image

More nap-training difficulty from the Ezzo follower in Michigan

More from the mother in Michigan:

[cont'd from the Day 5 post]:

We're now on Day 5 of Timothy's retraining for naps. Yesterday was the most difficult day ever. I thought the screaming and crying for 45 minutes was difficult, but I could endure because I felt sure that this was the right thing to do. However yesterday, when I saw a little blood, it was hard not to panic and question my methods.

I am actually not concerned at all about the blood -- it was just a little, Timothy's fine, and my doctor said it was nothing. However, I am extremely disturbed by what has happened to his voice. At one point yesterday I thought he was asleep, and when I checked by his door, he was really crying, but he couldn't make any noise. This broke my heart and I started crying also. I am nervous that this is doing damage to his throat, and that he is in pain (with a sore throat, I mean). Do you think I should keep pushing him? Has anyone else's baby lost their voice?

Yesterday's naps went as follows: Morning: slept 45, cried 45, did not resettle Afternoon: slept 45, cried 10, slept 30 (Hooray!) Early Evening: slept 30, cried 30, and then I got him because I couldn'ttake it

Any suggestions are welcome. (Tylenol or water maybe?). Also, your prayers mean more to me than I can express. I know that God is faithful and that He is working both in me and my son.


A contact mom replies:

Well, I would try to follow one plan consistently for a week. It does take some time for the baby to adjust to a routine. Also, I would listen for the type of cry. If it's off & on, you know he's trying to resettle. If it's solid for more than 15 minutes, then he may well need your assistance to help
him calm down, and it's fine to go in, hold him a bit & put him back down. If he'll calm down with you just patting his back or talking to him, I'd try that. If after a week you don't see any improvement at all, post again & we'll take another look at things. Please let us know how things go!

Another response:

In an earlier post, you raised concerns about Timothy's voice being hoarse. Reminded me of when we were going through the "tough days" when R. was a baby. Her voice was constantly hoarse -- I was sure I was to blame and she'd be scarred for life. Well, I'm happy to report that she has a beautiful voice and a couple of months ago (when she turned 2) began singing!

Timothy's mother replies:

Thank you so much for that little bit of encouragement. Hearing that hoarse voice is heart-breaking! However, after about 5 days, Timothy is getting his voice back -- hooray! A doctor I spoke with over the weekend assured me that no amount of crying would hurt his throat. We're starting to see some progress, so we're just keeping with it.

Timothy's mother writes in again:

Timothy and I are on Day 13 of trying to retrain his naps to
go from 45 minutes to 1-1/2 hours. In all honesty, I was hoping things would move faster than this, but we'll just keep plugging away.

We occasionally have success with nap 2, where he'll wake at 45 and then resettle to sleep another 45. Naps 1 and 3 are pretty consistently 45 minutes, and then crying the 2nd 45. I get a little confused with what to do with the schedule when this happens. Do I just leave the schedule as is, feeding and putting him down as planned, even if he's overtired, or do I adjust and count the 45 minutes of crying as wake time? If so, what happens at the end of the day?


And again:

Day 19:
Hello, it's me again. I'm sitting at my computer this evening fighting back the tears. We are on Day 19 of trying to retrain Timothy to take at least 1-1/2 hour naps, and in 19 days, we've seen 3 uninterrupted naps and 2 where he's resettled himself. The rest have been waking at 45 minutes and crying for 45, with many waking even at 25 minutes. I have been listening to so much crying that I think my heart is going to break. I feel like the cruel-est mother. I am willing to endure this if it will bring about what is best for my son, but I'm starting to question if that will ever happen. Is this a normal time frame, or am I doing something wrong? Along with trying to be as consistent as possible with the GFI principles, I kneel down in prayer every morning and evening, and before and during each nap, praying specifically that Timothy will have peace and sleep well. Is there any encouragement or suggestions that anyone can offer? I just don't know what to do anymore.

 


Another mother replies:

i am new at this too....

am retraining my 11wk old..it is so hard..but i just keep telling myself...it's gotta get better...we are only on day 6 or so...my poor guy sounds hoarse from all his crieng...

just wanted to let ya know you're not alone in your confusion....sorry i don't have any answers..

