Every 3 to 4 hours does seem to be the norm, for a formula fed baby. Formula is digested much slower than breastmilk of course, because it has all kinds of stuff in it that they baby can’t absorb. With breastmilk you should probably start a new feeding every 2 hours or less. And of course a baby’s hunger should overrule any clock.
I think though the 4 hours strict schedule that is being refered to comes from folks following that nutjob Ezzo.
Sorry for the serial post.
There is a book out there called Babywise.
In this book, it outlines how you should put your child on a feeding schedule by having it be parent directed.
The American Pediatrics association has found that using the ‘babywise’ method is often linked to ‘failure to thrive’ in babies.
A friend gave it to me and swore by it. I read it and thought it was pile of horse shit (no offense to horses there).
So much so that I threw it out.
It’s not that pediatricians recommend a certain feeding schedule–it’s that it’s only sensible to feed a baby when it’s hungry, and that’s what the recommendation is. Sometimes that’s every four hours, but sometimes it’s more frequently. You go with the baby’s need for food, or so you’d think.
But there’s a, well, school of thought might be granting it too much dignity…anyway, there are those out there who say that you should only feed your baby on a schedule, no matter when they cry, to teach them that crying can’t make you do whatever they want you to–to keep from spoiling them, basically.
Yeah, I think it’s nuts too.
Is that by the Ezzos? If so, it’s also called the “Growing Kids God’s Way” plan- the Ezzos are fundists who hold that feeding on demand encourages babies to develop self-centeredness rather than discipline. They’ve been greatly criticized by other fundists.
Yup, that’s the author.
a quote from an Amazon reviewer:
“The Biblical model is that children do not have all the answers about life and how best to live it; rather, they need loving parental guidance. That’s the thesis of Babywise.”
Need I say more?
I don’t think that you can spoil a child with too much warmth, attention and affection. If the child wants something that it should not have, however, and is old enough to understand the word no, then the parents must not allow themselves to be manipulated by a tantrum (or by crying) into choices which are not appropriate for the child. That holds true if the child is eighteen months old or eighteen years.
The parents have an obligation to be informed on what is appropriate and an obligation to be consistent with the child.
Please keep in mind:
You mean putting them up for adoption?
"The Biblical model is that children do not have all the answers about life and how best to live it; rather, they need loving parental guidance.
OH THE HORROR!!! Parental guidance is child abuse to the extreme!!! Don’t these people know that you’re supposed to let the kid make his own decisions from day one!!!
(Although I do agree that feeding them on a schedule is nuts.)
well, sure children need guidence.
I think that that quote, out of context, can be taken as me saying otherwise. I’m sorry to not have been clear.
The book, as far as I can recall is not about children, but infants. I can see how the quote saying ‘children’ instead of infants lead to this confusion.
Let me tell you, in case you are not familiar with the book:
The book believes that infants (babies!) need parental guidence for everything. EVERYTHING. When they eat, when they sleep, everything. That as a parent, to show love to your baby, you must discipline them.
I truly believe that it’s a bad way to raise a baby.
The problem I have seen is that too many people (around here, anyway) equate the babywise method with raising your children Christian. If you talk badly of the book, then obviously you are talking badly of God’s way to raise a child.
Here is a better link:
http://www.ezzo.info
Speak no more of this evil.
The LadyVor basically had to quit a playgroup because the rest of the moms got into that Babywise shit and she just didn’t want to deal with it anymore.
She’s also been known to go into the local Borders and rotate the baby-books, so that Babywise is facing spine-out on the shelf, while a Dr. Sears book gets rotated cover-out.
-lv
Twiddle, I didn’t mean to ignore you - sorry about that.
I’ve been known to ask for advice on these boards as well. There is a difference to me, just a gut feeling I guess. Maybe I’m biased (heavily) toward this board because I consider the posters more intelligent and the responses more well thought-out. I just get a sinking feeling when I see someone asking whether or not she should stay with her husband or keep her baby and a small army tells her what to do and she (if her posts are true) seems to be following their advice rather than deal with her own views on whatever is bothering her.
I’ve seen threads here along the lines of “Should I keep my boyfriend?” or “Do you use pacifiers?” but most of the responses give advice and then urge the OP to do what feels right or add “YMMV.”
