Babywise

This book was recommended in the Multiples pre-natal class I took. I bought the book and both my mom and I read it, and it seems to be working really well for us. My babies are both sleeping 8 hours a night now, just as the book said they would by 8 weeks. I am re-reading it again now and I just started doing part of it - up until now for each nap I've been using "sleep props" - like the swing or bouncy seat. Today I just started doing like the book says and just putting them in the crib when it is nap time and letting them fuss. It's so hard to listen to them fuss!! I had to just shut the door and go sit in the other room. When I went back in ten minutes they were both sound asleep. Neither baby went into an outright "cry" they both just fussed. I knew they were fine, they had just had their feed and awake time and were obviously sleepy when I put them down. Anyway I know everyone on here talks about HSHHC and I was just wondering if there was anyone else like me out there that is having success using Babywise. Having my babies sleep 8 hours each night is the best gift I've received since their birth!

Also, if anyone out there has read both books (Babywise and HSHHC) I am wondering what is the difference between the two books?

-aimee

 

I've read it, and used principles from it with great success for all three of my kiddos. We never followed it strictly -- for instance, I was always flexible on a morning feeding time, instead of establishing a set time like the book recommends -- but we did follow a 3-hour eat-wake-sleep routine after that first feeding. And, we never did sleep props, but always put our babies in their cribs from day one...

My older daughter also slept 8 hours by 8 weeks, and it was wonderful. I never had to let her cry, beyond the 5 or 10 minutes of fussing that you mention.

We followed the same routine with our twins, but they took a little longer -- we had to establish a good nighttime routine before they would sleep through the night. Still, they started doing so at about 12 weeks, and their naps have always been great.

I'm not sure if you know this book is really controversial -- you'll definitely get some opinions on this thread! A lot of people hate the book, and will tell you that Ezzo is a freak and a fraud, etc. There are whole websites about kids who failed to thrive because their parents used this book.

Honestly, I haven't the slightest idea what the fuss is about. I can't figure out *who* wouldn't feed obviously hungry babies, book or no book. I did read that an earlier version of the book was a little stricter, so maybe that was the problem? Still, I read it in 2003, and I thought it was fine.

I know at least 20 families who used the book with great success as well. I get a little irritated, actually, when people say, "Oh, you just got lucky with great sleepers!" Um, no, I worked my arse off to establish a routine early, to encourage full feedings and not allow "snacking," to be militant about much-needed naps...and it paid off. I really don't remember *why* establishing a schedule/routine during the day helps with nighttime sleep (it's been a long time since I read it), but I absolutely believe it's true.

I haven't read HSHHC, but I know Ezzo quotes principles from it in his book...

 

QUOTE
I really don't remember *why* establishing a schedule/routine during the day helps with nighttime sleep (it's been a long time since I read it), but I absolutely believe it's true.


If anybody does remember, I'd be very curious to hear about it. If there is any connection, it could be due more to training babies that it is futile to communicate their hunger than anything else. AFAIK, HSHHC (the best-researched sleep book out there, by an MD who specializes in sleep research, not just some guy with an opinion) says there's absolutely no connection between feeding on demand vs. feeding on schedule and night sleep. The AAP also unambiguously recommends feeding on demand as the healthiest thing for babies, and does not draw any connection between demand feeding and sleep problems. I don't mean to irritate you by calling your good sleepers a stroke of luck - but you'll never know how they would have slept if you'd done things differently. It would be interesting to see a large, well-designed study comparing demand-fed and schedule-fed babies and their night sleep - that's the only way we'd really know.

FWIW, I've been feeding my twins on demand from day one, and they're great sleepers. They take 3 good naps a day, sometimes 4, and go to bed peacefully around 7 and sleep until about 7 am. They still take a night feeding or two, which I am happy to provide them, since they're obviously hungry - and I would still call them great night sleepers, because it's all business at night: nurse, diaper, then straight back to bed without a peep.

Anyway, to the OP - the feeding schedule issue one big difference between the two books. Another is that HSHHC recommends waiting until at least 4 mo corrected age (IIRC) before doing any CIO/FIO (fuss it out), when the babies will have developed some self-soothing skills. (Not that I think there's anything terrible about giving a younger baby just a few minutes to fuss and see what happens, since sometimes they will just blow off a little steam for a minute or two and then sleep.) Another is that HSHHC says that it is physiologically normal and healthy for babies to need night feedings up to 9 months.