 


Then a GFI Contact Mom replies:

....YES, IT IS WORTH IT. I'm convinced that some babies are just plain harder to "sleep train"....So, I just encourage you to continue in your prayers for little Timothy and look long term...I know you feel you've been doing this forever, but it will pay off, he will become a good, long sleeper in time. It took Tyler 6 months, and I sounded just like you. I was doing everything "right", it just wasn't working. But, it was...it just took longer than everyone I knew....

Please keep writing. I want to follow Timothy. Feel free to email me too.

Love in Him,

xxxxxx


Timothy's mother has another update:

Day 23:

We have been going through a lot this past month trying to retrain Timothy to take good naps by letting him cry it out. One of the frustrating things is that our doctor is not in agreement with this practice. I have put it to a lot of prayer, and feel it is the right thing for Timothy right now, but it is very difficult not having the support of your doctor. We would like to change physicians for that and other reasons, and would really like to find a doctor who supports GKGW, or at least scheduling and letting a baby cry. Does anyone know of any ways to find a doctor like this, other than picking up the telephone and scheduling personal interviews (which is what I will have to do if I can't think of anything else). I'd love to hear suggestions. By the way I live in [name of town.]

BBC Newsnight segment on Gary Ezzo

Aired on the British Broadcasting Corporation Television Program "Newsnight"

Thursday, October 29, 1999

As with American investigative news programs, the Newsnight broadcast included reports on several issues. Only the portions related to the Ezzos and Growing Families International (GFI) have been reproduced here.

The program interviewer was British journalist Jeremy Paxman. Others featured in this report:

  • A British grandmother whose identity was concealed
  • BBC reporter Gillian Joseph
  • Health Visitors Association representative Christine Bidmead (The Health Visitors Association provides the majority of pre-school pediatric care as part of Britain's centralized health care system.)
  • British developmental psychologist and author Dr. Penelope Leach
  • American parents Michelle and Michael Hsieh

The report also included footage of the Hsiehs and their son Matthew, as well as footage from a GFI-produced promotional video. Paxman and the Ezzos were speaking live, in studio. The rest of the report was pre-recorded.

This transcript and accompanying photos have been produced with the permission of the BBC. The transcript has been produced as accurately as a possible from a recording of the program; an occasional few words of unintelligible cross-talk between Paxman and the Ezzos have been omitted.


 

Introduction at Beginning of Program

Concealed Woman: Sometimes he would be taken almost every hour into the room and be beaten. I could hear the sound.

Paxman: And biblical parenting is the newest in Christian America's advice on childcare. But, for them, smacking is the only way to remove a young child's guilt.


Report (Last on the Evening's Broadcast)

Paxman: The Health Visitors Association is not up there in the vanguard of militant trade unionism, and yet this weekend they plan a demonstration. It's not in support of more pay or anything like that; it's against an American couple who are here in Britain to promote their ideas about child rearing. They are, to say the least, controversial since what they advocate includes what they call "chastisement" and denying babies food. I'll be talking to them shortly. But first Gillian Joseph reports on what they're advocating.

GFI Video: Families today are faced with the difficult challenge of raising children who have a heart for God in an environment plagued with ever-increasing moral decay.

Michelle Hsieh: In the beginning, we thought they sounded wonderful. We wanted to raise loving and obedient children, and it sounded like by following their suggestions and techniques that they offered, that we would be able to do that.

Joseph: Mike and Michelle Hsieh followed the Ezzos’ program for feeding babies with an unquestioning Christian zeal. They attended classes at their local church, even before their eldest child, Matthew, was born. There, they were taught not to feed on demand but stick to a maximum three-hour schedule. At home, their child rearing manuals were followed to the letter. As he grew older, they applied the Ezzos’ philosophy on "high chair manners" and would restrain their baby as they tried to feed him.

Michelle Hsieh: Looking back, I believe the most outrageous thing we did was to keep Matthew on the strict feeding schedule. Keeping him on those feeding schedules, I think, took away some of the trust that he had in us, and when he was hungry and showing us cues of, you know, wanting to suckle or sucking on his hand, we would just try to pacify him in other ways.

