reading Babywise alone, with a solid family background (knows what babies are like, knows they grow out of stuff) will see it quite differently. To some extent, Ezzo is a master of sending double messages, and so one group finds a legalistic posture encouraged while an independent reader sees the disclaimer, "don't be legalistic," a phrase that the group has had explained as meaning a certain, very limited thing, while the independent reader takes the normal meaning.

I don't know if this is making any sense! Hope so! I can clarify further.

I read it when my oldest son was a newborn...my sister had used the method with her two girls...and passed it on to me. I think I had my filter on big time when I read it. So many red flags went up for me...but I still did it loosely with son #1. I never made him wait to eat, though. I followed the pattern of sleep time, eat time, play time, sleep time, etc. But if he woke up an hour before it was time to eat...I didn't make him wait if he indicated to me that he was ready to eat. I didn't do the typical holding him off from eating. I never left him to cry it out when he was trying to go to sleep.
I was so conflicted by it all though...and started reading more about it and the more I found the more I didn't like it. By the time my son was 8 months old, I threw it all out the window. And never looked back!! Thank God for that instinct and that pit in my stomach...because I still managed to have an attached baby after all that!

Well, I *did* and still do control what & when my kids eat. There would be utter anarchy in our home if I let my kids eat what they wanted, when they wanted. When they were infants I had no choice but to have them on a gentle schedule, but I also had enough sense & compassion to let them eat at other times, as well, particularly during growth spurts & frequency days. Back then our schedule revolved around their sleeping periods, not their eating. These days I do not allow my kids to snack in the morning, and they only occasionally have snacks in the afternoon. I recall a while back being slammed here at GCM because of this practice. For some reason some people here had a hard time accepting that not everyone has a metabolism capable of eating a snack and then eating a decent meal a few hours later.

I in no way consider myself an Ezzo mom, or Ezzo follower. I think his teachings are warped at best, and dangerous or worse for many families out there. However, I don't think that a parent trying to exact some degree of control over food/eating *for the sake of having the family on the same eating timetable (because family meals are of a high priority)* and *for the sake of ensuring the family food budget & balanced meal concepts are followed* is necessarily a bad thing. My goal is that as my children get older they will be better able to self-regulate what they eat, and when. In the meantime I'm here to help guide them. Plain & simple.

[TulipMama]

Tulip,

Having been on the meal-control side of things, I can tell you that what you are describing and the direction of practice and attitude tend to go with the Ezzo materials are two different things. I thought I was laid-back and low-key, and in retrospect, I see how much I made food (and other things) a control issue.

What I hear you saying is that you are assuming responsibility for your children's nutrition and your family time. *grin* And I agree with that.

I've found that we've needed an "open fridge policy" of sorts for our family--but that doesn't mean my kiddos eat whatever they want, whenever they want! (I try to have a bowl of "anytime snacks" which are healthy available on the table or fridge, and they are in the habit of asking before eating--and sometimes I say no.)

[illinoismommy]

Originally Posted by Tulip_Plus_3

Well, I *did* and still do control what & when my kids eat. There would be utter anarchy in our home if I let my kids eat what they wanted, when they wanted. When they were infants I had no choice but to have them on a gentle schedule, but I also had enough sense & compassion to let them eat at other times, as well, particularly during growth spurts & frequency days. Back then our schedule revolved around their sleeping periods, not their eating. These days I do not allow my kids to snack in the morning, and they only occasionally have snacks in the afternoon. I recall a while back being slammed here at GCM because of this practice. For some reason some people here had a hard time accepting that not everyone has a metabolism capable of eating a snack and then eating a decent meal a few hours later.

I in no way consider myself an Ezzo mom, or Ezzo follower. I think his teachings are warped at best, and dangerous or worse for many families out there. However, I don't think that a parent trying to exact some degree of control over food/eating *for the sake of having the family on the same eating timetable (because family meals are of a high priority)* and *for the sake of ensuring the family food budget & balanced meal concepts are followed* is necessarily a bad thing. My goal is that as my children get older they will be better able to self-regulate what they eat, and when. In the meantime I'm here to help guide them. Plain & simple.

Yes I also have a big say in my son's diet... but he is only 1 1/2 and I don't know how this will develop. I might hold up two items like "Do you want yogurt, or applesauce?" and he gets to choose. But he can't choose from *anything* because then he would choose to drink juice all day and eat something with no nutrition and empty calories. I limit how much juice he drinks because of his love for it...... but we do have a lot of snacking.... breakfast, morning snack, lunch, nap, snack, dinner.... some time in between all of that.... and sometimes a nighttime snack too Little ones need to eat often, and more smaller meals is better than fewer larger ones.... so thats why we do what we do. Sometimes there isn't much difference between a snack and a meal, but that's okay... if he eats cereal for a snack and yogurt for dinner, I don't really care, so long as its part of "good food" and he's getting plenty of what he needs.