QUOTE
I can't figure out *who* wouldn't feed obviously hungry babies


It's sad, but some people really do get sold on the rhetoric they read in books. If a book tells bewildered first-time parents that their baby will never sleep and will be an undisciplined, manipulative monster unless they refuse to feed her except at strictly clock-scheduled, parent-determined times -- well, some of them are going to buy it. I know of at least one mom whose baby got dehydrated because she followed Babywise - her baby was crying and crying, and the book said the baby was crying out of fatigue, not hunger - and the mom bought it for a few days before realizing that was nonsense. Luckily it was only a few days, and she wasn't like some parents who have literally killed their babies by following Ezzo to the letter.

I hold that if common sense is something you have to bring to a book from outside, then it is not present in the book itself.

Oh, just a note to the OP - I am NOT attacking you for following Babywise; just wanted to answer your q's about HSHHC, since I like that book quite a bit. Just had to squabble a bit with Becca for pooh-poohing demand feeding.

 

QUOTE(Becca34 @ Dec 23 2007, 05:50 PM) [snapback]544969[/snapback]
I've read it, and used principles from it with great success for all three of my kiddos. We never followed it strictly -- for instance, I was always flexible on a morning feeding time, instead of establishing a set time like the book recommends -- but we did follow a 3-hour eat-wake-sleep routine after that first feeding. And, we never did sleep props, but always put our babies in their cribs from day one...

My older daughter also slept 8 hours by 8 weeks, and it was wonderful. I never had to let her cry, beyond the 5 or 10 minutes of fussing that you mention.

We followed the same routine with our twins, but they took a little longer -- we had to establish a good nighttime routine before they would sleep through the night. Still, they started doing so at about 12 weeks, and their naps have always been great.

I'm not sure if you know this book is really controversial -- you'll definitely get some opinions on this thread! A lot of people hate the book, and will tell you that Ezzo is a freak and a fraud, etc. There are whole websites about kids who failed to thrive because their parents used this book.

Honestly, I haven't the slightest idea what the fuss is about. I can't figure out *who* wouldn't feed obviously hungry babies, book or no book. I did read that an earlier version of the book was a little stricter, so maybe that was the problem? Still, I read it in 2003, and I thought it was fine.

I know at least 20 families who used the book with great success as well. I get a little irritated, actually, when people say, "Oh, you just got lucky with great sleepers!" Um, no, I worked my arse off to establish a routine early, to encourage full feedings and not allow "snacking," to be militant about much-needed naps...and it paid off. I really don't remember *why* establishing a schedule/routine during the day helps with nighttime sleep (it's been a long time since I read it), but I absolutely believe it's true.

I haven't read HSHHC, but I know Ezzo quotes principles from it in his book...


The book is controversial?!? I had no idea! The book stresses that if your baby is hungry to deviate from the schedule - the whole point is to keep them on a *flexible* schedule. Well it's working really well for me! Babies failed to thrive because of that book? I just read about how on one end of the spectrum is feeding based on the clock, and the other end of the spectrum is demand feeding, and parent directed feeding is in the middle....

I've been starting my babies every morning at 6 am, and even when they have a feeding that is off, like when they only go 2 hours instead of 3, they seem to just automatically put themselves back on the 6, 9, 12, 3 schedule on their own. Maybe not all babies like it as much as mine do.

From what I have read, the difference between demand feeding and what I'm doing is that if it's been less than 3 hours since the last feed and my babies start to fuss, first I see if they are fussing because they want affection or if the pacifire will do until it's been 3 hours. If they are obviously hungry, I feed them, instead of offering the breast or bottle at the first sign of fussiness.

 

QUOTE(PgTimesTwo @ Dec 23 2007, 07:38 PM) [snapback]544997[/snapback]
I've been starting my babies every morning at 6 am, and even when they have a feeding that is off, like when they only go 2 hours instead of 3, they seem to just automatically put themselves back on the 6, 9, 12, 3 schedule on their own. Maybe not all babies like it as much as mine do.


Mine are on the same schedule as yours are, and they also put themselves back on that schedule if something happens that gets them off it. It's very interesting, how they seem to thrive on routine. I've been doing a modified version of Babywise, but mostly followed our ped's philosophy of 'feed your baby enough during the day and they will sleep at night'. Anyway, the boys have slept through the night on and off for two weeks now. I'm hoping it sticks with both of them in the next week or so. Naps, however, aren't going so well, because I have had no structure for the naps.