Joseph: At Matthew’s four-month checkup, his parents discovered that his weight had plummeted. By his next visit, he’d dropped off the charts altogether. But the Hsiehs persisted with the Ezzos’ program. At nine-and-a-half months, Matthew was admitted to hospital.

Michelle Hsieh: It was awful. We felt like our—I mean, I honestly believe he would have died had we not admitted him to the hospital. He completely rejected all food at that point—rejected nursing and all kind of spoon-fed baby food.

Michael Hsieh: To watch our child throwing up in the hospital with the little nutrition that we could get him down through his nose, I mean, that was just [pause] the worst pain emotionally and physically you could put a parent through, to watch their child suffer like that.

Joseph: Matthew’s pediatrician told Newsnight that his food aversion wasn’t due to any medical condition, but the combination of inexperience and a strong desire to apply the Ezzos’ feeding principles. Health professionals on both sides of the Atlantic stress the importance of feeding babies on demand.

Bidmead: The more a baby sucks at the breast and suckles, then it stimulates the mother to produce more milk. So it’s really important right from the start that when the baby cries and is hungry, that it’s put to the breast. There’s no instance I could think of that we would say you don’t feed the baby on demand.

Joseph: Child development isn’t an exact science, but despite room for interpretation, child psychologists point with particular alarm to the Ezzos’ theories on "highchair manners." Their use of isolation, both as a punishment and as a way of limiting a child’s emotional attachment to the mother, may also cause damage.

Leach: I think it’s the fact that this whole Ezzo program contradicts what we know of the way children develop and the way they learn. It’s kind of counter-childhood. We know a lot now about how stimulation’s used by children in their neural development, in, actually in building brains, not just how brains work, but how they build. And a lot of this repressive stuff is actually counter to that.

GFI Video: It is the belief of Growing Families International that once the seeds of biblical parenting…

Joseph: One of the things that attracted the Hsiehs to the Ezzo program was its promise of an obedient, God-fearing child. In the pursuit of that goal, the literature advocates physical punishment. One British grandmother says her son followed the Ezzos’ templates of smacking so religiously that she seriously considered informing social services. She’s concealed her identity in order to preserve her relationship with her grandchildren.

Concealed Woman: There seemed to be days when sometimes he would be taken almost every hour into the room and be beaten. I could hear the sound. Then he would cry, and then there would be a long period of silence, and eventually they would come out of the room. [Pause] And in an hour’s time, the whole thing would start again. And I did, actually, hear him pleading not to be beaten.

They’re forbidden to share their feelings. They have to bottle all their feelings down. They have to be good, well-behaved children, so everything is banged down inside.

Joseph: Eventually, when she could bear it no longer, she confronted her daughter-in-law.

Concealed Woman: I went and spoke to her, and she sat opposite me, and I gave her my concerns. And I looked straight at her, and I realized that I’d had absolutely no weight whatsoever. She had God on her side, and once she had God on her side, she was invincible.

Man on GFI Video: It provides the moral basis for children to function in society with a focus on others.

Woman on GFI Video: God’s Word never changes. And even though there are philosophies that come and go, God’s Word never changes.

Joseph: There’s clearly much more to the Ezzos’ philosophy than "spare the rod and spoil the child." The system they champion encompasses a whole school of thought contrary to current child-centered theory. They measure their success by the number of books they sell worldwide, but the only true way of judging them will be when this generation of Ezzo babies become parents themselves.

Paxman: And Gary and Anne Marie Ezzo are here in the studio. Can we be clear, first of all, what your medical qualifications are?

Gary Ezzo: Uh, I don’t have any medical qualifications. Anne Marie…

Paxman: But your wife?

Gary Ezzo: …is a nurse

Anne Marie Ezzo: I’m a registered nurse.

Paxman: A nurse, right. The American Pediatric Association says your advice on feeding babies is wrong. Why should we take the word of, with respect, one nurse against 53,000 registered pediatric practitioners?

Gary Ezzo: Well, first of all our advice on feeding babies is identical to the American Academy of Pediatrics’, number one. Certainly number two, there’s a comparison here, number two, uh, the American Academy of Pediatrics themselves have never come out with that statement. Others have written opinions like that, there have been counter opinions. But the, the basic blend of our teaching and the Academy’s teaching is, is probably very well on the same track.

