Parenting Philosophies

One of the more interesting controversies for new parents is the world of parenting philosophies. Like politics or religion, because the ideologies around parenting philosophies is so strong, the decision about “how to parent” can be confusing – how can so many medical doctors and other “parenting experts” have such diametrically opposing views about what is “best” for a child?

In the spectrum of parenting, on one side is the theory of attachment parenting, which emphasizes bonding with the child through physical proximity, allowing the child to signal or direct when feeding occurs, and responding to the child’s cries as quickly as possible. Attachment parenting is generally associated with co-sleeping, skin-to-skin contact between mother and child, and breastfeeding. The goal of attachment parenting is to help the baby have a deep sense of security that parents are loving and responsive, with the intended goal of greater independence and sense of self as the child develops. Critics of attachment parenting believe that the “child-centeredness” of this approach causes the parent’s lifestyle to be out of control, and leads to clingy, overly dependent, selfish children. One of the major advocates for attachment parenting is Dr. William Sears, though if you read about co-sleeping and breastfeeding you will hear from many other attachment parenting advocates.

The other end of the spectrum is more parent-focused parenting, which emphasizes a structured parental care framework to assimilate the child into the parent’s lifestyle. Characteristics of this parenting philosophy include “crying it out” (allowing the baby to cry without responding immediately to the baby to allow the baby to learn to self-comfort), parent-directed feeding (feeding the child on a regular schedule or based on certain time intervals), and an emphasis on the baby sleeping through the night on its own and learning to self-pacify. The goal of this parenting philosophy is to help the baby learn independence and to learn that the world does not revolve around the baby – the teach the baby to adapt and accommodate the parents’ needs and schedules. Critics of parent-directed parenting believe that this approach contradicts innate biological and developmental needs of the child, potentially causing long-term psychological and developmental damage (greater anxiety, insecurity, poor individuation). Two of the major figures in this parent directed approach include Dr. Richard Ferber (who has been popularized by the term “Ferberize” to train children to self-pacify and sleep on their own) and Gary Ezzo, who reformulated his own Christian parenting approach into Babywise, an extremely popular series of parenting books.

As new parents, we obviously have limited experience to comment on the validity of either of these parenting philosophies, but we have done a lot of reading about them, so we thought a brief summary would be helpful, especially for other soon-to-be parents who are starting to explore this world. Here are a few books with some brief comments:

The Baby Book by Dr. William Sears: This is a good general baby book, written from an attachment parenting perspective. Dr. Sears and his wife co-author a ton of books, and they have lots of kids. If it makes any difference at all, two of Dr. Sears’ kids are now doctors and have joined his practice. So, at the very least, his parenting philosophy hasn’t alienated his kids.

Attachment Parenting by Dr. William Sears: We haven’t read this book, but I’m guessing this is a pretty good overview of attachment parenting.

Our Babies, Ourselves by Meredith Small: This was a really fascinating book, written by an ethnopediatrician. Never heard of an ethnopediatrician? It is someone who studies the way that children are raised across cultures, and uses tools from anthropology and evolutionary biology. The most fascinating assertion in the book is the claim that parenting in 20th Century Western countries, like the United States, amounts to a grand, uncontrolled experiement in parenting that contradicts the ways that babies have been raised throughout human history. At the very least, it raises the very valid point that the goal of having a baby sleep through the night in their own room in a dark, quiet environment is a historically unique sleeping context. This book’s perspective tends to support the attachment parenting perspective, and it is a very worthwhile read.

Solve Your Child’s Sleep Problems by Dr. Richard Ferber: The main idea of “ferber-izing” is gradually teaching a baby to self-soothe to try to get the baby to be able to sleep through the night. The basic prescription is to gradually delay responding to a babies nighttime cries, and to respond minimally simply to reassure the baby of the parent’s presence, but not to interact with the baby. So the parent might respond to a baby’s cries in 5 minutes for the first week, then 10 minutes for the second week, etc., and will be careful not to hold the baby, speak to the baby, or sing to or play with the baby, so that the baby learns to comfort itself, while still knowing that the is present. It is an interesting approach, and quite in contrast to attachment parenting theories.

On Becoming Baby Wise by Gary Ezzo: This is probably the parenting book that causes the most controversy. “Baby Wise” claims that proper application of the principles in the book can result in babies that sleep through the night on their own by 8 weeks of age. Skeptics and critics note that Gary Ezzo is not doctor, and that text for Baby Wise is basically a subset of a Christian parenting book that Gary Ezzo wrote, with the Biblical references removed. In my opinion, the whole idea of “Christian parenting” or “Biblically-based parenting” needs to be approached very carefully. Should parents who are Christian parent in a way that is influenced by their faith? Absolutely. But is the Bible designed to be used as a parenting resource guide, with individual verses guiding specific parental actions? I’m skeptical (this also refers to my general thoughts about a separate book, Shepherding a Child’s Heart by Tedd Tripp, that my sister recommended and uses for parenting her own children. But I’m still thinking about my opinion about this. I have noted that Christian parenting books highly emphasize the value of obedience – certainly obedience is a very good value. But it seems to me that the emphasis on obedience almost becomes a reversal of what Jesus says in John 14:15 and John 14:23 – if someone loves Jesus, they will obey his teachings. Obedience follows love; it does not precede love. Teaching obedience as a value in isolation of the primacy of loving Jesus and enjoying relationship with Him is poisonous to genuine faith. In my parenting of my baby girl, I hope that she will always know that she is loved by her parents and by God no matter what she does, just because of who she is. Out of that love, I prayerfully expect that she will delight in obeying her parents and Jesus’ teachings – because she is confident that the love of her parents and her God is seeking what is best for her.