 

I also love the babywise book. My DD will sleep 11-12 hours and my DS 8-9 hours. I loave the book. I agree with the thoughts given here. It just makes sense. I would and ahve recommend the book to others

 

We read and follow the eat/wake/sleep pattern of Babywise. My twins are 10 month old now, but have been sleeping through the night since around 3 months. I never chose not to feed my kids because it wasn't the scheduled time and I would hope most parents out there would do the same. But I also did not feed my kids with every little cry they made. My kids were formula fed, so I always knew how much they were eating and when (which I kept track of in a notebook). I imagine it would be tougher with breast feeding since you really aren't sure how much they are taking at a feeding.

I think the key to Babywise and any other parenting book is to use common sense. No book is going to be 100% right all of the time because every baby is different. Some babies like schedule and others don't. Find what works for your kids and go with that.

 

I followed babywise for all of my children. For the girls, I didn't use it as strictly as I did for my son. I think that it gives new parents a good starting place to help their children establish a routine that works for the parents. All babies are different, of course, and I just felt that the book didn't quite meet my needs as well for the twins as it did for my son. However, it was a great guide when I had questions. I feel that the routines I established with my children as infants has allowed them to have wonderful sleep schedules now. My son has always been a wonderful sleeper since six weeks of age. It took my girls a little longer to sleep through the night (4 months) but they, too, only wake when they are sick or something is wrong. They go to sleep on their own every night right on schedule.

I don't recall the book ever telling me to withhold food from my child. However, it does suggest that you don't feed on demand so that the child doesn't snack all day long, but rather gets a complete meal at each feeding. I also remember their being conversations in the book concerning preemie babies and their needs for feeding, as preemies have a more demanding feeding schedule (which is very reassuring since twins are often times preemies). And I do recall the book giving recommendations for deviating from the schedule when your child hits growth spurts, etc.

Some of the parts of the book work well for singletons, but not so well for twins, in my opinion. However, I feel that it is a really good book and I give it a lot of credit in helping me establish good eating and sleeping habits for my children.

 

I have read the book, twice. Once for DD1 and now this time. I never followed it exactly. I did my own modified version and agree with the eat, play, sleep method. My DD1 slept through the night at 1 month old 10-12 hours and now my twins are sleeing through the night. My DD is 8-12 and DS is 7-8. It is hard in the beginning when you have such sleepy babies that don't want to be awake but it does work if you keep at it. I think the HSHHC is the same with eat then play then sleep schedule.

 

I've read babywise and HSHHC. I seriously think there must be a different "babywise" out there. I read the book cover to cover and never found even one instance where it suggested that a parent should not deviate from their routine. It says the opposite. It says in no uncertain terms to feed your baby if your baby is hungry. It doesn't even say to try to avoid it. I have heard the controversy but I didn't find it controversial.

In any case, I follow HSHHC and my gut.

 

QUOTE
I think the HSHHC is the same with eat then play then sleep schedule.


Actually, HSHHC does not recommend any particular pattern of feeding in relation to sleep (either eat/play/sleep or play/eat/sleep). Weissbluth even says that nursing to sleep is natural, beautiful, and does not cause sleep problems (unlike many books out there that tell you it's the road to perdition ) .

 

Well I just wanted to post and say that I had another AWESOME night of sleep last night! My girls slept for 9 hours!!!! 8 week olds sleeping 9 hours at night, I feel like super-mom and I really think it's due to Babywise!!! Everyone in this house is super happy today!!! I did their feeding a little early this morning because after they woke up after 9 hours I wasn't about to make them wait until 6 am to eat, so they ate at 5:30 am instead of 6, but big deal! Now they are both back asleep in their crib and I'll wake them up again at 8:30 if they don't wake up on their own.

I am just so happy about my girls, I feel like they are the best babies on earth! :banana: :FIFblush:

 

I didn't use the book except to help me recognize sleepy signs - first time mom. My LC told me that she had seen numerous babies admitted to the PICU for dehydration and/or malnutrition because of a rigid feeding schedule. So I just browsed the copy someone gave me and start our own routine. We fed on demand. Sleeping 12 hours at night by 4 months - without any sleep training.