Paxman: I have here a letter from the AAP executive director. It says newborns should be nursed whenever they show signs of hunger, such as increased alertness, etc., etc., etc. That is completely contradictory to what you recommend.

Gary Ezzo: No, I have it right here in the book. It says exactly, "Crying is a late signal of hunger. Newborns should be fed whenever there is a cue." We have it; I don’t know why it must be said, this is….

Paxman: You’re saying…

Gary Ezzo: It’s all right here.

Paxman: …forget it. You can feed children whenever they wish to be fed.

Gary Ezzo: They should be fed on cue with [pause] guidelines with parental assessment. And that’s….

Paxman: So it’s not true that you, that you believe that at the age of eight weeks, they should not be fed overnight, for example.

Gary Ezzo: If a baby needs to be fed at night, he should be fed. In fact, we say very, very clearly that whenever a baby’s hungry, he should be fed.

Paxman: How could people have got such a wrong impression, then? Such a wrong impression that their children end up in hospital with their lives at risk?

Gary Ezzo: Well, first of all, we’re not quite sure that what we just saw here had a degree of legitimacy. You had a lot of errors in here. Number one, any baby, as we read in the article, any baby that went to the hospital five times in the first week and was, was not kept is a problem at the hospital.

Paxman: No, it isn’t. It’s a problem because the parents…

Gary Ezzo: No, no.

Paxman: …was under ins…had been advised…

Gary Ezzo: No, no.

Paxman: …not to disclose that they were following your program.

Gary Ezzo: Oh, no, no. Right here we have…

Paxman: That’s what the parents say.

Gary Ezzo: Jeremy, right here, "Openly,…" page 100, "Openly share actual feeding times and precisely what you are doing. Cite all sources for feeding time recommendations found in chapter four." And this is dealing with how to contact a consultant, how to talk to your pediatrician, how to…we don’t say any of that.

Paxman: You acknowledge no responsibility whatsoever, then.

Gary Ezzo: Not in, not in this case, no. But there are, there is, responsibility, parental responsibility. There’s pediatric responsibility. There’s lactation consultant responsibility there.

Paxman: If somehow a parent should get into their heads that you have advised them that they should follow something other than feeding on demand, which is what very large numbers of people who follow your practice appear to believe, and that should result in a death, that’s nothing to do with you.

Gary Ezzo: No, no. First of all, I think, we’re, we’re—we’ve got to qualify some terms here. We talk about, instead of feeding on demand—that’s nebulous. There is cue fee…infant-led feeding, there is clock feeding, and then there’s parent-directed. The difference simply is this. On infant-led feeding, which is commonly referred to as demand feeding, if a baby cries, it signals hunger at one hour, you feed it. The problem with that, though, if it cries and signals hunger at eight hours, after eight hours, you feed it. Therein lies the danger; that’s the problem with the system. Parent-directed says, look, cue plus parental assessment equals feeding time.

Paxman: If your advice conflicts with that of a person’s pediatrician, who should they believe?

Gary Ezzo: Oh, pediatrician. As we say that,…

Anne Marie Ezzo: And we clearly state that in our books.

Gary Ezzo: Yeah, clearly. Pediatrician’s the final authority, always.

Anne Marie Ezzo: And even with the case of this young couple, and we feel very badly that their child ended up in the hospital, but in the article, they went in every single day for their whole first week…

Gary Ezzo: Right.

Anne Marie Ezzo: …um, there’s nothing….

Paxman: Let’s look at the case, then of spanking.

Gary Ezzo: Okay. Let’s do that.

Paxman: In young children, spanking is the only way to get rid of guilt. That’s your belief.

Gary Ezzo: Actually, that was Piaget’s belief. We adopted it.

Paxman: You, you believe it.

Gary Ezzo: Uh, no.

Paxman: You don’t believe it.

Gary Ezzo: Not, there’s context, age….

Paxman: Well, why is it in your books?

Gary Ezzo: Well, there is the context in which that is stated—it’s talking about in early childhood before there’s development of a moral conscience that fully can regulate and, uh…

Paxman: Then justify the statement which appears in your 1993 edition Growing Kids God’s Way, explaining how to smack a child in diapers.

