Touching on Parenting Philosophies…with my fist :-)

Alright, I’m going to take the parenting philosophy discussion to the next level. While I like the basic premise of Danielle Bean and others that we should all “do what works for our family,” I’m going to dare to say that the full-blown AP approach is actually harmful to families and should not be practiced by good Catholic parents. (Gasp!) Before I proceed, please allow me to emphasize that I do not speak on behalf of the other builders or anyone else with whom I am associated, except my husband who is even more extreme than I am.

I’m sure many of you are familiar with the Heart, Mind, and Strength Blog. If you’re not, they are a hard-core attachment parenting website, strongly advocating that AP is the one and only Catholic way to parent. Several months ago, Danielle Bean and Greg Popcack, Mr. Catholic AP King, debated about AP and whether it was or wasn’t the best way to parent. Many of the builders here followed the debate. Danielle Bean thought that many of the AP principles were all fine and dandy, but wondered how these principles could actually be practiced with a large family and with many babies closely spaced together? Greg Popcack actually stated that responsible parenthood required that a woman have children no closer together than every 2.5-3 years.. If AP didn’t naturally space babies this way, well then I guess a couple was “required” to use NFP to space babies this far apart?!? Upon reading this, red flags were immediately going up in my mind, as I question any philosophy that recommends a specific “spacing” for every family.

But on to my deeper criticisms of AP. Ultimately I believe the philosophy is child-led, rather than parent-led and it assumes that every want a baby experiences is good and should be met by the parents. Not meeting these wants means the mother and father have failed the child in some respect. The fundamental problem with this approach is that babies are born with original sin. While they are cute and adorable and very innocent compared to adults, the Church teaches that they are tainted with original sin, and so every desire of a baby is not necessarily a good that should be met by the parents. From the moment that a child exits the womb, parents must strike the delicate balance between comforting a child and building virtue through discipline. Every family will strike a different balance here, and many factors will affect the parents’ decisions. But strike a balance we all must do.

Another problem with AP is what it does to men. I’ve seen this scenario too many times. Man and woman get married. Man is supposedly head of household. Baby comes. Mother AP’s baby. Baby takes over family and marriage. Baby sleeps in bed and is comforted or nursed at every slight indication of baby’s displeasure. Dad leaves bed for couch. Man goes to work bleary-eyed wondering what happened to his life, and whether he’ll ever see his bed or wife again. This goes on for years and sometimes over a decade in AP households.

Instead of the old-fashioned Dad-Mom-Kids hierarchy where the marriage takes priority, you get the Kids-Mom-Dad hierarchy where the kids’ (often irrational) needs take priority. The attributes that men typically bring to family life—such as discipline, tough love, and objectivity—are cast aside as “selfish western values that thwart the mother-baby relationship.” In effect, you get an overly emotional and feminized brand of parenting that has no place for traditional fatherly input.

Please do not misunderstand what I am saying. I am not criticizing those that choose to feed on demand. I am not criticizing those that sleep with their babies. I am not criticizing those that chose to carry their baby in a sling, nurse their kid until they are 3 years old, or refuse to use a pacifier. Choosing to adopt one or a few of these AP principles is fine by me. What I am criticizing is the full-blown AP approach that people like Popcack endorse and consider the only good Catholic way to parent. I am contending that it is not the only way, and in fact, when taken to its extreme, it is actually a bad way of parenting. Yes, do what works for your family. But when doing so, be on guard for the dangers of closely following an AP philosophy.

I found this post necessary and important because so many Catholic communities are inundated with AP thoughts and practices. So many Catholic parents think that AP is the ideal, and they then feel guilty when falling short. This guilt is misplaced. You shouldn’t feel bad that your family functions on a regular schedule, your baby occasionally cries it out, your everyday life is more predictable, and you and your husband sleep well (and occasionally, together) because your kids are not in your bed.

Please note that this post is not meant to be comprehensive, and if there are particular questions or concerns about the positions I’m taking, I’d be glad to flesh them out. But since we were on the topic, I couldn’t resist giving my two cents.

Touching on Parenting Philosophies... with a Ten Foot Pole

Rather than hash out which way is The One True Holy Catholic and Apostolic Parenting Philosophy (I think it takes about 2 minutes of motherhood to convince any sensible woman that there's no One True Way for every family), maybe we can do it this way... what is your parenting philosophy and why does it work great for you?

Personally I lean heavily toward routines, and I was this way from the beginning. My epiphany came, as most of my epiphanies do, on the stairmaster in the gym. I was 7 or so months pregnant with my first baby, diligently reading La Leche League's "The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding" to learn how to breastfeed, which I knew I wanted to do. I was proud to be carrying a book with a cover that featured a baby latched onto a huge breast into the university gym where I was exercising.

Halfway through my workout, I came to a section about the sacrifices that nursing required, according to LLL. No pacifiers and no relief bottles. No time away from the baby, no babysitters. Exercise might increase the lactic acid in mom's milk and upset baby's stomach. And, worst of all, there were some gut-wrenching anecdotes. One written by a nursing mom about taking her baby to her yoga class to nurse her on demand. A couple other preachy ones about how nobody is entitled to a good night's sleep, and the sign of a maturing mom is that she can be awake all night nursing and soothing a baby and accept it with a smile.

When nursing and motherhood were put at odds with the outlets I knew I needed like exercise, some rest, and time out with my husband, I felt, for the first time during my pregnancy, unsure about motherhood. Once my wits came back, I recalled a passing suggestion from MaryAlice and Red about Babywise.

I devoured every word of On Becoming Babywise, scoffing along with Ezzo at the poor attachment parents who let their babies walk all over them 24/7; attachment parents who are themselves to blame for creating demanding babies (and bratty kids) who are poor sleepers and vomit constantly from overfeeding; attachment parents who go against Biblical principles of training up a child and directing his way by refusing to implement routines for their babies' well-being; attachment-parenting couples who allow the unreasonable demands of their babies to hijack the well-being of their marriage and their whole family. I was Babywise ALL the way, as a moral and spiritual imperative. WAY over the top, and MUCH mellowing has occurred since my first child was born!!! Funny how that happens : ) I totally believe that parenting style has to do with parental temperaments and family needs.

All in all, though, a Babywise approach has worked great with both of my kids. Bella was a good sleeper from the beginning and fell right into a pleasant routine, allowing me to finish law school with minimal stress caused by newborn unpredictability. Bean was tougher with sleep and colic and sensitivity, but I'm certain that the routines, such as predictable eating and bedtimes, have made his life easier. Crying it out is our sure-fire way to fix sleep issues, and neither child seems traumatized... only happier for achieving better sleep. Predictability (and getting some sleep myself!) have allowed me to maintain a sense of personal and family well-being while having kids close together.

But how about you? Do you love cosleeping and nursing-on-demand because it gives you a built-in chance to snuggle your babies all night after buzzing around busily all day? Because it delays the return of your fertility and gives you a sense of being a part of a greater mother-baby ecology? Or do you like the order of routines and sleep and feeding schedules so that you, the baby and the whole family know what comes next? Did one way of parenting catch your eye from the beginning--was Gary Ezzo the Babywise Guy your knight in shining armor, or did you ease naturally into a more La Leche League, ecological breastfeeding, baby-directed approach. Did your baby's temperament, your family size, your husband's thoughts, or anything else lead you to modify your style at any point? How do you incorporate good principles from the various styles to keep your babies and your entire family happy and thriving?

Style points to anyone who cites Sheila Kippley...