 

I also used Babywise as a reference for establishing a schedule for my girls. Not everything works for everyone and if my Mommy Instinct told me otherwise, that's what I did. I will say that at one point early on I was drifiting away from our schedule and it was a nightmare for everyone. I re-read some of the book, re-established our routine and the girls were sleeping through the night by the following week.

I have wonderful happy babies that nap three times a day and sleep 10-11 hours a night. Who know if it's truly because of Babywise?? But I don't think it's really because of "luck" either!

 

One other thing to keep in mind, many twins (including mine) are born pretty small and may need to eat more frequently than full term singletons born at a normal birth weight (i.e. 7-8 pounds).

My pedi told us sleeping through the night had less to do with age and more to do with weight - which makes sense, since how much babies eat in a 24 hour period doesn't change much from birth to age 1, it's just how often they eat.

As far as sleep training, we were failures, but about a month ago (at 11 months) they both started sleeping through (Becca mostly slept through at around 4 months, but then Jake woudld disrupt her). For Jake, were told he might need overnight feedings up until 9-10 months due to his low birth weight.

Miriam

 

Also wanted to add that babywise may work better for FF babies. BF babies tend to need to eat more often than 3 hours and in my case it's every 2 hours so the schedule is a little funky for me. I find my girls just have their own schedule and my job is to promote it and support it. My girls sleep 8 hours at night but I believe that's because I learned to watch sleepy signs and I enforce that they are napping before 2 hours of wakefulness. It's no fun for my social life and I generally don't run errands during the day (which drives me crazy) but, my babies are happy...and wonderful...and precious...and yummy...and perfect...okay enough.

 

QUOTE(girls! @ Dec 24 2007, 12:24 AM) [snapback]545219[/snapback]
I read the book cover to cover and never found even one instance where it suggested that a parent should not deviate from their routine. It says the opposite. It says in no uncertain terms to feed your baby if your baby is hungry. It doesn't even say to try to avoid it.



Ditto -- that's why I'm surprised when people blame it for failure-to-thrive. To be fair, maybe an earlier version of the book really was very stringent, and that's where the backlash comes from.

Fuschia, no secret that you and I really differ on this, LOL. I wouldn't consider my kids good sleepers if they were routinely waking once or twice a night after about 3 or 4 months. Your munchkins are almost 9 months adjusted -- will you stop feeding at night next week, since HSHHC says it's no longer physiologically necessary?

 

QUOTE
Your munchkins are almost 9 months adjusted -- will you stop feeding at night next week, since HSHHC says it's no longer physiologically necessary?


Nope, they're hungry. I have a high metabolism myself and I know what it's like to need to eat a lot (especially now that I'm making milk for two, in addition to running and swimming). I sometimes need a snack or a drink myself in the middle of the night, so I'm not about to deny it to my babies.

I go to bed at a reasonable hour, and most mornings I am rested and refreshed. The babies get to eat when they're hungry, and go straight back to sleep, and are rested in the morning. Everyone's happy. You may not call it a good sleep, but I do! If it works, don't fix it. B)

 

I just wanted to add (in support of fuschia) that she, like me, had an IUGR baby...again, our NICU doctors advised he might need to eat on demand until 1 year.

Please keep in mind, low birth weight and IUGR can change the rule book.

Miriam

 

I will echo again that mom's know best. Mom's know if their babies are waking to eat or waking from a habit. I truly believe that there are some babies who form a "habit" of waking and would benefit more from sleep - those babies mom's need to work to establish better sleeping habits for that baby. Then there are others that really do need to eat once or twice for whatever reason (preemie, IUGR, fast metabolism) and those mom's need to be prepared to wake nightly for longer than what's considered the "norm". These things apply no matter what book you read. That's why God gave babies mom's.

 

I think if babies ended up the hospital from dehydration then their mothers must have mistaken what the book said or just had no common sense. The book is just a guide. Or maybe there used to be a more strict version or something. To say that my babies think their cries are "futile" is not true at all. I just try to find out what the source of their crying is if they've just finished feeding, I don't automatically offer a bottle, there are lots of different reasons they might be crying. I think the schedule really helps the babies to feel secure and happy. At least for my babies that's how it is, and compared to some of my friends who just randomly feed, my babies seem like angels. None of the babies are BF, so maybe it's different for BF babies, I don't know.

 

QUOTE
I just try to find out what the source of their crying is if they've just finished feeding, I don't automatically offer a bottle, there are lots of different reasons they might be crying. I think the schedule really helps the babies to feel secure and happy. At least for my babies that's how it is, and compared to some of my friends who just randomly feed, my babies seem like angels.