Gary Ezzo: Yeah, you lift up the diaper. If you’re going to give them a little swat, because you have a twenty-two-month-old, give ’em a swat, don’t swat ’em on the diaper, just lift it up a little and give ’em a little swat on the backside. [Mr. Ezzo motions with right arm as if swatting gently with hand.]

Paxman: And that is a matter of practice? How frequently should you smack a child?

Gary Ezzo: Well, context, age, all those things. There, there is no number how frequently, frequently you should do that. I mean, let’s hope none…

Anne Marie Ezzo: There would be no need to smack a child unless there was just cause. And we….

Paxman: Could you explain why it is that smacking is the only way to get a child aware of guilt?

Gary Ezzo: Get, get rid of his guilt?

Paxman: Get rid of a child’s guilt, yes.

Gary Ezzo: No, I can’t, because we don’t necessarily believe that in the context in which you’re presenting it. What we’re talking about is there’s got to be removal of guilt somehow. Smacking, as we’re talking about in young children, is one of the ways. To say it’s the only way is probably—well, that’s 1993, and this is 1999. There’s been like six editions since, so….

Paxman: So, do you want to apologize to people who acted on the basis of your 1993 advice?

Gary Ezzo: Well, I don’t think necessarily that that is so way off the mark that it needs a public apology, but if you feel it does, I guess I, I apologize right now—if that had any implications, and if any one parent, out of 52 videos, if that one statement did something that moved the other 52 videos out of its, their context….

Paxman: Okay. Thank you both very much.

Gary Ezzo: You’re welcome.



A PDF version of this transcript

Living Hope Evangelical Fellowship's Statement about Gary Ezzo

Note: This is the second statement I know of by the LHEF elders on this topic. This statement supercedes the older one.

Note2: If you want additional verification of the authenticity I would suggest contacting those at Living Hope Evangelical Fellowship.

Elders' Statement Regarding Gary Ezzo's Church Discipline

Preamble:

Church discipline is a very serious matter. Scripture tells us that the actions of a local church leadership in discipline extend to the very courts of heaven (Matt 18:18-20)! This is true whether the discipline involves a new believer or a prominent church leader such as Gary Ezzo. Scripture constrains church leadership to investigate carefully any accusations of sin brought against a brother to ensure that an innocent man is not condemned by either malicious intent or a misinterpretation of events. If evidence is found that a brother is acting in a way that is contrary to Scripture, then out of love for that individual, we are compelled to reprove him. At this point, our desire is that our brother will see his sin, confess and turn from it. However, if the sinning brother refuses to hear our reproof, we are obligated to confront him with a plurality of witnesses. If he refuses to listen to this plurality, then we call upon his fellow-believers to exhort him to turn from his sin. If he refuses to listen to them, then due to his impenitence, he is to be treated as "a Gentile and a tax-gatherer" - in other words, excommunicated. Gary Ezzo refused to listen to his friends, his elders, and to the members of Living Hope Evangelical Fellowship when he was repeatedly exhorted to turn from a pattern of sin.

The elder board of Living Hope is made up of men who have known Gary for years - some for over fifteen years, co-laboring with him in the very important responsibility of raising up the next generation of believers. All of our families have benefited from Gary and Anne Marie's friendship and teaching and none more than Pastor Dave Maddox. He has personally known Gary for nearly fifteen years on both a ministerial and personal level. Moreover, for almost ten years Gary identified Dave as his personal and theological advisor. Throughout his relationship with the Ezzos, Dave tried to be a godly influence - providing encouragement, counsel, instruction, and even on occasion admonition. It was on the basis of this relationship that Gary approached Dave in September 1999 to seek counsel on the now-public revelation that his son-in-law, Robert Garcia, had misappropriated funds from GFI.

Dealing with such a matter was not easy. It involved the misuse of money within a church resource company specializing in family relationships, of which Gary was the founder and president and the mishandling of funds was by his own son-in-law. A period of extensive investigation and counseling ensued in order to determine the full extent of the state of affairs. As a result, in December 1999, the elders of Living Hope approached Gary and recommended that he take a temporary personal and spiritual sabbatical. The sabbatical was suggested so that Gary could focus his energies on dealing with the current crisis within his company and on repairing broken relationships within his immediate family. We were also aware that people not directly involved were becoming acquainted with these events at GFI. We believed that in time this would no doubt lead to a public spectacle. Thus, the elders' recommendation was rooted in the belief that the sabbatical would guard Gary against challenges about his spiritual fitness to be a leader. But more importantly, the sabbatical was needed to protect Christ's name. Once the events took on a public life, the elders believed that the sabbatical would uphold Gary's personal integrity, the integrity of GFI, and the integrity of Christ, His Word, and His church.