I know my response is filled with “seems” and “maybes” and I know I sound wishy-washy. I don’t mean to. I know some genuinely good advice comes from those boards and I don’t mean to discount that or the good advice I myself have received from other parents on this board. That was not my intention. My (admittedly weak) answer to you is this: I guess I just have more faith in posters here than other places.
Yeah, Babywise isn’t just “giving your kid guidance.” People who object to it aren’t equating good, appropriate discipline with child abuse.
But not feeding an infant when it’s hungry–that’s not discipline. The book also makes claims that, for instance, lactation isn’t affected when baby eats less frequently, and that children who eat whenever they’re hungry have a greater incidence of learning disabilities, and that you can physically harm your baby by holding it too much–all blatantly untrue. As a previous poster pointed out, the Babywise feeding schedule has been linked with numerous cases of dehydration and failure to thrive. Here’s a collection of articles on medical concerns with the Babywise thing:
http://www.ezzo.info/Aney/Aneypacket.htm (links to a collection of pdf documents)
And an article the AAP sent out to the media on the topic
http://www.ezzo.info/Aney/aneyaap.htm
Objecting to Babywise isn’t “letting your kid make his own decisions from day one.” Kids don’t make decisions from day one–they have needs, and you take care of them. Babies don’t decide when to eat–their bodies tell them when they need food. When they’re old enough to start moving around and making choices, then of course you give guidance and discipline. It’s appropriate then.
Sounds like a nutcase to me. I can’t imagine withholding food from an infant.
I’m also trying to figure out how one keeps a sleepy infant awake. When my daughter wanted to sleep there wasn’t anything we could do to keep her awake. Didn’t matter the noise level, once she was ready to sleep she was OUT.
I think that’s from that “Babywise” crap book. It’s about being in control of your baby and getting them to accomodate to your schedule.
Well, uh…yeah. Unless you’re laying around all day just waiting for your child to “do” something, the child, by default, HAS to acclimate to your schedule. It doesn’t always happen overnight, but you have to get them on your schedule. Sleeping, eating…whatever.
Now before you all call DCFS, nothing – NOTHING is carved in stone. The child’s schedule should be flexible, as should yours, to a degree. But you should train your child to eat at a certain time if you have to take them to daycare at a certain time. Of course, it doesn’t always work out that way, but you should be striving to feed the baby at about the same time every day.
I think parents read too many books. Whatever happened to instinct?
The problem, as you mention, is extremes. Babywise tells people that to be a good parent, the infant must bend to the parents will. If the infant is hungry and it’s not the set time, well too bad, baby. You’re just going to have to cry!
While looking up a link, I read this article:
http://www.tulsakids.com/babywise.html
reading stuff like:
“Dr. Barbara Francis, in her critique of Babywise, states: “Research (of families) and observational studies of institutionalized children, consistently indicate that there are two types of babies who cry the least: those with highly responsive parents who respond quickly and consistently, and those babies who learn that their cries will go unheeded, and so give up hope”.
(bolding mine)
A baby giving up hope? That’s just so wrong it makes me want to cry.
I think that’s kind of funny. My mom fed me cereal the week I came home from the hospital because I was starving and wasn’t sleeping at all. Then again, I weighed 10 pounds, 14-1/2 ounces when I was born, so it’s no wonder I needed more food!
I didn’t realize the Ezzo’s were fundies - I thought their philosophy was just a way for parents to justify their lack of effort. “Oh, I’m a great parent; it’s all my baby’s fault”.
And why is it that people who claim religion as their shield always seem to paint the worst picture of humanity? If people are created “in God’s image”, then how could a baby’s instincts be wrong?
From all my reading last night, I think I know why you didn’t know they were fundies.
There are two versions of the book: one with all the fundie stuff, one stripped of it.
My mom was also feeding me cereal by the time I was a couple of weeks old because the pediatrician recommended that she do so. By the time I was a couple of months old, I ate stuff like really mushy spaghetti and other ‘adult’ foods under the recommendation of the pediatrician. Same thing with my sister, same pediatrician of course.
I don’t think it’s always bad to feed a kid cereal at a month old, as long as their nutrition is OK and they are developing normally. As it turns out (and this is just personal experience) neither my sister nor I were harmed by being fed on a schedule and getting cereal and other ‘adult’ foods early on. Mom pretty much dumped the ‘baby food’ in little jars idea very early on and would just cook everything we ate until it was mushy enough for us to chew.