I think those are pretty common misconceptions about what feeding on demand really is.

Feeding on demand is NOT:

-feeding anytime the baby cries
-feeding at random

Feeding on demand IS:

-feeding whenever the baby is HUNGRY, regardless of how long it's been since the last feeding, and regardless of where the feeding falls in the sleep/wake pattern.

Demand feeders tend to be very good at reading their babies' cries and not offering food if hunger isn't the problem. This may be because they are more willing to learn to read their babies cries, rather than assuming that if it's x amount of time after a feeding, then cries can't possibly mean hunger.

I've also heard some people toss out the idea that feeding on demand leads to obesity due to emotional eating, but this is also false. Babies are smart: they eat when they're hungry and stop when they're full. If adults did the same, obesity would not exist (except in cases of hormonal imbalance and other disorders, of course). I'd tend to think that scheduled feeding, no matter how flexible the schedule, is more likely to lead to future weight problems, since it involves feeding based on considerations other than plain, simple hunger cues.

In general, my babies like an eat/play/sleep pattern. But if they're not hungry right away when they wake up, we nurse a bit later. If they're hungry before going down for a nap, they get to nurse again. They are hungrier later in the day, so we nurse more often then.

I also think that the notion that babies need some restriction on their feedings (and even sticking to an eat/play/sleep routine, no matter how flexible, is a restriction, since by definition it excludes eat/play/eat/sleep, for example) in order to feel secure is mistaken. IMO, the ultimate security for babies is knowing that their needs will always be met. What better security could there be than knowing that whenever you're hungry, you'll get to eat? There's nothing random about that - it's the most comforting predictability in the world. Routine is also important for babies (eg same naptime/bedtime routines, etc), but only insofar as it doesn't conflict with meeting needs as they arise.

 

I read babywise and HSHHC and Touchpoints. I didn't follow any of them strictly, and still don't, but I looked at them all as background reading just so I had an idea of the different philosophies out there. Then I used that background to create my own routine that works for our boys. Now if we come upon a problem, I go back to the books as reference. I read what each one says about our issue and try what makes the most sense to me, or a combination of their ideas. And our results are wonderful...12 hours of sleep at night, preemies who are thriving!!

I think all of these books are great to have as tools, but they are never the end all be all. As someone else said, that's what we're here for!!!

 

QUOTE(Becca34 @ Dec 24 2007, 11:24 AM) [snapback]545544[/snapback]
To be fair, maybe an earlier version of the book really was very stringent, and that's where the backlash comes from.


I read it in 1997 with my first son (I don't know if there is an earlier version than that), and I know it didn't tell me to withhold food. Sometimes it just easier to blame a book.

 

I followed the principals outlined in the book and I used it to help me put my beebs on a schedule. For us, being on a schedule works really well. My kids are very in tune with how their day will work out. They sleep 11 or so hours a night and have been for a while now (they are 5.5 months at the moment) and take two solid naps during the day. They eat well, sleep well and are very happy children.

I was glad to have this book as a resource in the early days.

 

QUOTE(fuchsiagroan @ Dec 24 2007, 03:19 PM) [snapback]545693[/snapback]
I think those are pretty common misconceptions about what feeding on demand really is.

Feeding on demand is NOT:

-feeding anytime the baby cries
-feeding at random


According to Babywise, that's exactly what feeding on demand is. That is the definition used in the book, I didn't just make it up. It's also what a lot of people that I know do, and they call it demand feeding. Maybe there are different types of demand feeding, but this thread is about Babywise and according to the book that's exactly what demand feeding is, offering the bottle any time baby cries. Maybe in HSHHC the definition is what you wrote about? I don't know because I haven't read that book. (yet). I've actually ordered it from amazon and it just hasn't made it to my house yet, so I'll soon find out for myself.

 

Then Babywise is caricaturing demand feeding. That is a grossly inaccurate definition.

It doesn't really take a book to define feeding on demand - all it means is feeding the baby whenever they're hungry. Which is pretty much a no-brainer to me.

The American Academy of Pediatrics explicitly recommends feeding on demand, and their positions on most issues are about as plain vanilla and unslanted as you can get. Not to mention that they're actually backed up by medical research and years of pediatric experience, unlike many of the baby books out there.