Unfortunately, Gary refused our counsel. It was distressing that he rejected the recommendation of the elders - men in spiritual leadership, to whom he had voluntarily submitted. He defended his decision to continue in leadership by downplaying, redefining, and eventually even denying the nature of the problems which existed in his life, business and family. What is more, after we recommended that Gary take a sabbatical, he started to express what Gary now refers to as "unnamed concerns" about the leadership of his elders. He claims that it was those "concerns" which led to his "voluntary" departure from Living Hope. These "concerns" were, in fact, the start of a pattern of lies, slander, gossip, and false accusation that precipitated a process of church discipline instituted by the elders in accordance with Scripture. Rather than presenting just "concerns" in a godly manner, Gary instead chose to spread an ever widening circle of lies in a sinful manner. Christ tells us that a man's words reflect the spiritual condition of his heart. Gary was excommunicated because of failed character which revealed itself by his lying and malicious words.

Church Statement (released April 30, 2000):

One way God calls upon us to love one another in "fulfilling the law of Christ" (Gal. 6:1-2; Matt. 22:39) is by our humble effort to restore a brother when he sins. The Bible does not describe church discipline as a form of punishment inflicted upon those who refuse to conform but rather as a positive ministry which is designed for the benefit of the individual, the church, and the glory of God. Just as God's discipline of Christians is for their welfare and as every father disciplines his own children whom he loves (Heb. 12:6-7), so also church discipline is a ministry of love in which the entire church family must participate. In our understanding of Scripture, biblical discipline will be exercised wherever the local church truly seeks to be a family of families (1 Tim. 3:14-16).

Though it grieves us to speak of our brother's failings, our greater commitment to God's glory, the authority of Scripture and the purity of the flock which God has entrusted to us to shepherd compel us to bring public rebuke when a public minister continues in sin (1 Tim. 5:19-20).

When a pattern of sin surfaced in Gary Ezzo's life, as his elders we sought to restore him in accordance with God's Word (1 Tim. 5:19-20; Matt. 18:15-18; 1 Cor. 5:12-13). Speaking to him in the authority of Christ's name (1 Cor. 5:4), we lovingly called upon our fellow church member to honor God by acknowledging and turning away from his deceitful speech by which he was inflicting harm upon others. Over a period of many weeks we pleaded with Gary to repent, in the hope and prayer that he would turn from sin and begin to walk in truth and integrity.

It saddens us to know that Gary failed to repent of former sins which we confronted, and even sadder still we have learned that he continues to widen the circle of his lies, slander, gossip and false accusations. Because of his persistent unwillingness to respond to biblical admonition (1 Tim. 5:19-20; Matt. 18:15-18; Luke 17:3) which he received from his elders and church family, we are fearful that Gary's heart has been hardened by the deceitfulness of sin and as a consequence he is resolved to continue in disobedience to the will of God (Heb. 3:13-14). Confronting Gary in a biblical process has revealed that when it comes to himself and other matters that reflect upon the question of his integrity, there is a pattern in Gary of not being truthful. Rather than waiting on God's provision, when confronted in his sins Gary readily sets aside integrity and seeks to protect himself and the financial viability of GFI by lying. Sadly, by such conduct he rejects the very spiritual authority God placed over him for his own spiritual welfare. Furthermore, by the fruits of his life, especially his words, Gary has manifested a lack of Christian character essential to leadership in the church.

Therefore, upon the authority of God's Word and the authority God invests in the church and upon the basis of facts established by biblical process, Gary Ezzo has been excommunicated from Living Hope Evangelical Fellowship (1 Cor. 5:13; Matt. 18:17). In the end, it was his impenitence that caused us to put him out of the church. The pattern of sin which made that measure spiritually necessary also explains why as Gary's elders we believe he is biblically disqualified from all public ministry. Although excommunication places Gary outside the fellowship of our church, we continue to pray that God will use this measure to win back Gary's heart and restore truth and integrity to his life.


The Elders of Living Hope Evangelical Fellowship November 1, 2000

Subcategories

Invitation for Connection

2024 Update: If you are looking to connect with others, a group of volunteers (not affiliated with this website) is organizing the next phase of activism to further expose Gary Ezzo. Contact them here
  • Professionals Say
  • Signs of Hunger
  • Recent Research
  • A Mom Says

Rosemary Shy, MD , FAAP
Director, Children's Choice of Michigan Ambulatory Pediatrics
Assistant Professor of Pediatrics, Wayne State University, Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit, Mich

"It is dangerous to do it the way he describes," Pediatrician Dr. Rosemary Shy says of Ezzo's technique. "It puts these babies at risk for jaundice, at risk for dehydration, and at risk for failing to thrive, all of which we’ve seen." -- Wilson, Steve, "Baby Care Controversy," WXYZ-Detroit, November 14, 2004

 

Arnold Tanis, MD, FAAP
1999 recipient, John H. Whitcomb Outstanding Pediatrician Award, presented by the Florida Pediatric Society and the Florida Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)

"There is no scientific basis whatsoever in their philosophy....It is contrary to what nature intended.

Read More

Watch Your Baby's Signs of Hunger

Although Babywise says to feed a hungry baby, it usually instructs parents to observe a time interval between feedings, or a certain order of events, such as only feeding the baby after she wakes up. There's another way to tell that your baby is hungry. You can watch your baby for her own signs of hunger.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends watching for the following early signs or cues by which your baby lets you know when she's hungry.

  • Small movements as she starts to awaken
  • Whimpering or lip-smacking
  • Pulling up arms or legs toward her middle
  • Stretching or yawning
  • Waking and looking alert
  • Putting hands toward her mouth
  • Making sucking motions
  • Moving
Read More

Maternal use of parent led routines associated with short breastfeeding duration.

Published Feb 12, 2014
Brown A, Arnott B (2014) Breastfeeding Duration and Early Parenting Behaviour: The Importance of an Infant-Led, Responsive Style. PLoS ONE 9(2): e83893. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0083893

"Results: Formula use at birth or short breastfeeding duration were significantly associated with low levels of nurturance, high levels of reported anxiety and increased maternal use of Parent-led routines . Conversely an infant-led approach characterised by responding to and following infant cues was associated with longer breastfeeding duration."

Raising Emotionally Healthy Children - 2014 Video

This KET Special Report looks at the importance of social and emotional development in the first years of life, featuring experts on infant and child development in Kentucky.

Read More
Our first child was born in the summer of 09, and I promptly began trying to apply the Babywise method. The book had been highly recommended by a distant relative, and promised structure and sanity amidst the exhaustion and upheaval I felt as a new mother. However, our baby did not respond the way the book promised he would if we followed the schedule. All my attempts to adhere to the book led to deep frustration, arguments with my husband (who knew better than to let a book dictate our newborn's schedule), feeling like a failure, and the worst--resentment of my infant. Why couldn't he sleep and eat like the book said he should be doing? The Ezzos presented their arguments as infallible.
Read More
Babywise and Preparation for Parenting

Free downloadable parent education brochure

research-based answers
print and share with your pediatrician
leave some with your health department
Give one to your pastor or Christian ed department

Download Now

Key Documentation

LIVING HOPE EVANGELICAL FELLOWSHIP:
Excommunication Statement

GRACE COMMUNITY CHURCH:
Statement about Ezzo - Materials

GRACE COMMUNITY CHURCH:
Statement about Ezzo - Character

CHRISTIAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE:
"The Cultic Characteristics of Growing Families International"
(originally titled "More than a Parenting Ministry")

CHRISTIAN RESEARCH INSTITUTE:
"GFI"
(orginally titled "A Matter of Bias?")

CHRISTIANITY TODAY:
Unprepared to Teach Parenting?

CHRISTIANITY TODAY:
Babywise Publisher Plans Contract Cancellation

AMERICAN ACADEMY of PEDIATRICS:
Media Alert